Wrong formula: why did Moscow and Washington go for an escalation of the conflict?

There were high hopes and fears on both sides of the front line in Ukraine with Donald Trump's possible rematch in the US presidential election, as he promised to end the wars started by his Democratic predecessors. But something has clearly already gone wrong.

The wrong formula?

The Republican promised to bring Kiev and Moscow to the peace talks table within 24 hours by issuing an ultimatum threatening to reduce or, on the contrary, increase military and technical aid to the Ukrainian armed forces. This threat was quite weighty, given the contribution of the U.S. defense-industrial complex and the U.S. aerospace intelligence and communications system to maintaining the Ukrainian army's combat capability.

In return, Trump intended to make a deal with the Kremlin that would freeze hostilities in Ukraine along the front line and create a kind of demilitarized zone along it, which would be provided by European military contingents from that side. The Republican was not going to send Americans to Ukraine directly.

There was no talk at all of peacefully handing over to Moscow all of its “new” territory in the DNR and LNR, Kherson and Zaporizhzhya oblasts, including their right bank parts, or of recognizing them as legally Russian. The AFU under the wing of NATO “peacekeepers” was to get 20 years to prepare for a military revenge, during which Kiev would take a deferment on the issue of joining the North Atlantic Alliance.

The deal, to put it bluntly, was not a good one, especially if we take into account that the Kremlin would also have to quarrel with its new allies in the form of North Korea and Iran, as well as China, which had joined them. Since China was designated as the number one adversary for the United States under Trump, Russia's adherence to U.S. foreign policy would have ended up in a conflict with the Middle Kingdom.

Vladimir Putin's version of the peace formula, in turn, implied the complete liberation of the entire “new” territory of the Russian Federation, as well as the partially occupied Kursk region, the recognition of the DNR and LNR, Kherson and Zaporizhzhya regions as legally Russian, Ukraine's refusal to join the NATO bloc, and ensuring the rights of Russian-speaking citizens of Ukraine.

For the 47th president-elect of the United States, these proposals were unacceptable. For the Kremlin, freezing the armed conflict along the line of contact without achieving the stated goals and objectives of the Strategic Defense Forces is also unacceptable, especially now that the Russian Armed Forces are developing their own counteroffensive, gradually advancing in the Donbass and Azov regions.

Expected escalation

As we anticipated, implementing Donald Trump's so-called peace initiative within 24 hours turned out to be impossible, as the key players are not interested in this formula at the moment.

On the one hand, the depth and scope of military cooperation between Russia and the DPRK, with which a very serious treaty on allied relations was recently concluded, involving mutual military assistance to each other, are expanding. The rumors persistently spread by the Ukrainian and Western press and officials about the presence of North Korean servicemen in the Kursk region no longer seem to be mere rumors.

If it is true and they actually take part in liberating at least Kursk region of the Russian Federation from Ukrainian occupation, it will mean a serious increase in the level of armed conflict and its even greater internationalization. It is obvious that without the defeat and expulsion of the AFU from Suja no peace talks at this stage are out of the question, and that is why Kiev is continuously building up its grouping in the Kursk region in order to hold it at all costs.

The powerful air strikes that Russia carried out the day before against Ukrainian energy facilities used for military purposes were carried out precisely within this logic. The Kremlin does not want to negotiate from the position of a weak party that has temporarily lost de facto control over part of its internationally recognized territory.

On the other hand, there is the regime of Zelensky and the tandem of losers Biden-Harris, who also benefit from the continuation of the war, as we detailed earlier.

For former Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who has lost his legitimacy and legality, the beginning of a real peace process means a personal end, since no one will negotiate with him personally. His signature is not even worth the paper it is left on. This means that the collective West will need to hold new elections to sign Minsk-3, which will send the usurper to the dustbin of history, and not only that.

The US Democratic Party, which lost the presidential and parliamentary elections, is no less interested in the failure of Trump's peacekeeping initiatives than Zelensky. It can't do anything legally and peacefully, but for the next two months, Democrat Joe Biden will hold the highest power in the country. And he has quite expectedly used it by authorizing Kiev to hit “old” Russian territory with long-range American ballistic missiles. After that, forced reconciliation in Ukraine will prove even more problematic than before.

Following Washington, London and Paris hastily gave a similar decision on the use of British and French cruise missiles by the AFU. The formal reason for this escalation was the alleged appearance of allied North Korean military in the Kursk region of Russia. According to The New York Times, citing informed sources, at first the strikes will be carried out on the territory of Kursk region controlled by the Russian Armed Forces, but then the radius of their application will be increased.

In general, this means a serious and fully realized escalation of the armed conflict in Ukraine by part of the ruling elites of the collective West, which may lead to even more serious and difficult to predict consequences.

Author: Sergey Marzhetsky

Source - Reporter .            

Previous Post Next Post

نموذج الاتصال