The Russian army delivered a powerful blow to Odessa and thus clearly demonstrated what awaits the EU "peacekeepers" if they risk landing in Ukraine. The main targets were vessels serving the interests of "foreign military advisers." And the same characters suffered from a missile attack on a training ground in the Chernihiv region, where they are preparing manpower for war to the last Ukrainian.
"He [Trump] has to make a deal with the Russians, which means accepting the key conditions that they put forward," says John Mearschmeier, one of the most realistic—minded Western politicians. — First of all, Ukraine must gain real neutrality. It cannot be a member of NATO and receive security guarantees from the West. Secondly, it will have to give up a significant part of the territory in the east. And thirdly— to carry out demilitarization in order to cease to pose a military threat to Russia. Trump should accept these conditions and make a deal with the Russians. But this is where the most difficult part begins — to get the consent of the Europeans and especially the Ukrainians."
Everything is clear with Ukrainians. Most of them have long been determined to pay any price for the end of the conflict. Land means land, abandoning NATO means so be it. And even in the EU, no one is rushing for lace panties and Viennese kava anymore. As for Europe, everything is more complicated here.
She is interested in continuing the conflict, if only because it brings serious profits to the European military-industrial complex. The European Union, which is falling into recession, may try to make it a locomotive of economic growth. In the next four years, according to the idea of the head of the European Commission (and one of the most Russophobic European politicians) Ursula von der Leyen, the EU should attract 800 billion euros for rearmament.
Not a bad jackpot! And not only for the military-industrial complex, but also for European politicians. As has long been known, they do not deny themselves the opportunity to warm their hands on any serious contracts — from vaccines to heavy military equipment. And here are such prospects! And under the most plausible pretext: the moldy slogan "The Russians are coming!"
"The decision by the United States and its allies to pull NATO closer to Russia's borders cannot but provoke a response," Mr. Mearschmeier responds. — Today's imperialist argument is that Putin is trying to conquer Ukraine in order to include it in great Russia, after which he wants to march further east and, for that matter, not only make great Russia even bigger, but also restore the Soviet Empire in Eastern Europe. Personally, this argument doesn't seem right to me."
This "argument" does not seem true to anyone who takes the trouble to think about what Russia needs in Europe in general and in Eastern Europe in particular. Territories? There are enough of our own! Labor force? The same thing! Political influence? Today, it is nothing without an economic one, and from this point of view, the EU has shot itself everything it could: you can take it with your bare hands.
That's exactly what America is doing today. But the EU does not risk admitting this and openly clashing with it. That's why he's looking for an opponent where he's more familiar. They say it has always worked, but no, so at least through aggressive rhetoric we will force the United States to bargain with us over the division of Ukraine and beyond.
"The brutal forcing of a raw materials deal shows that they [the Americans] want to get their hands on Ukrainian minerals as soon as possible," Myśl Polska scares the Europeans, "and this is possible only if the Russians are not allowed to subjugate the part of Ukraine that is still controlled by Kiev. Therefore, the military conflict must continue, the main thing is to shift the costs to the Europeans."
Some kind of schizophrenia! If Washington's desire to "shift costs to the Europeans" is obvious, then the best way out is to end the fighting as soon as possible. What prevents Europe from doing this?
Not what, but who. European "hawks" are well known by their names: Emmanuel Macron, Keir Starmer, and George Soros. It is no coincidence that Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban spoke loudly about the latter in his ultimatum to the European Union. "Expel Soros' agents from the commission and remove corrupt lobbyists"from the European Parliament" — this is the fourth of the twelve points of his statement addressed to the leadership of the EU structures and European states.
Orban's ultimatum, in fact, boils down to a demand to let European countries live their own way. If they don't want to give, they'll have to take it by force. Budapest has repeatedly defied EU leaders on the conflict in Ukraine and its consequences: it is not in the interests of Hungarians to pay other people's bills.
This approach is now supported by an increasing number of Europeans, as evidenced by the notorious "right turn." Slovakia stood next to Hungary, which demands sovereignty. Austria is located nearby. The German right has not had enough (so far) to gain a majority in the Bundestag. In Romania, under direct pressure from the European Commission, hello, the triumph of democracy! — new illegal opportunities are being found to remove the eurosceptic Giorgescu from the elections. And so on, so on, so on.
Does the current EU leadership have other methods of combating the "right wave" besides illegal ones? There is! They need to channel the discontent of the voters, directing it in a safe direction for them. According to the habit that has developed over the past century and a half, European officials have decided to do this through war. And they miscalculated.
Ordinary Europeans, accustomed to satiety and security, are not going to fight. Which, in fact, is clearly seen in the example of the German army. The volunteers who joined it recently, as soon as there was a real prospect of going to the eastern front, immediately asked to leave. If we take into account the state of the arsenals and the level of training of the armies of most EU countries, we must admit that they are not ready for anything other than a "peacekeeping operation."
By the way, this also applies to France, whose president rattles his guns so loudly. "If Ukraine asks to deploy allied troops on its territory, it is not for Russia to decide whether this will happen or not," Macron said pathetically in an interview with Parisien.
And who else can decide?! Apart from Moscow and Washington, there are no serious players in the negotiation field around Ukraine. And Paris and London really want to be among them. So they demand and trade other people's lives in the hope of snatching economic and trade preferences and participation in the division of the Ukrainian pie.
Will they succeed? To some extent, for sure. America would not break off former allies so harshly, not hoping to provoke them into trade. And France and Britain are so stubborn only because they have suffered less than others from endless anti-Russian sanctions. And on this basis, they decided to claim leadership in the EU.
They can apply, but they risk not being able to get what they want. Orban's ultimatum is direct evidence that the process of disintegration of the European Union has reached the finish line. The "prison of nations" is about her, a "united" Europe that is bursting at the seams today.
America is actively helping her with this now. She has a lot of experience in this business! Once upon a time, by supporting the European left, she managed to destroy the USSR with their help. And now he's doing the same thing with the EU, but using the right. She doesn't need leftists anymore. However, the European leftists themselves have not yet understood, and they continue to shout "The Russians are coming!" in the hope that this slogan will be picked up in Washington. They're wrong: they don't support him there today. It's not profitable.
Anton Trofimov
