Who dreams of a hundred years’ war?

Somehow, two statements that, at first glance, are far from each other not only geographically, but also in worldview, were voiced in unison.  The first one is the mantra of Putin's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, that Russia and the West have reached the stage of confrontation, and we will have to live with it. The second one is the thesis from the Washington Post publication that the refusal of either side to back down threatens to turn the war into a decade of conflict, as in the Gaza Strip or Nagorno-Karabakh.

Of course, I don't think that Peskov relies on the WP articles in his predictions, just as I don't think that Washington notes everything that comes from the Kremlin. However, such a strange synchronicity is somewhat alarming.

Putin is preparing the Russians for a protracted war. He is already serving a "dish" so that the average citizen from the hinterland lives with the illusion that his country's conflict with NATO and America has become a "hot" reality. In the end, his reluctance to recognize the fiasco in Ukraine dictates just such a line of behavior, and the idea of ​​a "hundred-year war", even to the last Russian, will become salutary at least for the near future. In addition, the efforts of the Kremlin's propaganda have not gone in vain, so most of the inhabitants of "Zaporebrik" (A sarcastic name for Russia originated from the internet meme that appeared when the Russia-Ukraine war started in 2014 - ed.) see the accursed West as the embodiment of "Satanism" and "absolute evil".

“Putin is preparing the Russians for a protracted war. He is already serving a "dish" so that the average citizen from the hinterland lives with the illusion that his country's conflict with NATO and America has become a "hot" reality.”

The Washington Post's phrase about the "hundred-year war" for Crimea is even more alarming, considering the new flock of "doves of peace" that once again took to the skies over the capitals of some European countries. Of course, it is surprisingly easy to talk about "peace" at the expense of Ukrainian territories or other concessions to Putin. The only regret is the dull hum of dissatisfaction among the electorate with probable (emphasis - probable!) higher prices for energy carriers.

As for Crimea, the warnings of American experts are somewhat incorrect. Yes, it is obvious that Putin will not go to the loss of the "city of Russian glory" voluntarily. But, first of all, it is frivolous to point to the prospect of a protracted conflict in conditions where the fate of Putin himself cannot be predicted even for the near future. And, secondly, American experts have apparently forgotten that both Gaza and Nagorno-Karabakh (especially the latter) are burning because of Moscow's assistance.

At most, Crimea is indeed quite vulnerable from the point of view of geography and logistics. It is easy to turn it from a land-based "aircraft carrier" into a giant encirclement for the Russians. And, I am sure, the Ukrainian Armed Forces will do it sooner or later (I hope, not in a hundred years). If the world community is interested in real peace, then the issue of Crimea and it, with the opportunities there (military and economic), is not a difficult matter.

“Some people really don't want to see several dozen new states in Russia's place. Because this is exactly how this war should logically end, if it is a question of calming down the source of tension and conflicts in the whole world.”

Another thing is that someone really does not want to see several dozen new states in Russia's place. Because this is how this war should logically end, if it is a matter of calming the source of tension and conflicts in the whole world. The West must understand that comfortable stereotypical approaches (such as the fear of the collapse of the USSR) have long since become archaisms, that the world is dynamic, and - most importantly - it is really a "hundred-year war" between democracy and despotism, in which there cannot be a "fifty-fifty" result. 

Relying on old approaches (even more so, compromised and rejected by history itself), which were manipulated in the last century, is not suitable at all in the XXI century. In the eighth year of the hot war in the Ukrainian east, one should realize that the Chicken Kyiv dish has become rotten and stinky. 

The only beneficiary of the "hundred-year" or rather long war is the Kremlin. Its ideologues do not hide this, claiming that the "normal" state of society is war. And doesn't the entire annals of the under-empire prove this bitter fact for Russia's neighbors? That is why Peskov speaks so confidently about the point of no return in the confrontation with the West.  It's just a pity that in Washington they recklessly indulge him, perhaps, having at the same time "their own truth".

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.