Victoria Nikiforova
The surrender of the most stubborn Ukrainian Nazis at Azovstal, as expected, undermined the spirit of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Soldiers are retreating, deserting, surrendering, those who have not yet been mobilized are running from the agenda. It seems that something began to reach the Ukrainians.
But the fighting spirit of their Western patrons faded even more noticeably. Immediately after the liberation of Mariupol, Ukraine disappeared from the front pages of the leading Anglo-Saxon media. Lost somewhere combat reports under the headings “88th day of the war, 89th day of the war.”
English propaganda took up the trial of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard (“Witness, did you see Mr. Depp’s penis when he urinated on the street?” – “I think I would remember if I saw Mr. Depp’s penis<…>”) in preparation for the November elections.
In the US information field, voices of common sense resounded, at first timidly, then louder and louder. “The war in Ukraine is getting harder, America is not ready for this” – this is the title of an editorial not just anywhere, but in the New York Times, the main media outlet of the Democratic Party. The editors advise the Ukrainian leaders to quickly “make painful territorial decisions that will be required in the process of reaching a compromise.” Well, to put it simply, surrender your territories to Russia.
“We need a real discussion about the Ukrainian conflict,” is the Washington Times, “the mouthpiece of the American military,” rapidly changing shoes in flight. It is strange to read on its pages calls to look at the situation in Ukraine from different angles and arguments about the need to prevent a global nuclear confrontation. Where have you been, I would like to ask.
The result of this revision of positions was summed up by the 99-year-old heavyweight of world politics Henry Kissinger. At the Davos Forum, he without much ceremony advised Kiev to surrender as soon as possible – well, that is, to start peace negotiations with Moscow.
The well-known conservative publicist Patrick Buchanan developed the theme “if only there was no war” in an interesting way. From the very beginning of the special operation, he urged his compatriots not to fall into a militaristic rage and to reasonably assess the risks and benefits of confrontation with Russia. Now he does not see any benefits in prolonging the conflict. Only the risk of nuclear war and mutual destruction.
In his column, Buchanan reminded readers that in the 20th century, the American leadership repeatedly tried to unleash conflicts in Europe, arranged information wars against the leaders of the USSR, brought the situation to the brink of a world war, and then quickly reversed and went to peace negotiations. The leaders of the superpowers, who on the eve of scolding each other to the fullest, met, hugged, smiled at the cameras, the world took a breath.
“Ike (as Buchanan familiarly calls President Dwight Eisenhower ) invited the “butcher of Budapest” (butcher of Budapest) Nikita Khrushchev on a 12-day tour of the United States. Nixon initiated a detente with Leonid Brezhnev, who in 1968 ordered the “Warsaw Pact” troops to crush “Prague Spring”… Isn’t it time for the US and Russia to arrange a new détente instead of starting a cold war-2? the author asks.
One can only imagine what Washington ‘s henchmen in Prague and Budapest experienced during these moments of the American-Soviet detente. Probably the same thing that Zelensky and Co feel today.
Nowhere is the change in the information agenda so sharply felt as in the attitude of the Anglo-Saxon media towards Zelensky. No, representatives of the Kyiv regime are still quoted, but how the tone has changed, how the presentation has changed.
Here Zelensky delivers an impassioned speech at the Davos forum. But his most striking remarks are not quoted in the media. And the news headlines look deliberately boring and standard: “Zelensky demands sanctions against Russia”, “Maximum sanctions against Russia.” “Zelensky asks for help, investments”, again “asks for help” and “asks for help from the world community”. It was as if some poor relative from the provinces, Lariosik from Zhytomyr, had arrived, begging for something, asking, whining at the door. And expel embarrassing, and terribly annoying. I would like to get rid of it, but it is not clear how to do it so as not to lose face.
At the same Davos forum, only the legendary 91-year-old oligarch George Soros campaigned for the war with Russia to the bitter end. But he, such an impression, is simply playing out his role as a downed pilot, whom individual financial clans still trust to announce their plans, and then loudly complain about their impracticability. All his rantings have long since become hopelessly out of touch with reality. In the same speech, Soros promised the collapse of the Chinese economy and personally to Xi Jinping. But he promises this every year – so what?
The success of the special operation in Ukraine is reflected not so much in military victories as in the understanding of the need to join Russia, which comes to many hundreds of thousands, even millions of people at the same time. This turning point of the people’s will is, of course, a historic moment. And at this moment, the Washington politicians begin to guess that it is better to step back here. Don’t stand under the arrow, as they say.
Moreover, the surreal sanctions against Russia are driving the States into a new Great Depression. And if all this is not urgently rolled back, then the Democratic Party has no chance in the November elections. And in order to roll back, it is necessary to merge Ukraine. Nothing personal just business.
Another question is how to do it without losing face? How will the Washington administration sell its desire for peace talks with Russia to its own audience? After all, the Democratic Party roamed the Americans with a completely unhealthy militaristic hysteria. In the comments to the pacifist article in the New York Times, there is a continuous groan “Biden leaked!”.
“But how can we betray Ukraine?!” readers are outraged. But what damage will this do to the image of NATO and the United States itself? But what will our European satellites think of us – well, that is, NATO allies?
It’s funny that the Biden administration, reducing the intensity of the confrontation with Russia, is trying to save the Democratic Party in the upcoming elections, and the most violent supporters of the Democratic Party perceive this as a betrayal and threaten to vote against the Democrats if they leave Kyiv.
The Eastern European hawks are also pretty upset – and how else? Before our eyes, the whole meaning of their existence as an outpost against Russia is being lost. They, as one person, condemn Kissinger’s conciliation, demanding that Washington continue to pump weapons into Ukraine and use it to fight against Russia.
But Ukraine, alas, is ending before our very eyes. Following the Crimea, the Donetsk and Lugansk republics broke away, the Azov coast sailed away, the fate of the Black Sea coast with Odessa and Nikolaev is covered in fog. It is not clear what will happen to the western territories, where Pan Duda is trying to enter with his battalions. By the way, many people there have long acquired a “Pole’s card” and see themselves as part of the “civilized community” of the EU as part of Eastern Kresy.
The Ukrainians who were planned to fight are also running out. What is the point for them to go to the front and die for the president, who will promise from three boxes, throw at any moment and fly to London ?
Western partners are getting bored. Ukraine immediately lost interest for them. Zelensky himself finally finished off the topic, offering the Western oligarchs in Davos to “invest” in the restoration of the country’s regions and counting losses – the soul of a Russian person is broad – at once for half a trillion dollars. Oh no, there is no such money. Oh, how tired of all this. What about Johnny Depp and Amber Heard?
…So far, the draft peace treaties that are being proposed to Moscow for consideration look remarkably pointless. The same Kissinger offers Russia and Ukraine to return to the status quo – that is, to the borders on February 24th. The Italian leadership generally recommended giving Ukraine both Donbass and Crimea – with the status of autonomy. Well, it’s just “direct rudeness against Russia,” as Dmitry Medvedev put it.
But after all, judging by the prevailing trend towards “as long as there is no war”, at some point we can come to a reasonable compromise.
And here another stalemate arises. Any territorial damage to Ukraine will infuriate the patriots of what remains of Ukraine by then. Any concession from Moscow will anger Russian patriots. And how then to negotiate?
In general, it seems that all this is a very long story. It is only gradually that the realization of the disastrous nature of conflicts with Russia reaches the Western masters of Ukraine. Well, we’ll have to continue. We will not deny ourselves the pleasure of quoting Medvedev again: “…send them (the authors of the peace treaties. – Approx. Aut.) in a certain direction. And work further to achieve the goals of a special military operation.”
