Ian Proud is an individual much better qualified than a New Zealand resident watching from afar. Yet...
I am not sure that he has got it right in his analysis of the current war taking place in Europe. I question, for the sake of simplicity, just one of Ian's assumptions - that the countries of Western Europe have an interest in seeking a settlement of the war. What I see is the opposite of trying to end the war. I must admit, that I came to the conclusion, long ago. That I saw the arming of Ukraine by NATO countries, prior to the war, as part of a plan by NATO to expand the alliance in a bid to take on Russia. The purpose being to break Russia up, so that Corporations could resume their destruction of the "Soviet Union" as they did when Yeltsin ruled.
Whether you accept my analysis or not, I have no belief that the largest European countries have any interest in seeking a peace - a war in which many of them are covertly taking an active part.
I generally find it tedious when people respond to my posts in the third person. I have long said that leaders in western Europe have shown little interest in ending the war. This article suggests a need to break the dialogue through really diplomacy. So spare me (sorry, whoever you were writing to) the lecture and read the article please.
From an offensive realist viewpoint, if Europe can successfully wage a war that breaks Russia's energy export capabilities with minimal U.S. help, it represents a highly successful buck-passing strategy. It starves China of a secure overland energy supply, restores a unipolar focus for the U.S. in the Indo-Pacific, and forces China into a position of maritime vulnerability where American naval power remains dominant. However, it requires navigating the extreme risk of Russian nuclear desperation and global economic chaos."
My attempt at being diplomatic clearly failed miserably.
Let me be clear.
The reason that Western Europe has little interest in seeking an end to the war taking place on their continent is that rather than being spectators, it is their war. A war that they and the Americans fund and actively support. They have done so since before hostilities actually took place. The only difference is that their mililitaries are not taking an active part on the front lines. It is young and not so young Ukranians who are dying, rather than their paymasters in the West.
I accept that you do not come from the same standpoint.
But the idea that somehow Western Europeans might wish to end the war between Ukraine and Russia can only have validity if you also believe that they are not active participants, and have been all along.
However, I do think that it is in the interest of European Governments for the war to end. Their economies are in a poor state, and show little sign of recovery. On top of that the recent moves to militarisation by Germany and Britain, so that they can directly fight Russia themselves, have limited chances of success - primarily because they no longer have the industrial base to do so.
If Britain and Western Europe wish to make progress, it will not be via fake diplomatic efforts, to resolve a war that they are participants in. The first thing that any country, in my humble opinion, should do, is "Make a Plan". For themselves. What they want to achieve. Where they want to go. I admit that under the current "democratic" procedures it won't be easy. But without a plan, everyone is just flailing around in the dark, living from day to day. Could this be why China is so successful? They have plans, and are able to carry them out.
So.
Going back to the premise of European nations attempting to negotiate with Russia - I think that it is a non starter.
It isn't diplomacy that is missing, it is honesty.
Totally agree. NATO is 100% involved in this conflict. It's fully laid out in the 2019 Rand Report which is available online. Ukraine provides the soldiers while NATO arms, trains, funds, and provides ISR for targeting.
Later, the EU helpfully provided us with a post-war map of Russia broken into 16 satraps governed no doubt by Imperial Legates appointed by Washington and Brussels.
We're up to our necks in this shit show and only Russian restraint has prevented this conflict from escalating, despite NATO's efforts to the contrary.
If I was Russian I would never trust either the US, UK, or EU to make an agreement and stick to it. Putin has described the Americans as 'agreement incapable', and looking at its history he's dead right. Just capture Odessa, Sumy, Kharkov, and everything east of the Dneiper and then offer terms.
Sadly this hatred for Russia goes back at least to the early C19th (triumph of Russia over Napoleon and subsequent British hostile pivot to Russia) and ain't going away any time soon.
Welcome back Ian. A comprehensive piece that sets out the missing path (Diplomacy) to re-setting the relationship between Europe, and ironically, another European country - Russia. Even more ironic that a definitely non-European country is playing a major role in mediating an intra-European problem, leaving aside the fact that NATO is in the driving seat of prolonging the war, as it has for a couple of decades now.
One ray of hope. The thread running through the possible MOU between Iran and the USA - you guessed it Diplomacy, almost invisible beneath the bellicose US president and the Israeli wrecking ball.
"Ukraine needs cast iron security guarantees..." This often seems implicitly framed as 'only' Ukraine. I think it's worth considering that Ukraine is not the only one; Russia also needs security guarantees. You sort of say this but only as reassurance.
Sadly, that would mean Zelensky and his team would not get their cut of the money that is recycled back to the cronies in the west (which will be even more bad news for the German luxury car makers). And if the war ever ends and there is still a country called Ukraine in existence, why would Nato or the EU want them a members as they will have nothing left to offer.
The West is using Ukraine to weaken Russia so that it can maintain its global hegemony. Some of the ways the people of Ukraine have been deceived include:-
E.U. MEMBERSHIP
In 1991, the Ukrainian leadership was offered EU Membership and a Western lifestyle in exchange for help to collapse the Soviet Union. Despite doing what was asked of them, 35 years later:-
βΒ Β Ukraine has been so thoroughly plundered that the average person is worse off than they were under Communism! In 2023, the average annual income in Ukraine was a meager $4,950, which is on par with the lowest level of Social Security in the UK; and
βΒ Β Poland's Foreign Minister, RadosΕaw Sikorski, recently told Russian pranksters Vovan and Lexus that joining the EU is a pipedream that will not happen for at least another decade.
More recently, the Ukrainian leadership was told that "a big war with Russia" was Ukraine's "price for joining NATO". Despite provoking just such a war:-
βΒ Β Ukraine was never given enough weapons to force the Russian Army out of the Donbass; just enough to keep them fighting and dying; and
βΒ Β Sikorski told Vovan and Lexus that NATO membership has been used as a carrot-on-a-stick, with Ukraine having no real chance of joining.
There would be no current war between Russia and Ukraine if the US hadn't fomented and financed the illegal coup in Kiev in 2014 (thank you Victoria Nuland). That coup made Russia's naval base in Crimea very tenuous and because of that, Russia formally brought Crimea into Russia once again. Ukraine's constant attacks on both Crimea and Donbass made Russia's entrance into the violence inevitable. Russia was not going to betray its ethnic Russian population of the Eastern Oblasts and allow them to be obliterated by Kiev. The only reason this "war" has not ended years ago is because the US, UK and NATO have decided to use the situation as a proxy war to harm Russia with absolutely no concern for Ukrainians!
From an offensive realist viewpoint, if Europe can successfully wage a war that breaks Russia's energy export capabilities with minimal U.S. help, it represents a **highly successful buck-passing strategy**. It starves China of a secure overland energy supply, restores a unipolar focus for the U.S. in the Indo-Pacific, and forces China into a position of maritime vulnerability where American naval power remains dominant. However, it requires navigating the extreme risk of Russian nuclear desperation and global economic chaos.
These EU idiots are the greatest gift that Putin and his team could have ever hoped for.
Putin knows that all he needs to do is continue Russiaβs strategy of attrition. His EU adversaries will squawk and make a lot of noise, while continuing to drain their vaults of treasure and weapons, weakening themselves in the process and strengthening Russia.
Ukraine went into this war already broken β oligarchβrun, hollow, corrupt to the bone. The invasion didnβt just expose the rot; it pulverised what was left. Now itβs a country running on foreign money, drained of men, ruled by panic, and bleeding institutions faster than it can bury its dead. Itβs collapse in slow motion.
Unfortunately, OSCE proved to be bought and paid for when it provided info to NATO when it was supposedly overseeing the 'peace' during the Minsk Agreement period. (As a side note, the same can be said for the OPCW when it falsified its investigation report into the Syrian gas attacks.)
Ian doesn't mention it but the EU and NATO used that period to arm Ukraine in preparation for war. That was admitted by both Merkel and Hollande separately in interviews.
Many thanks for the osce info. Once such international bodies are corrupted, itβs over for that body. The same applies for many others, including most painfully the ICC.
Ian Proud is an individual much better qualified than a New Zealand resident watching from afar. Yet...
I am not sure that he has got it right in his analysis of the current war taking place in Europe. I question, for the sake of simplicity, just one of Ian's assumptions - that the countries of Western Europe have an interest in seeking a settlement of the war. What I see is the opposite of trying to end the war. I must admit, that I came to the conclusion, long ago. That I saw the arming of Ukraine by NATO countries, prior to the war, as part of a plan by NATO to expand the alliance in a bid to take on Russia. The purpose being to break Russia up, so that Corporations could resume their destruction of the "Soviet Union" as they did when Yeltsin ruled.
Whether you accept my analysis or not, I have no belief that the largest European countries have any interest in seeking a peace - a war in which many of them are covertly taking an active part.
Time will tell.
John Rothery π (Tauranga)
I generally find it tedious when people respond to my posts in the third person. I have long said that leaders in western Europe have shown little interest in ending the war. This article suggests a need to break the dialogue through really diplomacy. So spare me (sorry, whoever you were writing to) the lecture and read the article please.
Mainly free Gemini AI after 2 prompts
"Summary
From an offensive realist viewpoint, if Europe can successfully wage a war that breaks Russia's energy export capabilities with minimal U.S. help, it represents a highly successful buck-passing strategy. It starves China of a secure overland energy supply, restores a unipolar focus for the U.S. in the Indo-Pacific, and forces China into a position of maritime vulnerability where American naval power remains dominant. However, it requires navigating the extreme risk of Russian nuclear desperation and global economic chaos."
Open Google Doc
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10mN5e3ivNvZg9Vc2ULyIMjKTVpSd1WJMNuIWgCTWIos/edit?usp=drivesdk
My attempt at being diplomatic clearly failed miserably.
Let me be clear.
The reason that Western Europe has little interest in seeking an end to the war taking place on their continent is that rather than being spectators, it is their war. A war that they and the Americans fund and actively support. They have done so since before hostilities actually took place. The only difference is that their mililitaries are not taking an active part on the front lines. It is young and not so young Ukranians who are dying, rather than their paymasters in the West.
I accept that you do not come from the same standpoint.
But the idea that somehow Western Europeans might wish to end the war between Ukraine and Russia can only have validity if you also believe that they are not active participants, and have been all along.
However, I do think that it is in the interest of European Governments for the war to end. Their economies are in a poor state, and show little sign of recovery. On top of that the recent moves to militarisation by Germany and Britain, so that they can directly fight Russia themselves, have limited chances of success - primarily because they no longer have the industrial base to do so.
If Britain and Western Europe wish to make progress, it will not be via fake diplomatic efforts, to resolve a war that they are participants in. The first thing that any country, in my humble opinion, should do, is "Make a Plan". For themselves. What they want to achieve. Where they want to go. I admit that under the current "democratic" procedures it won't be easy. But without a plan, everyone is just flailing around in the dark, living from day to day. Could this be why China is so successful? They have plans, and are able to carry them out.
So.
Going back to the premise of European nations attempting to negotiate with Russia - I think that it is a non starter.
It isn't diplomacy that is missing, it is honesty.
John Rothery π (Tauranga)
Totally agree. NATO is 100% involved in this conflict. It's fully laid out in the 2019 Rand Report which is available online. Ukraine provides the soldiers while NATO arms, trains, funds, and provides ISR for targeting.
Later, the EU helpfully provided us with a post-war map of Russia broken into 16 satraps governed no doubt by Imperial Legates appointed by Washington and Brussels.
We're up to our necks in this shit show and only Russian restraint has prevented this conflict from escalating, despite NATO's efforts to the contrary.
If I was Russian I would never trust either the US, UK, or EU to make an agreement and stick to it. Putin has described the Americans as 'agreement incapable', and looking at its history he's dead right. Just capture Odessa, Sumy, Kharkov, and everything east of the Dneiper and then offer terms.
Sadly this hatred for Russia goes back at least to the early C19th (triumph of Russia over Napoleon and subsequent British hostile pivot to Russia) and ain't going away any time soon.
Totally agree!!!
Good riposte..
Welcome back Ian. A comprehensive piece that sets out the missing path (Diplomacy) to re-setting the relationship between Europe, and ironically, another European country - Russia. Even more ironic that a definitely non-European country is playing a major role in mediating an intra-European problem, leaving aside the fact that NATO is in the driving seat of prolonging the war, as it has for a couple of decades now.
One ray of hope. The thread running through the possible MOU between Iran and the USA - you guessed it Diplomacy, almost invisible beneath the bellicose US president and the Israeli wrecking ball.
Looking forward to more thoughtful pieces.
"Ukraine needs cast iron security guarantees..." This often seems implicitly framed as 'only' Ukraine. I think it's worth considering that Ukraine is not the only one; Russia also needs security guarantees. You sort of say this but only as reassurance.
Ian, please stop fantasizing. Ukraine is not going to join the EU.
"We should stop sending money to Ukraine"
Sadly, that would mean Zelensky and his team would not get their cut of the money that is recycled back to the cronies in the west (which will be even more bad news for the German luxury car makers). And if the war ever ends and there is still a country called Ukraine in existence, why would Nato or the EU want them a members as they will have nothing left to offer.
The West is using Ukraine to weaken Russia so that it can maintain its global hegemony. Some of the ways the people of Ukraine have been deceived include:-
E.U. MEMBERSHIP
In 1991, the Ukrainian leadership was offered EU Membership and a Western lifestyle in exchange for help to collapse the Soviet Union. Despite doing what was asked of them, 35 years later:-
βΒ Β Ukraine has been so thoroughly plundered that the average person is worse off than they were under Communism! In 2023, the average annual income in Ukraine was a meager $4,950, which is on par with the lowest level of Social Security in the UK; and
βΒ Β Poland's Foreign Minister, RadosΕaw Sikorski, recently told Russian pranksters Vovan and Lexus that joining the EU is a pipedream that will not happen for at least another decade.
https://www.sott.net/article/445209-Putin-expels-the-oligarchs
https://www.worlddata.info/average-income.php
https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/zelenskys-last-hail-mary-gets-off?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email#media-a17e6278-131e-4424-9e65-83889eeeb4e5
NATO MEMBERSHIP
More recently, the Ukrainian leadership was told that "a big war with Russia" was Ukraine's "price for joining NATO". Despite provoking just such a war:-
βΒ Β Ukraine was never given enough weapons to force the Russian Army out of the Donbass; just enough to keep them fighting and dying; and
βΒ Β Sikorski told Vovan and Lexus that NATO membership has been used as a carrot-on-a-stick, with Ukraine having no real chance of joining.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Osu7KBMbXN4
Don't forget that Ukraine is notoriously corrupt and approaching third world status!
There would be no current war between Russia and Ukraine if the US hadn't fomented and financed the illegal coup in Kiev in 2014 (thank you Victoria Nuland). That coup made Russia's naval base in Crimea very tenuous and because of that, Russia formally brought Crimea into Russia once again. Ukraine's constant attacks on both Crimea and Donbass made Russia's entrance into the violence inevitable. Russia was not going to betray its ethnic Russian population of the Eastern Oblasts and allow them to be obliterated by Kiev. The only reason this "war" has not ended years ago is because the US, UK and NATO have decided to use the situation as a proxy war to harm Russia with absolutely no concern for Ukrainians!
Summary
From an offensive realist viewpoint, if Europe can successfully wage a war that breaks Russia's energy export capabilities with minimal U.S. help, it represents a **highly successful buck-passing strategy**. It starves China of a secure overland energy supply, restores a unipolar focus for the U.S. in the Indo-Pacific, and forces China into a position of maritime vulnerability where American naval power remains dominant. However, it requires navigating the extreme risk of Russian nuclear desperation and global economic chaos.
Open Google doc
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10mN5e3ivNvZg9Vc2ULyIMjKTVpSd1WJMNuIWgCTWIos/edit?usp=drivesdk
Sunk cost fallacy.
These EU idiots are the greatest gift that Putin and his team could have ever hoped for.
Putin knows that all he needs to do is continue Russiaβs strategy of attrition. His EU adversaries will squawk and make a lot of noise, while continuing to drain their vaults of treasure and weapons, weakening themselves in the process and strengthening Russia.
He has them over a barrel and he knows it.
Ukraine went into this war already broken β oligarchβrun, hollow, corrupt to the bone. The invasion didnβt just expose the rot; it pulverised what was left. Now itβs a country running on foreign money, drained of men, ruled by panic, and bleeding institutions faster than it can bury its dead. Itβs collapse in slow motion.
Do you think the OSCE could be resurrected, as an alternative to reinventing the wheel?
Unfortunately, OSCE proved to be bought and paid for when it provided info to NATO when it was supposedly overseeing the 'peace' during the Minsk Agreement period. (As a side note, the same can be said for the OPCW when it falsified its investigation report into the Syrian gas attacks.)
Ian doesn't mention it but the EU and NATO used that period to arm Ukraine in preparation for war. That was admitted by both Merkel and Hollande separately in interviews.
Many thanks for the osce info. Once such international bodies are corrupted, itβs over for that body. The same applies for many others, including most painfully the ICC.
Correction: to stop the war. There's absolutely no guarantee that it also leads to peace talks.