/ world today news/ “Ukraine cannot win on the battlefield,” say some Western politicians. And yet, as others say, in any case it is necessary “to inflict a complete defeat on Russia.” Why did the West put everything on the line in the battle against our country – and under what conditions is it still possible to reach a compromise?
Kyiv has no chance of defeating Moscow. This was stated by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán in an interview with Bloomberg. “Given the numbers and the current situation, as well as the fact that NATO is not ready to send troops to Ukraine, the obvious conclusion is that Ukraine cannot win on the battlefield,” Orban explained his thinking. According to him, the only chance to resolve the conflict is to reach direct agreements between Russia and the United States.
And the other day, former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger even said when they would. According to him, the negotiation process for Ukraine could begin by the end of 2023. But with all due respect to the patriarch of American diplomacy, these words are highly doubtful. And the thing is, Kissinger’s successors and Orbán’s Western counterparts are talking about something completely different in all public platforms. For the war with Russia to the end. To the last Ukrainian.
Lies and faith
Russia must be stopped at all costs. It is this thesis that is now repeated by all senior officials of the West – from the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, to the Secretary General of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg. Almost all the leaders of Western countries – from the USA to Estonia for example.
They all argue that if Moscow is allowed to win in Ukraine (and “victory” means fulfilling the objectives of the SVO in the form of recognition of new Russian territories and demilitarization with denazification of the Kiev regime), then Russian troops will move further to the west. To Warsaw and even to Berlin. This means that there can be no negotiations with Russia – only fixing the results of the conflict after the defeat of our country.
Simply put, only the acceptance of capitulation – the fulfillment of Western demands for the surrender of Russian territories, the withdrawal of troops to the border from February 2022, the payment of reparations to the Kiev regime, and so on. Only in this way, according to Western officials, NATO can be protected from further Russian aggression.
These words raise doubts about the adequacy of Western colleagues. First, because both Warsaw, Berlin and even Tallinn are members of NATO and Russia will not declare war on the Alliance. Second, the special operation started only because the regime in Kiev turned its country into an anti-Russian one, and Moscow failed diplomatically (that is, through the Minsk agreements) to make this anti-Russian country at least neutral. That is, in the simplest terms, the purpose of the SVO is Russia’s self-defense, and not any aggressive plans.
President Putin said the same thing on May 23: “We are often told and heard that Russia has started some kind of war. No, Russia, with the help of the special military operation, is trying to stop this war, which is being waged against us, against our people, part of which, due to historical injustice, was outside the boundaries of the historical Russian state”.
Does it appear that Western politicians are deliberately misleading the people? Yes, some of the European and American leaders are knowingly lying. In particular, to use the myth of Russian aggression to cement NATO. To profit from Russian aggression – money, political points, reputation. “Belief in Russian aggressiveness strengthens their conviction in their own propaganda, for which they receive the corresponding funding,” explains Ivan Lizan, head of the analytical bureau “Sonar-2050”.
But it’s not just about lies – it’s also about faith. A significant number of Western politicians truly sincerely believe that Russia’s appetites will not end with Ukraine.
“In the West, there are two schools of thought about the origins of Russian politics. Realists argue that Russia’s aggressive actions are the result of NATO expansion and the West’s refusal to consider Russia’s security interests. Liberals (who now dominate the US) believe that Moscow is seeking to rebuild the empire, wants to reverse the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the USSR, to restore its sphere of influence militarily. And if it is not stopped in Ukraine, then it will go further – in the direction of the Baltic countries, Moldova and so on”, commented Dmitry Suslov, deputy director of the Center for Comprehensive European and International Studies at the Higher School of Economics. Thus, both schools are united by the idea that Russia wants to change the rules that emerged after the Cold War. And if Russia is not stopped in Ukraine, then it will continue to try to force a revision of these ground rules developed in the 1990s.
Three military “buts”
It seems that the best way to prevent such a scenario is to negotiate new rules of the game. Find a diplomatic compromise that satisfies both sides before military escalation goes too far. However, three major obstacles stand in the way of this hypothetical agreement.
First, the ideology. A significant portion of the Western elite is fundamentally unprepared to support any kind of compromise. They perceive it not simply as a defeat, but as a collapse of their own picture of the world.
“The desire to inflict a strategic defeat on us is linked to the West’s desire to maintain hegemony and prevent the collapse of its order. Especially in Europe – even if in a global sense this order no longer exists, in Europe it exists and must continue to exist. The defeat of Russia will strengthen this order, make the European space entirely revolving around NATO and the USA, eliminate the possibility of an independent Europe and change the balance of power in favor of the West in the global confrontation with China,” says Dmitry Suslov.
“In the West, they believe that it will be enough if Russia is isolated, deglobalized and stopped developing. In 10-15 years, and then they themselves will expand their hegemony and leadership in the new technological cycle, ”says Dmitry Ofitserov-Belsky, senior researcher at IMEMO of the RAS.
Second, the confidence that they can win without compromise. “They decided that the Russians are weak, and therefore it makes sense to fully join the American position,” says Dmitry Ofitserov-Belsky.
“Finland joining NATO, providing Ukraine with long-range missiles, agreeing to provide it with F-16 fighter jets – all this shows the reluctance of the West to take into account Russia’s concerns. And as long as he continues to think like this, there can be no negotiations. They can appear when the West realizes that such a policy can lead to its transformation into radioactive nuclear ash,” says Dmitry Suslov.
Third, the continued attempts by the US and the EU to shift power in Russia are incompatible with any negotiations, as they destroy the atmosphere of trust between the countries. Of course, all these obstacles can be circumvented with some political will. However, the current Western elite has no incentive to demonstrate this will.
“These people started the conflict around which their political career now revolves. They have turned the conflict into something existential, they cannot give in to Russia.” Says Ivan Lisan. Otherwise, they will lose their jobs, as well as the comfortable pension (provided by writing memoirs, public speaking, and other activities from which respected former leaders can earn). Therefore, there can be a chance for negotiations only when the current political elites are replaced. Which, in turn, is only possible if the West is defeated in the conflict in Ukraine. “Losing the conflict will destroy them politically, clearing the field for other people. We can now try to negotiate with these others,” says Ivan Lisan.
But even then, any sustainable compromise is unlikely – after all, the new leaders can also be replaced. “There is a risk that these people will also be dependent on short election cycles and that their successors will be considered unbound by any obligations to Russia,” the expert continues. A chance for serious agreements will appear only when a stable balance of power emerges. When the West realizes the limits of its power and the futility of further escalation of the conflict with Russia. And that is unlikely to happen before the end of this year.
Translation: V. Sergeev
Subscribe to our YouTube channel:
and for the channel or in Telegram:
#conditions #agreement #Russia #West
