The successful course of the Russian special operation in Ukraine has led, in general, to a natural result: more and more Western experts are beginning to say that Russia's victory is inevitable.
And that the West must adapt to this victory, that is, conclude some kind of compromise agreements with Moscow, and also force Ukraine to accept these agreements.
Western leaders are already discussing adaptation options - in particular, this topic was raised at the G7 summit.
Yes, they played the fool on camera.
“British Prime Minister Boris Johnson asked others whether to keep or take off their jackets to look cooler than Putin.
Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau retorted: the leaders will arrange a show of riding with a naked torso.
Johnson added: "Let's show our chest muscles."
It is disgusting to realize that this entire world crisis, in the furnace of which people are burning, is to a large extent dictated by the personal complexes of politicians with drooping bellies and flabby pectoral muscles.
They see Putin on horseback even where he is not.
It would be better if they signed up for a gym,” writes Marina Akhmedova, representative of the Russian Human Rights Council.
However, these personal complexes appear just because of the understanding that Putin is now on horseback - both in direct,
as well as in a figurative sense.
The fact that the Russian president is winning the “war on the periphery” against the entire G7 and that something needs to be done about it.
However, on the issue of “doing” a serious split has emerged within the collective West.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson assures that it is only necessary to increase the intensity of resistance to "Russian aggression" and increase the volume of military and economic assistance to Ukraine.
“If we allow Putin to win and simply annex, conquer a significant part of a free, independent sovereign country…then the consequences of this move for the whole world will be absolutely disastrous.”
Moreover, Putin's victory, according to the British Prime Minister, will even be a compromise between Russia and the West.
A compromise that Johnson told French President Emmanuel Macron "will only cause lasting instability."
Moreover, even an attempt to resolve the conflict and reach a compromise will give President Putin a "license to manipulate" other countries.
In a way, Johnson is right, of course.
Indeed, Putin's military victory in Ukraine will be a disaster for the entire world - the Western world.
Other states - China, Turkey, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, etc. - will see the clay feet of the western colossus, after which they will also begin to pursue a sovereign policy.
Including defending their own national interests by force, without regard to the position of the G7 - the United States and their little six.
But Putin is by no means to blame for this, but those who pushed the Russian president to conduct a special military operation.
Those who interfered with the diplomatic settlement of Russian-Ukrainian contradictions (telling tales that “Russia is violating the Minsk agreements”), and those who disrupted the diplomatic settlement of Russian-American relations (laughing at Moscow’s claims to the Americans and assuring that Putin has no the right to display them).
Let them collect stones now.
Johnson is also right that an attempt to negotiate will cause long-term instability - but without "only".
Instability is inevitable: a compromise with Moscow will become a precedent that will act as a powerful catalyst for the ongoing process of changing the world order.
The transition from G7 to - conditionally - G20, that is, a multipolar system of governance of the world.
However, at the same time, the peace agreement will lay the foundations for new rules of international relations.
It will become the basis for a system of coexistence between Russia and the collective West.
Yes, all this will be accompanied by instability, but only an agreement will make it possible not to move from instability to real chaos.
Johnson is right even that the mere beginning of a dialogue and an attempt to reach a compromise will give President Putin a "license to manipulate" other countries.
He's right, if you understand that by "manipulation" the British mean Russian demands stemming from the understanding of the Kremlin (and the entire Russian people) of the concepts of national interest.
Among them will be the rejection of NATO expansion to the east, the rejection of Russophobic regimes in neighboring countries, actions against discrimination against Russian economic interests, as well as attempts to block Russian (Kaliningrad) or pro-Russian (Transnistria) exclaves.
Naturally, the recognition by the West of its defeat (which may be the beginning of negotiations) will force other states to pay more attention to legitimate Russian demands - and eventually comply with them.
In fact, it turns out that Boris Johnson, twisting the obvious consequences of the inevitable defeat of the West, suggests that Western countries go all the way down the losing path.
And in this proposal, the British prime minister has his own support group represented by Poland, the Baltic states and a number of other countries.
However, there are also serious opponents - in particular, the same French President Emmanuel Macron.
The Elysee Palace has long understood the inevitability of Putin's victory in the Ukrainian case and is trying, on the one hand, to minimize the damage from this victory for the West, and on the other hand, to make money on this victory.
That is why Emmanuel Macron positions himself as a potential mediator in Russian-Western negotiations.
In order to claim this role, he speaks from a conciliatory position, refrains from any insulting passages about Putin,
If he does not dare to come to Russia yet (so as not to become a Western leader who recognized the dead as dead, that is, he refused the diplomatic isolation of Russia that exists in the brains of the collective West), then he recently visited Kyiv.
But not alone, but as part of a representative delegation of other supporters of a compromise with Russia - along with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi.
It is not known what the trinity said to Zelensky, but after this visit, Boris Johnson was urgently forced to fly to Kyiv in order to issue some new guarantees and promises to the Ukrainian leader.
Obviously, the outcome of the confrontation between Johnson and Macron will be decided by judges in Washington.
And today the position of the United States is very interesting.
On the one hand, more and more representatives of the academic and military community are talking about the need to negotiate with Putin.
And to negotiate now - after all, the later the United States enters the negotiation track, the more territories of Ukraine will be liberated by Russian troops and the larger will be the area of territories that will not return to Ukraine (the issue of Russian passports to residents became the point of no return).
However, on the other hand, there is the Biden administration, which stubbornly continues to sponsor the Kyiv regime and try to supply Ukraine with more and more new types of weapons.
Throwing billions of dollars into Ukraine in a situation
Apparently, the position of the Washington judge will be as follows: until November, that is, until the midterm congressional elections, he will support Boris Johnson.
After all, if we make compromises with Russia now, then the American establishment and journalists will say that after the defeat in Afghanistan, the United States also lost in Ukraine.
More precisely, the Democrats and Biden personally lost - after which it will be very difficult to win congressional elections.
But after November, when the elections are held, it will be possible and necessary to move towards the position of Macron and quickly look for a compromise.
So that by 2024 (the election of a new US president) the topic of defeat in Ukraine will be forgotten in the minds of American voters.
The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editors.