Ukraine, a tragic victim of a Russian invasion, appears to be offering scandal-ridden British Prime Minister Boris Johnson a political lifeline. He is now more of foreign minister than he is a prime minister.
Even before Russian troops landed in Ukraine, he was busy — too busy even to stitch Britain together — drumming up support for Ukraine.
The Economist has a point: "Russia's invasion of Ukraine has highlighted one of the less attractive aspects of Johnson's character: a willingness to squeeze any issue, no matter how grave, if it might yield the slightest political advantage."
Look before you squeeze the war for all its worth, Mr Prime Minister, for it will show up your hidden hypocrisies.
We didn't have to wait long. Five days ago, Johnson was all of a video king with a message to the Russians: "Your president stands accused of committing war crimes. But I cannot believe he is acting in your name." No, Johnson isn't interested in getting the Russians to do a citizen's arrest of Putin. Not at all. He is going for the West's favourite menu: regime change through popular uprising.
It is the Arab Spring all over again, only this time, it is not so Middle Eastern. There is little chance that Johnson would be able to stir up a national uprising in Russia for at least two reasons.
One, Russia isn't the Middle East. What works for the Middle East need not necessarily work for Russia. Two, the West may see the Arab Spring as a success, but it isn't. The Arabs saw through the Western motive for the uprising. So will the Russians.
So why did Johnson do it? As The Economist says, the British prime minister needed a boost from somewhere. Just four months ago, he faced being kicked out of office in a parliamentary rebellion "after it emerged that raucous parties were held in Downing Street during Covid-19 lockdowns".
According to the British weekly, Johnson's ratings fell to the lowest of any prime minister since John Major in 1994. He may be thinking if the Falklands war could give Margaret Thatcher a bounce, so may the war in Ukraine. Political opportunism? Beyond doubt.
There is more from the video king: "Those responsible will be held to account. And history will remember who looked the other way." Let's be blunt. True, Russia stands accused of war crimes in Ukraine. So does Britain, the United States and Israel. Where is the holding to account? And who looked the other way? Britain, the US and the European Union. History remembers only too well.
And so do the loved ones of all those massacred and murdered by Britain, the US and Israel. Did any of the three do what international criminal law demands? No, not only the trio failed to put the criminals on trial but repeatedly blocked the International Criminal Court from taking any action. Johnson is a crying shame when it comes to looking the other way.
In April last year, he condemned the ICC's Palestine investigation as an "attack on Israel". As the Palestinian Authority mission in London pointed out then, such a view subverts the rules-based global order. We agree.
The ICC is needed, but it must be a just institution. It will only be one if it indicts all war criminals, not just the "enemies" of the West.