In those last days of February, public opinion, with public opinion released, focused its attention on the global calendar of the first year of the war, whose reason, geopolitical importance and the ugly cruelty of the conflicts are less intense than those that preceded the EU before the implementation of supranational integration, based on the lessons from the devastation of the two of the world wars that arose in Europe in the first half of the 20th century, he learned
The first line is illustrated in these poetic thoughts, without a doubt, the history of the historical acceleration by Putin of the war against Ukraine on the unity of the EU, on his call to affirm the common Foreign and Security objective, together with his declared objectives. its global relevance and maturation, that is, the perceived need to move once and for all from the comfort of the age of innocence to the conflict with a changing reality, in which dangers and threats against Europe’s reason d’être. and its social model.
“Even the time of the advanced struggle, which shows pains to his chronology, demonstrates the dissection of Putin’s rhetoric, often dismissed as “paranoid” and “delusional”.
The second element revolves around what was expressed, in a graphic speech, by High Rep Josep Borrell: “At the moment, Ukraine and its President, Volodymyr Zelenski, are getting more applause from the EU than arms, which is what they need and are asking for. Endlessly.” Underscored in this provocative statement is an urgent demand for increased European contribution to the war effort in Ukraine, which demand acquires an especially urgent tone when it is certain that this contribution will strengthen the inexorable victory of Ukraine against the invading Russian forces; both conventional and mercenary (Wagner).
The third element, about which even this advanced contention, which bears its chronification with difficulty, shows the dissection of Putin’s rhetoric, often dismissed as “paranoid” and “delusional”, when he claims that “Russia is great”. the aggressor advocated by the “West” itself (the USA, NATO and the EU) would threaten themselves, whose objective would be nothing other than the “disintegration” of the Russian country and therefore its “exit”.
As crazy as Putin’s argument may seem, it cannot be underestimated or dismissed out of hand, given the scope of its implications. The basis of this concern is the stark contradiction between the premise of a defensive war, which has as its object the complete expulsion of the invading Russian forces from the territory of the attacked republic, and the consequent military conclusion. There can be no conflict without the defeat of Putin.
“In order to understand the course of events, it is necessary to confirm the continued commitment of Europe to the success of Ukraine.”
That “Putin has already lost this war” is an essential part of the story that is already well established in European public opinion. This interpretation is based on the following objectives of Putin: a) – on the other hand, if the Russian President had an excessive crushing effect, in a short period of time, what he continues to call a “special military operation”. it is evident that he despises the heroic resistance of the Ukrainian army and the ability of his people to adapt and resist; b) – On the other hand, if Putin despised the leadership of President Zelenski, developed his behavior due to his profession as a comedian and was considered “pro-Nazi”, it is clear that he has revealed himself to be an effective communicator in times. of extraordinary urgency, which not only led to some accusation of neo-Nazi with Jewish genealogies, but compared all the great democracies in the ambiguity of the study in favor of the attack against the savage aggressor; c) – Finally, if Putin has calculated that his war will divide the EU – thinking that it depends on its energy, especially more strongly in some of its most vulnerable Member States (EEMM) -, the error is clear: the outcome of his action. wrongfully, illegally and criminally – the whole of the EU to the extent that it was, until recently, hardly predictable and consolidated.
In fact, in order to understand the course of events, it is necessary to note the persistent affirmation of the European interest in the victory of Ukraine, so much so that the President of the European Commission, Ursula Von der Leyen, proceeded with it. to declare that this absolute support would last as long as it took (for the time being only).
However, Putin’s failure to pursue his political goals in Ukraine as well as in the global sphere – where he has been condemned in many UN resolutions, and where even alliances with China and some other BRICS must now oppose the reservations and conditions of the “Peace Plans” (such as China’s) is far from satisfying , the truth is the proposition that the “Western” support (USA, NATO and EU) is based on, for the Ukrainian military counteroffensive continues to be Putin’s military defeat.
This is inexorably understood because a military defeat in a bloody war at a high cost in the lives of people, but also especially unarmed and innocent civilians – requires the articulation of internal dissent in Russia (an expression of sadness and growth. I protest) not to be expected from the conferral of absolute central power, like the one that Putin operates in an autocracy, from which he has drawn all his dominion over Russia and all its public information and communication terminals.
These characteristics, by the way, establish a crucial crisis with respect to any parameter of comparison, which has suffered with the defeat by the USA in Vietnam: even when it is often called nuclear power, it is in fact the greatest military power and weapons. in the world, the dust of its defeat before the heroic insurgency of the Vietcong guerillas bites, the truth is in this balance the instability of war – and the terrible balance of its victims and POWs (Prisoners of War) – before dissociation. American public opinion, which can establish a negative and illegitimate opinion of its continuation in the face of the political and military power of the United States of America, which crucially restricts the margin of maneuver of its president.
For Putin, a military defeat is credible, a condition without which he does not acknowledge: Putin considers himself defeated.
But the situation is different in Russia. Unfortunately, there seems to be no indication that any internal dissent – all opposition suppressed with a relentless attack – can weaken Putin to end his rampant aggression.
All this leads to the expression of a further concern: it is credible that Putin is a “military defeat”, without which he does not accept the condition: Putin considers himself defeated. Nothing in his statements announces this possibility, not even as a hypothesis! Again and again it leads – in the opposite direction – to nuclear proliferation, which leads to false claims of “threats from the West” against the Russian population and against the “integrity and security of Russia”.
A full year of Putin’s criminal war -Putin against the government of Ukraine, against the law of nations, against peace and against the security of the world -, in a sad mission, very disturbing, very uncertain about the scale of development and threats. We believe, however, that the unity of the EU, together with the will to prevail and early affirm our global vocation, to find and illuminate, sooner than later, viable alternatives to the conflict until its chronification. (“as long as it takes”), with the risk of great pain and suffering.
