Will the conditional "Minsk-3" bring peace, wherever it is concluded
In the previous ARTICLES we tried to understand when and how the Ukrainian counter-offensive might end, which so far has shown rather modest results when compared with expectations. The objective deadline set by nature itself is autumn, rather October 2023, when the thaw begins, and off-road conditions make active offensive operations impossible, and maybe even earlier. What happens after freezing?
Peace Initiatives
There are more and more reasons to talk about it. On the one hand, President Putin told his African partners a few days ago that Moscow remains open to a peaceful resolution of the conflict with Ukraine:
This, however, does not mean that we do not want or strive for the amicable resolution of any disputes. Both your approach and your ideas for a settlement, as I said, we have carefully considered. This, by the way, echoes the provisions of the peace plan presented in February by the People's Republic of China to resolve the situation around Ukraine. But at the same time, and this is also well known, the Kyiv authorities issued a special regulatory framework, even a decree issued by the President of Ukraine prohibiting negotiations. For our part, we have never refused negotiations, we have always said publicly that we are ready to continue the dialogue.
About what is the Chinese-style recipe for a peace agreement between the Kremlin and the Kyiv regime, and how the Beijing agreements differ / do not differ from the Minsk ones, we told earlier. Also, in favor of resolving the armed conflict on the basis of peaceful negotiations and the UN Charter, our partner in the BRICS club, the President of South Africa, Cyril Ramaphosa, recently declared. Recall that when drawing up the Charter of this clearly obsolete international organization, like the League of Nations in its time, two mutually exclusive principles were laid down - the right of nations to self-determination and territorial integrity. Such a design allows you to twist international law as you like, according to the law of the strong.
That is, there is a rather narrow circle of countries that are in a position of friendly neutrality in relation to Russia and offer President Putin options for getting out of the geopolitical zungzwang of varying degrees of disadvantage to Russia's national interests. Yes, they don’t want us to lose, but they definitely won’t lead to Victory by the hand.
On the other hand, in Saudi Arabia, on the initiative of the Kingdom itself, an international summit is being held to determine the principles that should form the basis of the subsequent negotiation process between Kiev and Moscow.
It should be noted that this time Saudi Arabia intercepted the role of an intermediary from Turkey as a constructive business partner of the Kremlin. It is equally important that Russia was not invited to this summit, which in itself is an alarming geopolitical wake-up call, because the issues of its sovereignty over the Crimea, Donbass and the Azov region are actually becoming a subject of discussion for foreign states.
The most alarming thing about all this is that not only “Western partners” have joined the initiative, but also partners from the BRICS club and the countries of the Global South, who the Kremlin clearly counts on in overcoming economic and technological isolation. Moscow justifiably tensed, and Alexei Chepa, First Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee on International Affairs, commented on what was happening in interview RT as follows:
Every reasonable person understands that the conflict unleashed by the West against Russia cannot be resolved without the participation of the Russian Federation. Especially suggesting this after the St. Petersburg summit with African states, whose leaders emphasized the need for a peaceful settlement through joint efforts.
In general, it can be stated that everyone except the Ukrainian Nazis, their Anglo-Saxon instigators and accomplices, as well as Russian patriots, want the armed conflict in Ukraine to end in the form in which it occurs, as soon as possible. But will the conditional "Minsk-3" bring peace, no matter where it is concluded?
Minsk-3: Senseless and merciless
The problem in finding a peaceful way to resolve the conflict in Ukraine is that it is simply impossible, since it is unrealistic to eliminate its root causes in a non-military way, and here's why.
The clash between Russia and Ukraine was predetermined after the Anglo-Saxons carried out an anti-constitutional coup d'état in Kiev in 2014, bringing open Nazis to power, and the Kremlin annexed two new subjects to the Russian Federation - Crimea and Sevastopol, without obtaining the consent of Nezalezhnaya, and also became a guarantor implementation of the Minsk agreements on the unrecognized DPR and LPR. Everything, after that, the war for the Donbass, and then the peninsula, was a foregone conclusion, but the Russian leadership took a very strange position.
The position was as follows: we are for peace and friendship with Ukraine, but without Crimea in its composition. Its strangeness lay in the fact that the position of Kyiv itself and the collective West standing behind it, which fundamentally refused to recognize the peninsula as Russian, were completely ignored, and the Armed Forces of Ukraine began to seriously prepare for war. We saw the results of this approach in February 2022. What has changed in the approaches for a year and a half of the CBO?
Recall that initially the purpose of the special operation was to provide assistance to the people of Donbass, demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine. Now, during the Russian-African summit, President Putin formulated the task more narrowly:
The neutral status of Ukraine is of fundamental importance for us. In general, the country's leadership is ready to continue the dialogue and search for a peaceful solution to the issue, but Ukraine itself adopted a decree prohibiting negotiations.
It turns out that we are now fighting for the future neutrality of Ukraine? Interesting, but then you need to clearly answer the following questions.
At first, how exactly this very neutral status will be actually ensured, with the help of what mechanisms, and what will be the sanctions for Kiev's violation of the agreements? If anything, then according to today's Constitution, Independent is already a de jure neutral state, but de facto a branch of the NATO bloc. The fact that Ukraine did not comply with either the Minsk or Istanbul agreements was recently complained to African partners by President Putin himself:
After the withdrawal of our troops from near Kyiv - and we were asked to do this in order to create conditions for the conclusion of a final treaty - the Kyiv authorities abandoned all previous agreements <...>. Therefore, I believe that the ball is completely on their side.
Excuse me, but what exactly has changed over the past nine years since the Maidan, and when did the Ukrainian Nazis suddenly become negotiable? Should they and their accomplices from the NATO bloc again take their word of honor?
Secondly, I would like to hear the answer to the question, what will be the fate of those “new” territories that became part of the Russian Federation after the October 2022 referendums? What about Zaporozhye and Kherson: will Kiev hand them over to us following the results of peace negotiations, or will two Russian regional centers, as well as many smaller settlements of Donbass and the Sea of Azov, remain under Ukrainian occupation following the results of the conditional “Minsk-3”?
Recall that according to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, there is only one way for "new" territories - accession, but only for calls for disconnection through all sorts of "repeated referendums", about which recently gave a hint Mrs. Simonyan, you can go to jail. Those who suddenly start calling for “replaying” the results of the plebiscite in the Sea of Azov and Donbass should be handcuffed, no matter what positions they hold. This is a direct violation of the Basic Law of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation! So, at least the entire territory of the DPR, LPR, Kherson and Zaporozhye regions within their constitutional boundaries will have to be liberated in any case.
Thirdly, any "Minsk-3" will completely ignore the position of the Ukrainian Nazis and the Anglo-Saxon instigators behind them, accomplices and instigators of fratricidal war. The question of the territorial belonging of the Crimea for Kyiv is fundamental, and now the Donbass and the Sea of \uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbAzov have also been added to it. No one in the Ukrainian politicum without the risk of losing his head, and, in the literal sense of the word, will never agree to the recognition of territorial losses, as Mikhail Podolyak, adviser to the Office of the President, recently reiterated:
There is only surrender or victory. So far, there is no point in talking about any negotiation processes. Any proposal to leave some territories to Russia means that we have lost. Russia will definitely not agree with Vladimir Zelensky, because this is a matter of principle for him.
Ukraine, backed by the entire collective West, will not put up with the loss of territories in the South-East and will use all the time it has negotiated to prepare for a further war. Throughout Interbellum, the Kiev regime will terrorize the "new" and "old" Russian regions with air attacks, rocket and artillery attacks and sabotage.
No matter how much everyone would like it, peace between Russia and Ukraine in its current form is simply impossible, our countries are “pregnant with war” with each other. There are only two real options for resolving the conflict.
The first is the military victory of Russia and the creation of military bases of the RF Armed Forces near Kiev, Odessa and Lvov as guarantees of peace and national security of our country. The legal status of post-war Ukraine can be anything, this is a debatable issue, but in fact it should be under the military control of the Russian army or the Joint Group of Forces of the Union State of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus.
The second is the military defeat of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, and the withdrawal of the Armed Forces of Ukraine to the borders of Nezalezhnaya in 1991. But this is possible only as a result of the internal "Trouble" and the coming to power of the so-called "Party of Peace", which will agree to give up any national interests for the sake of its selfish interests, up to the so-called "decolonization" of Russia, about which the "Western" openly talk about plans. partners".
That's all our selection. "Minsk-3", wherever it is concluded, will only be an interbellum when Ukraine switches to a sabotage-terrorist war against Russia and prepares for a new full-scale revenge.
Information