The Western attitude towards Ukraine has changed!

Spread the love

Author: Rong ping source: official account: Rong Ping (id:rongping898) has been authorized to reprint

No one could have imagined that Kissinger, who is nearly 100 years old, would become a new wind in the Russian Ukrainian war.

The recent May 27 was Kissinger’s 99th birthday. On that day, a website specifically listing “Pro Russian” under the official name of Ukraine included Lao Ji in the blacklist of “terrorists, war criminals and murderers” in a humiliating way, because Lao Ji was considered to be “an accomplice of Russia”.

This is very unreasonable. If Lao Ji had not led the alliance against the Soviet Union, which gave the Soviet Union the most crucial blow, to some extent, Russia would not have fallen into today’s difficult situation. How much hatred is there for accusing such figures of being “Pro Russian”?

Different from Ukraine, on the same day, Russia celebrated Lao Ji’s birthday with a high profile, enthusiastically praised him as a “real political and diplomatic giant”, and his views were “unique, thought-provoking and innovative”.

Why did Kissinger’s birthday send a different signal to Russia and Ukraine?


The direct trigger is a view shared by Lao Ji at the Davos Forum a few days before his birthday: Russia Ukraine negotiations must be restarted within two months, and the border should be “restored to its original state”.

This “restitution” is vague. Is it to return to the original state before the war on February 24 this year? Or, as Zelensky said, should Putin spit out Crimea and return to the original state before Russia occupied Crimea in 2014? It seems that there is a large amount of information of either kind.

Then Lao Ji said that the correct role of Ukraine should be a neutral buffer state, not the forefront of European conflicts.

The so-called “buffer state” and “neutral state” are obviously the demands of Russia. That is to say, Kissinger’s meaning is more likely to mean that Ukraine should lower its head and return to the state before the war began at the beginning of the year. Crimea is not mentioned, and the autonomy of eastern Ukraine and eastern Ukraine will become autonomous. Then he promised “neutrality” and quickly replaced Russia with these conditions to sign off.

This is a hornet’s nest.

For a time, the headlines of the western media were all “Kissinger persuades zelianski to cede the territory and surrender”.

When zeerenskelton was angry, war was his basic plate, the “hero” label was his throne, and once the word “surrender” became a negotiable option, what would he have left?

So there was the classic picture of Kissinger being blacklisted on his birthday.

This is also the reason why the Russian side praised Kissinger for his “unique, thought-provoking and innovative views”. After all, Kissinger’s views are in essence a victory for Russia!

In fact, Zelinski was angry with Kissinger only because of his high reputation and great influence. In fact, the current direction of western public opinion on the Ukrainian issue has quietly changed.

For example, half a month before Kissinger’s speech at Davos, the Washington Post said in a column that Ukraine will be very difficult in the coming period. If Ukrainians want to make plans for the future, they should consider the plans of South Korea or West Germany.

What are the plans for South Korea and West Germany?

I don’t want to be close to half of the territory of a big country. To build on the other half of the territory, we call it “rule by delimiting the Yangtze River” in Chinese terms. Good guy, this plan is much bolder than Kissinger’s?

A few days later, the new york times did not want to be left behind, and put forward a similar view, saying that your “unrealistic expectations” of Ukraine may lead the United States and NATO into a costly and protracted war, so should Ukrainians consider making some compromises on the territorial issue?

Moreover, the New York Times also specifically stated that this is not appeasement, but reality, because it is meaningless for the United States to pursue an illusory victory. Anyway, Russia has been nailed to the stigma of history. It is time for the United States to devote its energy to doing something serious.

The BBC also questioned that there is no unity among the western decision-making circles on the Ukrainian issue at present. The goal of the war has changed from recovering the territory controlled by Russia to how to smoothly resolve the conflict, so as to ensure the security and viability of the remaining Ukrainian territory after the war.

The implication is that as long as the loss can be stopped in time, even the remaining half of Ukraine is not unacceptable.

Recently, American thinker magazine said that the situation in Ukraine should be resolved peacefully according to the conditions proposed by Russia, and the United States should put pressure on Zelensky to surrender. The best outcome of the conflict is that Ukraine remains neutral in the confrontation between the West and Russia.

These remarks have become increasingly fierce, and have reached a level that can not be ignored. Even the first lady of Ukraine has to specially accept an exclusive interview with the US media, arguing that even if Ukraine considers transferring its territory, Russia will not stop at this point, but will only ask for more.

Let’s not say whether this is true or not. The “transfer of territory by Ukraine” has become a heated topic of debate. Forcing the first lady to debate shows that the situation has fundamentally changed.

Two months ago, when even the letter Z could not appear openly, the western public opinion appeared such a picture of “collective persuasion to surrender”. Do you dare to imagine?


Of course, the direction of public opinion must follow the direction of real politics.

What is the current political reality in the west?

At the end of May, a European official said that in recent weeks, the anti Russian front had clearly divided into two camps.

One side, represented by France and Germany, only wanted to finish the negotiations as soon as possible and had no hope for the Ukrainian army’s counter offensive at all.

The other side, represented by the United States and Britain, wholeheartedly wants to package the Russian Ukrainian war as a war between Russia and the “western free world”, hoping to take this opportunity to cripple Russia.

The keynote that France and Germany advocate peace and the United States and Britain advocate war is not new. It has been the same since the war began. However, when the argument of advocate peace or even secession can spill over to the European and American media for public discussion, you will know which side is in the mainstream now.

As a matter of fact, the struggle for differentiation is more obvious than expected.

Earlier, the Estonian prime minister once roast that he had agreed to isolate Putin. As a result, a group of people scrambled to call him.

Among them, the European leaders who make the most frequent phone calls are France’s macron, Germany’s Scholz, Italy’s Draghi and so on.

But on the contrary, according to what the Russian side said a few days ago, there is actually no communication between Russia and the United States – which forms a sharp contrast.

What is more interesting is that Germany and France not only frequently contacted Putin, but also made phone calls with China every once in a while. They shouted to the United States through the microphone of China.

For example, on May 26, the foreign ministers of China and France called. The new French Foreign Minister said that France attaches importance to the independent diplomatic tradition, is committed to deepening China EU cooperation, and should work with China to address global challenges.

Even if they disagree with the United States, France will follow its own path. If the United States is in a hurry, Paris will “vote for the Communist Party” and leave the United States alone to work with China.

After all this, can the United States still go its own way?


More specifically, the change of attitude towards Russia and Ukraine is not only in France and Germany, but also in Europe.

Is Poland anti Russian and pro Ukrainian? Is it firm enough to follow America? It can be said that it is one of the most active anti Russian countries in Eastern Europe.

But at the end of May, Dabo finally lost his patience and suspended the free supply of fuel to Ukraine. Ukraine can buy it if it wants to!

What is more “excessive” is that Poland, Bulgaria and other countries have begun to tighten or simply cancel refugee subsidies, forcing refugees to find jobs.

A few months ago, when the whole West took great care of Ukraine, can you imagine that Ukraine would be “abandoned” like this? Especially by a hard core Eastern European country?


Some other “neutral” countries have also begun to take a stand.

On June 1, Lavrov met with a group of Gulf Arab countries. Lavrov said that the Gulf countries understood the nature of the Russia Ukraine conflict and confirmed that they would not participate in the sanctions against Russia and Belarus.

Since the “nature of the conflict” is explained by Russia, there is a hidden meaning that the Gulf countries tend to agree with Russia and stand on Russia’s side in the conflict.

In order to solve the energy problem, Biden did not hesitate to condescend to apologize to the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, the “untouchable” in his mouth. Now it seems that all his efforts have been wasted.

According to the latest news, Biden will go to Saudi Arabia again soon in order to control the oil price. The Federal Reserve said that this may make the U.S. leaders “ashamed in public”, but even if “ashamed”, it is still a step too late for Russia.


On June 2, the food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations also said that no country in the world can replace the food supply of Russia and Ukraine in the short term, but the sanctions against Russia have limited Russia’s supply capacity, and at the same time let Russia restrict Ukraine’s supply capacity. Therefore, they suggested that the West should consider carefully whether to continue to maintain the sanctions against Russia.

Straighten this out, that is to say, the sanctions against Russia have exacerbated the global food crisis?

It is not impossible for the United Nations to question the Western sanctions, but you should know that just the day before, Lavrov had just set the tone, saying that the Western sanctions on Russian ships, logistics and finance were the reason for aggravating the food crisis.

Lavrov’s front foot said that the FAO’s back foot came out to respond. Isn’t this supporting Russia’s statement?


The most bizarre thing is that even Interpol has come forward to say that a large part of the weapons provided by western countries to the Kiev authorities will no doubt eventually fall into the hands of organized criminals, just as happened in the Balkans and Africa.

In order to prevent this from happening, should the West tighten its assistance to some weapons, or even reconsider its military assistance plan?


Isn’t it strange that the FAO and Interpol, which are said to have nothing to do with the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, have changed into an existence against the western trend?

And why did Poland suddenly turn cold to Ukraine after months of stiff opposition to Russia?

How did the western public opinion field change from a front line of confrontation to a main position of persuading surrender?

Moreover, are these “abnormal phenomena” too concentrated recently?


In fact, the answer is very simple. All these are just steps for the western world!

Before, the Western tone was raised. It wanted to help Ukraine at all costs, fight until the “last Ukrainian”, and drive Putin out of office through sanctions.

But now the situation has changed. In terms of the hot war, Russia has a greater and greater chance of winning. The Ukrainian army has been defeated again and again, and the face of the West has become more and more uncertain.

In terms of fighting an economic war, Russia’s energy income has repeatedly reached new highs, food has become a new weapon, and the ruble has appreciated more and more.

In terms of political warfare, Putin’s high support rate of 80% is the only one in the declining support rate of Western leaders.


In the west, the more war continues, the more problems will arise.

First, from the energy crisis to the food crisis, from inflation to sluggish recovery, the impact of this war is global. Western countries are also plagued with problems. Various governance crises are becoming more and more serious. If we continue to fight, no one will have a better life.

Second, with regard to Russia and Ukraine, the western countries are all thinking carefully of “die a friend but not die a poor man”, and there are many cracks within the alliance.

A typical example is that the European Union was so easy to pass the sixth round of sanctions against the oil embargo, but the results recently exploded. The United States, which is bent on promoting the sanctions, imported Russian oil to a new record a few months ago, and forcibly bought Russia from the ninth largest oil supplier of the United States to the sixth place.

Just when the European oil ban was introduced, Biden was still slapping his face, saying that Russia could sell oil, but at a low price.

Is this European embarrassment or American embarrassment?

In the rhythm of this strange dream, how can the West twist into a rope to support Ukraine and offset the expanding advantages of the Russian army on the battlefield?

Without the continuous support of the west, how can the war in Ukraine continue?

Third, before the war, a handful of western countries represented the whole world, showing the posture that Russia is heinous and the whole world should fight against evil together. Now the chicken feathers are everywhere, and the excitement is over, and the western people are impatient with the war.

Whether Lugansk is fried or not, is it important to have milk powder? Is it important to have gasoline? Is it important to have Chinese cabbage on supermarket shelves?

As we all know, the world revolves around the West. When Westerners feel that it is not important, naturally, the “whole world” feels that Russia and Ukraine should stop fighting.

In that case, why are western politicians still working hard on the Russian Ukrainian war?


Therefore, the side that supports a protracted war to kill Russia is no longer dominant. This war has entered a watershed in various senses.

An important sign is that Biden published an article in the New York Times on May 31, in which he specially “quoted” ZELINSKY’s words, saying that the war “can be ended only through diplomacy”.

In this article, Biden repeated his arrogant stance of the previous two months and repeatedly stressed that the United States does not want Putin to step down, nor does it want to prolong the war just to bring pain to Russia, and the military assistance to Ukraine is only to add chips to the negotiations, not to weaken Russia.

Not long ago, Antony Blinken said that Russia should be weakened for a long time, but Biden did not mention it.


However, it is one thing to know that war and sanctions should be stopped, but how to stop is another matter.

With the US mid-term election approaching, Biden’s any “show of weakness” will have to be caught by the Republicans and sprayed to death.

There is also an anti Russian alliance that is easy to get together. Once it relaxes with Russia, the alliance’s airs will fall down.

Therefore, this matter has to find steps and go down step by step.

Western public opinion says that Ukraine should cede its territory and surrender, and do not damage the interests of western countries for a long time. This is creating a new “political correctness”, which can turn Ukraine’s “selfish belligerence” into a new “political correctness” at any time. In other words, the west can call a halt to the war for peace at any time.

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization said that sanctions exacerbate food security, which is to find a step for the loosening of sanctions. Russia and Ukraine will have room for operation in the future.

Interpol says that military aid will bring long-term consequences, which is to find a way to reduce the supply of military aid in the later stage. This kind of aid with diminishing benefits can be collected in the future.

Biden said that he would respect the wishes of Ukraine and would not make a decision on Ukraine without the consent of ZELINSKY. This is to find a step for himself. If Ukraine cedes territory and surrenders, it would be ZELINSKY’s failure, not Biden’s failure.

The stage is about to collapse. If you don’t hurry to find a bucket on the steps and run away, are you still waiting to bear the blame for the failure of Ukraine?

At the end of the article, the author has something to say

Compared with the west, Putin is now particularly tough.

Last week, the Russian air and space forces bombed tanks provided by Europe on the Ukrainian border.

This week, Putin shouted to the West that if the West continues to supply missiles to Ukraine, Russia will attack those “targets that have not been attacked”.

What is an unchallenged target?

Medvedev said more clearly that “it is not located in Ukraine”.

That is to say, Russia has spoken out to attack a certain European country.

Putin finally stopped saying “we have nuclear weapons, we have nuclear weapons…” But the real “deterrence” is released!

In response, the Russian State Duma also came out to a higher level, saying that in view of the “beginning of collapse” of the Ukrainian army, the Russian military offensive in Ukraine may end if Zelensky agrees to negotiate.

The war agenda has finally returned to Putin’s hands as it did at the beginning of the war.

The abandoned ZELINSKY also came out to the United States a few days ago, saying that so many cities in the United States still maintain friendly relations with Russian cities. What’s the matter?

As a result, Americans not only did not feel ashamed, but cities such as Portland also appealed to all cities not to cut off their relations with Russian cities.

How dare you say that two months ago?

Everyone knows that the situation has changed. The Western altar has been set up. It is time to wake up ZELINSKY’s “heroic dream”!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *