Stanisław Michalkiewicz: Advantages and traps of analogy
president Donald Trump spoke to Russian president Putin on the telephone for 2 hours on March 18, as if the war in Ukraine had ended here. Not even so much about the end, due to the fact that as if the first step had already been agreed – that it would be a 30-day ceasefire, but about how to accomplish this. If you believe Propaganda Abteilung officers who are just experiencing cognitive dissonance, whether to hatred Putin more or not – Donald Trump – the way is simple, like building a cepa.
According to them, Russia is to unconditionally accept the terms agreed between the US and Ukraine delegation in Saudi Arabia – and that's it. But can you believe the Propaganda Abteilung officers from TVP or TVN, and especially from Judenrat-led “Gazeta Wyborcza”? Of course you can't, and whoever believes them recklessly, is hurting himself, as is the 1 who takes Kukuńka seriously. If so, as they say, why would president Trump gotta talk to president Putin for 2 hours?
It would be adequate if he told him: you know, you know, Putin, you do what we and the Ukrainians set up in Saudi Arabia, or you're gonna be ugly. Even if Putin answered: so rolling, hearsay, Your Greatness – how long would it last? No more than 3 minutes. But since the conversation lasted 2 hours, there must have been more. And the same day it became clear – what was.
Well, president Putin said yes – but then, as the U.S. will halt providing military aid and intelligence to Ukraine, and in addition, to origin the European NATO states to abandon this assistance. Neither condition nor another condition is impossible.
The first – due to the fact that otherwise it would appear that the US is following Putin's orders – which would undermine their prestige among European allies – possibly with the exception of Poland – and the second – due to the fact that especially now that Germany is trying to usage the situation to fulfill its own dreams – there is no way that they will perceive to American suggestions. So the only certain uncovering in this conversation is the announcement of a common – that is, a Russian-American hockey match. General Roman Polko considers this to be a “fake” conversation – but, as usual, he does not necessarily should be right – about which he is about to.
On 19 March, president Trump had a akin two-hour conversation with president Zelenski, both of whom considered “promising”. It is interesting, especially in the context of president Trump's proposition that the best warrant of the safety of Ukrainian energy infrastructure would be to hand it over to the United States. It is said that president Zelenski has no objection to this – but president Zelenski besides had no objection to the transfer of Ukrainian mineral deposits not only in Donbasa, but besides in Ukraine not yet occupied by Russia.
As we know, nothing has come of it yet – and in addition, there are false rumors that Ukraine sold these deposits to the English on 16 January in exchange for macagigi, i.e. “a hundred-year partnership” of Ukrainian-British. Do Ukrainians believe in any partnership with England, especially in the “hundred years”? If that were true, they could be said the same way they were said in the 1970s about black people in Africa who opened their arms to Brezhnev: “black people are red due to the fact that they are inactive green.”
Perhaps, however, these false rumors have already reached Donald Trump, since he did not mention any of the minerals in his conversation with president Zelenski, but switched to atomic power plants? Just so it doesn't end like Kazimierz Grześkowiak sang: “At least give me the difference!” How it will be, especially after the 23 March American-Russian conversation in Saudi Arabia.
And here I return to the opinion of General Polko – that this hockey is simply a “fail”. The general is young, and in 1972, erstwhile the war in Vietnam ended, he was only 10 years old, which means that he was just beginning to be interested, which the girls have under their skirts. Otherwise, he would have known that the end of the Vietnam War by president Nixon began with “Pingpong diplomacy”, that is, from a journey to the PRC with which the US had no relations, the American ping-pong team.
And so, from the hilt to the horse, there was a visit to Beijing by president Nixon, who agreed in a conversation with Mao Zedong to end the Vietnam War – as he promised voters in 1968 and only due to that he won the presidential election. If ping-pong diplomacy had that effect then, why couldn't hockey diplomacy bring the desired results today?
But not only did diplomacy depend on that. So how can it be now? In this telephone conversation, either immediately after and under her impression, president Zelenski declared out of the blue that Ukraine would “not agree” to resign from the territories occupied by Russia. It is simply a pity that he did not add that “never” would agree to this, because, firstly, it would sound more decisive, and secondly, it would remind us of the declaration of Stanisław Mikołajczyk, the Prime Minister of Poland in exile that Poland “never” would not agree to the dedication of Russia Vilnius and Lviv.
Churchill, to whom this declaration was addressed, murmured under his nose: Hmm, never, never... That's the word you can't say. The same was actual in the case of the Vietnam War. Despite the arrangements in Beijing, authorities in Hanoi abruptly stated that until the ancient and sacred Vietnamese land desecrates with its boots even 1 American invader – they will not sit to the negotiating table. And what the president did in this situation Nixon?
He ordered carpet raids of strategical bombers B-52 in North Vietnam that peculiar attention was paid to the capital Hanoi and port Haiphong, which then served a function akin to that of Jasionka Airport. What do you say? Just a fewer days later, a delegation of North Vietnam ran into a negotiation table in Paris, although the ancient and sacred Vietnamese land defiled with its boots as many as 500,000 American invaders. Apparently, Keyman Gerwazy was right to say that “win in the field, and you will win in court.”
Especially if there were members of the judicial “Free Courts” gang in specified a court, which I think will recover the American juggle from the USAID – according to the ruling of the independent court there. What is there to talk about; independent courts take on the function – we do not know yet whether gangster or ideological international. Invisible judges of all countries – take care of yourselves! I wonder what the cold Russian checker Putin will come up with in this situation to make it easier for president Trump to end the war in Ukraine.
Because although the ancient Romans kept saying that cuius est condere eius est tolere, which is explained that whoever established (who started) can endure (to finish)—but, as we can see, in the case of war, everything is complicated, so president Putin will someway come out to president Trump opposite.
We besides recommend: Rabbis call for the execution of Palestinian civilians
