There are many strange things in the conflicting reports about the evacuation of Western diplomats and their families from Kiev.

At first, the Western media wrote that the evacuation of Russian diplomats was in full swing.

After the Russian Foreign Ministry denied these reports, and Bloomberg and similar fake media failed to provide evidence, the topic of the Russian embassy withered.

But instead, there were reports about the embassies of the Anglo-Saxon countries: the USA, Britain, Canada and the Netherlands and Germany that joined them.

Then, however, reports of the evacuation of German diplomats were refuted.

The departure of ambassadors and embassy workers (if we are not talking about a planned rotation) is always a landmark event, so it is advisable to handle departures and departures more carefully in order to avoid rumors and not aggravate the state of the atmosphere.

Probably, involuntary departure, when a diplomat is declared persona non grata, should be immediately excluded from consideration. Or, let's say, when the ambassador gets a hint that it's time for him to take his passports. This happens. But a completely voluntary departure is an event much more significant.

Two conflicts must be distinguished here. If relations between powers eventually end in war, then the emergency departure of diplomats (even if not all of them) is an alarming sign. For example, in mid-June 1941, a massive departure of German diplomats from Moscow took place, pulling straight to the evacuation. Or the burning of embassy archives. The receiving side, that is, the USSR, could not but take this into account, although the hands of the USSR People's Commissariat of Foreign Affairs were tied with the instruction "not to succumb to provocations." Despite the fact that formally the Germans were in their right: “The diplomats went to the waters for treatment!” And what do you object?

By the way, there was no preventive evacuation of Soviet diplomats from Germany, which casts doubt on the theory of the revisionists (Suvorov-Rezun and others), according to which the USSR prepared to attack the Reich and only a desperate preventive action on June 22 thwarted the Kremlin's plans.

But if he is prepared, why leave the entire embassy staff in Berlin?

Perhaps, when announcing the departure of Russian diplomats from Kiev and Lvov, the truthful Western media had in mind the analogy with June 1941, where the Russian Federation acted as an aggressive Reich.

True, there was no evacuation, no aggression - only talk about it - but even President Trump directly answered such media: “You are fake news.”

What a demand!

But even more questions are raised by reports of the evacuation of Anglo-Saxon diplomats from Kiev.

Even the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine was surprised by such news.

Minister Kuleba called this decision "premature."

“There are no objective and real conditions.

I don’t want to reduce the [tension] of the situation and the level of threat, but everything must be done in time and thoughtfully.”

And the High Representative of the European Union, Josep Borrell, said that the EU Foreign Ministers agreed on the issue that at the moment there is no need for any measures to evacuate employees from Ukraine.

True, the position of the German and Dutch Foreign Ministries has remained ambiguous, but at least most of the countries of united Europe are showing courage so far.

Such courage (if such a big word is applicable to a very, very divinatory threat) is in principle consistent with the laws and customs of diplomacy.

In September 1939, when France declared war on Germany (the so-called strange war, after all), neither US diplomats nor Soviet diplomats evacuated Paris.

The evacuation took place only in the summer of 1940, when the government of the republic fled from the capital in an unknown direction and, after long wanderings, settled in Vichy.

The government of Ukraine is still far from that.

In exactly the same way, after June 22, 1941, the embassies (USA, for example) remained in Moscow.

Their move to Kuibyshev took place only in October - along with the evacuation to the Middle Volga of a number of central departments and institutions.

In those old days, the diplomatic departments of the whole world proceeded from the fact that the diplomatic service is not a lobio to eat and not even to shine in the front harness at receptions. This service is in many ways akin to military service and requires steadfast fulfillment of duty to one's country. Especially in a difficult military or close to military situation, when embassies work in emergency mode - 26 hours a day.

And when the head of the Dutch Foreign Ministry, Hoekstra, says that “if the workers themselves or their families want to return to the Netherlands, then, of course, there is an opportunity to do so,” and US Secretary of State Blinken echoes him: “I have no higher responsibility than the well-being of people, who work for the State Department. We are following this issue very, very closely on a daily basis. And if we have to make a decision that we need to reduce the staff of the embassy, ​​we will do it on the basis of the security situation,” we see an unusually careful attitude towards our personnel, moreover, a preventive one. Not a single bomb has yet fallen on Kiev and is even unlikely to fall - the horrors of war so far exist only in the overheated imagination of Bloomberg and others like him - but the readiness to celebrate the coward is already very high.

The Anglo-Saxons and those who joined them are ready to rock the situation in Ukraine (and not only, by the way) with persistence worthy of a better use.

But then, having frightened themselves, they demonstrate such strong cowardice that even the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry is embarrassed.

Minister Kuleba has never seen anything like this.

The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editors.