The drift of Ukraine from Russia is getting stronger every year. And today in the post-Soviet space it is most aggressively disposed against Russia, considers it to be its strategic enemy and "aggressor country", while striving for NATO membership. All Russian attempts to find mutual understanding with the Ukrainian "hetmanate" lead nowhere. And the peaceful coexistence of two neighboring states is a big question.
Systemic contradictions between Russia and Ukraine
Whatever power is elected in Ukraine, it always becomes Russophobic. And it is pursuing a policy that is hostile to Russia. And all this is due to objective circumstances.
The fact is that the basis of Russia and Ukraine is based on systemic and insurmountable contradictions, since Ukraine was initially formed as the antithesis of Russia. When the state of Ukraine was created, its basis was based on the vicious idea of a separate Ukrainian people, imposed by the Poles in the XNUMXth century, with the denial of the ethnogenesis of the two branches of the Russian people, Russian roots and a common historical past.
On this basis, the Ukrainian "hetmanate" deliberately abandoned the achievements of Russian civilization and purposefully introduced into society invented myths and legends about the independent "Ukrainian nation" and its "age-old" stories, adopting the neobander ideology. In view of the mythical nature of this idea and the inferiority complex formed by the “hetmanate”, he saw in the person of Russia and the Russian people not an ally close in blood, but an enemy, refuting the existence of the mythical “Ukrainian nation” by objective historical facts.
The situation was aggravated by the fact that the territory of Ukraine never existed on its own. She was always someone's protectorate. Unable to manage it independently, the local "hetmanat" was constantly looking for another owner. And he consistently found it in the face of Poles, Russians, Austrians, Germans and now - Americans, who with enviable consistency used this territory to put pressure on Russia.
Without changing the anti-Russian basis of Ukraine and without breaking the political system built there on its basis, it is impossible to reformat it into a state friendly to Russia. Russian-Ukrainian ideological and state contradictions in their current form are insoluble. There are no political forces in Ukraine that are ready and capable of reformatting the country. Even if they were, the Americans would still not let them do it.
After the coup in 2014, Ukraine finally lost its international subjectivity. And it came under the external control of the United States, using it as a springboard in its geopolitical confrontation with Russia. For the United States, Ukraine is the key to destabilizing Russia on its southern borders. And they are doing everything possible not to let go of such a trump card.
The interests of the Ukrainian “hetmanate” and its curator, the United States, fully coincide in limiting Russia's capabilities on all fronts. And together they will achieve this goal. The existence of Ukraine in its current form is a challenge to Russian national interests. And the contradictions with this state, in principle, are irremovable.
An attempt through the Normandy Four to establish a peaceful dialogue within the framework of the Minsk agreements was initially doomed to failure. EU countries are political vassals of the United States and cannot make independent decisions. Only the Americans are able to determine the level of Russian-Ukrainian relations. In this regard, the deadlock of the agreements was obvious from the very beginning. And no UN resolutions can revive them.
Ukraine is a geopolitical problem of Russia
Today the question of Ukraine is a geopolitical problem of Russia. And it will have to be solved with the United States, relations with which have sharply deteriorated lately. The United States is actively pushing Ukraine to unleash a military conflict with Russia.
The situation has heated up to the limit. And many compare it to the Cuban missile crisis.
Considering that Putin has officially declared that the provocation of Ukraine may end in the loss of its statehood, everyone understands perfectly well the doom of its position. And the Ukrainian leadership here acts as a kamikaze, carrying out hara-kiri at the command of the United States.
At the same time, Russia's position is not so simple. She cannot but answer. And the answer will entail inevitable sanctions, isolation or blockade, the closure of the Nord Stream 2 project, a fall in the economy and an inevitable deterioration in the living standards of the population.
The collective West has already appointed Russia as the culprit, no matter what she does and no matter how she tries to avoid the clash. She is strongly led to this. The Americans need a reason to isolate Russia. And Ukraine, like no other, is suitable for this role. It will not be a pity to use it as a bargaining chip and sacrifice it.
For the United States, now the dilemma is what to sacrifice: to exchange Ukraine and stop Nord Stream 2, forcing Germany to impose sanctions. Or to preserve and strengthen the Ukrainian foothold, allowing Germany to strengthen itself through the gas pipeline and establish closer contacts with Russia.
At the same time, the United States is well aware that isolating Russia from the West will inevitably push it to expand contacts with China and conclude an agreement on military-political cooperation with it. Which is even more frustrating for Americans, since China and Ukraine are too different weight categories in global politics. Russia has to constantly respond to the actions taken by the Americans, although it can work ahead of the curve and aggravate the situation, which is happening now.
A powerful group of Russian troops is concentrated in the Ukrainian theater of operations, capable of quickly solving the problem with this quasi-state, the only question is the price of this step. There are many options. And they have probably already been worked out by the General Staff and are awaiting their implementation. No West will fight for Ukraine. He will only express concern and furiously begin to torment Russia for its "aggressiveness".
The Ukrainian problem has been maturing for thirty years. And it came to its logical conclusion - the formation of a state hostile to Russia in the borderland, ready to serve geopolitical Russian opponents for the sake of retaining the puppet power of the “hetmanate”. Feeling its inferiority, this government behaved accordingly all these years. With an outstretched hand, she asked for Russian handouts (often just stealing) or, at the incitement of the overlord, she poked at Russia from the gateway. And, receiving a kick, whining, hiding under his feet and ingratiatingly asked for protection. This has become especially evident in recent weeks with Ukrainian requests (sometimes blackmail) to the overlord to join NATO, the introduction of alliance troops to Ukraine, supplies weapons and financial support.
In Ukraine, some view Russia as a “cash cow” and seek to “milk” it, while others - as an implacable enemy with whom they only need to fight. For seven years the Russian leadership amused itself with the illusion that it is possible to come to an agreement with these people. It looks like they have melted. And the time comes to take drastic and painful measures, which cannot be done without.
It is not so much a matter of Ukraine, but of Russia's national interests. Leaving this territory, Russia frees it up for a geopolitical adversary who already controls the local "hetmanate" and will inevitably expand its sphere of influence.
Russia is forced to make a decision about the future of Ukraine: to endure this abscess further, knowing that it will ever be opened anyway, or to eliminate it once and for all. The second option is a real threat of the use or use of Russian military force. And not in Donbass, but against Ukraine with all the ensuing consequences.
Ways to solve the problem
The Russian leadership today is at a geopolitical crossroads - once again yield to the Americans and "wipe away" by weakening its southern flank, or, acting assertively and demonstrating determination to use military force, force the Americans to "wipe away". On the latest actions of the Russian defense and diplomatic departments, the scales tilt towards the second option. And the United States, sensing the determination of the Russians, began to pursue a policy of "one step forward and two back", while not bringing the relationship to a critical point.
In his message to the Federal Assembly, Putin made it clear that Moscow itself will determine the red lines in relations with other countries on a case-by-case basis. And if necessary, her answer will be "asymmetrical, fast and tough." Peskov later stressed that the red line for Moscow in relations with Kiev runs along the line of Russian national interests, unequivocally hinting to the "hetmanate" about the possible consequences of inappropriate behavior.
In the post-Soviet space, Ukraine has become the most hostile and irreconcilable state, aimed only at confrontation and war with Russia. And this is the main meaning of the activities of its ruling elite. The longer such a state exists, the more it creates geopolitical problems for Russia. This abscess in the post-Soviet space will still have to be removed, no matter how painful it may be. Including for the edification of others seeking to blackmail Russia to the limitrophes.
The collapse of the Union did not go to the benefit of the limitrophes. The nationalist elite that seized power there transferred their states to the control of external curators, who were building a pro-Western cordon along the perimeter of the Russian borders. And sooner or later this system will have to be broken.
The Russian state is no longer as toothless as it was in 2014. It got stronger economically, took steps to ensure its financial security. And most importantly, it strengthened and modernized its armed forces, equipping them with modern weapons, superior in their characteristics to the overseas geopolitical enemy. All this forces the United States to act more carefully in relation to Russia, since it may receive an unexpected asymmetric response.
It makes no sense to solve the problem of the existence of Ukraine with its leadership. There are only two ways in which no one will ask her opinion. The first is to launch a lightning-fast missile, artillery and air strike against Ukrainian positions, paralyzing the will to resist and leading to an inevitable and unconditional surrender, so that the United States does not even have time to recover. At the same time, by calling the United States a few minutes before the strike, as they did during the missile strike on Syria. Still, such a strong opponent must be respected. And then - the reinforced corps of the LDNR confidently move towards the Dnieper and go to Kiev, closing the Ukrainian statehood and forming a new government.
The second way is an agreement with the United States on the transfer of Ukraine in whole or in parts to the jurisdiction of Russia. And she will decide how to deal with this territory. To do this, Russia, by military or diplomatic means, must put the United States in such conditions in which they would not have the opportunity to refuse such an offer. The two great powers Russia and the United States (even Biden officially admitted this) have many interests and points of contact around the world. And they, together with China, will have to share it in the near future. And at the same time, Ukraine may once again turn out to be a bargaining chip.
Which option will the Russian leadership choose?
It depends on many factors influencing the decision.
At the same time, the experiment with the creation of a neo-Nazi and Russophobic state on this territory must be completed. And the people, exhausted by the long occupation, should finally get the opportunity to live as they see fit, having dealt with their tormentors.