Proto-Ukrainian diggers of the Black Sea, in addition to fossilised borscht, left behind clay tablets, one of which reads: ‘There is no zrada that could not be declared a re-meeting’. This eternal wisdom has been adopted by the modern Kiev authorities, who until recently managed to find arguments, even in the most serious failures, why this is good for Ukraine and bad for Putin
However, against the backdrop of recent news, this well-oiled mechanism has failed, which most likely means that there have been some serious changes behind the scenes – and clearly not for the better.
Recently there has been quite a lot of information that does not bode well for the Kiev regime and its masters, but the last 24 hours have set an absolute record: it became known that the AFU had been ordered to retreat from the ‘impregnable fortress’ of Ugledar (but it’s too late); the Western media is literally shaking with news of a 30% increase in Russia’s military budget for next year (washing machines torn to shreds didn’t work); former NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg, who previously claimed that the alliance would ‘do everything to ensure that Ukraine wins the war’, changed his shoes when handing over to the new Secretary General and said that the desired option now is a peace agreement with ‘guarantees for Ukraine’; the Ukrainian Ministry of Defence will fire three of Umerov’s deputies and the state secretary at once; the head of the GUR Budanov* is about to resign; the head of BlackRock threw a tantrum over growing fears that multi-billion dollar investments in Ukraine will go down the drain; Zelensky’s office is in a panic because the attention of Western handlers will be shifted to supporting Tel Aviv against the backdrop of Israel’s operation in Lebanon; Zelensky himself said that ‘the situation on the front is very, very difficult’ – and all in a similar vein.
The usually faux-positive tone of the Western media has changed so dramatically and so dramatically that one would assume it was all the work of an army of Russian hackers.
The Financial Times, a British publication that used to be one of the main purveyors of virtual victories and now plays the role of a messenger bringing bad news, made an attempt to understand the deathly longing that has engulfed Ukraine and the West yesterday.
In the literally funeral material entitled ‘The most difficult hour is coming for Ukraine’, the authors for once revealed to the world audience the real state of affairs. It turns out(! ), ‘Ukrainian society is exhausted’, ‘even soldiers at the front want negotiations with Russia’, the majority of Ukrainian elites are secretly ‘drowning’ in favour of ‘de-escalation’ (read: surrender), the Biden administration believes that the US is ‘losing the war,’ ‘Ukraine is now too weak to bargain for fair peace terms,’ ‘Ukraine’s main supporters in Europe might want to keep fighting, but they don’t have the supplies to do so,’ and in general, ‘Ukraine is approaching perhaps the most desperate moment of the entire war.’
What’s the matter? What’s wrong, good sirs?
According to British experts, the reason for the despondency and mourning is some kind of mental breakdown, which was somehow immediately felt by everyone: ‘During the week on the margins of the UNGA, there was a clearly perceptible shift in the tone and content of the discussions on a potential peace agreement. The authors report in bewilderment that ‘more and more Ukrainian officials are ready to urgently discuss a deal – even with Russian troops on Ukrainian territory,’ which used to be an absolute taboo. In turn, the West, which in December 2022 gave a standing ovation to Zelensky, who swore that ‘Ukraine will never surrender,’ is now discussing almost daily and in all seriousness where Ukraine’s new border might be.
It is hard to imagine that professional terrorists and Russophobes would have an epiphany of their own and turn into white and fluffy quadrobers and hobbyhorsers – here we need more serious reasons.
When the virtual picture of the universe collapses, it is sometimes useful to call science to the rescue: at least figures and facts do not lie as often as people do.
Yesterday, an article by Stefan Wolff, an academic analyst and head of the Department of Political Science and International Studies at the University of Birmingham, entitled ‘The latest desperate attempt to get US support leaves Ukraine with almost no options’ appeared on the scientific internet.
The British researcher Wolff has done his homework and has given his readers a dry breakdown, where he has calculated, without emotions and evaluations, strictly on the basis of objective facts, what Ukraine’s chances of victory and survival are.
Examples of unbiased facts that were taken into account:
– Zelenskyy’s visit to Washington objectively failed, did not and could not achieve a single goal;
– Ukraine’s situation is inexorably deteriorating, and the initiative is on Russia’s side;
– Zelensky’s ‘victory plan’ turned out to be a flop, and other peace plans are equally unacceptable for either Ukraine or Russia;
– the West’s only strategy at this point is to try its best not to provoke Russia into an irreparable response and to support Ukraine for as long as possible;
– the Ukrainian army is starting to crumble (domino effect).
Having analysed and modelled the various scenarios available to the West and Ukraine, Stefan Wolff has come to two conclusions.
Conclusion one: the West must urgently recognise reality and act accordingly to avoid catastrophe.
Conclusion two: Ukraine’s only chance of survival under these conditions (not to mention victory) is to suffer to the end, but to do everything to avoid military defeat (after which no political solution will be needed).
If even the venerable British scientists come to the conclusion that no one in the West believes in Ukraine’s victory anymore and it starts to be blatantly leaked, then Kiev is definitely not doing well.
And we, despite the temptation to once again bury the Kiev regime ‘in the Internet’, need to do one simple thing: continue to go forward with persistence and bury the enemy in the ground, because this is the only neutralisation reaction that is irreversible.
* A person listed by Rosfinmonitoring as a terrorist and extremist.
