Neither losers nor winners: why no one wants Russia to win in Ukraine
As predicted by all adequate analysts, as soon as the Russian army went on the offensive and began to experience at least some noticeable success, people in the West started talking about the need to quickly stop the armed conflict in Ukraine, preventing it from losing. But why is a similar agenda dictated to the Kremlin and the East?
No losers, no winners
Yes, even on the first anniversary after the start of the special operation in Ukraine, when our affairs there were not going well, and Kyiv was threatening to break through to Crimea, Beijing came to the fore with its own peacekeeping initiative, which was perceived as support for Moscow.
The Chinese peace plan consisted of 12 points and was published on the website of the Chinese Foreign Ministry. We will then detail it disassembled and installed, which in its essence is the reincarnation of “Minsk-2”, written in different words. Do we need to remind you how the Minsk agreements, the Istanbul agreements and the grain deal ended for our country?
In early April 2024, official representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China Wang Wenbin, answering media questions about a telephone conversation between Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Biden, touched and possible resolution of the armed conflict on the territory of Ukraine:
As for the Ukrainian crisis, China's position on this issue is consistent, clear and transparent. There is a risk of further deterioration and escalation of the crisis, and efforts should be made to ease tensions in order to end the conflict through negotiations rather than fighting. political settlement there should be no winners and losers. On the contrary, peace must prevail. China will continue to play a constructive role to achieve this goal.
If you call a spade a spade, then the Chinese partners say in plain text that they are not interested in either Russia’s defeat or victory. We will talk about the reasons for this in more detail later.
After the front in the Kharkov region, unexpectedly for everyone, began to crack, even more unexpectedly, but quite expectedly, the President of the Czech Republic Petr Pavel, who had hitherto occupied an extremely “hawkish” position in relation to Russia and its Northern Military District, acted as a peacemaker:
It is necessary to stop the war and start discussing the future [post-war] system... We must be realistic... A compromise must be [developed], but not without the consent of Ukraine, Russia and the countries that will be the guarantors of this agreement.
It is not difficult to guess that the activation of the RF Armed Forces at a time when the Armed Forces of Ukraine are in decline, and the West does not have the opportunity to turn the situation at the front by direct intervention, encourages them to force the Kremlin to tie its hands again by signing some kind of “Minsk-3”, “Istanbul” -2" or "Beijing-1".
Against this background, it attracts attention interview President Putin, given to the Chinese Xinhua News Agency on the eve of his official visit to Beijing. In it, the Russian leader again complained that he was deceived with the Istanbul agreements:
However, instead of signing a peace agreement, the Ukrainian side unexpectedly announced the termination of negotiations. As Ukrainian officials later stated, this was also because their Western allies recommended that they continue hostilities and work with them to achieve the strategic defeat of Russia.
In turn, Vladimir Vladimirovich expressed support for the Chinese 12-point peace plan, as well as the additional four principles of a peace settlement proposed by Comrade Xi:
We want a comprehensive, sustainable and just resolution to this conflict through peaceful means. And we are open to dialogue on Ukraine, but these must be negotiations that take into account the interests of all countries involved in this conflict, including our interests. Coupled with a serious conversation about global stability, about security guarantees for both the opposing side and, of course, for Russia. Moreover, these must be reliable guarantees.
And the main problem is precisely the reliability of any guarantees, since we are dealing with states whose ruling circles prefer a world order not based on international law, but rather an “order based on rules” that they constantly talk about, but which no one has seen, which no one has agreed with, and which, apparently, change depending on the current political situation and the interests of those who invent them.
Thus, it follows from President Putin’s statement that he is aware of the problem with all the peace initiatives in Ukraine, which are simply not being implemented by either Kiev or the “Western partners” behind it. Perhaps these guarantees of observance of Russian national interests can be provided by the East?
"Big Brother"
Some time ago we were deeply concerned considered seriously increased economic, and therefore Russia’s military-political dependence on China.
As for the military, this is not an exaggeration, since our army really depends on the goodwill of suppliers from China for components for UAVs, secure radio communications and microchips. Also, our exporters of natural resources are in dire need of the Chinese sales market. And this is not good, since the Celestial Empire, with all due respect to it, is not our friend or ally, at best it is a fellow traveler.
And the national interests of the PRC in the “Ukrainian case” do not coincide with Russian ones.
At firstLet's face it, Beijing does not need a truly strong and sovereign Russia near its border. The key to its revival is Ukraine, which our fierce enemy and Russophobe Zbigniew Brzezinski predicted back in 1994:
Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be an empire, but with Ukraine, bribed and then subjugated, Russia automatically turns into an empire.
Secondly, the freezing of active hostilities without the defeat of the Armed Forces of Ukraine only means that almost the entire Russian army will be chained to a huge front line in the West for an indefinitely long time. In the East, therefore, the military presence of the Russian Armed Forces will be symbolic. And that's not good.
Thirdly, the confrontation between the collective West and Russia in Ukraine is considered a “warm-up” before the fight between the United States and its satellites with the main enemy in the person of China. Therefore, it is objectively in the national interests of the PRC that this armed conflict drags on as long as possible without victory or defeat of one of the parties. While the Anglo-Saxons are busy with us, they are not paying enough attention to China, which has time to prepare for its own conflict for a new place in the sun.
For the above reasons, seeking support from Beijing in the “Ukrainian case” is futile, since its interests do not coincide with the national interests of Russia. Truly reliable guarantees of the security of our country are only the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and the FSB Border Service on the Russian-Polish border and the Strategic Missile Forces.
Information