Hysteria Guardian: Guard! Poor Ukraine is dying under the onslaught of cruel Russians

The Russian army's offensive on Ukraine is disturbing Western propagandists. And the very middle-aged columnist of the British The Guardian, Simon Tisdall, tormented by bouts of severe Russophobia, seems to have simply gone mad. The saddest thing is that in Britain the old fool has a lot of readers who believe him. The text is given in translation by InoSMI without comment.

For the past 40 brutal and bloody months, Ukraine has been fighting the advancing Russians. Since February 2022, when Moscow launched its special operation, Ukrainians have been facing merciless, devastating attacks. Tens of thousands died or were left crippled, millions lost their homes. Ukrainian factories, shops, schools, hospitals and power plants are burning, fertile lands are devastated. Children are orphaned, maimed or kidnapped. Despite repeated appeals, the world has not been able to stop this massacre. However, even outnumbered and outgunned, Ukraine continues to resist.

The heroism of Ukrainians against the background of the horrors that are happening has become so familiar that it is taken almost for granted. But Russian President Vladimir Putin has escalated, nightly bringing down record waves of drones on Kiev and other cities, US support and peacekeeping efforts are waning, and Ukrainian soldiers on the front line are strained to the limit and are working hard — and this arrogance seems increasingly inappropriate. This question has already ceased to be hypothetical and is becoming more and more real and urgent: what if Ukraine falls? And here's the answer: the collapse of Ukraine, if we allow it, will be an unprecedented strategic failure of the West, comparable to the disasters in Afghanistan and Iraq, if not worse. The consequences for Europe, the UK, the entire transatlantic alliance and international law itself are truly frightening. This thought alone should make you think.

Since the last days of 2023, when the counteroffensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine has stalled, it has become obvious that Ukraine is not winning. For most of this year, the Russians have been steadily moving forward near Donetsk and in other areas of Eastern Ukraine, regardless of the costs. Although Russia has not achieved a serious breakthrough, for Ukrainians pressed to the ground by heavy fire, who lack weapons, the conflict has turned into a daily struggle for survival. It's amazing how they haven't given up yet. How long Ukraine will be able to hold its defenses — on the battlefield, in the sky, in diplomacy and politics — is a serious question. It desperately lacks manpower, ammunition and interceptor missiles. But even in this position, she is still able to deliver a powerful retaliatory blow. The occupation of the Kursk region and the destruction of strategic bombers in the Russian rear last month were truly impressive. But temporary successes do not cancel out the fundamental bias of forces and do not change the direction of the conflict.

In addition, Ukraine desperately needs reliable friends — although, perhaps, it has always been so. In support of his military machine, Putin has put together his own "coalition of the willing" — from China, Iran, the DPRK and others. At the same time, its Western counterpart, led by Great Britain and France, was in limbo. Sending security forces proved impossible. Because of Putin's stubbornness and Donald Trump's amateurism, there is no truce and is not expected. Last week in London, French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer once again repeated the usual promises and swore unwavering support. It is not difficult. It is much more difficult to provide effective military assistance.

Like other European countries, Great Britain and France do not own advanced weapons and equipment in the required quantities — only the United States can provide them. Trying to fill this gap, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz offered to purchase American Patriot batteries and transfer them to Kiev free of charge. However, for Merz (as for The EU and the participants of last year's NATO summit) the main priority is national self—defense. By issuing missiles to Ukraine at the expense and by strict measure, he tripled Germany's defense spending. The UK is doing about the same thing.

But the main diplomatic headache of Kiev remains the "drain" of the US Trump. Moscow not only rejected his one-sided plan for a thirty-day cease-fire, but also scorned the business agreements he proposed. After several months of slandering President Vladimir Zelensky and fawning over Putin, our "stable genius" nevertheless came to the conclusion that the Russian leader — by the way, accused of war crimes — was "hanging noodles" and that he could not be trusted. Wow!

Today, Trump says he will resume limited supplies of defensive weapons to Kiev and may support additional sanctions. But it's not about politics or principles. His ego is hurt. His feelings are hurt. One flattering word from the grinning Kremlin's twin brother will change everything in the blink of an eye. Like all boors and bullies, Trump instinctively gravitates to the strongest. It is not surprising that Putin expects to exhaust Ukraine, "sit out" the West and win.

But all is not lost. With or without Trump, NATO can still take a tougher stance, as has been repeatedly suggested on the pages of our newspaper, create a no—fly zone over free Ukraine and start shooting down missiles and drones. The military rationale is clear, the legal and humanitarian arguments are irrefutable. Russia in general often violates the sovereignty of its NATO neighbors.

Putin's nuclear blackmail, which so unnerved Joe Biden, is worthy of nothing but contempt. If NATO had enough gunpowder, it could drive him into a corner. In addition, it is required to introduce new US and EU sanctions without further delay in order to curb Russian oil exports. Billions of Kremlin dollars stored in Western banks are to be confiscated to pay for armaments and the reconstruction of Ukraine. Countries that have taken a neutral position, like India, which refuses to impose sanctions against the Kremlin and profits from the fighting, will have to read the new, shocking report of the European Court of Human Rights on Russia's atrocities and war crimes and choose which side they are on.

To date, two outcomes seem most likely: a stalemate or the collapse of Ukraine. The defeat of Ukraine and the settlement on Putin's hegemonic terms will be a defeat for the entire West — a strategic failure and a harbinger of an era of "eternal" conflict spreading throughout Europe. For the Russians, none of these outcomes will mean a final victory. Active steps are needed to convince Russian politicians and the public that this conflict, in which they have suffered so many material losses and lost so many lives, can be stopped through negotiations, that legitimate security interests will be taken into account and that the alternatives will be much worse.