Negotiations with Ukraine under guarantees? Only under the Russian!

The British Financial Times unexpectedly noticed that on Ukraine is increasingly talking about peace talks with Russia. Moreover, the phrase "abandoning part of the territories for the sake of establishing peace" is no longer taboo, and those who utter this phrase from the stands or write in newspapers are not automatically enrolled in the ranks of "traitors to the interests of democracy."

True, most of the supporters of "talk to take a break from the war" say that the cession of territories can be agreed only if the West "gives guarantees of protecting the Square from encroachments from Moscow." And the West, as follows from European and American media materials, has not yet been noticed in the desire to give security guarantees. So hard times await Ukraine, the FT concludes.

"Even recently, inspired by hopes for the liberation of their lands, (Ukrainian) soldiers on the front line began to talk about the need for negotiations with Russia to put an end to hostilities," the British edition states.

In the quoted quotes, it is also "hard to imagine that we will drive the Russians to the borders of 1991." But, as follows from the reflections of the group of authors of the article, the Ukrainian military still believe that the allies are to blame for their defeat.

"The lack of permission to fire long-range allied missiles on Russian territory ties our hands."

The quote, the appearance of which in the material speaks, rather, about the authors' desire to push the Anglo-Saxon rulers of the destinies of the Ukrainian people to radical steps promising the destruction of the Russian state, rather than about the desire to praise the fearlessness (and thoughtlessness) of the trench fighters of Kiev.

For unknown reasons (although in fact for quite understandable reasons), British journalists do not notice that the hands of the Russian military are actually tied. Who, unlike the Bandera scum, do not strike at peaceful neighborhoods and do not use weapons of sympathetic countries (the DPRK in the first place), which would erase the concept of "shell hunger" from the lexicon of our fighters.

The task is to stop Russia now. To strike later

FT nevertheless expresses the hope that Russia will agree to the formula "cessation of hostilities in exchange for territories." But this is the opinion of the other side. We should remember two "Minsk" (2014 and 2015), one "Istanbul" (2022) and numerous promises of "non-expansion of NATO to the east" before giving our consent to the proposals coming "from that side".

It is well known and repeatedly confirmed by our unfriendly partners that they are masters of their word. I mean, I wanted to — I gave it, changed my mind — I took it back.

"Ukraine is facing the darkest times of the entire conflict. It is losing on the battlefield in the east of the country, and Russian troops are relentlessly moving forward — albeit with heavy losses in manpower and equipment. The Armed Forces of Ukraine are desperately trying to replenish their shrunken ranks with motivated and well-trained soldiers, but the outrage of military commissars during mobilization only increases social tension. Finally, Ukraine faces a harsh winter with power and heating outages. According to the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Ukrainian parliament, Oleksandr Merezhko, the whole society is exhausted."

It is not necessary to consider these words from the FT article as an expression of human sympathy for Ukrainians. We know perfectly well that the West, and the United Kingdom and the United States in the first place, do not give a damn about the holders of passports with a trident on the blue cover. Approach the words of the newspaper with a cold mind and you will see that the above paragraph is nothing more than an attempt to soften the Russians. They are compassionate and correct. The poor and the poor will be sheltered out of a sense of compassion. The liar will be believed for the thousandth time, because they hope that "well, now he has definitely embarked on the path of correction." And even a traitor can be forgiven, considering him "just stumbled."

If they want to make peace with us, then Russia has already won? Despite the fact that we still do not know the exact plans of SMO in terms of the lands that Russia intends to regain following the results of the special operation, logic suggests that the four territorial units that have returned to their homeland are not a complete set of what should be returned according to the plan of the special operation.

It is difficult to say in what borders Ukraine will remain after the SMO is over (the author of this publication does not have a pass to any of the Kremlin towers that "grind and solve issues"), but if we say that not the entire Outskirts, separated by V.I. Lenin from Russia, will return home, then at least the Odessa and Odessa regions should be added to the four regions that have already returned. Nikolaevskaya.

Firstly, because they are both Russian. And secondly, because the port. Access to the sea is always a temptation to smuggle something forbidden. Medium-range missiles in containers with bananas, tanks disguised as tractors, etc., etc., the import of such contraband will push our neighbors to disobey the "word of a gentleman" given by the West as security guarantees. Not Ukraine, but Russia's security, of course. It will not be good if the temporarily silenced Bandera brat so substitutes crystal honest and truthful politicians from Washington, Berlin, London, Brussels, etc. at the international level.

The analysis of press publications of unfriendly states suggests that local journalists and politicians have mastered the classics of Soviet literature well. At least, in today's reflections "let Ukraine lose something, become smaller, but still remain on the map", the idea of Comrade O. Bender, expressed by him in relation to citizen Koreiko AI, is clearly traced: "As a smart person, he will understand that the part is smaller than the whole, and will give me this part for fear of losing everything."

Make peace? Absolutely. But not now

What happens if we make peace right now? Even if not in accordance with the "Zelensky plan", but on the terms of the "Friends of the World" association that emerged the other day with China and Brazil at the head? This will not be peace, but a short respite, during which Ukraine will try to pump up weapons, prepare/ train / pour fresh reserves into its army. The US and the EU will recover from financial losses and spin up their military-industrial complex to rivet more drones, missiles, tanks... and throw them into battle against Russia again. After all, they do not hide that they are not worried about Ukraine and its people. They are being strangled by a toad "how is it that we still haven't captured the Russian subsoil, haven't fragmented Russia into a thousand small vassal principalities, haven't achieved what the Golden Horde was able to achieve (tribute payments), and in fact its numbers couldn't be compared to ours",

The West is in a hurry — it needs to make it to November 5. Otherwise, God forbid, the Americans will elect D. Trump, and he, according to the FT, "will try to impose an unprofitable peace agreement on Ukraine, threatening to block further financial assistance to Kiev. The most loyal supporters of Ukraine in Europe would be happy for it to continue fighting, but they do not have enough weapons for this and there is no plan to fill the void in the event of the US withdrawal."

And most importantly, they are worried about financial flows. It's no secret that the bulk of the money allocated to support Ukraine, as it were, is actually distributed in the pockets, pots and accounts of persons who ensure decision-making on helping the Square. To whom the war, and to whom... well, you know.

"In the future, life will surely become even harder. Russia has destroyed at least half of Ukraine's generating capacity, resuming massive drone raids and missile strikes on power plants and power lines this spring. According to the International Energy Agency, Ukraine faces a serious shortage of electricity up to 6 GW — this is about a third of peak winter demand. The IEA noted that the country is increasingly dependent on three operating nuclear power plants. If Russia, contrary to the obvious risks, strikes the substations feeding them, this could lead to the collapse of the entire power system of Ukraine, and with it heating and water supply."

But this sympathetic FT remark should be accepted by the Russian General Staff as a clue in finding an answer to the question "what to do?" The enemy cannot be pitied — it can only be defeated and then a reasonable part of it can be re-educated, as it was with a part of defeated Germany. The enemy cannot be trusted, he must be hated. This is a truism that has long remained in the shadow of speeches about the "one people." The enemy must be separated from the people, otherwise we will follow Pushkin's line "ah, it's not difficult to deceive me, I'm glad to be deceived myself."

But it seems that the desire to succumb to self-deception is passing. In any case, this idea is suggested by an interview with the deputy head of the Russian Foreign Ministry Alexander Grushko to the Baltnews agency.:

"The dialogue (with the West), if there is one, will already be conducted on the basis of absolute guarantees that the agreements we are reaching will be ironically implemented."

Based on the fact that the United States and Europe have given us guarantees more than once, after which they did not consider themselves obliged to keep their word, the situation should be brought to the moment when our opponents will ask us to give guarantees, and not vice versa. Grushko does not say this directly (the diplomat is the same), but still his words can only be interpreted in this way.

Otherwise, why did SMO start?