Subjective review of current hot events of geopolitics, interests of Poland and activities of planet powers.
A pinch of fresh past – how the West looks at Central and east Europe
The English, who will turn out to be the most crucial at this point, see Poland after planet War I as a life without a chance for longer life, and besides establish its borders east of the Bug and give the Republic of Ukraine as a concession to the Polish... imperialism (a curious function in specified a imagination of affairs was played by Lewis Namier, actually Louis Namirowski, formerly Bernstein) [Lewis Bernstein Namier, British historian, official, Zionist activist – ed.]
***
“New York Times” sees another expression of Polish imperialism in the Polish war against Bolsheviks, sees in Poland the bastard of nations who attacks the recently formed folk democracy.
***
The U.S. is giving us up in Yalta (I do not blame them – they armed the ZSRS to war against the Germans, the Red Army is fighting sacrificially on the east front, something is due to them). In addition, Central and east Europe is, in the U.S.'s view, a permanent and "everlasting" origin of conflict and war.
***
The planet is beginning to reign Pax Americana, to whom this fresh governance is gradually beginning to be governed by financial (and business) oligarchy, and this, although of American origin, has its own (not American) interest; within these governments, for various reasons, various political interests, not only financial-business interests, specified as strengthening the political influence of the US in a given region, or at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, Israel's interest in destroying comparative governance in the mediate East, are besides taken into account.
***
The 1994 Budapest Memorandum is simply a meaningless part of paper for Ukraine. Russia's invasion of Ukraine did not have any naive effects from the memorandum.
***
Before Russia invades Ukraine, the US, besides in our interest, test Russia's weakness, slow circling it – they grow NATO, effort to bring the erstwhile republics together, for example in the Caucasus region.
***
Putin warns at a conference in Munich in 2007 that he will not let Ukraine to escape from Russia's shoe, or at least not stay a buffer region for Russia.
***
The US has an impact on Ukraine accidents in 2014, Putin occupies Crimea, green men appear in Donbasa.
And so we arrive on 24 February 2022
If the Russians had succeeded the blitzkrieg, the West would not have spoken a word and the business with Russia would have flourished nothing, especially German.
But we must besides admit that the U.S. has contributed to the actual blitzkrieg defeat, for example by sharing intelligence with Ukrainians. The U.S. has trained Ukrainians since 2014, most likely influenced Zelenski's politics.
The heroism and perfection of the Ukrainians' war effort makes the West look at the Russian invasion differently. As peace negotiations between Kiev and Moscow will show in March and April 2022, the same West does not want to give Ukraine a safety warrant if a peace treaty should be concluded, and Washington wills (and Boris Johnson co-firms it) to keep Ukraine fighting, weakening Russia.
The course of war, the nature of Ukraine's aid we know well, almost day after day.
The assistance to Ukraine from the old EU is almost nothing. U.S. help, give (or sell) weapons, but it is clear from the beginning that this is simply a substitute war for them – Ukrainians spill blood, destruct their country to weaken Russia.
As far as the U.S. is afraid and as much as the U.S. can afford any help. possibly in the summertime of 2022 it was hoped that American aid would be so large that it would lead to Russia's defeat. But Russia wasn't expected to lose to the moles, that's what the US didn't want, they couldn't hazard much. This has been clear since the beginning of 2023. The situation of Ukraine worsened her failed counteroffensive in the summertime of 2023. For the U.S., China was more important, and there was a focus of military effort (the alleged denial strategy, strategy of denial)!
Russia lost so much that it showed its weakness and inability to control Ukraine. But he has the resources to destruct Ukraine. The U.S. wants the war to end. Ukraine is entirely dependent on Western aid. He'll die without it. The EU cannot and cannot supply this assistance in the short term. The U.S. no longer wants to help, and they have no interest in it either, but the economical and military and geopolitical interests.
The Ukrainian front has secondary meaning for the US (for example George Friedman has been writing about it for months). The east Flank is to organise, arm and be able to defend itself in the close future with the aid of another European countries.
Meanwhile, present Germany is disarmed by its own decisions, plunged into a deep economical crisis, and the remainder of the West is almost disarmed. The combined forces of France, Germany and the United Kingdom number about 600,000 soldiers without considering reservists with about 150,000; fortunately, France and Britain have atomic weapons. The full EU is losing economically to China and the US.
The EU has not yet been able to organise a debt by mobilising Russian money deposited in Belgium. The EU can only talk. How to usage this money and do business on it know Donald Trump – giving Russia part of Ukraine. This was initially proposed – specified a fresh Yalta or Munich from 1938, or actually Budapest from 1994. It is not Trump who is liable for this war, in fact, that is the reality of today.
But Trump is besides open to the EU's proposals, and this 1 should yet come up with something, seeing that Trump knows how to usage the deposited Russian money and what to do if no 1 in Ukraine can aid – I repeat, sale it for the benefit of itself, but not all and so safe that doing business with the US, and so possibly in the function of a kind of condominium of the US and Russia (which is behind it, is called in cynical modernity the state ration). The EU can, if it wishes, join Trump's business and – more importantly – propose to effectively safeguard Ukraine's sovereignty. Will he convince himself—and Russia, of course—I don't know. Talks continue.
But that Ukraine will at best stay a buffer region for Russia, it is clear from the year 2023 (my opinion). Was the sacrifice of the Ukrainian people needed? Yes, erstwhile it comes to weakening Russia, but the price is terrible.
We compose about people, not power.
We show the fact about causes, not consequences. We are your voice. Support independence!
Donate and become our contributor
And most likely before Ukraine, even if there is now a peace agreement, a war in a new, different version, even a civilian war. And before Poland, the last moments to scare Russia distant from attacking us in years a fewer or more (our strategy of denial). I don't know. I'm certain we've lost our chance to be the leading country in the fresh Inter-Mediterranean, which is the east flank of NATO, and we should be.
A fewer words of general nature
Ukraine is simply a pawn in a geopolitical game of large importance. China grows, it will be the world's first power. U.S. forces are exhausted due to her business-political establishment.
Trump's trying to fix it, revive it. I don't know if he'll make it. The EU is bankrupt without an army, which yet made the first efforts to improve its fitness. It has a chance due to the fact that Russia is weak, although at the same time dangerous – Russia has atomic weapons of all kind in large quantity, and as a weakening it can be erratic. He sees the weakness of the West very well and is constantly leading the EU with harassment.
Moscow was given opportunities to make with the EU, but Putin could only manage the safety service and the financial-business oligarchy, and present he can only wage war by killing Ukrainians and his own (as I mentioned earlier, there may have been a chance of ending the war in the spring of 2022, but it did not come true, including Washington and the EU). Putin is simply a large-Russian imperialist, incapable to guide the state towards prosperity, economical development. China is watching. They don't want Russia besides weak, they don't want Russia besides strong – they despise it more than the West, they don't trust it (nota bene, in 1956 China contributed to the Russians' failure to enter Poland).
China wants a vassal, a supplier of natural materials and a peaceful land supply way to the EU. But they're besides playing with the US, and that's what they can do to let Russia to proceed the war.
The EU will become increasingly dependent on China, while maintaining any sovereignty and yet being able to defend itself against Russia's temptations (at the same time trading with Russia).
The US wants the EU to keep this certain sovereignty and thus push China distant from the Atlantic. The U.S. wants to persuade Russia to keep any independency from China, they want to aid it preserve this independence, they want to benefit from it (e.g. by jointly extracting Russian natural materials, providing Russia with various fresh technologies), they want any cooperation in controlling the Arctic, so that Russia and China do not control it itself. This US-Russia cooperation would besides push China distant from the Atlantic.
That's all in the short term. That's what the U.S. is planning. Only China plans for 50 or more years.
And that's why I don't see the point in attacking Taiwan. He'll come to them. Taiwanese people besides think of us as inferior to them, closer to mainland China, although they besides cooperate with the US.
What about Ukraine? possibly in the end any truce, a long-term one, surely 1 that the US has earned, and Russia has not only lost what it already has, but Ukraine has been further weakened, and Russia has earned time and money to destruct Europe in the future. As many as Ukraine manages to get safety guarantees for the future, it depends most on the EU, and as this is not good, it can besides be bad with these guarantees.
The hope is that the EU sees how bad policy it has been, how weak it has the possible to rise. Today, no 1 matters with the European Union due to it.
Whether the EU has the capacity and the will to mobilise its possible today, I do not know. On the another hand, I know that improving the EU's condition takes time, which means that the EU does not want a truce to take place now.
How much better was Kiev's position from which he conducted peace negotiations with Moscow in March and April 2022. Incomparably better! Russia lost, had to retreat from the directions in which it invaded Ukraine. It cannot be excluded that Putin then considered that the invasion was a mistake and was willing to end the war under conditions acceptable to Ukraine. And today? What qualities does Zelenski have up his sleeve? None. A deficiency of personnel in the army, indescribable fatigue of soldiers on the front. A truce, which will yet come to pass (when China comes to an agreement with the US in this matter), will be passed on terms closer to Moscow's demands each day. That's what I fear in the end. And so far, day in day, Ukraine is being bombed, the situation on the front increasingly worse for Ukrainians, more tragic.
One last word. I confess, I have never seen the destiny of Ukraine better than being a neutral state, in the best possible sense "finalised", without hope of joining NATO, with the hope of joining the EEC in the far future. I did not want our neighbour ill, but I did not see any chance of a better destiny of this young state, a clan state at least to stand Volodymyr Zelenski at his head, a state almost to the ground of corruption, until the Russian assault divided into the pro-Russian east and pro-west.
And I inactive want Ukraine the position of neutral and sovereign state (how much sovereignty is possible today). Just as I want her a successful restoration, with pain reasoning of the unspeakable sacrifice she bears for the preservation of her statehood.
Note written in November and December 2025
