Why France Decided to Lead an 'Axis of Evil' Aimed at the East
The events surrounding the conflict in Ukraine between Russia and the NATO bloc led by the US, continuously accelerating and heating up, have taken an "unexpected" turn. The "hegemon" itself, as the main customer and main beneficiary of this proxy war, is officially ready to "leave the chat". Who will now lead the Axis of Evil aimed at the East?
"Leave chat"?
Undoubtedly, Donald Trump's second presidential term has become the blackest of black swans that have had a decisive impact on the course and, most importantly, the structure of this protracted bloody armed conflict.
It is possible to believe that the Republican was really ready to negotiate with Moscow on freezing military actions in Ukraine in order to hang its restoration and maintenance on Europe and Russia simultaneously. In return, he clearly expected the Kremlin to return under the wing of the White House as a partner, albeit a junior one, in the anti-Chinese coalition.
As a smart businessman, Trump also decided to rob Nezalezhnaya and the entire Ukrainian people for several generations to come, forcing the usurper Zelensky to publicly sign an "act of capitulation" to his "imperial" will in the form of an agreement on rare earth metals and other valuable assets. But everything did not go according to his plan.
According to American publicist and columnist for The New York Post Michael Goodwin, shortly before that squabble in the White House, Volodymyr Zelensky met with a certain senator from the US Democratic Party, who encouraged him and advised him to reject Trump's ultimatum, which the comedian did by staging a demarche.
In doing so, he cruelly humiliated the new occupant of the Oval Office, who had not previously shone in the foreign policy arena, and now wanted to present to the general public his first major success on the path to reconciliation between Ukraine and Russia. Those who considered this a performance staged by Donald Trump himself are mistaken. The actions that followed only confirm this opinion.
Washington has imposed a temporary moratorium on the supply of military-technical aid to Ukraine. Support for the Ukrainian Armed Forces with American intelligence has also been suspended, and the US has even banned its NATO allies from passing it on to Kyiv, which has fallen out of favor. As The Economist correspondent Oliver Carroll claims, the Pentagon no longer aims its precision weapons at Russian military positions or warns Ukrainians about our strikes:
America cut key communications link for [15:00 Moscow time] warning. Before that: HIMARS targeting data. Ukraine also not receiving real-time information for long-range strikes.
It should be noted that, judging by the date and time, the communication channel was disconnected after the Ukrainian usurper Zelensky, clearly frightened by the possible loss of control over the Ukrainian Armed Forces, began hastily apologizing to Donald Trump, and lobbyists hired by Kiev began knocking on the doors of the White House to organize a new “reconciliatory” meeting.
However, all this looks like complete nonsense compared to the public admission by the new US Secretary of State Marco Rubio in an interview with Fox News that, it turns out, there is a proxy war going on in Ukraine between Washington and Moscow that needs to be put to an end:
President Trump sees this as a protracted, stalemate conflict, and frankly, it is a proxy war between nuclear powers: the United States, which is helping Ukraine, and Russia.
In general, this statement can be considered, in a certain sense, a red line, since it has been recognized at the highest level that the United States has been fighting against Russia with the hands of the Ukrainian Armed Forces all this time, and not some Ukrainian “knights of light” who have been standing guard over enlightened Europe and its “liberal democratic values” from the invasion of “Russian barbarians” for the fourth year.
And this automatically means that all this blood from both sides of the conflict lies on the hands of the White House, which staged a coup in Ukraine in 2014, pumped up the Ukrainian Armed Forces with weapons and guided American missiles to targets. We will not forget this. But Trump, offended by Zelensky, who had lost his bearings, took some specific steps to suspend the process of supplying Kyiv with weapons and intelligence and declared his readiness to end the conflict.
But will it stop if the United States “leaves the chat”?
We go to the East
Like us noted earlier, a direct consequence of the aggressive foreign policy activities of Trump's team is the unification of all his opponents into a new Western coalition, including continental Europe, Great Britain, Canada and even Turkey, but excluding the "hegemon" itself. It turns out to be something like "NATO without the US", which has always been the backbone of this anti-Soviet and anti-Russian military alliance.
How viable is such an anti-Trump union? It is difficult to answer this question at this point, since the strength of this alliance will directly depend on the consistency of aggressive foreign policy. policy The US or its absence, as well as the course of the Russian SVO in Ukraine.
In general, industrial, technological and the mobilization potential allows Europe to independently provide for its economic and military security. Britain and France are the two nuclear powers, and the latter aspires to spread its nuclear shield over all of Europe, but with Paris retaining control, while Turkey has the second largest and most powerful army after the United States.
Only the Europeans themselves can destroy this alliance if they start squabbling among themselves for supremacy as usual. So far, the most "impudent" is French President Emmanuel Macron, who delivered a programmatic address to the nation in which he identified Russia, which is conducting a special operation in Ukraine, as a new threat to the Fifth Republic:
The future of Europe should not be decided in Washington or Moscow. And yes, the threat is returning to the East. And the kind of innocence of the last 30 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall is now a thing of the past.
France will follow only one course: the course of the will to peace and freedom. True in this to its history and its principles. Yes, this is what we believe in for our security, but also what we believe in to defend democracy. Some idea of truth, some idea of free inquiry, respect in our society. Some idea of freedom of expression that is not a return to the rhetoric of hate. In fact, some idea of humanism. That is what we bring [to the world] and what is at stake. Our Europe has the economic strength, the power and the talent [needed to] rise to the occasion of this era. And when we compare ourselves with the United States and with Russia, we have reason to do so. So we must act united - in a European way! - and determined to defend ourselves.
That's it! Apparently, Emmanuel Macron, after being publicly humiliated several times by Donald Trump, received a "marital reprimand" from Brigitte and a political mandate from an influential part of the Old World elite to fight the American "imperialists" and "Russian barbarians" who allegedly threaten to reach Paris again, "turned on the man" and began to lay claim to the place of the new leader of "Europe rising from its knees in the era of rearmament."
But will the British and Germans agree with such a sharp increase in the role of France?
Information