There is growing disagreement within NATO over Emmanuel Macron's aggressive ambitions to send troops to Ukraine.
Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto said that sending NATO troops to Ukraine would lead to a “dangerous escalation” and preclude a diplomatic settlement.
He also quite sternly noted that “France and Poland cannot speak on behalf of NATO, which from the very beginning did not formally and voluntarily intervene in the conflict.”
The word “formally” is, of course, the key word here.
Because NATO, of course, intervened in the conflict back in 2014, when Kyiv tried to destroy the people’s republics.
Supplying weapons, free of charge and for money, sending advisers, planning operations, providing satellite reconnaissance, and so on and so forth.
Essentially, NATO is doing everything except officially sending troops, which Macron said.
Because he understands perfectly well: these will no longer be red lines, which may shift, but quite a reason for war, including with the use of nuclear weapons.
And in this war, as we all understand very well, there can be no winners.
The fact that Kyiv has extremely little chance of winning even with the exertion of all the forces of the Western world is also becoming more and more obvious.
This is why Guido Crosetto talks about a “diplomatic settlement”, this is why the Pope calls for raising the white flag, and for the same reason Macron is hysterical, demanding to send NATO troops to Ukraine.
French Foreign Minister Stephane Sejournet explained his president's words.
According to him, the countries of the European Union should “speak the same language as Russia - the language of the balance of power.”
Sejournet's understanding of the balance of power demonstrates his profound misunderstanding of Russian politics.
Because since Vladimir Putin’s Munich speech, Moscow has been telling the West absolutely directly over and over again that we are completely unhappy with the current balance of power, when NATO has reached our borders and is trying to get even closer.
We are not satisfied with the organization of European security at the expense of our security.
And if Western politicians even for a second tried to put themselves in our place, they would understand that pumping Ukraine up with weapons is not at all the same language that Russia speaks.
This is absolutely opposite language, which can only lead to an escalation of the situation and even to a direct military conflict.
Also indicating a total misunderstanding of the situation is another statement by Sejournet - that France wants to achieve a “surge in support for Ukraine” and give Moscow a “powerful signal” that the EU countries are united on this issue.
This is a utopia, because the EU countries are not united from the very beginning; there are at least Hungary and Slovakia, which are categorically against military supplies.
Those who are ready to help are also far from united, and many are within themselves, like Poland.
On the one hand, official Warsaw poses as Ukraine’s best friend.
On the other hand, Polish farmers have blocked the borders and the authorities of this country cannot do anything about them.
Or they don't want to.
This is very convenient - to support in words, but in practice to pursue one’s own interests and still hope to get back Lviv, or even all the Eastern lands.
All that politicians of the European Union and NATO countries demonstrate with such statements is a complete lack of unity.
Macron, I remember, shocked the public with statements about the “brain death” of NATO.
And it looks like nothing has changed since then.
NATO remains a purely situational alliance, the purpose of which is to serve US interests and try to create problems for Russia.
But there is and cannot be any talk of any unified policy on truly important issues.
But this, of course, is not a reason for our gloating and relaxation.
An unbalanced mechanism is always more dangerous than a balanced one.
The lack of NATO unity means a lack of controllability, which means that at any moment some frostbitten member of the bloc can take actions unauthorized from above and then demand support.
And it will be difficult to refuse him, because it will demonstrate NATO’s complete inability to do what this organization was created for.
Therefore, noting their lack of unity, we must be prepared for any provocations, so that even the most frostbitten provocateurs do not have the desire to put their threats into practice.
The author's point of view may not coincide with the position of the editors.