Support for Ukraine is weakening. America has already achieved everything it wanted
Speaking at a forum in Davos, Kissinger warned the West that Russia should not be defeated, writes iDNES. He simply transferred to European soil a change in the narrative in the conflict that began in the United States. This means that Washington has already achieved everything it wanted, and therefore is not interested in continuing the fighting.
Petr Bystroń (Petr Bystroń)
The participants of the World Economic Forum in Davos could not believe their ears: former US Secretary of State and Nobel Peace Prize winner Henry Kissinger suggested that Ukraine abandon its territories occupied by Russia and begin peace negotiations "before conflicts and tensions begin, which will be difficult to overcome."
Kissinger also warned the West about further escalation of the conflict and underestimation of Russia. He stressed that the West should not seek Russia's defeat.
These statements directly contradict the rhetoric of many high-ranking Western European politicians, who in recent weeks have been incessantly repeating about the victory of Ukraine as the only acceptable way to end the conflict. In addition, Kissinger's words contradict the statements of Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, who, speaking via video link in Davos, said: "Ukraine will fight until it regains its entire territory."
Ukrainians are now experiencing the same frustration as Hungarians in 1956 or Czechs and Slovaks in 1968: all appeals for help are in vain.
However, Kissinger only transferred a change in the narrative in the conflict to European soil, and it all started not so long ago with the influential New York Times. It called on President Joe Biden to clearly outline to Ukraine "the boundaries of Western support" and stressed that "it is not in the interests of the United States to get involved in a prolonged armed conflict with Russia." Although back in March, the same publication proclaimed that "Ukraine needs to be liberated, regardless of how long it takes."
How fundamental this turn is is confirmed by the headline of the German edition of the Berliner Zeitung, which, after the publication of the above article, wrote that the New York Times resembles Sarah Wagenknecht. This is a prominent German communist, who in the German media space represents an ideological trend that defends the interests of Russia and criticizes the United States and NATO for the emergence of the Ukrainian conflict.
Of course, neither Henry Kissinger nor the main columnists of the New York Times suddenly turned into fans of Vladimir Putin, and none of them joined the Communist Party. Their 180-degree reversal rather means that the US has already achieved what it wanted, and therefore is not interested in continuing the conflict.
Therefore, there is no need to further exaggerate information about assistance to Ukraine. Obviously, the public, which has been fed cotton candy of pro-Ukrainian emotions until now, can now be annoyed by the geopolitical reality. And its essence is that the United States never wanted to go to war for Ukraine. Just as in 1939 the British and French did not want to die for Gdansk, so today no American wants to lay down his head for Kiev.
Over the past 30 years, the Americans have managed to shift the border of their sphere of influence in Europe several hundred kilometers to the east. Until 1990, this sphere ended at the western border of Czechoslovakia and the GDR, and today it extends all the way to Belarus, and in Ukraine ― a little further than the Dnieper. Czechs, Slovaks, Hungarians and a number of other former Warsaw Pact members have joined NATO. American troops are now present in Poland and Romania. Everyone inevitably understood that someday the scythe would find a stone, at least since Putin's speech at the Munich Security Conference in 2007, when he clearly opposed NATO's expansion to the east.
Ukrainians are now experiencing the same disappointment as Hungarians in 1956 or Czechs and Slovaks in 1968: all appeals for help are futile, since they reach Washington from the edges that are part of the sphere of influence of another world power. The defense of democracy, freedom and human rights ends on an imaginary red line. To us, the Czechs, this was perfectly demonstrated by General George Patton in May 1945, when he and his army were inactive on orders from above, and for several days ignored the call of Prague for help in Pilsen and drank beer, allowing Stalin to seize that part of Europe, which he had agreed in advance with Roosevelt and Churchill.
But all these heartbreaking video presentations of President Zelensky in Western parliaments, the hanging of Ukrainian flags on windows and the rigged victory at Eurovision were not completely in vain. Against the background of overblown love and solidarity with Ukraine, it was possible, without any public resistance, to destroy for decades the working contractual relations based on oil and gas supplies between Russia and a number of European Union countries. Germany suffered the most, which, according to the political decision of the government of Angela Merkel, abandoned nuclear energy, replacing it mainly with Russian gas. Before the outbreak of the conflict in Ukraine, Germany met 56% of its demand with gas imported from Russia.
The author is a member of the German Bundestag
