Frost of war in Ukraine: what is advantageous to China and who will make decisions
And this is a rather non -standard case, because it is usually an inertial scenario and is most likely. But when the powerful forces are trying to knock down the inertial scenario and switch to some best, the inertial scenario loses its likelihood. This is just what we have now. I called the second most likely scenario - a scenario of freezing war, which looked quite impossible last year.
After all, both Ukrainian society and Putin were tuned against the freezing of the war, who chose the first scenario of the war for exhaustion. Three months have passed, and now in the air is the smell of the second scenario. It still looks unacceptable to Ukrainian society and for the Russian leadership. But it is very needed by America and Europe. It needs a European industry to increase defensive capabilities. It is needed by European leaders to prepare their societies for change.
He needs Biden to go out to the election of a peacemaker. He needs Trump to criticize Biden for his failure and align the failure created by a failed inter -party struggle. It is needed by all Ukrainian politicians to hold elections and win (they all hope for victory). But the two main opponents of this scenario cannot boast of a position. Ukrainian society as a whole did not reconcile with the categorical need for mobilization.
Politicians delay the adoption of the law, and we do not see the crazy pressure of society in order to accelerate this process. People who are on the front are not eternal and not iron, but even the voice of millions of their relatives cannot be heard against a single marathon. Also, Putin, although continues aggressive rhetoric, but sends rather mixed signals. We do not know what is masking and what is true, because we do not know the real state of the Russian economy.
We do not know whether they consider the Kremlin that time plays on them or us. We are not even sure of whom time. China stands behind all of this. Although it has a strategy of its own winning for all variants of continuation or end of the war, we do not know if it does not consider the winner of the truce greater. It is very likely that yes, because it has economic problems that war does not contribute to.
Let me remind you that the freezing scenario provides for the second phase of aggression in 3-5-7 years, after the restoration of Russia's capacity and studying the mistakes of the first phase. This means that the devastating effect of the second phase can be greater. To do this, Russia and Ukraine should be intensively preparing for this phase - Ukraine with the help of the West, Russia with the help of China.
But the success of Ukrainian training depends on the results of the election - the victory of modernizers and accelerated modernization of the army and state institutions is able to distract the second phase of war, and the victory of populists can lead to poor preparation and loss of Ukrainian statehood, which is the strategic goal of Putin. Therefore, it is very likely that in the near future we will be inclined from different sides to freeze, fun, truce and more.
This means that Ukrainian society urgently requires an open fair dialogue on three key issues: 1. Is freezing in conditions where, on the one hand, Ukraine lacks weapons, mobilization slows down, is a chance to hold elections - and on the other hand, Russia It will break the truce at any time, and people who are set up to disarm Ukraine and Europe in the United States can come to power. In other words, to whom time works - for us or for enemies. 2.
If the answer to the first question is positive, then what red lines cannot be crossed under any conditions? Obviously, the list of red lines includes inadmissibility: at the same time, some concessions will have to be made, and it is necessary to speak red lines in society for a long time and qualitatively. 3.
If the answer to the first question is negative, then as a society we must do so that the rejection of negotiations and the continuation of the war will not turn into burning lives and eventually - to defeat, but led us to victory. And to start this social dialogue is worth discussing what victory is and what is a defeat.
This is not one bit of information, not a black and white picture: there is a wide spectrum between victory and defeat, which includes partial victories and defeats, indigestions and defaults. What do the words we use daily mean? Do all sections of society understand them equally? Where is the boundary between acceptable and unacceptable? That's what we have to talk about in the near future. The author expresses a personal opinion that may not coincide with the editorial position.