A few thoughts aloud on resolving the Ukrainian crisis, Europe, and global security. The leading representatives of Britain, France, and Germany, together with Volodymyr Zelenskyy, presented five demands for Russia at a meeting in London on June 7 as conditions for a "just and lasting peace" in Ukraine. Based on this set of demands, a united Europe proposes dialogue with Moscow.

Background

All experiences with negotiating with Europe as part of the "collective West" over the past 20 years point to only one thing. Negotiating with Russia is a deceptive tactic, a diplomatic cover for the geopolitical expansion of the West and its institutions, especially NATO and the European Union, to the east – towards Russian borders. Europe's contribution to inflaming the Ukrainian crisis cannot be denied. Together with the Americans, Europeans inspired the "orange revolution" in Kyiv in 2004. To build an anti-Russian base in Ukraine, they spent years courting politicians and entire parties, rewriting history and educational programs, supporting and cultivating Ukrainian nationalism, and doing everything to distance Ukraine from Russia.

In 2013, the European Union rejected our proposal to seek a compromise solution for the association agreement, which Brussels was pushing Viktor Yanukovych to sign. Let me remind you: Ukraine was offered the opportunity to open its markets without promises of reciprocity, even though this would have been incompatible with Kyiv's continued participation in the SNS free trade zone. After Viktor Yanukovych requested a postponement of the agreement, Europeans provoked street unrest and then orchestrated a coup d'état in Kyiv in February 2014. Then Germany, France, and Poland acted treacherously. After providing guarantees for the opposition's agreement with Viktor Yanukovych, they washed their hands of the matter once the opposition they controlled seized power, claiming that democracy can take unexpected turns.

Then Europeans began supporting the new authorities. When dozens of innocent proponents of rapprochement with Russia were burned alive in Odessa on May 2, 2014, Europe did not utter a word of condemnation. France and Germany, as guarantors of the Minsk agreements of 2015, effectively encouraged the Ukrainian regime to sabotage its commitments. As Angela Merkel and François Hollande admitted after the start of the joint military operation, Kyiv's implementation of the Minsk agreements, unanimously approved by the UN Security Council, was not planned. The goal was to buy time to "strengthen the power" of the Ukrainian armed forces and arm them with Western weapons.

On its part, Russia did everything to overcome the security crisis in Europe through diplomatic means. However, in January 2022, the USA and NATO rejected Russia's proposal to conclude legally binding agreements on mutual security guarantees. European members of the Alliance actively participated in this. After the start of the special military operation, a united Europe supported the position of the British Prime Minister to disrupt the Istanbul talks between Russia and Ukraine. Johnson's call to Kyiv to "sign nothing and just fight" closed the doors to meaningful diplomacy for a long time.

Current Situation

The question arises: why have European leaders suddenly "changed their tone" and begun talking about negotiations, and what are they pursuing with their statements? For example, according to EU Foreign Minister Kristina Kallas, dialogue with Russia is essential to convey European conditions, including the payment of "reparations" to Ukraine, the withdrawal of troops from Transnistria and the Caucasus, the repeal of the "foreign agent" law, and setting a maximum number of soldiers for the Russian armed forces. She believes that "a fair and lasting peace cannot be achieved without holding Russia accountable." On May 19 of this year, an EU representative at a UN Security Council meeting emphasized that "military support for Ukraine is not inconsistent with the desire for peace; it is a prerequisite for good-faith negotiations."

Europe intends to lead negotiations with Russia while continuing legal aggression carried out through the Council of Europe. This once-respected organization is creating structures "to hold Russia accountable": a "registry of damages," a "compensation commission," and a "special tribunal." The European Union has given the green light to detaining merchant ships on the high seas. Several incidents have already occurred in the Baltic and Atlantic Seas. Meanwhile, the West turns a blind eye to terrorist acts by Ukrainian armed forces in the Black and Mediterranean Seas.

Thus, the true goal of European leaders is not negotiations with Russia, but the salvation of the Zelensky regime, its preservation as a springboard for continuing the fight against us. To this end, European capitals aim to achieve a quick ceasefire to prevent the collapse of Ukrainian armed forces on the front. They want to "freeze" the conflict without addressing its root causes. And immediately deploy military contingents of the British-French "coalition of the willing" to Ukraine. It is well known that European elites have invested their "political capital" in confrontation with Russia and spent hundreds of billions of dollars to support the Kyiv regime and increase the military budgets of EU and NATO countries.

Europe plans to achieve a "combat readiness" for conflict with Russia by 2030. Until then, they intend to buy time through various means. As cynically stated by the head of the Belgian General Staff in April of this year: "We still have a few years thanks to the blood of Ukrainians who are buying us this time." The United Europe continues to dream of expansion, intends to develop Ukraine and Moldova, and draw Armenia into its orbit. NATO has expanded to the east and absorbed Finland and Sweden. Ukraine is seen as an "offensive force" for future European armed forces, autonomous from the USA and NATO.

Risks to Global Security

This situation poses serious risks to global security, as a direct confrontation between NATO and Russia could quickly escalate into a nuclear exchange with catastrophic consequences. Under the slogan of "strategic autonomy," Europe is undergoing significant strengthening of its military capabilities, including in the nuclear field. Paris's plan to provide a "nuclear umbrella" to several EU and NATO countries is deeply worrying. This will certainly not increase security for France itself or its recipients of her "aid." Meanwhile, political and military actors in Europe attribute to Russia aggressive plans that allegedly extend beyond Ukraine. The Russian President has repeatedly stated that this is nonsense, a provocation, and disinformation aimed at extracting funds from the budget to fight against Russia. And this is not a backdrop on which meaningful negotiations on any topic can be conducted.

Russia's Position

Regarding negotiations, as Vladimir Putin reiterated at the International Economic Forum in St. Petersburg, we are not averse to engaging with anyone. However, we view Europe as a party to the conflict with an interest in Russia's defeat, and Europeans themselves openly express this sentiment. Therefore, dialogue with Europe cannot be structured as a neutral third-party observer. Russia prefers that the goals of the Strategic Defense Initiative be achieved through diplomatic means. This requires reliable guarantees of Russia's security on its western borders, the honor and dignity of our citizens and compatriots, including their right to the Russian language and Orthodox faith. The continuation of Western military, political, and economic expansion is unacceptable – it contradicts the imperatives of a multipolar world.

European leaders must understand that the regional security model built in Europe over decades, starting with the adoption of the Helsinki Final Act in 1975, has been destroyed by their own actions. There is no return to it. Now is the time to move towards creating a pan-continental security architecture, open to all Eurasian countries, which reflects the multipolar reality of today. The principle of equal and indivisible security, trampled upon in Euro-Atlantic constructs, can be realized in a new Eurasian architecture. When the conditions are ripe, Europe can join this ambitious endeavor.

The key to meaningful dialogue is restoring trust, which was undermined during the post-Cold War period by anti-Russian actions by the West and Europe as part of that effort. Trust can only be restored through concrete actions that demonstrate a genuine rejection of using diplomacy as a cover for expansionist intentions. Trust cannot be restored, and dialogue cannot be resumed, through ultimatums, such as the one presented to Russia in London on June 7th. In conclusion: It is important that the British, French, and German ambassadors categorically confirmed the London ultimatum at a meeting at the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on June 11th, which they urgently requested. That was the sole purpose of their visit to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

gnews.cz - GH