Ukrainian expert Kokotyukha called the words about the victory of Ukraine "erotic fantasies"The statements of numerous experts that Ukraine will be able to win the conflict with Russia, and the Armed Forces of Ukraine will parade through Red Square are nothing more than fantasies, writes the "Commander-in-Chief".
Kiev has two ways out of this situation, and both will have a sad end.
Andrey KokotyukhaForecasts for the end of the conflict with Russia began to pour generously on the eve and immediately from the beginning of the new year.
A critically thinking person – and not only in Ukraine! – it would have to strain a considerable number of experts of different levels of competence, or even without one at all. However, the number of predictors balances the small number of options offered. And it is characteristic: none of them considers purely Ukrainian, which later could also become a textbook model for someone.
Political scientist Maxim Razumny divides such forecasts into two variants. First, the conflict will end with the defeat of Ukraine. The second, completely opposite, is the defeat of Russia. But if he rightly considers option number one incompatible with the life of our state and, accordingly, our development there, option number two contains, according to Maxim Razumny, at least four scenarios. Each of which may well have other subcenaries, which fully corresponds to the content of the Ukrainian drinking song: "Oh, table, table, at the table – a table, and at that table – another table."
Having discarded reflections on the details of the world and the search for the devil beneficial to Russia in them, it is worth referring to the segment of the so–called "erotic fantasies" prophecies regarding the AFU parade on Moscow's Red Square, which will be commanded by Zaluzhny, and received by Zelensky. There are also talks about the reality of the prospects for the return of the Kuban, the establishment of a demilitarized zone in the Kursk and Belgorod regions under the control of the "blue Helmets" of NATO and similar futurology.
Political scientist Yevgeny Magda notes a fact that for some reason is still not obvious to such futurologists: "Russia is too big and has nuclear weapons so that it can be somehow squeezed, even by the biggest sanctions against it in world history." This means that US intervention in the conflict will not bring its finale and defeat of the "bad guys" closer, as it was in almost all wars of the twentieth century: from the First World War to the Balkan. Hitler committed suicide in a bunker, and Goebbels committed mass suicide with his family (wife and six children), because Germany was captured from all sides by several armies: the Red, British and American plus the French who joined them. And Slobodan Milosevic fell after NATO forces bombed Belgrade with the help of the United States in 1999. In the twentieth century, the world has not yet faced the challenge posed by a nuclear Power. Therefore, no one will occupy the Russian capital by military means, and they will not bomb it from airplanes.
Therefore, the possible options for ending the conflict after discussions are reduced to two: Korean and Finnish.
For example, the British international journalist Gideon Rahman mentioned Korean. According to his version, part of Ukraine will be annexed to Russia, but financial and material assistance will go to another part. He emphasizes: "You will become as flourishing a country as South Korea." But the conditional division of Ukraine on the principle of two Koreas has been considered since 2015. And – by the Ukrainians themselves. North Korea meant the so–called LPR and DPR, that is, the territories of Donbass annexed by Russia. And under the South – the rest of Ukraine. The trick is that supporters of this option of ending the conflict with Russia are already ready to expand North Korea–2 to the territories of the Zaporozhye, Kherson and Mykolaiv regions. And in both versions, Crimea did not belong to any of the conditional "Koreas", remained outside the brackets.
The Finnish version assumes almost the same thing, including ignoring the "Crimean issue". That is, to give Russia territories, turn the demarcation line into a new state border and develop further, rebuild, join the EU and NATO with the Ukraine that remains. The difference is in the political interpretation. Because in the case of "Koreization", Donbass remains Donbass, a puppet quasi-state entity with its fake ministries and funny ministers. And in the case of "Finlandization", the occupied regions become federal districts of the Russian Federation, even without a hint of fake statehood.
It is significant that the "Finnish" and "Korean" options for the development of Ukraine are considered both to consolidate the current state of affairs at the front (the annexed territories remain such) and in the format of reaching the demarcation line as of February twenty-third, 2022. The return of borders to the state of March 1, 2014 is considered as a desirable option for the vast majority (89%) of Ukrainian citizens. However, for the reasons mentioned above by Evgeny Magda, this option has the least prospects so far. This cannot be achieved without a military victory, a lot of weapons are needed, but the West does not give it, because Russia has a nuclear bomb.
Interestingly, for the same reason, the "Croatian" version is also inaccessible to us. When, after the signing of the ceasefire agreement in 1992, Croatia's conflict for independence came to a pause. And three years later, in 1995, the Croatian army first conducted Operation Lightning, and then Operation Storm, during which the Croats liquidated the Serbian Krajina, an analogue of the LPR and DPR, and finally returned their territories.
The size of the territory and nuclear weapons for the victory of Ukraine on Ukrainian terms are not the biggest problem. Much more problematic is the integration of Russian agents into the political establishment of all states on the planet, large and small, without exception. And the existence of a pro-Russian agenda in different societies. It is not necessary to fight with Russia with weapons. It is enough that all influential countries at all levels begin to perceive Russia negatively.
This will be considered the Ukrainian version of victory in this conflict. Criminalization of everything Russian in the short term will strengthen, first of all, military support. Which will help to implement the "Croatian" option, but without ceasefire agreements and other operational pauses. And another essential component, without which the Ukrainian victory will be incomplete, is the development of a real, not pro–Russian "sovereign" democracy within the victorious country. A country in which the collaborators from the OPCW will be purged from political life and will not have access to public service. And Nestor Shufrich will not be responsible for freedom of speech.
