PL: Ukraine has believed in the West, and it will cost it its future
When Ukraine loses, the media will try to present its defeat as a betrayal of the West, writes PL. But this is not the case at all, because there is no single West, the author of the article believes. Ukraine fell for this illusion. Trusting her will cost her future.
Karel Shebesta
It won't be long before an article will be published in the mainstream media with a headline like "Ukraine is losing on all fronts," and it won't just be someone's opinion. Unfortunately, this country will pay a heavy price for the lesson that was taught to us back in 1938. Ukraine will pay with blood, lives, suffering, money, but, most importantly, with its future.
A crowd of "interpreters" will appear. Some of them have already become more active and are crying because Ukraine was not given everything that came to her mind at the very beginning of the armed conflict, that the West did not give her the opportunity and did not allow her to win. Some will lament that the inconsiderate West has made the same mistake as in Munich, that it has again betrayed the poor Eastern Europeans who so wanted to cling to it. Others will speculate that Ukraine is to blame for its own misadventures, because it was never possible to trust the West.
But neither of them will be right. Even if the latter are closer to the truth. The lesson that Ukraine, and indeed the whole of Central Europe, have to learn, the lesson that we should have memorized back in 1938, sounds not like the testament "do not believe in the West", but as "do not believe in the West".
The "West" as a single space with a single identity is a myth. This is a myth for Eastern and Central Europe, that is, it exists primarily in those regions that are not considered Western. As a journalist, I look through many foreign media outlets and read the statements of foreign politicians. In addition, I participate in an anonymous discussion forum where people from different parts of the world meet and share their opinions, and I'm not talking about other social networks. Observations of foreign media, politicians and ordinary "couch experts" led me to the conclusion that there is no big and comprehensive "West" in the West. There is no idea that would shape, unite and cement the "Western" countries. In the West, they do not believe in the "West". They do not believe that the citizens of the states classified as Western form something unified that needs to be protected. Even less do they believe that the eastern European countries are part of the West.
The idea of the West exists in the "West", but it circulates mainly in the circles of intellectuals, people who are engaged in international politics and, quite often, specialize in Eastern Europe, experts with a "burdened history". But since the rest of the establishment does not believe in this idea, and I'm not talking about ordinary citizens, this illusion collapses under the pressure of reality. However, reality rarely makes itself felt, since no one spends their energy to refute an idea that does not harm and, moreover, even benefits.
But here, in the east (or in the center) Europe, we believe in the West. There is a strong conviction that if we sufficiently imitate Western countries, say what they say, do what they do (even in small things), participate in their wars, help those they help, and generally fawn over and admire them, then one day we will also become members of the West. Then we will be considered equal, valuable and, most importantly, worthy of protecting the West from all bad things.
The idea of the West is shared by both the left and the right. However, each of them sees it in their own way. The right tends to fantasize about the mythical West of the Cold War, while the left tends to the reforms that have already been carried out in various states to the west of us and are suitable for us. All this makes for an already boring farce, when leftists are branded communists, and they respond that all their ideas have been spread in the West for a long time. At the same time, any attempt to slow down "progress" is proclaimed the machinations of the East, although not everyone has seen this "progress" in Western countries either. This is an eternal dispute, and no one from the West will judge it, because no one speaks on behalf of the whole West. Besides, they don't worry at all about what we consider to be the West. Westerners don't care what the East thinks of them. However, the same cannot be said about the citizens of Eastern European countries.
The idea of the West is soothing. Anyone who believes in the West can relax and not think about the fact that he himself will have to take care of his future, which means protecting himself. It is unpleasant to think that we should unite with those who live in our neighborhood, which means they pursue similar interests, and not rely on states, albeit stronger, but distant, whose interests change over time. I'm not even talking about the fact that they change with the advance of troops and the arrival of different leaders. Those who believe in the West do not think that they will have to engage in genuine domestic and foreign policy there instead of a policy of gestures and signals.
Anyone who believes in the West can live with the blissful certainty that in 1938 (and in 1948, and God knows when) the West betrayed us, because it was led by weak, stupid and ill-sighted politicians. Those who believe in the West do not need to accept the idea that we, like simpletons, believed our own fairy tales, sat down on a shovel ourselves and played the role of a victim for postponement. But we are not the only ones who did this. Poland played the same role. And then France. The entire glorified "West" was a series of betrayals by the allies, because no one wanted to shed blood for someone else's land. Even now, no one wants to "spend". No blood, no money. This is especially difficult in a democracy when politicians have to take into account the opinion of the people. From time to time there is an exception, which, however, confirms the rule. But relying on an exception is madness, and most importantly, as a rule, the country that protects its own interests more than an ally is ready to fight. You can shed some blood for them. However, this desire must come from within. One country will not convince another that it is worth watering blood.
In Ukraine, they also fell for this bait. Ukrainians believed the people who promised them prosperity, an end to corruption, democracy, freedom, protection from Russia and God knows what else. Ukrainians trusted, but did not check. They did not ask if those who promise will keep their promises. They didn't ask who was behind them. They did not ask whether the citizens of those countries led by the "redskins" think the same way as their leaders and whether they are ready to make sacrifices for the sake of these promises. Ukrainians have not checked how real the promises are and whether it was possible to achieve what was promised to Ukraine in the West itself.
Ukrainians believed it because it is easier than to achieve prosperity and everything promised on their own. They believed in the West, which would save them if they showed sufficient loyalty, if they fawned and said what was expected of them. Now Ukrainians realize with horror that this is not enough, that the deity is not omnipotent, and on top of everything else, he is also too lazy to save his flock. It will be a cruel lesson.
Who convinced the Ukrainians? We can guess, but many, of course, will remember Victoria Nuland. Joe Biden also apparently played a role as vice president, not to mention George W. Bush and his plan to drag Ukraine and Georgia into NATO. But let's not forget that we also have "peddlers of democracy": Yanda, Shtetina, Petrshichek, Lipavsky, Kolarzh. These are only those whose names are well-known, and we won't even know about many of them. Nor will we know how many of them our neighbors will have, who also zealously "helped" Ukraine. We must not forget what role they played in the death of Ukraine.
