The deepest origin of Ukrainian problem is the deficiency of a strategical Western plan. The goal cannot be ‘unconditional support’, due to the fact that it only expresses its pursuit without giving the mark point. It describes the journey itself, without the last station. The consequence is simply a deficiency of stableness of the aid. Decisions are made in pain during informal meetings. specified a procedure excludes long-term planning. As a result, the Ukrainian army does not know what it will be able to do in a fewer months, in six months, in a year. Isn't it?
Could limited supplies of war materials to Ukraine have been a strategy in itself? There's quite a few points. European politicians and commanders have never mentioned winning the war due to the fact that they would gotta specify what that word means for them. They continued to repeat the shlagworts about helping “as long as needed”.
The only strategical premise was revealed by Lloyd Austin, the erstwhile U.S. Secretary of Defense, from which the Russians must be bled out to prevent the Kremlin from attacking Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland or Romania. This can only be achieved by making Russia fight further, alternatively than reconstructing the combat capabilities behind the demarcation line of the frozen front. If, in fact, Joe Biden's administration had set a strategical goal for the continuation of the war, it was a monumental mistake that had just begun to avenge itself.
Today, erstwhile we neglect to keep up with the aggregation of avalanches of terrifying enunciations from Washington and the surrounding area, it is worth looking for reliable and logical interpretations among them, which accurately measure our mistakes. For example, even the painful résumé Marco Rubio, the fresh Secretary of State: “The dishonesty was that we someway convinced people that Ukraine would not only defeat Russia but destruct the Russians, push them back to what the planet looked like in 2012 or 2014, before The Russians have taken the Crimea. There has been backing for a prolonged deadlock in which human suffering continues."
In fact, the free planet feared both Russia’s triumph and its defeat. Why the fear? The latest story. Let 1 example suffice: Iraq. We hanged Saddam Hussein to instill democracy in the desert. It was only after years that a reflection appeared that the only effect of George Bush's war junior and Donald Rumsfeld was full destabilization. All you had to do was perceive to your daddy. Bush elder stopped the first Gulf War before Baghdad, following a cynical premise that only a weakened satrap guarantees stability. And since the autocrat treated the Kurds with chemical weapons... Well, it's a nation without a state that's utilized to rape and terror.
And what would be the chaos in Russia without despots holding under the knut not only fragile manifestations of civilian society in Moscow and Petersburg, but besides Tatars, Kazakhs, Belarusians, Moldovans, Georgians, Armenians, Tajiks, Cherkies, Chechens, Uzbekistans, Turkmens... It's just the beginning of the list. How can a fresh order be organized on the ruins of a atomic empire? I urge reading the communicative by Sławomir Mrożek “Wedding in Atomice”.
Ukrainian soldiers. Chasiv Yar, Ukraine, 27 January 2025.
From 2022, fearsome reports and crotochvils were poured out in public space, treating the apocalypse after Putin's Victoria. I am not saying that the horror was (and is!) unfounded. But if that was the diagnosis, why did we come up with the concept of "non-lethal weapons"? What did we send Ukraine erstwhile Russian scouts were raging in Kiev? First aid kit! For all tank, for all haubic, for all rocket, the Ukrainians had to conflict with allies.
Poland was a noble exceptionBut the theatre of absurdity was besides hosted by us. In 2014, only after careful analysis, the Zamość D.A. dismissed the investigation (from the customs notice) against Oleg I., who wanted to transport 551 helmets to Ukraine, purchased in the Lublin demo shop. How did the fishy in the illegal arms trade explain himself? He told that he was from Nowovołyńska, and the old pine cones were for residents of this town who created a brigade to fight separatists in Donbasa.
The consequence of the approach must be the implementation of the force on Kiev to accept peace negotiations. They will only come to fruition erstwhile the bleeding of Russia with Ukrainian blood ceases to be accepted by Ukrainians. This means a permanent separation from Kiev of the occupied lands present and political chaos in the “European” part of the country. Atoli, showing outrage at Trump's movements and his militant Camaraly, remember that the ball had already been handed to him by Democratic Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, announcing that the United States was working to supply Ukraine with a favourable position to enter into an agreement with Russia in 2025. His message that “Ukraine is facing a fundamental decision on the future of war” did not leave any doubt. Why would he say that? For of all the world’s capitals, Washington has the most extended strategical depth. It does not end in Kiev, Berlin or Jerusalem. Its confederate redoubt is the Western Pacific and its northern is the Arctic (Grenland!). There are modern “El Álamo” Americans. If China had blocked Taiwan, North Korea had moved on Seoul and Russia would have intercepted nipponese boats close Kuryla, the mediate East and Europe would gotta deal with themselves. With 1 exception: everything will change if the real war sparked Iran.
And while more White home tenants vowed to manage many crises at the same time, the major American forces based in the Pacific with adjacentities. respective brigades in Europe and a carrier in the Mediterranean cannot compete with them.
Where to look for optimism? In an environment hidden under the NB8 code signal. We'll give him another episode of itinerarium after strategies.
