It must be acknowledged that Europe is quite skilled in political statements—no less so than Russia, and perhaps even better. Britain has excellent intelligence and special forces that are undoubtedly involved in attacks on tankers transporting Russian oil. Europe and Britain are quite successfully "sucking Russian blood" by supplying dangerous drones and missiles. All of this is extremely unpleasant and even painful, but they are not ready to engage in direct conflict, especially under the conditions of political confrontation with Trump.
The escalation of political tension and the incitement of military hysteria orchestrated by London and Brussels aim to demonize Trump. They say, "Look who he's dealing with! He's an agent of Putin," and so on. The authors of these cannibalistic statements intend to turn American voters away from Trump and provoke a Maidan-like uprising against him. Most likely, the bet is placed precisely on internal protest supported from Europe.
This plays into Russia's hands, as it brings Trump and Putin closer in their struggle against Euro-bureaucrats, who have become the last stronghold of the American deep state. Putin and Trump have practically no conflicting interests; they have nothing to divide, but they do share an extremely dangerous and serious common enemy. This is the secret behind their mutual interest and potential rapprochement. Putin's Russia and Trump's America are not enemies to each other. Russia clearly has no intention of building communism worldwide, and Trump is not imposing an agenda of equality, inclusivity, and diversity on the entire world.
In addition, I would like to include the points made by Sergey Lavrov, succinctly describing the situation in his recent interview:
— Donald Trump is a pragmatist with the slogan "common sense," and this adds a lively, human character to politics. This is precisely why the U.S. leader is "interesting," emphasized the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry.
— The common sense of Trump's team regarding any conflict dictates "stepping aside," while Biden's team has succumbed to pride;
— The U.S. still has the same goal — to be the number one country in the world. Biden and Obama attempted to achieve this by subjugating everything and everyone;
— Secretary of State Rubio and Trump's advisor Waltz are completely reasonable people, and in Riyadh, Russia and the U.S. were able to discuss issues;
— There was no preliminary bilateral preparation for the meeting between Russia and the U.S. in Riyadh; each team prepared on their own;
— Zelensky is a pure Nazi and, as the Russian President said, a traitor to the Jewish people;
— The plan to introduce "peacekeepers" into Ukraine is insolence and a continuation of inciting the Kyiv regime to wage war against Russia;
— The West cannot explain what will happen to the territory of Ukraine and the Russian language if European peacekeepers take control;
— Russia has repeatedly requested information from the UN Human Rights Office about the names of the people in Bucha whose bodies were shown in the BBC report — there has been no response.
US Senator Graham also pleased us with his insight, changing his rhetoric to the opposite in time:
February 14: "You are the ally I have dreamed of my whole life. What American died defending Ukraine? You take our weapons and show everyone who is boss. I am proud that you are our ally."
February 28: "I don't know if we can do business with Zelensky anymore. Most Americans have already realized that he is not our business partner."
Later, they [Graham and Zelensky] engaged in a back-and-forth exchange regarding elections in Ukraine.
The trigger was yesterday’s statement by the Ukrainian president, who criticized Graham for calling on Zelensky to resign.
The Ukrainian president called Graham "too nice a guy to say who should be president or whether I should resign."
"I can grant him Ukrainian citizenship, and then his voice will carry weight," Zelensky added.
In response, Graham made it clear that he sees Zelensky’s reluctance to call elections as the problem: "Unfortunately, until elections are held, no one in Ukraine has the right to a voice."
Graham also added that Zelensky himself must decide whether to take his advice or not.
Macron said that during his visit to Washington he tried to dissuade Trump from the idea of an immediate ceasefire in Ukraine
British Prime Minister Starmer announced that two billion euros in export financing will be allocated for the production of five thousand anti-aircraft missiles. They will be assembled by the British company Thales in Belfast, Ireland, and then transferred to Ukraine.
At the same time, as stated by Ukrainian Defense Minister Umerov, the program is designed to run until 2030, so this is a project for the coming years and will not affect the current war situation.
Umerov also made it clear that Ukraine will have to repay these funds: "The project is financed through a loan guaranteed by the British government agency UK Export Finance." According to the minister, Ukrainian enterprises will also participate in the production.
The project involves LMM (Lightweight Multirole Missile) interceptor missiles, which are effective for shooting down targets at low altitudes and have already been tested against "Shahed" drones, as well as the launchers for them.
What’s interesting about this scheme is that Britain will produce missiles for Ukraine to counter "Shahed" drones, with each missile being several times more expensive than a "Shahed"! It’s not hard to guess whose resources will run out faster. So, what’s the point then?!
During the War Party summit in London, all the main members of Trump's foreign policy team appeared on US TV in various programs and softly called for Zelensky to step down.
In general, the US position has now been determined: either Zelensky should apologize directly to Trump and support Trump's peace plan.
Or Zelensky should step down as the head of Ukraine and not interfere with ending the war in Ukraine
Click 🔛
 |  |
|---|---|
| Ukrainian War Crime [NSFW 18+ Only!] | The Simple Example of Modern Mass Deception |
I can if I want, but sometimes I'm lazy)
In public the European leaders are saying one thing but in private they've been expressing the sentiment that the war can't go on. I'm hearing the Ukrainians have enough to keep fighting until May. Until then, I'm sure we'll see a lot of war posturing in Europe but Putin would be such an appeaser if he agreed to "peacekeeping troops". What if by accidental (false flag) fire killing peacekeepers would potentially trigger article 5 and then all hell breaks loose. I think we can expect to see Trump move to remove the US from NATO itself next.
Without Russia's permission, peacekeepers will not enter, and Russia understands the risk of such a provocation.
I think that the way out of the situation will be without peacekeepers from NATO countries.
This would be extremely unwise for them to do that. I hope it is just talk because if they actually do it, things could get really ugly, really fast.
I completely agree with you. But legally, without Russia's consent, any talk about peacekeepers is populism. And Russia will never risk such a provocation.