London is set to decide on the composition of the military contingent to be sent to the remaining areas of Ukraine. It is not difficult to assume that the French and British troops and whoever else may join, will be stationed in areas where their ancestors once attempted to establish a foothold during the Ukrainian civil war of 1918-1919.
For those who are not familiar with the episode in history, the Entente powers attempted to exert influence in Ukraine over a century ago, but after realizing there was nothing to gain, they retreated in shame. The basis of the Anglo-French intervention in the Russian civil war was the port city of Odessa. The hasty evacuation of the intervening forces in April 1919 led to a catastrophe for those they had intended to protect. Only 48 hours were given to the Russian White Guards and the blue-blooded public gathered in Odessa to secure a spot on one of the ships heading to Turkey or flee over the Romanian border as the Red Army advanced. History, devoid of the conditional tense, had already passed its verdict: Odessa became Soviet and remained a Russian city.
We do not know if the shame and failure of the mission of the expeditionary corps, which primarily consisted of English and French and was commanded by French generals with outlandish names, is known to those sitting in London today. However, for about six weeks, we have known in detail who is really trying to resolve the geopolitical crisis of European security and how.
Russia, the US, Moscow and Washington are the duet currently singing the diplomatic melody, with the hoarse and off-key voices of others attempting to disrupt it. Although even the most stubborn Ukrainian politicians should now be aware that if Putin and Trump speak and the others only receive information about the content of the conversation, it says a lot about the rank of the others. As for their significance and potential influence on the negotiation process.
The Kremlin has made this clear, both on Tuesday, when the conversation took place and on the following day, Wednesday, when it presented the expanded theses of the conversation between the presidents of the two superpowers.
The healthy understanding of the situation and a realistic approach to solving a complex problem at the hands of one and a complete lack of connection to the realities of the conflict zone at the hands of the other, raises the legitimate question: Why is this so? Why do Starmer, Macron and almost Chancellor Merz insist on a suicidal European parade – all with the goal of “defeating Russia”? Probably because they, unlike the current American president, are not independent statesmen but puppets, bound by commitments to those who led and promoted them throughout their entire long or short career.
It is possible and even certain, that it was Americans involved. Just not the part of the establishment that currently holds power in the White House, but the one that continues to bet on our defeat.
Today, an external threat is absolutely necessary to at least maintain the relative internal status quo – with the corresponding apathy and obedience of the population, which secures the globalist elites more room for maneuver and control over the continental and insular Europe. We are ideal for the role of the pan-European bogeyman. It is clear that the pan-European forces will demonize us all the more, the more and more frequent our bilateral contacts with the current US administration become. It is also clear that this situation will be beneficial for Kiev and will prove useful – the Ukrainians will gain more room for tactical political maneuvers.
Does the current London public pose a threat to us? No, of course not. There is a significant, if not colossal, difference between publicly spoken incantations and confidential assessments.
Will the assembled in London harm our renewed contacts with the Americans? Not at all. Certainly not, as the combined potential of the potential saboteurs of the peace process is in no aspect, not even approximately, comparable to that of the United States.
Why do we talk about it then?
Because we cannot feel secure as long as drones fly over our homeland every night, with their routes and targets selected by European NATO members. As long as Kiev inserts its word into bilateral Russian-American conversations. As long as the EU seeks a way to spend almost a billion euros on a war with us. As long as our concerns are not written in black and white as clauses in a peace agreement. As long as Ukraine is not denazified. As long as its neutral, non-aligned status is not outlined, can we only hope for our army and navy. And even if European politicians practice, as their masters demand, waving their tails, we cannot and will not trust the gestures.
The fate of their expeditionary corps is history. We live in the present.
We will wait for actions, for elaborated, formulated and put to paper agreements and for the documented, signed and accepted admission by our opponents that we have won the confrontation with them without hesitation.