Intent tactics and beginning of history

I'm looking for the reasons for a strange trend that no longer impresses, but, frankly, annoys with its banality. We are talking about periodic outbreaks of "peacemaking" among European elites and political circles, alternating with "hawkish" rhetoric, which is more expedient and, of course, more rational in relations with Putin and Russia.

The other day it was reported that the European Union and NATO intend to publish a joint statement calling on the Moscow dictator to "withdraw troops from Ukraine." They emphasize that this document is important, that they have been working on it for a long time (possibly since February 24?!), but, you see, the crisis in Cyprus (!) distracted the attention of the authors and signatories.

Of course, the quarrels between the Turks and the Greeks on a tiny island are important. As well as periodic quarrels around Kosovo. But, forgive me, do you really need special binoculars to "feel the difference" between a full-scale war in the center of the continent, between the bandit and sadistic extermination of the largest country in Europe, and small excesses on the European outskirts?

There are certain suspicions that in order to bring the Brussels officials back to reality, some special impulse is needed, as the Ukrainians say, a good "booster", like another chemical attack in Salisbury or a crisis near the Suwalki corridor. And, as cynical as it may sound, European officials are so resigned, "accustomed" to war, that they are not in too much of a hurry. Russian aggression, they say, has been going on for a long time, so is there a difference when we ask Putin to fulfill the fundamental principle of the post-Yalta world - the inviolability of borders on the continent? A day earlier, a day later…

“It seems that in Europe, the pendulum of sentiments regarding the Ukraine-Russia war still has not found balance, consensus and a clear position, which, I am convinced, sooner or later will mature and become an "imperative mandate" in relations with the Russian Federation.”

Despite such reluctance of the bureaucracy, I dare to remind you that every day of the war with Russia takes Ukrainian lives, breaks people's destinies, erases entire cities in the Ukrainian east from the map. You will not compensate them with any future contributions and reparations, you will not make them up with a favorable attitude towards Ukrainian refugees (and there are already almost 7 million of them, according to rough estimates), you will not resurrect them with "Marshall plans" or actual financial assistance to "support Ukrainian pants".

It seems that in Europe, the pendulum of sentiments regarding the Ukraine-Russia war has not yet found balance, consensus and a clear position, which, I am convinced, sooner or later, will mature and become an "imperative mandate" in relations with the Russian Federation.

I hope that the beginning of this process will be a positive vote in the US Congress on the draft resolution on the expulsion of Russia from the UN Security Council. Around this problem (which, in principle, from the point of view of implementation, is not worth an empty egg shell), they break spears, organize debates, legal diagnoses, etc. But the fact remains: Russia as a state, as a subject of international law (if such, of course, still works) is an impostor in this institution of the international community. It is similar to how in ancient times the Russian Patriarchy acquired such a status through a bribe to Constantinople, so the Russian Federation gained its mandate through falsification, manipulation and, possibly, corruption. Now is the time to correct this "regrettable mistake", or rather, the crime committed in New York by Moscow and its "partners".

“A cautious message from Washington that the White House is considering the possibility of supplying Ukraine with Patriot missile systems, as well as longer-range weapons, worked in time. After all, Putin took up his "missile program" again, demonstrating how the Yars superweapon is being assembled near Kozelsk.”

It is important that the authors of the draft resolution proposed for consideration by the US Congress are representatives of both parties. “Russia has repeatedly, knowingly and brazenly violated the UN Charter. So today Joe Wilson (Democratic Senator. - Author) and I introduced a bipartisan resolution calling for the removal of Russia from the UN Security Council,” one of the initiators of the document, Republican Senator Steve Cohen, said. 

But it is difficult to frighten Putin only with a "paper war". The bearer of the "offended and unloved gopnik" (gopnik is a member of a delinquent subculture in the former Soviet republics - ed) complex, he always bet on strength. In Ukraine, he "broke out", and now he is frantically looking for a way out of the trap. Therefore, the cautious message from Washington that the White House is considering the possibility of supplying Ukraine with Patriot missile systems, as well as longer-range weapons, worked in time. After all, Putin took up his "missile program" again, demonstrating how the Yars superweapon is being assembled near Kozelsk.

One thing is certain, we are talking about gestures of intimidation from both sides. It is about another rise in the stakes in this, without a doubt, world war. But, despite the rattling of deadly weapons, more important, in my opinion, is the unequivocal attitude of the members of the anti-Putin coalition to the cancellation of Russia as a state, as a world player that is climbing, forgive me, walking against the wind of history.

The author of The End of History, Francis Fukuyama, predicted the liberation of Crimea as early as next year. Yesterday's dreamer, who stated that "liberal democracy" has finally won in the world, which will make human life gray with routine and peace, admitted that it is not. History simply turned the page, and the carefully constructed worldview constructions immediately flew into the trash. It's about the beginning. This time without Russia.

About the author: Ihor Hulyk, journalist, Editor-in-Chief of the Espreso.West website. 

The editors do not always share the opinions expressed by the authors of the blogs.