Russian President Vladimir Putin has turned overnight from the subject of “undisclosed” amusement and infatuation to a devil threatening the world’s security, stability, and peace. The accusations against Putin have been made under the pretext that he plans to forcefully bring back the Soviet Union. After all, he is the one who said, “Whoever does not miss the Soviet Union has no heart. Whoever wants it back has no brain.”
Western media seem to be inching towards achieving their goal: portraying Putin as a "vicious aggressor" who disregards the charters of the "civilized" world and its "unique" support for democracy and human rights. Moreover, some channels and radio stations labelled in Russia as “foreign traitors” have been particularly active. Take Echo Moskvy radio station and Dohzd TV channel for example, and their attempt to portray the “failure of the first phase of the military offensive,” as per the well-known Russian journalist Mikhail Fishman. Perhaps these facts could explain why the Duma is discussing the terms of a draft law that imposes a criminal penalty of up to 15 years in prison for anyone who is proven to disseminate “fake news.” The Public Prosecution also announced the possibility of shutting down the Echo Moskvy radio station and Dohzd TV channel, which are known for their Western inclinations and opposition to the official authorities. Talking to Russia Today, Igor Ashmanov, an expert in information security, revealed that Western countries have opened many “propaganda” centers against Russia in recent years. Ashmanov pointed out that these centers are mostly based in the Baltic States, in addition to two powerful centers in Poland, the Association Citizen Journalists in Prague, and another center in Georgia. There are also other centers in Ukraine backed by the "virtual fighters" of Russian-speaking hackers on social networking sites. According to the Russian Defense Ministry, with the success of the special military operation to protect Donbass and disarm Ukraine, the volume of misleading and fabricated information has been growing exponentially.
The suspicion furthers thanks to the almost continuous airtime presence of certain figures such as Yakov Kedmi, the Mossad general and the former Soviet dissident who fled to Israel at the end of the 1960s. There, he joined Mossad, supervising the agency "Nativ" that was created to transport Soviet Jews to Israel, and later joined the Israeli army in its war against Egypt in 1973. Kedmi, who is introduced in his capacity as an “Israeli social figure,” is clearly trying to draw a constant comparison between the Russian forces and the Egyptian armed forces during the June War of 1967 in order to show similarities. Kedmi constantly recalls how the Egyptian army was publicizing false victories in the first days of the war against Israeli defeats, which later proved to be non-existent. In this regard, it is a shame that worldwide media fall into the trap of inciting Arab countries and the opponents of Israel on every occasion as such inappropriate conduct is not worthy of the media of a superpower. Such tactics have exposed people who take their own country as an enemy at a time when loyal nationalism is much needed.
When it comes to tackling the battlefield, including the victories and setbacks witnessed by both sides, the Western media has been surely turning a blind eye to many events. Examples include when the Russian army took control of Kherson in southern Ukraine and the fresh water sources there, close to the Crimean Peninsula. The Ukrainian authorities had prevented the Crimea from access to water in Kherson since March 2015, which caused much suffering to the Crimean residents. In this regard, Igor Konashenkov, the official spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry, revealed that the forces of the Donetsk People’s Republic were able, with the support of the Russian forces, to tighten their siege around the Port of Mariupol on the shore of the Azov Sea. Such an accomplishment was an indicator of taking control over large areas south of the Donbass region.
Meanwhile, thousands of tons of weapons are flowing, backed by the so-called “International Legion of Territorial Defense of Ukraine,” which was hastily formed of factions from ISIS “fighters” and other terrorist factions which still enjoy the protection of a number of Western countries, according to Bashar Jafari, the Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister and former representative of Syria to the UN. The Western sanctions are being profusely issued in an attempt to isolate Russia from the international community in a manner unprecedented since the Cold War. As for the real goals of the raging conflict and confrontations, they remain within the framework of what many sources have revealed as the “color revolutions” that ravaged many of the countries that were part of former Soviet Union.
Scholars and artists recall that Hitler’s forces reached Moscow’s doorstep, and were only 12 km away from the Kremlin in October 1941, only to retreat. The Soviet forces then emerged victoriously and managed not only to liberate the Soviet lands, but also the lands of all Eastern European countries. They even reached Berlin where they planted the Soviet flag on the dome of the Reichstag in May 1945, a few days before the arrival of the Allied forces. In this regard, one must highlight how many of Russia’s great icons in arts and music have been treated. The international opera singer Anna Netrebko was suspended by the management of La Scala, the Italian opera house. In Germany, the Munich Philharmonic terminated its contract with Maestro Valery Gergiev. The reason? They refused to announce their rejection of war and to condemn President Putin. The absurdity reached the point of cancelling a lecture by Italian writer and translator Paolo Nori on the Russian writer Feodor Dostoevsky. This is in addition to the sanctions and bans to which many sports teams in various games have been subjected, even though people in the field have long called for separating sports from politics. Then came the downpour of rumors and fake news that which could explain why Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Chernyshenko launched the “Explain.rf” portal, stressing that it was the only source of reliable information.
Chernyshenko added that at the present time, “huge volumes of news and so-called information are being disseminated on social networks and sites and in the media, among which, unfortunately, include many fake rumors. It is therefore important for the government to pass on relevant and reliable information to the people.” The Deputy Prime Minister explained that the portal will work in cooperation with “stopkoronavirus.rf.” According to Chernyshenko, the portal has already published answers to questions encompassing areas of interest, including the extent to which the current conditions affect social payments, and whether there are enough basic products in stores. He stressed that the only information that will be published is that which is verified as well as official statements. The portal also has a "Stop Fake" section that debunks false information circulating on social media.
As for the current events and developments on the battlefield, announcements and statements oppose and converge according to the stances of the websites of the concerned warring parties. These websites play a key role in supervising, controlling and directing the course of the confrontation, amidst growing pressure from the USA and other Western countries to dissuade Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenskyy from any decision that would lead to a compromise with Russia. It is worth noting that Zelenskyy had previously announced his country's readiness to accept "the situation of his country's neutrality,” which means abandoning the “dream” of joining the NATO. However, he later reneged on his promise with clear support from his “present friends” represented by the NATO and the European Union. In this regard, all eyes are on the prospects of attempts at communication between both sides, and their talks in search of a "lost peace" and a ceasefire. The Ukrainian sources confirmed that the main objective of these talks is to reach a “ceasefire.” As for the Russian side, it said that Moscow remained committed to the previous statement of President Putin: “Demilterizatsya,” which means “disarmament,” and “Dyntsvikatsiya,” meaning the liquidation of Nazism. Neither of the two goals have been yet fulfilled. Putin later added the need to recognize the annexation of Crimea, stressing at the same time that there were no intentions to occupy Ukraine.
A review of the positions of the two sides and what is related primarily to Russia’s stance, shows that Moscow insists on adopting the constants of history and many historical events as the basis and starting point for any interpretation and revision of the events in southeastern Ukraine. Moscow has previously explained its decision on annexing Crimea in March 2014, a milestone in the history of the development of the Ukrainian crisis. However, consider what is happening in southeastern Ukraine, which is witnessing intense battles. The forces of the Donetsk and Luhansk rebel republics, both recognized by Moscow, continue their battles there in order to fulfill two main goals. (1) Pressure the Ukrainian government forces to evacuate as much as possible of the lands they seized from the two “provinces” in response to their unilateral decision to separate in the wake of the “coup” that overthrew former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014. The aim is to mitigate the burdens and consequences of the continuous bombardment and to prevent further destruction and devastation. (2) In the words of President Putin, the recognition of the two republics extends to all the historical lands of the Donbas region. This underlines restoring all the remaining historical territory of the two provinces, which Russian official sources say is “Russian land” that the leader of the October Revolution, Vladimir Lenin, decided to include in Ukraine in support of its working class.
This is the genesis of the “Ukrainian crisis” and the associated armed confrontations. Many decisions characterized by racism and national sectarian discrimination came hand in hand, the culmination of which was the Verkhovna Rada (Ukrainian Parliament) issuing a law banning the use of the Russian language and the closure of Russian schools in regions where Russians and Russian-speaking nationalities accounted for more than 35% of the population. Observers note that the armed confrontation between the two sides had reached a peak and was in dire need of mediation. The beginnings of the reconciliation were with the formation of the Normandy Group during the celebrations of the seventieth anniversary of the landing of the Allied forces in French Normandy. The group consisted of former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, former French President Francois Hollande, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Russian President Vladimir Putin. The meetings of this group led to the announcement of the commencement of the "Minsk talks" at the invitation of the President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko in February 2015.
After a “marathon” of discussions that lasted for more than 16 hours, the concerned parties reached what is called today the “Minsk Accords.” They explicitly stipulate Ukraine's recognition of a special status for the two “separatist” republics, a ceasefire, an exchange of prisoners, an amendment to the Ukrainian constitution, including the subsequent recognition of the Russian language and the right to local elections, and the formation of special security authorities before the return of Ukraine's supervision of the borders of these two "republics" bordering Russia. However, the RADA Council refused to ratify these agreements and former President Poroshenko refrained from implementing them. These factors were the main reasons for the return of military confrontations. Nonetheless, the accords managed to facilitate a partial exchange of prisoners. It is worth mentioning here that current Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenskyy ran in the presidential elections under slogans calling for a peaceful solution to the crisis, including the recognition of all the provisions of the Minsk agreements. He even initiated the “reconciliation” with a large-scale exchange of prisoners. However, it was not long before he disclosed his desire to join the NATO and return to the EU accession talks. Moscow was not aloof from the pressures and persecutions that many Russian-speaking people face, which were a prelude to many efforts aimed at persuading the Ukrainian leadership to implement the Minsk Accords which had been mediated by the German and French. Meetings followed at the level of the leaders of the Normandy Group in Berlin and Paris, in addition to the formation of the so-called Minsk Accords group, which held several meetings in Minsk without making any progress.
There are indicators that the failure of these talks and the insistence of the Ukrainian side on joining NATO are at the forefront of the reasons for the messages that President Putin delivered along with his country’s security demands. These include the non-expansion of NATO to the east, and the return to the reality of 1997 before the formation of the “Russia-NATO” council and the before Eastern European and former Soviet Union countries started joining NATO. Accordingly, these countries should withdraw their strategic forces, including nuclear ones, from the alliance that they joined as of 1997. In this context, Putin made sure to stress the need to obtain a written response during his contacts with his US counterpart Joe Biden, and in the meetings of the foreign ministers of both countries, Sergey Lavrov and Anthony Blinken. This would prevent any attempt to deceive the Russian side once again, similarly to what happened with former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Former NATO Secretary General Manfred Werner, and former US Minister of Foreign Affairs James Baker retracted their promise to Gorbachev which was made in the wake of announcing the Warsaw Pact. The Pact had brought together the former Soviet Union with all the countries of Eastern Europe in 1991 over the commitment not to allow the NATO expand “one inch” beyond its existing borders at the time.
Western sources had attempted to deny such promises, which were refuted by the German magazine Der Spiegel over the past few weeks, thanks to the documents it published from that period. It can be noted that the summit of NATO leaders in 2008 in Bucharest after the Georgian-Russian war retracted its decision regarding the annexation of Ukraine and Georgia. The move prepared for the realization of their deferred dreams, foremost of which, as we mentioned above, is “the overthrow of Russian President Putin,” and dismantling Russia in a manner similar to what happened with the former Soviet Union. This is what no one in Russia can accept, except for the opposition factions known for their loyalty to Western liberal ideals.
The current reality confirms that Russia has not yet revealed all its cards, although there is much evidence that the more dangerous and more severe actions are yet to come. Hence, all eyes are on the results of the negotiations, with the first round kicking off last Tuesday on the Belarusian-Ukrainian border. However, the only result was the announcement of Vladimir Medinsky, head of the Russian delegation, who declared the existence of a “reasonable area of agreement on which we can build.” A second round of talks was also announced, which was held last Wednesday. It is worthwhile to monitor how neighboring countries, including Turkey and Kazakhstan, are actively attempting to reach a mediation that might ease the current confrontation, and implicitly answer the question we posed in this article’s headline.
