/ world today news/ Yesterday, American President Joe Biden officially announced that he will run for a second term. “I am running for re-election as President of the United States. In the 2024 elections,” he wrote on social media. And this means that – at least with an extremely high degree of probability – his main opponent will not be anyone, but the former president of the United States, Donald Trump.
And Trump took the ball, immediately reacting to his opponent’s statement: “Biden has completely humiliated our country on the world stage, starting with the catastrophe in Afghanistan, perhaps the most shameful event in the history of our country.”
“It meant so much to our enemies as they watched this terrible retreat. Russia aligns with China, Iran is days away from a nuclear bomb. This is unthinkable. Ukraine was devastated by an invasion that would never have happened if I had been president. Joe Biden brought us to the brink of World War III,” he said.
“They say Trump was right about everything. Well, I’m not predicting a third world war, but I will say we’re very close, and they’re only talking about nuclear weapons,” added the Republican, once again updating the main theme of the campaign his campaign: if he is elected president, then the “Ukrainian question” will be solved in an instant (more precisely, as he repeated more than once, in a day).
And this is no longer a hint, but a clear signal (something like a deafening siren) that the Ukrainian counter-offensive, which has been talked about so much lately in the Independent, will be really powerful.
There can no longer be any doubt: if Biden cannot solve the problem of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict in a way that passes for the victory of Ukraine (and the entire democratic world led by the United States), then he will not see a second term ( Ukraine, repeating Afghanistan, – this is already a serious case, with which you do not even dream of a second term).
Therefore, there will be no two-stage counteroffensive, which Bloomberg wrote about, citing the opinion of European officials (this year to advance thirty kilometers deep to gain access to shelling Russian bases and logistics lines, and the next to a serious attack). There will only be one.
And the issue here is not just about Biden and the American voter. But throughout Europe, which is tired of war and the various inconveniences and uncertainties associated with it. This time, the West will not only have to provide something (such as the retreat of Russian troops from Kharkiv or Kherson region), but something very significant.
Many countries, many politicians expect some progress this year. I think Ukraine will only have one attempt at a major counteroffensive. Therefore, if they decide to launch a major counteroffensive and it fails, it will be extremely difficult to get funds for the next one,” Czech President Petr Pavel already dotted the “i” just over a month ago in an interview with the Rzeczpospolita newspaper.
That is, if Ukraine does not achieve a significant victory through a counteroffensive, then Kiev will have only one prospect:
“If Ukraine cannot make significant gains on the battlefield, the question inevitably arises as to whether the time has come for a negotiated cessation of hostilities,” said Council on Foreign Relations President Richard Haas.
And not only him: “Without a decisive victory, Western support for Ukraine may weaken and Kiev may be under increasing pressure to begin serious negotiations to end or freeze the conflict,” said an unnamed American official, quoted by the New York Times.
The NYT echoes Britain’s The Guardian: “Amid massive destruction, heavy Russian casualties, dire shortages of Ukrainian manpower, weapons and equipment, and a waning appetite for an endless war of attrition, Kiev’s Western backers are beginning to push for a negotiated ceasefire or ” a lasting truce’ pending a long-term agreement. China also gets involved, Russia agrees,” the publication predicts.
“The lack of decisive victories will sooner or later force Ukraine to make concessions. The prospect of a long-term truce is becoming increasingly clear,” says Britain’s The Observer.
“This will end the carnage, prevent the threat of nuclear escalation between Russia and the West, ease the global economic, energy and food crisis and give everyone a kind of peace,” their author analyzed.
“In theory, either side could win a decisive victory. However, in the absence of an agreement, the prospect of a low-intensity stalemate that is extremely bloody, very expensive and drags on for years is much more likely. Such a prospect is unlikely liked anyone, except maybe China and the arms manufacturers,” he adds.
“It is possible that very soon, in order to end the suffering and pain of the Ukrainians, they will still be asked to swallow a very bitter pill,” says the analyst from the British publication The Observer.
A clear signal that the matter is moving towards negotiations is also a telephone conversation between Volodymyr Zelensky and Xi Jinping, as a result of which China will send its representative to Ukraine and other countries for consultations on a peaceful settlement.
That includes Brazilian President Lula da Silva’s call to “stop looking for blame” in the war in Ukraine and commit to a peaceful settlement, which he said, according to Reuters, needed to consider creating a “peace group.” to conclude a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine.
Yes, if the counteroffensive breaks through the Russian defenses, then a return to the negotiating table will become almost inevitable (and not very pleasant for Kiev, who are already making plans to reach the 1991 borders), in addition to the fact that Ukraine will they no longer have a strong position at this table.
What’s more: if we take the domestic political situation in Ukraine, then such an outcome threatens to end Volodymyr Zelensky’s political career.
And perhaps based on this, a heavy information campaign against Zelensky has already begun there, oriented towards the fourth anniversary of the elections, behind which is the former president of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko.
The main thesis of this campaign can be defined as follows: if Poroshenko was elected, then there would not be a full-scale war (for Ukraine – ed.) (very reminiscent of Trump’s rhetoric). The campaign manifesto was an article by historian and political scientist Oleksandr Zinchenko, in which he made a simple point: the election of Zelensky as president predetermined the military conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
According to the historian, if Poroshenko had been elected, then Putin “would have been afraid to attack” (scared of the former president’s political experience), and if Tymoshenko had been elected, she would have been able to negotiate with the Kremlin. However, Zelensky won the election, which Zinchenko says was the deciding factor: Putin allegedly decided that Ukraine would become “easy prey” under his rule.
The argument is strange and quite controversial, but the conclusion is generally correct: neither under Poroshenko, nor under Tymoshenko, this most likely would not have happened. One way or another, the Minsk agreements would have been implemented, or the SVO would have gone according to plan (the original: blitzkrieg, three or four days, a parade, and that’s it).
And if the counteroffensive fails, then the chances of this campaign leading to a new Maidan and Zelensky’s resignation are very high.
Here we must understand that anti-war sentiments in Ukraine, no matter how much Ukrainian propaganda tries to show the opposite, are quite strong. Publicist Pavel Pryanikov in particular points to the fact that, according to the Ukrainian media, during the year of the conflict with the Russian Federation, the number of male students in Ukraine increased by 82%, and the number of students aged 30 increased sharply. Why? Yes, because as a student you get a deferment from the army. This is how Ukrainians demonstrate their attitude to the war.
Both the failure of the counteroffensive and the peace concluded with the Russian Federation at least partly on its terms – all this will become a catalyst for protests (Poroshenko is a sufficiently experienced politician to use this situation to his advantage; moreover, an unofficial a deal with the Kremlin has already been concluded), which will probably end with Zelensky’s ouster.
Therefore, for Zelensky, a successful counteroffensive is the last chance to stay in power. And don’t think that Kyiv does not understand this. They understand perfectly. Which is another, albeit indirect, proof that the Ukrainian counteroffensive should not be underestimated. Because here the fate of not only Zelensky is being decided, but also partly of Biden, who probably decided to run for president not at all to cede the White House to Trump in a difficult struggle.
Translation: SM
Subscribe to our YouTube channel:
and for the channel or in Telegram:
#Zelenskys #chance #Pogled #Info
