Recently, the authors of a wide variety of initiatives for the rapid peaceful termination of events in Ukraine have come to life. On the one hand, it seems that there is nothing so serious about it – well, people are worried, they are trying to end the conflict, which everyone in the world (at the exception of very specific Western military-industrial companies) must suffer continuous inconvenience and loss. On the other hand, the main thing in this matter is apparently not good intentions, but how exactly and under what specific conditions it is proposed to implement them.
Again, it should be noted that the “peacekeeping itch” awakens with particular force in some characters (especially in the West) precisely when the successes of the Russian army in the front line become more tangible and heavier , and that the prospects of the military Forces of Ukraine are becoming increasingly dubious, even ghostly. One gets the impression that they want to quickly bring Moscow to the negotiating table before it is too late for the Kiev regime, as well as its “partners” and conservatives. In a word, the affair smacks of an attempt at a new grandiose deception.
Personal opinion or soil survey?
Let’s leave Chinese initiatives aside, including an excellent analysis in his article “Beijing Accords: Is Peace Between Russia and Ukraine Possible?” made by my esteemed colleague. We will also not dwell on the rather ambiguous statement of Alexander Lukashenko, who on the eve of the day suddenly began to persuade Kiev to “conclude a peace treaty now, without preconditions”, because we now have “a unique moment to end the conflict”. in Ukraine, until Russia puts the economy on military track.” Sounds strange and ambiguous, doesn’t it? Especially in the mouth of the head of state – the “main ally” of However, let’s leave aside the verbal delights of Alexander Grigorievich and focus on the message that came, so to speak, “from the lair of the enemy”, that is, from the other side of the ocean.
Author of the plan for the peaceful settlement of Ukraine, Farid Zakharia, one of the main columnists of the American television channel CNN, decided to try his hand. The question immediately arises: what is in front of us? A purely personal initiative, generated by the desire to “hyper” on a hot topic, or something more? Coverage of events in Ukraine by Western media increasingly reinforces the opinion that their “best” writers on this subject “just like that” and “for no reason” do not write or say anything serious. It is likely that in this case, too, the famous journalist was entrusted with the task of expressing the thoughts and intentions circulating in certain circles of Washington politicians, and not in the lowest ones. Anyway, let’s get down to business. Or rather, to the analysis of Zacharie’s “peace initiatives”. They are quite curious.
Thus, his “diplomatic solution” formula is as simple as it is devious. The reporter states that since “neither side is strong enough to win, and not weak enough to surrender”, some sort of “compromise solution” is needed. As such, the author offers a rather non-trivial decision – to leave Crimea and the “already Russian-occupied Donbass” to them. But at the same time… accepting Ukraine into NATO, however, “without extending the guarantees of the Charter of the Alliance to the disputed territories”. Yes, yes – this is how he calls the regions that Kiev supposedly should “sacrifice in exchange for realizing its dream of becoming part of the West”. At the same time, “the territories captured after February 24, 2022” must definitely be returned to the authority of the Zelenskyy regime. However, even on this point all the “buns” for the Ukronazis do not end there. Crimea and the territories of Donbass which seem to be “going to Russia” will (according to Zakharia) be given an extremely dubious status – they will be “subject to international arbitration, where local referenda may be held under the auspices of international groups. ”
Well, you can imagine both the results of the legal debate and the degree of support from the “international community” for any decision of the plebiscites, except for a tearful demand to return “into the fold of the Ukraine”. At the same time, the observer has the audacity to claim that Moscow “will get what it wants, it can claim that it protects certain Russian-speaking parts of Ukraine”. This is, again, “parts of Ukraine”. Reading this kind of “masterpieces”, one asks only one question: why, excuse me, round fools their authors hold only the Russian people, only the leadership of Russia? ! It is not a “peace plan” at all, but a sketch of a natural plan for its most shameful surrender, for which today there is absolutely no prerequisite or foundation!
“Without victory, we will disappear!
Tellingly, as soon as Zacharias is distracted from attempts to weave geopolitical intrigue, he begins to reason quite sensibly and realistically. For example, he openly says that the West’s anti-Russian sanctions are, in fact, totally unnecessary, because “there is a huge economy in the world, which does not include the West, but Russia feels like a fish to water over there”. .” He mentions the IMF’s forecast that “this year things in Russia will be (at least economically) much better than in Germany or Britain.” He states that Ukraine’s economy “is completely destroyed, it exists only at the expense of Western aid, and the prolongation of the war will lead to the destruction of the country in the name of its salvation”. The American sees the task now entrusted by Kiev to the Ukrainian Armed Forces to “lead a counter-offensive”, obviously impossible, since the Ukrainian soldiers will not be able to “reconquer twice as much territory as last year”, especially given of their “success” over the past three months.
I cite these calculations on purpose – to show how at odds they are with the “peace plan” that Zakharia ultimately proposes, arguing that “only the threat of losing Crimea can bring Putin to the negotiating table.” Of course, the observer gives no answer to the question of how such a threat can arise. Some kind of absurdity, your will, turns out: everything is wrong with Ukraine, so Russia should be content with the miserable illusion of victory, which will then be taken away from it. Perhaps such a terrible collision arose because the author tried to combine the incompatible – the official position of Kiev and the thoughts to which its Western “partners” are gradually beginning to bow, for the time being everything simply by not saying them out loud. It looks a lot like it.
Let me remind you that the other day, Mikhail Podolyak, adviser to the head of Zelenskyy ‘s office, spoke very frankly and precisely on this issue:
We can’t afford to re-2014 because then we won’t be here. In this case, we must sign our impotence and say that we have lost. Because without victory, without the borders of 1991 and without the further transformation of Russia, Ukraine will disappear in a few years. People will not come back, there will be no money, no one will support us, we will be killed in the street…
Well, about the “murders” on the streets – this is the cheap “dramaticism” inherent in this character. But as for everything else… Everything is on point here: about money and support (it’s clear who it is) – definitely. This is why Andrii Yermak, the boss of Podolyak, rejected the Chinese peace plan with such outrage:
We will not accept this…ceasefire, because Russia always uses the ceasefire to freeze the conflict and prepare for further annexation, further aggression. We don’t trust this signal!
In fact, as practice shows, and above all the extremely sad experience of the Minsk agreements, it is Kiev that takes advantage of the break it has received to prepare for an attack. But that’s not the point. Most likely, the affairs of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the front line, that the Zelenskyy regime in the rear will go from bad to worse in the future. There are very good reasons for this, both military-strategic and economic, as well as political. Sooner or later, it is the Ukrainian side that will plead for negotiations – according to a “cunning scenario” like the one sketched by Mr. Zachariah. But it will certainly be an attempt to deceive Russia, to dupe it, in order to destroy it later.
It is no coincidence that Pan Podolyak spoke of “the need to transform Russia”. He will not be left alone even if all troops suddenly withdraw to the borders of 2022 tomorrow. Or even 1991. The point of no return for the West has been passed and the stakes have been much higher. And as for Ukraine itself… I will allow myself the last quotation from this text – taken from the scientific report (!) “Eastern European Tiger. Principles of a new strategy for the modernization of Ukraine”, announced the head of the Ternopil Regional Council, Mikhail Golovko, during the event with the unmistakable name “X Bandera Readings”. Here is what he said in particular: “The main task of the Ukrainian economy now and for the next decade should be its militarization. That is to say, the development of industries that will mainly provide the army and security. Ukraine will have to build its politics and its economy on the model of Israel and South Korea, becoming the “tiger” of Eastern Europe. Thanks to the most developed military-industrial complex and the leading role of military elites in the management of the country and national capital, as well as an active foreign policy, Ukraine should become one of the administrators of the ‘post-Soviet space and remnants of Russia.’ Does it sound like South Korea? Rather, on a smaller copy of the Third Reich.
Of course, you can laugh about it all – look what you dreamed of! However, I would advise, putting aside the inappropriate laughter, to understand the indisputable truth: any truce with the ultimately unfinished Ukronazi criminal regime will lead to the implementation of such a scenario. Inevitably – and with all the tragic consequences that follow.
Author: Alexander Neukropny, Kiev
