Categories: ANALYTICS

The West vs. Russia: the tactic of a thousand concessions

After the much-publicized Peace Summit in Switzerland, which we are proud of, an act of shuttle diplomacy by V. Orban, which we condemn, took place. And then—nothing happens. Our government squeezed out that Russia should participate in the next summit. Instead, Russia immediately responded that it has no desire because everything is going well for it: it is not planning to capitulate as it is advancing, and it can accept the West’s capitulation in Moscow without any summit.

These are, of course, bluffs from the back alley, but the peacekeeping activity has clearly slowed down.

The thing is, the Kremlin is now reviewing the goals of the war. It started, firstly, to channel the wild destructive energy of resentment associated with the cannibalistic “Russian world.”

Secondly, to distract Russian society from the glaring socio-economic inequality, which is even greater than in Ukraine, and the associated social tension.

Thirdly, to destroy Ukraine as an example that power can be changed and, in one way or another, held accountable to society.

Fourthly, to frighten the collective West with demonstrative cruelty against Ukraine (a tactic tested during the bombing of Syria) to regain influence over all post-Soviet countries.

In this sense, the destruction of, for example, Ohmatdyt is a completely conscious act of intimidation for Europeans—”see, we have no brakes or limits, so we will do the same to you if you do not accept our terms.”

But now, Putin and his entourage have discovered a few things with some surprise.

First of all, NATO and the USA have demonstrated suicidal sluggishness and uncertainty. Instead of taking advantage of the despair in the Kremlin after the failed blitzkrieg against Ukraine and decisively finishing off the aggressor, the West began to act extremely cautiously, homeopathically dosing aid and accompanying it with absurd restrictions that are still in place. And this is not the fear of nuclear conflict (Hamas and Hezbollah do not have nuclear weapons, yet Israel’s hands are also tied in defending its country), but the absence of resolve and the ability to act for principles, overcoming fears, in modern Western politicians.

This tactic of a thousand cuts kills the attacker, while the tactic of a thousand concessions destroys the victim and strengthens and stimulates the attacker.

The Kremlin has also realized that Russians not only support the war against the once “brotherly nation,” but are also ready to die in it for propagandist illusions and crude money.

Another unexpected gift for the Kremlin’s leader was that he did not become a complete pariah in the world. International sanctions are too gradual, and the neo-empire received equipment, components, and resources to conduct and even escalate an aggressive war. There is virtually no one to support the same “global security order” by force. But there are those who can break it.

Consequently, the “Russian world” leader now wants much more than at the beginning of the invasion: not just control over the post-Soviet space, but a decisive influence over all of Europe, thereby replacing the United States. And also a noticeable influence, though not exclusive, in the Middle East, Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

Some may call this a foolish euphoria from successes not yet achieved. But if the tactic of a thousand concessions by the collective West continues, Putin will eventually demand power over almost the entire world—dictators who do not face resistance are guaranteed to become increasingly unreasonable.

Thus, when peace negotiations, or rather, bargaining, resume, the conditions for a potential cessation of hostilities in the center of Europe may shock many.

Alexandr Kochetkov

Ukraine Front Lines