The West is preparing to freeze the conflict in Ukraine

In the domestic media, information about the program article of US President Joe Biden on Ukraine, published in the New York Times on May 31, passed almost unnoticed. To understand the contrast of the changes in the perception of the geopolitical alignment that have occurred among the political elites of the United States, we should recall Biden's speech on March 26 in Warsaw. It also gives reason to talk about the prospects for the development of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict.

Let me remind you that almost a month after Russia launched a Special Military Operation (SMO) in Ukraine, on March 26, Biden delivered an address in Poland, which was called: "On the united efforts of the free world to support the people of Ukraine”.

In this speech, Biden spoke about the fundamental struggle between democracy and autocracy in the world on the example of Ukraine. "In this battle, we need to be clear-eyed. This battle will not be won in days or months either. We need to steel ourselves for the long fight ahead," the American president said.

"It will not be easy. There will be costs. But it’s a price we have to pay. Because the darkness that drives autocracy is ultimately no match for the flame of liberty that lights the souls of free people everywhere," Biden said.

He further explained the principled nature of the situation: "Every generation has had to defeat democracy’s mortal foes. <…> And history shows this is the task of our time, the task of this generation.”

The American president also explained that Russia will never defeat Ukraine, because "free people refuse to live in a world of hopelessness and darkness”. He compared Russian President Vladimir Putin to a dictator "who believes that force will prevail”, at the same time, according to Biden, Putin "can and should" end military operations in Ukraine.

Summarising what is happening in Ukraine Biden said: "It’s nothing less than a direct challenge to the rule-based international order established since the end of World War II. And it threatens to return to decades of war that ravaged Europe before the international rule-based order was put in place. We cannot go back to that. We cannot."

According to Biden's assurances, as a result of the unified sanctions of the West, the Russian economy will fall by half, and soon it will not be included in the world twenty, and that for $1 allegedly 200 rubles are given (at that time).

At the same time, the American president said that he would not send his soldiers to Ukraine, but the protection of NATO members would be strengthened. Biden ended his speech by saying that "a dictator seeking to restore the empire will never destroy the people's love for freedom. For God's sake, this man cannot remain in power." Of course, here he meant the Russian president.

If Biden's pretentious speech in Warsaw was about 27 minutes long, then a smooth and unhurried reading of his article in the New York Times will take a maximum of 5 minutes. The very title of the article "What America Will and Will Not Do in Ukraine" reflects a change in the US’ approach to the Russian-Ukrainian conflict – Americans are shutting themselves off from the conflict.

At the beginning of the article, Biden defines the US’ goals for Ukraine: "We want to see a democratic, independent, sovereign and prosperous Ukraine with the means to deter and defend itself against further aggression”. As you can see for yourself, there is no question of any fundamental struggle between democracy and autocracy, light and darkness.

The fourth paragraph of the article says: "As President Vladimir Zelensky of Ukraine has said, ultimately this war ‘will only definitively end through diplomacy.’ Every negotiation reflects the facts on the ground. We have moved quickly to send Ukraine a significant amount of weaponry and ammunition so it can fight on the battlefield and be in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table."

Again, Biden does not recall the threat to the order "established after the Second World War" and apparently "generational victory over the enemies of democracy" already does not appeal to anyone. It is very characteristic that the demands to the President of Russia to cease hostilities have changed to the topic of the negotiation process, although with the hope of Ukraine's strong position.

The article goes on to talk about the continuation of sanctions pressure on Russia, about promises to US allies to reduce their dependence on Russian fossil fuels and accelerate the "transition to a clean energy future”. Nothing was said about the "successes" of this sanctions policy, the place of the Russian economy in the world and the ruble exchange rate.

According to Biden, the United States is not only stopping to seek a war between NATO and Russia, but also will not overthrow Putin: "As much as I disagree with Mr. Putin, and find his actions an outrage, the United States will not try to bring about his ouster in Moscow." After the pretentious statements that the Russian president is a dictator and he cannot remain in power, the words "I disagree" from the mouth of the American president sound very modest, and the intention to remove Putin from power is completely refuted.

"We are not encouraging or enabling Ukraine to strike beyond its borders. We do not want to prolong the war just to inflict pain on Russia," Biden writes. The fact that throughout this article, the United States voices its demands in relation to Ukraine, and not to Russia, suggests that the United States is trying to level this conflict.

Then the American president returned to the topic of negotiations, but he began with a statement that "I will not pressure the Ukrainian government — in private or public — to make any territorial concessions." In general, the very public voicing of such a possibility is associated with behind-the-scenes rumours that leaked from the White House to the media.

After that, he accused the Russian side of disrupting the negotiation process between Russia and Ukraine, but it was precisely the Ukrainian side that refused its proposals submitted to Russian representatives in Istanbul on March 29, referring to the provocation of mass killings in Bucha. At the same time, Biden assured that the United States "will continue to work to strengthen Ukraine and support its efforts to achieve a negotiated end to the conflict."

At the end of the article, the American president recalled that "if Russia does not pay a heavy price for its actions," it will endanger other democracies and "could mark the end of the rules-based international order”. He drew a red line in this conflict: "any use of nuclear weapons in this conflict on any scale would be completely unacceptable."

The article ends with the following phrases: "Vladimir Putin did not expect such a degree of unity or strength of our response. He was wrong. If he expects us to falter or break down in the coming months, he is equally wrong."

Comparing these two speeches, we can unequivocally say that the collective West in the face of the United States has already flinched, the only red line voiced in this conflict is the use of nuclear weapons by Russia, which means that everything else no longer plays a role.

It is worth recalling that after a visit to Kiev on April 24, Pentagon Chief Lloyd Austin, commenting on the situation of Ukraine to journalists, said: "We believe that we – they – can win, if they have the right equipment, the right support, and we’re going to do everything we can and continue to do everything we can <…> We want to see Russia weakened to such an extent that it cannot do the things it did before the invasion of Ukraine."

However, since then Lloyd Austin has not spoken out in this way about Russia. Even on May 11, at a hearing in the US Congress on the defence budget and the allocation of $40 billion to Ukraine, the head of the Pentagon called China "the leading long-term problem of the US armed forces”. The need for military assistance to Ukraine was justified by the fact that the main fighting had moved to Donbass and "the coming weeks will be critical for Ukraine."

RUSSTRAT's previous materials have already described the struggle between "doves" and "hawks" in the White House over Ukraine. Therefore, it is not surprising that initially leaks from the White House, voiced by a completely reliable source – Politico magazine, said that Biden resists Ukraine's demands for the supply of long-range multiple launch rocket systems. However, a little later, the delivery of American MLRS was approved, but without ammunition with a maximum range.

This heterogeneity of the White House's approaches resulted in a public plane and even developed into specific demands for Biden in the media, which have always supported his party. In the article "In the US and EU, they are beginning to realise the limit of confrontation with Russia has been reached", it was described that for domestic political reasons Biden is required to determine specific US goals for Ukraine. The media also wanted the White House to cut Ukraine's "appetites" and inform its leadership of the need to conclude peace agreements, even with costs for this country.

Now we see with our own eyes that Biden partially fulfils these demands by publishing a program article in which the US policy on Ukraine looks very modest compared to the initial statements. However, it would be premature to say that the struggle between the "doves" and "hawks" of the White House is over.

Of course, the situation on the fronts plays a very important role in these changes in the political approach, since the Western media already recognise that Ukraine is losing the battle for Donbass. The New York Times newspaper reported that Ukraine deliberately suppresses information about the real state of affairs at the front in order to guarantee the preservation of US arms supplies.

In addition, the collective West has not calculated its strength in the economic war against Russia and is now suffering losses that threaten to change the ruling elites. Because with a sharp drop in the standard of living of the population, they have practically no chance of being re-elected within the framework of democratic procedures.

That is why the progress in changing the position on Ukraine is noticeable in Europe too. Thus, German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock refused to hold a meeting with the Ambassador of Ukraine to Germany Andrey Melnik. Previously, no one could refuse Melnik, he got away even with insults against the top officials of Germany and continued to speak on German television.

Now the Zeit newspaper admits that after February 24 in the German media there was a rule "only good things about Ukraine publicly", but meanwhile this country is mired in corruption, and its president Vladimir Zelensky is building a dictatorship.

As CNN reported, the United States, Britain and the EU are discussing ways to resolve the situation in Ukraine without the participation of representatives of Kiev. The collective West is unable to endure the protracted conflict between Russia and Ukraine: in addition to the sanctions costs, rising energy prices, Ukraine will have to be financed almost completely, since its economy does not work and degrades with every day of hostilities. It is almost impossible to explain the huge costs of Ukraine to a European citizen who already sees the prospect of freezing in a cold apartment in winter.

In Ukraine, this situation is well understood: "Everyone wants to push us a little bit to some result, exactly unprofitable for us, but beneficial for those ones or other parties who have their own interests. And again, interests are different: both financial and political ones," Zelensky told Ukrainian media. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has already warned his colleagues against forcing Ukraine to conclude an unprofitable peace agreement, which means that such conversations are really going on at a high level.

Of course, the West wants peace agreements between Russia and Ukraine on terms, acceptable for itself, so that they can then explain to their electorate that they managed to save Ukraine from complete destruction by Russia. The West is not ready to admit defeat, it is easier for it to declare that there are no final losers in this battle. Of course, there will be concessions from Ukraine, but these concessions agreed with the West are unlikely to satisfy Russia.

A senior source in the Russian government told the Izvestiya newspaper that if Kiev does make contact with Moscow, the status of the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions will not be discussed, as well as the topic with Crimea and Donbass. Russia is raising the stakes and that's right. At the same time, for the purpose of Russia's special operation in Ukraine, the denazification and demilitarisation of this country have been determined, and Vladimir Putin voiced that the issue of any threat from Ukraine should be unequivocally resolved, and not postponed.

Summarising the above, we can conclude that the collective West has matured to proposals to Russia to freeze this conflict, but our country needs to achieve the goals originally set in Ukraine, otherwise, as a result of these negotiations, only a respite will result, which will turn into a new, even more fierce war against the Kiev junta.