Why Zelensky prefers to ignore the paradox of making Ukraine a NATO ally


Ukrainian President in a televised speech last Sunday Vladimir Zelensky choose to point to Nicolas Sarkozy already Angela Merkel as an accomplice Butcha Massacre Because it does not support Ukraine’s accession to NATO. “I invited Mr. Sarkozy and Mrs. Merkel to come and see what their policy of appeasement against Russia has been over the past 14 years,” Zelensky said in a heated speech for internal consumption.

In blaming the former French president and the former German chancellor, Zelensky knew he hit the sore spot: If there is one characteristic of the West, it is that it is easy to blame itself for all the problems in the world, while pointing at anyone who wants to solve them. Zelensky understood that if he blamed European inaction for the war, public opinion would turn to his leaders, increasing pressure on Russia and increasing aid to Ukraine. I may be right, but it’s not fair.

Put Western actors, including France and Germany, on top of NATO and Ukraine issues Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine on February 24From the beginning, perhaps a little timid at first, but then very enthusiastic, the West sided with the Zelensky regime. This may seem like the moral minimum, but morality and politics do not always go hand in hand: the West, and the EU in particular, shares many interests with Russia. Getting rid of them is not easy. Of course, fighting a nuke-wielding thug isn’t easy.

The West stood up against him. When Putin threatened names and surnames—Sweden, FinlandUSA, Poland, Moldova…-, we all decided to impose The toughest trade sanctions in our history. Insufficient? This will be seen. But not just for the Putin regime, but also for our own economy at a very delicate moment. Likewise, weapons were sent to Ukraine so that Ukraine could defend itself. China forced not to arm Russia. When Putin’s entourage kept threatening nuclear catastrophe, he persevered.

It is clear that Russia’s humiliating defeat in Ukraine is explained by the heroic resistance of the Ukrainian people and army. Also from the tenacity of his government, who refused to hand over even one of his positions, he continually condemned every atrocity committed by the enemy. Now, it would be absurd to deny that Western weapons have something to do with it too. It cannot be that Russia hates us for arming Ukraine and Ukraine hates us for not arming enough or giving us attention. Do not, The West did not turn a blind eye, and for many days it has been exposed to war scenes that seem to herald World War III. All for Ukraine…to prevent what happened in the Sudetenland in March 1938.

The complexity of Ukraine

It is unfair and ungrateful to insist on Western cowardice. This is also to influence the constant message of the Kremlin. Putin is convinced that the European Union and the United States will back down in the face of the threat of war on the border.He has no united front to tell him: “Every inch of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, even your great ally Hungary will be defended like an inch of our own flag.” So, of course, that doesn’t stop us already in Syria , Georgia and Chechnya have seen massacres, massacres or brutality (we do cross our arms there), but at least it stopped Putin from expanding these massacres across the country

Will all these problems be resolved when Ukraine joins NATO in 2009? Or sometime in the future? That is to put the cart in front of the cow. It’s easy to say that France and Germany refused and suggested they did so out of cowardice, not wanting to confront Putin when the time came. Complicating matters is the acceptance of the complex situation Ukrainian politics has experienced over the past two decades. When NATO asked itself what it wanted to be, it decided it wanted to tighten up and establish itself as a defensive force. The most important thing is to defend against terrorism, especially possible challenges from Russia and China.

Five bodies found in Ukrainian city of Bukha after Russian troops withdraw


In all this, where is Ukraine? If NATO were to be a closed alliance, based on trust, and with all members committing to defend each other in case any of them were attacked… What can the Yushenko and Timoshenko governments contribute to the agreement? Unfortunately, not stable. External instability due to threats from Russia, agree… However, internal instability is also typical of a country that appears to be split in two, as will be shown later.

Example of Yanukovych

If Merkel and Sarkozy agreed in 2009 not to let any eastward expansion projects go, then in 2010, time proved them right.In Ukraine’s presidential election, pro-Russian candidates Viktor Yanukovych defeat the pro-European bloc it leads Tymoshenko and take power. Yanukovych was close to winning the election in 2004. If he doesn’t, it’s because of the anger caused by the Kremlin’s attempt to poison his arch-rival, Victor Yushenkothe leader of the so-called “Orange Revolution”, with a pro-European color.

Ukraine has experienced this kind of internal tension since independence, and NATO knew it at the time, just as Putin knew it and wanted to exploit it on February 24. Four of the country’s five main cities speak Russian and support the Kremlin-promoted candidate, while the rest of the country voted in the opposite direction, amid internal tensions. One of the reasons Russia thinks the war will last a week is because it believes the country’s southeast will behave in war the same way it did in peacetime or Crimea in 2014: loyal to its Slavic roots.

Merkel and Sarkozy know the risks, they know Scholz now or Macron or his own Boris JohnsonIt would be an unacceptable paradox to have a country in your midst that, at any time, depending on the outcome of the election, could be led by someone more sympathetic to the enemy than the coalition itself.NATO will face enough problems in the short term Victor Orbangrown up after his devastating election victory In Hungary this weekend, it seemed as though it had accepted a country willing to appoint Vladimir Putin’s lackey as president.

In any process of joining the EU or NATO, Ukraine will encounter both problems, and they will work together. Furthermore, without one, the other will not be understood. On the one hand, it will face the threat of Russia intervening in what it considers to be its sphere of influence – which has led us to a world war, possibly nuclear war – … on the other hand, it will have the uncertainty of the state itself.

Even without Russian troops deployed on Ukrainian soil, Yanukovych came close to winning in 2004 and won in 2010. Kyiv and western Ukraine have strong pro-European willbut it is reasonable to think that the southeastern part of the country not only does not have this enthusiasm, but prefers a military alliance with Russia.

Partner or “mole”?

Zelensky’s own account is contradictory in this regard: it must be remembered that Zelensky is not precisely the most pro-Western candidate in the 2019 election. A car was on its way to Moscow and they played that role. Zelensky was a beloved and respected man in the pro-Russian region. In fact, his series, village servant It aired in western Russia with some success. Born in Dneprotovsk, his mastery of the language was absolute.

Why does Zelensky want his country to be an organization of cowards? Every time he accuses the West of sitting on his hands, but at the same time calls again and again for integration into its economic and military establishment, Zelensky should ask himself if he is contradicting himself.His message to his people, his citizens, was ambiguous to say the least: “They got us in trouble.” To get backCompared to this Tuesday at the Spanish sovereign headquarters“They did to us what Britain and France did to the Second Republic in 1936, they let neo-Nazis go unpunished”.

It’s not like that. If Zelensky really believed this, or if it was a strategic ploy, it would certainly not make Ukraine a least reliable ally. Neither Merkel nor Sarkozy should be held responsible for the Buha incident.Neither France nor Germany should be held responsible for what continues to happen Mariupol. yes Yanukovych on duty could have it, those who defended Putin for decades in the same country who made it impossible for Ukraine to be a country where you risk your life Can have it, it depends on government power, yes he may not play for you. You don’t know when a buddy can be a mole countrythere is no risk of a military alliance at any time: not in 1949, not in 2009, not in 2022.


Source link


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here