Washington Revives the “Crimea Platform” After Its Failure in Switzerland
What the American mind has devised after revisiting old strategies, in the wake of the failure of the recent conference in Switzerland and the withdrawal of most signatories from the final statement, is the idea of enticing wealthy Third World countries, especially Arab nations, into projects for rebuilding Ukraine. This has led to the revival of the so-called “Crimea Platform,” in a renewed attempt to attract more supporters for NATO and Kyiv’s policies and to create a new alliance that Western countries could exploit again with hollow promises.
Western nations are once again attempting to regain control of Crimea, raising the banner of protecting the Crimean Tatars, and convincing the world that they are being oppressed under Russian rule. This is an effort to rally humanitarian organizations and countries that champion human rights, or those seeking to improve their image before the West.
The conference, to be held in Kyiv next October, will be followed by a parliamentary conference in the Latvian capital of Riga, where the outcomes of the Crimea Platform conference in Ukraine’s capital will be discussed.
The shocking revelation to observers is that the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense has frequently attacked the Crimean Peninsula, focusing its raids on Tatar gatherings. During the recent war, the ministry forcibly conscripted Tatars into its armed forces, sending them to the front lines and into the most dangerous areas. Many of them never returned home, as they were sacrificed and turned into guinea pigs. Furthermore, under Ukraine’s rule, Tatars faced suppression and persecution, with their rights violated, their customs, traditions, and language banned.
The Crimea Platform has held numerous conferences and meetings under the sponsorship of Western countries, but the name has been exploited against its intended purpose. It has produced no tangible results, receiving nothing but promises and hopes that will never be fulfilled. This mirrors the U.S.-sponsored negotiations to halt the Israeli war on Gaza. Washington focuses on its electoral interests, indifferent to the tens of thousands of Palestinian victims and the ongoing humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, which has recently spread to the West Bank. This raises legitimate questions about Washington’s neutrality as a mediator, especially since it continues to support the Israeli side of the conflict with an ongoing airlift to replenish the weapons of destruction used by the occupation forces in Gaza.
