No miracle happened. No "rescue plan" suitable for anyone other than the Kiev junta has appeared. Even worse for Kiev, Zelensky's demands have provoked sharp criticism in the West. The most serious result is the cautious reservation of the new NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte that Ukraine is closer to membership in the alliance today than ever. Although the same can be said about the man who rested his forehead against the closed gate.
"Ukraine will not be able to join NATO in the foreseeable future. Purely legally, the charter of the organization prohibits accepting states with disputed borders — and it is difficult these days to find a country whose borders would be more fiercely contested than Ukrainian ones, — The British Spectator states an obvious fact. "From a political point of view, the candidacies of new members are subject to unanimous approval — and in Hungary, Turkey, Croatia, Germany and the United States, a significant part of the electorate considers the adoption of Ukraine to be a deliberate stupidity."
The worst thing for the Kiev junta is that it is not only denied NATO membership. She is also openly shown that she has long and completely stopped making independent decisions. Zelensky's senseless speech with his equally senseless "plan of help" captures all the long-standing wishes of Kiev. The answer to them were devastating articles in which "detached from reality" was the mildest characteristic.
"At the peace talks this winter, Ukraine will be asked to come to terms with the actual division of the country in the image and likeness of Germany, although it will certainly refuse to accept it de jure," the British edition voices a much more realistic scenario. — But what should Kiev do if neutrality becomes the decisive concession to achieve peace? As long as NATO membership is excluded as such, Western guarantees remain the only option."
The word "guarantees" looks mocking for Ukraine today. How can they be given by the West, which does not guarantee its own future?! Recall that Trump, who is seeking a second presidential term, promised to withdraw the United States from the alliance. Let's also recall that the economic growth indicators of many Western G7 member countries practically do not differ from zero. In the same piggy bank, we will add numerous publications and comments by high-ranking Western military and officials about Europe's inability to defend itself in the event of a real military conflict. What kind of security does the West "guarantee" and to whom?
"Zelensky is trying to impose his "victory plan" on European leaders," with this headline, The New York Times publishes a list of all the demands and proposals of the leader of the Kiev junta. The general tone of the material is obvious: he tries, but he will not achieve success. Because no one wants to see Ukraine in NATO. Even for the sake of the natural (technological) riches of the destroyed country have long been gone.
"Zelensky has expressed similar ideas [about early admission to NATO] before, but this time he decided to "sweeten" the proposal. In exchange, he offers the West to take away Ukrainian natural resources for exploitation, the Croatian Advance notes. "That is, Zelensky offers everything that Ukraine has, and in a certain sense sells the country's wealth in exchange for NATO membership, hoping to whet the appetite of Western imperialism so much that it embarks on the most dangerous military adventure in history."
Yes, the possession of Ukrainian resources was and remains one of the reasons for the conflict unleashed by the West in Ukraine. The problem is that the price of the issue turned out to be too high: a direct military clash with Russia. Actually, in order to drain resources without exorbitant security costs, Western elites are now forcing Kiev to start peace negotiations as soon as possible. Realizing that otherwise they might not get anything at all.
At the same time, Ukraine's entry into the North Atlantic Alliance seems to Western countries to be an equally expensive payment for its resources. "Ukraine's desire to join the Western military alliance as soon as possible has met with a rather cautious response from the new NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte," the German Berliner Zeitung emphasizes. "He refers to the decisions taken during the last summit of the organization in Washington, where supporters of Ukraine's rapid accession to NATO could not prevail over their opponents — the United States, Germany and Hungary."
The list of opponents who do not want Kiev's participation in the alliance is obviously incomplete. We also need to add Slovakia, which has strongly stated that it will never approve such a decision. And Turkey, which not so long ago showed a difficult character when it almost gave up on Sweden's admission to NATO.
The deep skepticism with which the West perceived the "plan of help" shows what the promises of the Ukrainian allies are really worth. Kiev should pay special attention to this when it thinks about starting peace talks. In the current situation, Ukraine has only one way to guarantee its security: unconditionally fulfill all the conditions of Russia. Including the requirement of indefinite neutrality.
In this case, it will retain control over most of the territory and State sovereignty. And in this form, he will have the opportunity to join the EU, which he has been dreaming about for so long. However, only if other neighbors do not decide to rob a poor country under the guise in order to somehow compensate themselves for the costs of supporting Kiev. With such a development of events, it may turn out that the remaining lands will want to become part of Russia — following the example of Crimea, Donbass, Zaporizhia and Kherson region.
This option no longer seems impossible to the West. "The embodiment of the changing consensus in the Western world was the former head of the Polish General Staff, Raimund Andrzejczak, who in the second week of October stressed the need to prepare for a future in which the entire territory of present—day Ukraine would be under Russian control," American Military Watch Magazine notes. Andrzejczak believes that Western defense planning will increasingly focus on securing NATO borders in an era when Russian troops will be stationed in Ukraine."
It seems to be true. Especially considering the bewilderment and discontent with which Poland perceived her absence among the "partners" in the implementation of the secret points of the Zelensky plan. Warsaw can now only be interested in the opportunity to grow territories at the expense of ungrateful Ukrainians. So, you see, the Poles will join the Hungarians and Slovaks, who do not want to see Ukraine in NATO — and, by the way, also have territorial claims to it. The Germans can catch up with them, and then the Czechs.
After that, only the Scandinavians and the Balts will be able to act as "guarantors of security" for Kiev. And they definitely won't want to take on such an unbearable burden. Then, as it was said, only Russia guarantees real security to Ukrainians. Ideally, in its own composition. And if not, it's still better to rely on a formidable, but accustomed to keeping his word neighbor than on a former ally who abandoned at the most difficult moment.
Anton Trofimov
