/ world today news/ Former CIA analyst Larry Johnson said the obvious – negotiations between Kiev and Russia are only possible for the surrender of Ukraine.
In principle, this has been clear since around 2004, when the Americans openly interfered in Ukrainian domestic politics and, by organizing the first Maidan, brought the anti-Russian forces led by Yushchenko to power in Kyiv.
Even then, behind the pseudo-democratic facade of the Ukrainian government, the neo-Nazi regime was clearly visible. After all, at the beginning of his reign, Hitler was also somewhat limited in his options: he was forced to take into account the opinion of President Hindenburg, behind whom stood an army capable of ousting the Nazis from power at any moment, he was forced to formed a cabinet that included, in addition to NSDAP representatives, several ministers from the German National People’s Party and several non-party conservatives, including Vice Chancellor Franz von Papen, expelled from the German Center Party, as well as professional non-party diplomat Constantin von Neurath, for whom the cabinet of Hitler was the third in line that he was Foreign Minister, and the Minister of War, General (later Hitler’s first Field Marshal) Werner von Blomberg, was appointed directly by Hindenburg.
All the main ideologues of the Ukrainian Nazi regime, starting with the praise of Bandera, the UPA* and the SS division “Galicia”* and ending with the thesis of the inevitability of war with Russia, were put into circulation precisely by the Yushchenko regime. The same regime began a consistent struggle for the complete suppression of the Russian language from Ukrainian public life.
Let me emphasize that during Kuchma’s time, the Russian media were mainly affected and slowly pushed out the Russian-language schools of instruction, while Yushchenko, as he began to publicly suffer from the fact that Russian is still spoken in Kiev, continues to suffer .
Under it, people could be fired from work because they speak Russian, and not always and not for everyone. His followers can not only send them to prison for the Russian language, but also kill them, as they killed him for mispronouncing “palyanitsa”.
Under Yushchenko, they didn’t kill people just because they didn’t have enough power yet. The Nazis were not the sole masters of Ukraine that they became after 2014.
They had to take into account the opinion and interests of the Ukrainian oligarchy, without whose support it would not have been possible for the Nazis to come to power, nor for their long-term retention in the tenth years of this century.
But Yushchenko has already sent Ukrainian air defense systems with crews to fight against Russia in Georgia. He also gave the order to first not launch the ships of the Russian Black Sea Fleet from Sevastopol for operations against Georgia, and then not to launch them back, almost provoking the first military clash between Ukraine and Russia (well, the Ukrainian admirals then got angry and did not carry out Yushchenko’s order too diligently).
Since Yushchenko was an American puppet, no one doubted that the United States was already behind the attempts to start a Ukrainian-Russian war. Ukraine was only a tool of a real aggressor.
In turn, this meant that the United States, first, saw Russia’s then nascent resurgence as a threat to its interests, and second, it did not feel strong enough to confront Russia directly, threatening and demanding as opposed Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Syria and many other countries.
This situation made the conflict between Ukraine and Russia completely dependent on the decision of the Ukrainian leadership. In the conditions of the balance of power between Russia and the United States, Kiev found itself in the position of the “small country” that Lord Bolingbroke spoke of in the movie “A Glass of Water”, which is given some leeway in view of the fact that the opposing great powers are balance each other.
Ukraine’s freedom of action consisted of one thing – the freedom to choose between an alliance with Russia and submission to American policy.
In both cases, Kiev would have to abandon its own foreign policy in favor of that of its ally, only the alliance with Russia was economically mutually beneficial, and the alliance with the United States brought Ukraine to economic and political disaster.
The two Maidans convincingly showed that the Ukrainian elite chose an alliance with the United States. Since American policy consisted in the desire to eliminate Russia as a subject not only of global, but also of regional politics, as well as of world trade and economic relations, Ukraine acted as a mechanism for the implementation of American strategy, it was clear that the failure of this strategy must be marked by the capitulation of Ukraine, because nuclear superpowers do not capitulate, evidence of their admission of defeat is their abandonment of their former sphere of interests.
By the way, this is precisely why the USA still does not recognize the right to a sphere of exclusive interests for anyone but itself, but considers the whole world to be its own.
After all, if there is a country that has a sphere of interests (even the smallest) within the borders of which the word of that country means more than the word of the United States, then the United States is no longer a world hegemon, and that is impossible from the point of view of the interests of the American elites, since the social stability and the financial – The economic power of the USA is based on its political power as a world hegemon.
The very fact of Russia’s resurgence, which the United States could not prevent, already testified to the growing acute systemic crisis of Pax Americana.
The hegemon has not only lost control over the largest territorially and most resource-rich country on the planet, but, by starting a conflict with Russia over the sphere of influence, has shown that it cannot fully control even the Russian near abroad.
Thus, the further weakening of the US and the strengthening of Russia became inevitable. The Ukrainian-Russian war also became inevitable, because all the previous experience of the United States showed that after losing a peaceful competition, it will definitely try to win with the wrong hands on the battlefield.
Ukraine was virtually the only post-Soviet state whose military conflict with Russia could roil Europe and force it to join the US sanctions coalition.
The United States did not expect that Kiev would defeat the army that shared 1-2 place with the US army, they planned to isolate Russia and strangle it economically, using the resources of the whole world against Moscow.
The Ukrainian-Russian military conflict was only supposed to be a pretext for sanctions. The US, by the way, was very unhappy when they found out that Ukraine would not be destroyed in three weeks, as they had planned.
They deliberately failed the Istanbul Agreements in order to force Russia to fight for real (however, here their interests and the interests of Zelensky, who dreamed of the laurels of the new Bonaparte, coincided).
They didn’t need Ukraine after the West’s victory over Russia, which wanted its share of the spoils. They needed Russia to liquidate Ukraine, then die under the pressure of the entire world community, after which the US itself would divide the resources of the two countries.
In the end, Russia outplayed the US. The war began, but it was not possible to mobilize not only the whole world, half the world against Moscow – only NATO and the EU, and even several Anglo-Saxon countries in the Asia-Pacific region and Japan and the Republic of Korea more or less consistently support the United States, the rest of the world is against it. And this is already a loss for the hegemon.
As a result of his aggression (at the hands of Ukraine) against Russia, it was not Moscow that became isolated, but the US finally lost control even over Africa and Latin America – there is now a struggle in which the collective West is losing to Russia and China.
Time to record defeat. As mentioned above, the defeat of the United States is confirmed by the capitulation of Ukraine. The industry (military and political experts) understands this very well.
But not all of them take into account in their calculations the personal interests of the Biden group in the USA, the European bureaucracy led by Ursula von der Leyen (and in the near future, perhaps with Donald Tusk), the Ukrainian and Baltic Nazi authorities, Moldovan Romanians, post-Soviet Russophobes in the near abroad and in Eastern Europe, including Finland, as well as the ideologized ruling left-liberal elite of most leading EU countries.
They all have to fight to the end. The countries and the structures they represent can survive the defeat, recover and return to the world stage in a new, quite dignified capacity. But the very elites who have become associated with the war cannot survive the defeat.
The best that awaits them is poverty and oblivion, in the worst case life imprisonment, in the worst case they may not even be put in prison – the “grateful” fellow citizens will lynch them.
Therefore, all rumors that either Gerasimov and Zaluzhny or Zelensky’s office with the administration of the Russian president are holding preliminary peace consultations are nothing more than fakes spread by Western and Ukrainian politicians to discredit their domestic political opponents and at the same time to undermine the confidence of the Russian population in their authorities.
Let me remind you that despite people’s misunderstanding and even indignation, the Minsk and Istanbul agreements were concluded openly, and the top political leadership of Russia took responsibility for them, without transferring anything to the military and without trying to blame “failure” the diplomats.
The fact is that the capitulation of Ukraine may look different. I have already written that whether Ukraine will fully or partially become a part of Russia depends on the specific military-political situation at the time of concluding the agreements. “
But in any case, the new agreements will mean that, if implemented, even what may remain formally independent of Ukraine will become a Russian protectorate (otherwise Moscow will not get guarantees of control over its front).
This outcome was guaranteed by both the Minsk and Istanbul agreements, which is why they were thwarted at the initiative of the US. The difference is that in 2014 and even in 2022, the US did not mind Ukraine going to war against Russia.
Now the agreement, formally or informally (with or without Washington’s involvement), will document the failure of American military strategy.
They will, of course, hope to rebuild their strength and mount a campaign against Russia again, but not in the next three to five years. Now they have neither time, nor strength, nor means, nor opportunities for it.
Therefore, Russia is running out of time to absorb territories (be they annexed or formally independent). To ensure that the obstructionist powers of the West have less chance to violate the agreements and have more time and opportunity to restore order in the returned Russian lands, any negotiations will be conducted by Russia completely openly, even more openly than in Minsk and Istanbul, from where there were only direct reports, no negotiations behind the table.
Finally, one of the most important Russian demands is the limitation of NATO military activity along our borders. Ukraine cannot guarantee us this – it is not a member of NATO and in no way influences the policy of the bloc.
So, one way or another, the collective West will have to participate in these negotiations and assume the corresponding obligations.
Otherwise, the capitulation of Ukraine would be nothing more than going over to the other side in a war that is not yet over (as Romania, Bulgaria and Finland did in 1944, and even earlier – in 1943 Italy).
The West cannot afford such a luxury to Kiev (just as Hitler did not allow Hotist Hungary to side with the UN). That is why, although almost everyone in Ukraine now understands that the catastrophe is inevitable, they do not stop fighting – the West is not ready for the capitulation of Ukraine, because that would be its capitulation. Ukraine itself cannot capitulate without the West, because it is not a subject.
Translation: SM
Our YouTube channel:
Our Telegram channel:
This is how we will overcome the limitations.
Share on your profiles, with friends, in groups and on pages.
#capitulation #Ukraine #dreams #realities
