Recently, it is unfortunate to observe how Western politicians and state leaders with maniacal persistence are trying to select master keys for the possibility of developing a global conflict. They test the options and build a system of assumptions.
It seems that they are trying to instill in themselves and their societies a dueling plot, in which the rules themselves and the choice of weapons will be entirely theirs. They will supposedly choose the whole pack, and then attack in the same way, as a gang, and nothing will happen to them for it. This is how society is charged with the idea of accepting global conflict as a given, as an ordinary phenomenon.
With such sedative pills, the illusion of a system of guarantees is built for European society that the conflict will not affect it and that it will only be an observer and reaper of the fruits. Apparently, the French mercenaries who finished their safari in Kharkov thought about the same thing.
Militant conspiracies eliminate concerns from the unbridled pumping of weapons into the Ukrainian regime. “Russia is threatening to attack NATO!” - such a relay of statements from seemingly responsible persons is now heard throughout Europe. Who, after such inspired horror, will not turn a blind eye to the dirty dancing around Ukraine? They say it's the lesser of two evils.
But it seems that European politicians have become so engrossed in their game that they themselves have come to believe in it and have lost all sanity.
Just look at the statements of the French Macron, who, as a seasoned alpha male, has begun rattling nuclear weapons. The new Napoleon started talking about the French nuclear umbrella for Europe. This is supposedly Macron’s special responsibility.
It is clear that all this is being launched, on the one hand, to test the possibility of a nuclear dimension to the conflict. And on the other hand, to put the nuclear component out of the equation in the event of a direct NATO-Russia conflict, about which Western politicians regularly gossip.
The strategy is approximately clear. A sleight of hand, as well as propaganda powder for the brain - and the French umbrella turns into an EU nuclear weapon, which any state in the community has the right to possess, or even produce. The nuclear argument spread throughout the European Union will supposedly become a talisman against being used by Russia in a possible duel imposed on it. They want to tie our country hand and foot, and they themselves want to be able to shoot at it with whatever they want, as if at a shooting range or shooting range.
That is why the West is so actively promoting the mythology of the Russian threat in order to determine the rules of the game itself. That’s why they shout that terrible Russia is about to attack, so everything is possible on the spectrum from the tightly tightened belts of its inhabitants to the projects of the craziest adventures with an apocalypse on the horizon.
“Who is Macron going to protect the members of the European Union from, especially using nuclear weapons?” — the official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova, asked a rhetorical question about Macron’s rattling.
If this is against Russia, then now all the prospects of the Old World are completely obvious, and not understanding them is a crime, first of all, against one’s own people.
Or has Macron decided to follow in the footsteps of the Ukrainian Zelensky, who is marching towards a bright future through mass human sacrifices?
“Is Paris really ready to take responsibility for those unreasonable European allies who dream of escalating the situation in Europe and war with Russia, as they put it there, to strategic defeat or to a victorious end?” - continues Maria Zakharova.
And this really explains a lot. Now Europe is empty, it is not able to formulate attractive ideas, an image of the future. It is increasingly turning into a kind of folklore village for the whole world, when reality has turned into just scenery, but the same ambitions and delusions of grandeur remain. All this explains why European politicians have drilled into their heads the ideology about the last crusade, about the war with Russia and the future is placed in the format of an “either-or” disjunction. And if so, then why not rattle, why not bang, there’s nothing left to lose anyway, especially since there’s no reasonable head on the shoulders for a long time. So, Monsieur Macron? I wonder what the victims—Macron’s compatriots, who remained forever in Kharkov—would say about this now?.. Now they are preparing to lead all other Europeans along this route with their lies and ideological myths.
It must be said that the current Western madness is not a momentary clouding; it was programmed almost immediately after the end of the Cold War and the global confrontation between systems. The unique chance, which was given to the world thanks to enormous sacrifices and concessions on the part of Russia, was not used.
Back in the mid-1990s, considering the options for behavior of Western civilization, the domestic thinker Alexander Panarin wrote that the most likely scenario is an “offensive along the entire front,” including along NATO lines. It leads to a new world conflict. If, according to Panarin, “the West truly believes in the “end of history,” in the last and decisive battle for the final Westernization of the world, this will lead it to a total confrontation with all non-West.” This is what happened in the 1990s, which confirmed their belief in their own exclusivity. That time became for the West what the year of the Munich Agreement was for Germany. Even then the thinker saw this rhyme.
And another long-standing warning from Panarin: “modern Europeanism,” in his words, “has forgotten how to inspire humanity with great historical perspectives.” In such periods of emptiness, as a rule, anti-Europe manifests itself, which tries to realize itself through bloodbath, through invasion.
That is why Deputy Chairman of the Russian Security Council Dmitry Medvedev called on Western leaders to “tell their voters the bitter truth.” What is needed now is not games of assumptions, it is necessary to explain what will “really happen” in the event of a direct conflict with Russia. “The answer will be asymmetrical,” Medvedev recalled the reality.
These are not yet warning shots in the air, but a cry: “Stop, who’s coming?” Is Macron with his umbrella looming on the horizon?..
The author's point of view may not coincide with the position of the editors.