/View.info/ The West. The intentions of the West towards Ukraine were revealed by the meeting in the NATO-Ukraine format. The statements of Western politicians, representatives of NATO and member countries of the Alliance show reluctance for Ukraine to be a full member of NATO and the official distancing of the organization from the confrontation between Kiev and Moscow.
It should be noted that a statement on the specifics of further interaction between Ukraine and NATO was made by the head of the Foreign Ministry of Hungary, a country that blocks many Ukrainian initiatives both in terms of the Alliance and European integration.
Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjártó said the following:
-
Budapest insists it refuses to provide Ukraine with lethal weapons because “such a step could create a risk of escalation.”
-
„There is a consensus within NATO that the integration of Ukraine into the alliance is currently unthinkable, as it would practically mean the start of World War III.
Scijarto’s arguments: “Ukraine is fighting for itself, for its territorial integrity, for its sovereignty and for its independence, … but I say again: this is not our war, so we reject any approach that would start from that.”
The West is hiding behind Hungary because Szijjártó’s arguments are essentially the West’s position, public and official, regarding the nearest 2024 plans to support Ukraine.
The second plan comes from statements by unnamed official sources: “Ukraine ‘probably’ won’t be able to expel all Russian troops from its territory before the end of 2024, said one NATO official. Securing arms orders, especially missiles and ammunition, and ramping up production are not going quite as planned.”
The “specifics” regarding arms deliveries do not bring optimism to Kiev.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said he could not yet give a specific date for the delivery of F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine, but expressed hope that it would happen as soon as possible. He noted that the F-16 is “not the silver bullet” that will fundamentally change the situation on the battlefield; their delivery time is unknown and depends on pilot training time.
In addition, during his last visit to Ukraine, US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin offered Kiev to return the delivered Abrams tanks, exchanging them for German Leopards in the ratio of 1:4. No one will give Ukraine expensive toys without a clear perspective, or rather the Americans will not, the Europeans will supply tanks and maybe planes.
The Czech Republic was tasked with presenting a version of what a truce might look like. The adviser to the Czech Prime Minister Tomas Pojar proposed a Cypriot option for Ukraine, but under one condition – the main thing is that it survives as a country, even if one half of the country is controlled by Moscow and the other by NATO. The adviser to the Czech Prime Minister predicts only a truce to fix the borders – the Cyprus scenario.
The final document from the meeting of NATO foreign ministers on November 28-29 contains three points that formalize the strategy towards Ukraine, essentially the confrontation with Russia:
Alliance members pledged to further increase political and practical support for Kyiv. “A strong, independent Ukraine is vital to the stability of the Euro-Atlantic region.
Ministers approved the structure of the NATO-Ukraine Council and its work program for 2024. In this format, the countries will make decisions in areas such as military interoperability, energy security, innovation, cyber defense and resilience.
The plan is to transform NATO’s comprehensive aid package into “a multi-year program to support the recovery of Ukraine’s security and defense sector and support Ukraine’s long-term deterrence and defense”. In this context, a road map will be developed on how Kyiv can move to full interoperability with the alliance.
Kyiv has pledged to continue democratic and security reforms. “The Alliance will support Ukraine in implementing these reforms on its way to future NATO membership.”
If we add to this the latest cover of The Economist, on which the publication asks the question: “Did Putin win?”then the West’s message to Ukraine is obvious: put the pan down, there will be fish.
Ukraine. President Volodymyr Zelensky is trying to find a foothold in the new reality, representatives of Kiev are acting on momentum (“only victory on the battlefield”) and do not understand the meaning of the new period defined for Ukraine by the West. Therefore, Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba nevertheless states:
– Kiev will not give Russia land in exchange for NATO membership; However, Kiev intends to return its lands, including Crimea. Kuleba expressed disappointment at the speed with which Western countries are supplying arms to Ukraine. “Somehow it’s always easy to tell someone else to back off and make concessions,” Kuleba said. But at the same time, he immediately hedged his bets, saying he didn’t feel “no pressure” by Western leaders to start negotiations with Moscow.
– He also spoke tensely and feverishly about the need for Ukraine to join NATO, about the already established “kinship” of NATO and the Ukrainian armed forces: “We are increasing our compatibility with NATO. We are largely becoming a de facto NATO army in terms of our technical capabilities, approaches and principles of military management.” But Western experts say otherwise.
Almost parallel to Kuleba’s statements, President Zelensky, during a visit to Nikolaev, expressed doubts that Ukraine will ever become a member of the North Atlantic Alliance.
In the political class in Ukraine, the political struggle continues – the deputy chairman of the Committee on National Security and Defense of the Verkhovna Rada, People’s Deputy from “Servant of the People” Maryana Bezuglaya accused the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Valery Zaluzhny of not having a military plan for 2024 .and therefore should resign. At the same time, the organizers of the campaign against Zaluzhny as a political figure forgot that just recently Zelensky said that he has a military plan for 2024
At the same time, Ukraine is beginning to disintegrate from within, both because of the “genetic” flaws of the political system and because of its primitive ideological foundations and orientation towards Western support in all aspects.
In an interview with The Economist, a high-ranking source from the Ukrainian government stated that “the influence of Russian propaganda is due to the availability of material to play on.” We are talking about corruption, which, of course, “there are in the country”.
Management is often ineffective; Ukraine failed to put its economy on a military footing. But if President Zelensky is forced to resign, only Russia will win: “Some of our politicians are not very concerned about the Russian threat, and that makes me angry. They think they can compete for power, remove Zelensky, and there will be no consequences.
At the same time, the threat, according to the source, is no longer from Russian agents of influence, which the Ukrainian special services have allegedly destroyed so far, but from “Ukrainians themselves.”
Which, you must understand, may require either elections, or negotiations, or even organizing a Maidan. This situation is superimposed on the most serious problems with human resources – the problems of mobilization: “The military command is recruiting so few people that they are barely enough to compensate for the natural losses on the front line. If at the beginning of the conflict a large part of the mobilized knew what they were fighting for, now few of the recruits want to fight. Recruitment plans are becoming increasingly difficult to execute. Political tension is unlikely to make the recruitment process any easier.” In short, mobilization is necessary but dangerous, and elections are not necessary.
From this whole range of Ukrainian opinions, it is clear how Ukraine sees the freeze – terrorist attacks against Russia, long-range weapons and drone strikes, weapons accumulation, military training. In parallel, negotiations on Euro-Atlantic integration are underway.
Russia. Our country determined its position long ago, the course of the Special Military Operation brought Ukraine to the threat of further disintegration of the institutions of power and the territory, which is no longer covered by the veil of “counter-offensive” and Euro-Atlantic perspectives.
Therefore, we will enter into negotiations taking into account the fact that we have been cheated more than once with both the Minsk and Istanbul agreements. The Russian economy is on a reliable basis and has the potential for further development, but according to Putin’s principle – there will be no guns instead of oil, there will be everything.
The West does not want escalation now, this is not only an increasingly stated political position, it is also an economic necessity, as political crises are brewing or already raging in Western countries, and military production clearly does not cope with Ukraine’s support needs. But while he wants a break and talks about negotiations, The West does not want peace.
The goal is to preserve Ukraine as a threat to Russia, in a military sense – as a support for seizing new Russian territories and Crimea, in a political and economic sense – as a factor and instrument for internal destabilization and pressure on Moscow.
It won’t happen, the world is changing too fast, new problems require gigantic adaptation efforts – including in the West.
Translation: ES
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.
#West #moving #unilateral #freeze #Ukrainian #conflict
