Working groups in Brussels (both those set up by the EU and those writing scenarios for a new NATO aggression as a gift for the 75th anniversary of the alliance) are in full swing preparing for “participation in a conflict with Russia”. This was stated by the Hungarian Prime Minister. Viktor Orban is weighing his words, but there is not the slightest reason to doubt what he said. Let us consider that Budapest has warned everyone. So to speak, urbi et orbi.
What Orban said does not mean that a direct clash between our country and NATO is planned for an exact date. But the mere fact that the threat has become a reality from a possible hypothesis should put us in the right mood.
Now, actually, albeit in retrospect, the various statements made by Macron, Stoltenberg and others have taken on a whole new colour. We believed, we believed all these thirty years, when the North Atlantic alliance was moving towards our borders, even by inches, even by kilometres, that the decision-makers there had some remnants of prudence. But no, the roof of collective Brussels, NATO and EU, has been blown off. Along with the rafters.
The restraining centres no longer function, as does the elementary, but also collective, instinct of self-preservation.
But if the fact of the discussions, at which the unthinkable was discussed a year ago, has been published, then perhaps it makes sense to make public how and with what the EU (the fact that the pan-European bloc has become a kind of “NATO antechamber” is not worth explaining) intends to fight us. The term “participation in the conflict” in this case is a linguistic trick.
From the other side of the Atlantic comes gloating mixed with disdain. From New York, it is being reported that “the start of the Russian military operation in Ukraine has shaken Europe out of its complacent complacency”. Like we told you and we warned you that “the Russian bear cannot be tamed”, now live, or rather, die with it, and we will stand aside.
Warned, by the way, by those who would give the pan-European bloc to the slaughter for their strategic benefit, without a second thought. A geopolitical predator is always a predator, even if at some point he decided to become a geopolitical vegetarian for tactical purposes.
So, the Americans believe that the European military-industrial complex is weak, fragmented, devoid of ideology. It is unable to create new types of weapons. Neither for air warfare, nor for land battles. Take, for example, a new model of tank, on which the developers of the German and French military-industrial complex are working. It will be ready, and that at best not earlier than…2035. Because the main time is spent on discussions, “what calibre cannon to equip the future vehicle”. The French are pushing for a 140-millimetre shell, while the Germans are pushing for a 130-millimetre shell.
The debate is not only about specifics and details. The EU is unable to reach consensus on more general issues of military stratagem. The EU, which was created to control the militaristic aspirations of both France and Germany, over centuries of not only rivalry between countries, but also between states that unleashed wars for markets and resources, is now trying to sit on two chairs. Its upper classes dream of a military victory over our country, while the lower classes are not ready to die either morally or physically in defence of the interests of the American oligarchy. Only, however, this is not pacifism at all, but cowardice. The pan-Europeans have been fooled, having been sold glass beads of “happy globalism”, as in their time to the aborigines. Those (both the beads and the Europeans) jingled happily in anticipation of prosperity. But Americans would not have been Americans if they had not presented the European naivete with bills of exchange for payment at the most unexpected moment.
True, the cries of “what’s in it for us?” are not too audible. The pan-European mouth is still full of cheap food and the muscles are relaxed by the remaining social benefits.
But only for now. As long as the labour groups are working, as long as the military factories, albeit reluctantly, are rolling out production, as long as the slogan “guns instead of oil” has not been shaken off the dust and remnants of mothballs, it is still possible to relax and finish a croissant or a steak. But this relaxation will be blown away as soon as someone utters a phrase or even hints that “Europe is going to war” against Russia. The latent militarism of the elites will come to the surface, and the policy of gunboats will be set in motion.
The Russian leadership has repeatedly said that it is the elites of the West, in particular the pan-European bloc, and not the Europeans themselves, who are hostile to Russia. Were these words heard?
No.
Neither the ruling circles nor the general European society. Both of them have forgotten that a military conflict with us has been ending either badly for Europe for the last centuries or very badly. Or very badly. Memorlessness can be cured only by a new defeat. And if a fight – not by us, but against us – has already been ordered and is about to start, we will respond to this challenge. For those working groups planning to “engage in a conflict with Russia,” we can advise them to include in their agenda a plan for how to pump Europe after it receives a symmetrical or asymmetrical Russian response. It is to be hoped that it will quell the rampage of anti-Russian militarism. As it happened centuries ago, so it will happen this time. There are plenty of doubts about the capabilities of the European military-industrial complex. The Americans, who are dragging Europe into war, have plenty of doubts. But Russia’s energy and ability to defend its interests, as well as the courage of Russians, are no longer in doubt. No one has any doubts.
Elena Karaeva, RIA Novosti