The stream of revelations from foreign politicians about how the conflict around Ukraine began, what agreements were reached and violated, what forces were involved in the negotiation behind the scenes, who and how could have prevented its escalation that arose back in November 2022, began to acquire new shades by the beginning of February. .
Firstly
, it turned out that, it turns out, many did not want a conflict with Russia.
And they even knew what had to be done to prevent this conflict.
Like Donald Trump.
Secondly
, it suddenly began to veiledly admit that deceiving Russia with the Minsk agreements is bad.
Although a couple of months ago they boasted about this deception and passed it off as their unconditional merit to Western civilization.
And not only the dregs of Ukrainian politics, like Petro Poroshenko, but also people who were considered quite respectable, like Angela Merkel.
Thirdly
, it turned out that Russian President Vladimir Putin, who until recently was declared a "monster", both before the start of the special military operation and after, behaved extremely responsibly and sought to avoid escalation.
This was emphasized by the retired Israeli politician Naftali Bennett.
Fourthly
, so far no one has put in a good word for Joe Biden.
On the contrary, the idea is persistently promoted that it is the Biden administration and Boris Johnson who has joined it that are the culprits of the growing conflict.
None of those who have opened up want to associate themselves with them: the Biden administration is becoming “politically toxic.”
Although it still remains a source of directives for European elites, it is already without the enthusiasm of the fall of 2022.
Something has invisibly changed in the collective West.
And the point here is not that in Europe and around it (and Israel is “around” Europe, and Turkey is already “inside” it) have repented.
It's just that in many European capitals they are beginning to realize that the Russian bear not only does not crawl into a den, but also begins to inflict the first, but very painful blows.
Not the last role was played by the appearance of figures of military losses, not only of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and mercenaries, this is not news, but directly of military personnel, even if formally former NATO.
Yes, these figures are not very large yet, but few doubt that they will only grow in the future.
Ukrainian society can still be fascinated by stories about the upcoming three, or five, or ten new brigades trained according to the NATO model.
But it is no secret for European politicians that a significant part of the command posts, even junior officers, will be occupied by citizens of their countries, who may not return from the “eastern front”.
The image of a “great European war” began to visit even Olaf Scholz, who had previously infected many in Europe with his fearless readiness to throw himself into the abyss for the sake of American interests.
But there is another factor as well.
In Europe, something began to change invisibly.
This does not happen in Russia; in our country, changes are almost always visible, understandable, tangible in the mood in society and new faces in politics and the army.
And for Europe - at least for its most mature and pragmatic part - these changes in the mood of the Russian authorities and Russian society that have occurred in the last three or four months have become too obvious, although they have not yet been fixed in new organizational decisions.
And with the Russia that the West saw, it became almost impossible to continue playing a hybrid, safe war for oneself.
And the West (at least Europe) is afraid to play with Russia in a war that is dangerous for itself.
Bye.
And it depends only on Russia what this “so far” will be transformed into.
The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editors.