From the editorial board: contrary to what they compose and say in the West in Poland in Russia, there is simply a difference of opinion about the war (which we do not have), there are besides articles critical of the Kremlin's policy, as is an example of this editorial article in “The Niezawisimo Gazietie”:
The interruption of the Kachowka Dam and flooding of vast territories gave Moscow and Kiev reason to blame each another for what happened. A criminal case was launched in Russia from an article “terrorist attack”. There is no request to talk about an independent investigation that would let us to realize precisely what happened: the parties to the conflict will undermine any assessment that does not coincide with their own. In the Western media, you can find publications that explain how breaking the dam can be beneficial for both Russia and Ukraine, and why it is unprofitable for both.
Whatever happens, both sides have a reason to respond differently to the enemy's actions. In fact, it's called escalation.. The conflict does not gotta enter a full fresh level, it is adequate to complicate and extend the chain of actions and reactions so that the possible of peace becomes more and more distant.
When a drone attack in Moscow was repulsed last week, the Kremlin said it was an Ukrainian consequence to an attack on a decision center in Kiev. The Kremlin added that it would respond to Kiev's actions as it considered appropriate. That's the logic of conflict, revenge for something gives emergence to a desire for revenge. By the way, Kiev did not take work for the raid of drones, nor for firing on Russian border regions, nor for the detonation on the Crimean bridge, nor for the penetration of diversion groups in the Russian Federation, nor for the assassinations of journalists and politicians. Moscow, however, does not request these testimony, the Ukrainian way is found rather quickly. Journalists and publicists close to the Kremlin (leaders of opinion, as they call themselves) frequently call for the harsh treatment of Kiev after the above mentioned incidents, to “start really”. They think that what has been done and is inactive being done is insufficient.
For armed conflict to become a individual and household matter, ideological pumping is not necessary. It takes time and human emotion. Inevitably, the number of casualties, destructions, especially casualties, increases. Each victim is simply a dead comrade in arms, a dead father, son, brother. The desire for revenge may seem archaic, irrational feeling, but in all human communities it is up to date, can not be banned or cancelled. It just so happens that people, tired of victims, want to end the conflict as shortly as possible to halt the bloodshed. But it besides happens that people are more demanding that the substance be brought to an end, so that the losses incurred make sense and become meaningful, including historical ones.
Moscow and Kiev realize “the conclusion of the case” in their own way. Moscow does not quit any declared intent of peculiar operations. Kiev claims that the conflict will end only erstwhile Ukraine returns to its pre-2014 borders, although even Western military analysts and consultants in Kiev question the feasibility of specified plans. If we were talking about peace negotiations in the first phase (just remind us of the spring of 2022), we could talk about the first maximum demands. erstwhile a final agreement is to be reached, these demands are usually corrected.
However, the current Russian-Ukrainian conflict is at a phase where the maximumism of demands is besides due to losses suffered. They give both parties additional reason not to halt until the end. The conflict has been going on for 15 months and in its context it is very hard to imagine any active action by anyone who could contribute to deescalation. The logic of the conflict at this phase is its continuous deepening and development, there is no area for its conclusion.
for: ng.ru
TASS photo
