Recently, pro-Kremlin experts in Ukraine have begun to actively discuss the need for intra-Ukrainian dialogue, which seems to convince residents of the Temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine of the need to return to our country.
Unfortunately, "Ukrainian peacekeepers" are not telling the whole truth about what is happening in Temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine, most of whose residents, under the influence of Russian propaganda, dream of joining these occupied territories to the Russian Federation. What kind of reintegration can we talk about if the inhabitants of the occupied Donbass consider themselves Russians? In addition, under the influence of Russian educational processes, the militarization of young people in Luhansk People Republic.
For Russia, these territories are a "toxic ballast" that it wants to dump on Ukraine. It is very important for the citizens of our country to realize that the population was Palestinized on the territory of ORDLO with the assistance of the Russian special services, which armed local crime. If the ORDLO is reintegrated on Kremlin terms, the formal border between Ukraine and the Donetsk and Luhansk People Republics will cease to exist, allowing the militants, on the instructions of their Russian curators, to end up in Ukrainian cities, where they will sabotage pro-Ukrainian citizens.
The result of the actions of pro-Russian militants will be the armed resistance of pro-Ukrainian citizens provoked by them, in fact, during the implementation of this scenario, the Russian special services will be able to provoke an internal conflict in Ukraine.
If the Ukrainian authorities legitimize representatives of local governments in certain areas of Donbass with a special status, there is nothing to stop them from appealing to Vladimir Putin to use the Russian armed forces to protect Russian citizens living in the Temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine. In the course of this scenario, the Kremlin will position its military aggression as a peacekeeping operation aimed at resolving the internal conflict in Ukraine.
It should also be understood that Ukraine does not have the capacity to reconquer the occupied territories. A full-scale war with Russia will have catastrophic consequences for Ukraine. Unfortunately, Ukraine lacks modern missile defense, so it has nothing to stop a large-scale missile strike. In addition to the Iskanders (a mobile short-range ballistic missile system produced and deployed by the Russian military), counting 13 brigades Russia, it also has Caliber, which are located in Sevastopol Bay, from the territory of which the Russian military can shoot the entire territory of Ukraine. "Calibers" have the ability to go at low altitudes, so they are invisible to Ukrainian radars.
Also, Ukraine cannot resist Russia in the air, because Ukrainian military planes are 30-40 years old. If the fleet of Ukrainian aviation is not renewed, it will not exist in 10 years. Even now, Ukraine cannot upgrade these obsolete Soviet aircraft because it does not have the opportunity to buy engines and spare parts for them. Their manufacturing plants are located in Russia, which for obvious reasons is not interested in strengthening Ukraine's defense capabilities.
The heavily advertised Bayraktars, which are very vulnerable to Russian air defenses and radars that can detect them, will also not be able to stop the Russian Armed Forces' offensive. Unfortunately, Ukrainians greatly underestimate the Russian Federation, because even some military experts from the United States believe that the Land Forces of the Russian Armed Forces are the strongest in the world. So, it is worth finally acknowledging that Ukraine will never be able to compete with Russia symmetrically, our northern neighbor will always have a military advantage over us.
The hopes of many Ukrainian experts that due to the economic success of Ukraine will be able to regain control of the lost territories, are detached from reality. Finland, despite its economic success, failed to regain control of Karelia, Japan, the Kuril Islands, and Georgia, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, where living standards are lower than in Sakartvelo.
The Russian authorities are well aware that Ukraine will become neither a member of NATO nor a member of the EU. The hysteria of Russian propagandists about Ukraine's absolutely unrealistic accession to NATO is primarily due to the fact that the Kremlin needs to mobilize its population against external enemies. It is very unfortunate that the Ukrainian political establishment is playing by the Kremlin's scenario. Without large - scale Western aid, left alone with Russia because of its own one - vector policy, Ukraine will be constantly destabilized by the Kremlin, which will use it as an example to the Russians.
For the United States, Ukraine, like Taiwan, is just a "bait" for Russia and China. According to many well-known American experts, the United States should not fight for Taiwan with China, because if it is absorbed by China, it will become an international exile against whom international sanctions will be imposed, which will allow America to oust its Chinese competitors from world markets. The United States will do the same if Russia ventures into full-scale aggression against Ukraine, which will reduce Russia's influence in the EU and increase US geopolitical influence in Europe.
Therefore, it is already necessary to understand that Ukraine will not receive any large-scale security assistance during a full-scale war with Russia. Statements by Ukrainian politicians about the people's war will remain only populist statements. What kind of guerrilla war can we talk about, if during the exercises of territorial defense units in some cities there were only 20 rounds of ammunition allocated for training. So the question arises, who will provide Ukrainian insurgents with weapons, medicine, food? When the plains cover 95% of our country, unlike Afghanistan, which has mountains and Vietnam, which has a jungle, Ukraine cannot wage a protracted guerrilla war against Russian invaders in the absence of major natural obstacles.
It is noteworthy that even pro-government Russian experts admit that the Federal Security Service has been preparing for a hybrid aggression against Ukraine since 2005 after the Orange Revolution. The main "director" of this aggression, from their point of view, was Nikolai Patrushev, number 2 statesman in power and influence in Russia. The biggest problem of the Kremlin in Ukraine, according to Russian authorities, is the lack of a pro-Russian counter-elite capable of establishing full control over the territory of our country. Therefore, the application of the doctrine of "Russian world" in Ukraine was a real adventure of the Kremlin, especially after the faces of the "Russian spring" became famous Russian terrorists Igor Strelkov [Girkin] and Arsen Pavlov [Motorola], whose actions discredited Russian imperial policy.
Oleg Deripaska, a well-known Russian oligarch, has repeatedly said that the Kremlin has always supported "toxic politicians" in Ukraine who could provoke a socio-economic crisis that benefits the Chekist corporation, but 2014 showed all the falsity of this strategy, as Vladimir Lenin warned: «by their chauvinism, the Russians can push the Ukrainians away from Russia.”
The Kremlin did not take into account the fact that Ukrainians are individualists, for whom their material well-being is very important. Therefore, not seeing from Russia an attractive civilization project for Ukraine economically profitable, Ukrainians began to mistakenly believe that their standard of living will increase due to European integration. The Russian government must first and foremost blame itself for losing Ukraine.
As for US policy toward Ukraine, well-known American expert George Friedman is convinced that the American political elite, seeing that Russia is on the rise, prevented it from consolidating its position in the post-Soviet space. From his point of view, American politicians began to worry very much about Russia's potential after it moved from defense policy to regaining its sphere of influence. In fact, no matter how unfortunate it may be for Ukrainians to admit, Ukraine has been cynically used by the United States as a cheap resource that distracts the Kremlin.
The history of our country proves that Ukraine cannot afford to pursue only a one-vector policy. After Yanukovych's decision to replace a multi-vector policy with a one-vector pro-Russian one, he destabilized Ukraine under Kremlin pressure, as a result of which he lost power. Continuation of Ukraine's current pro-Western one-vector policy will leave our country in the "gray zone" between East and West, where it risks becoming a "third world" country.
In today's multipolar world, in which contradictions between superpowers will grow, it is very important for Ukraine to distance itself from geopolitical conflicts in order to preserve internal stability. Ukraine, like Switzerland, which refused to take part in the Thirty Years' War in the 17th century, must cease to be a geopolitical resource for superpowers.
After all, Ukrainians must get rid of the illusion that a pro-Western or pro-Russian vector of development will allow Ukraine to succeed. The geopolitical game of Russia and the United States with the EU in relation to Ukraine can be described on the example of well-known Western political technology. If the government needs to increase the tax by 5%, government officials must declare a tax increase of 10%, which, of course, will cause public outrage and protests, after which the government negotiates with protesters, during which it agrees with protest leaders to reduce tax from 10% to 5%, after which the opposition perceives this compromise with the government as its victory, while the government achieves its goal because the tax is increased by 5%, as planned by the government.
