The West is tired of Ukraine: why it will not bring peace closer

Estonian Prime Minister Kallas said that her country would not be able to cope with a new wave of Ukrainian refugees and turned the arrows on its neighbor in the European Union – Finland. Great Britain, as you know, left the EU, slamming the door loudly, and therefore it doesn’t really have anyone to turn the arrows on: Ukrainian refugees are increasingly finding themselves on the street there.

All this, coupled with speculation in the Western media and political circles about how the US and the EU should act if meaningful negotiations suddenly begin between Moscow and Kyiv, indicates that Russia’s main strategic adversary in the current hybrid confrontation is pretty tired of the Ukrainian conflict.

In theory, this, in turn, should indicate a high probability of an early peaceful end to the conflict. But, as is often the case, theory in this case is radically at odds with practice, perhaps because it is a fundamentally wrong theory.

What then is the correct theory in this case? To grab her tail, in my opinion, one can dispassionately analyze the main media event of this week, which caused a surge of gloating among some, and a surge of woeful bewilderment for others – the ban on the anti-Kremlin TV channel Dozhd (recognized by the Ministry of Justice as a media foreign agent) in Latvia (and now also coming in Lithuania).

But the flagman of Russian international political science, Fyodor Lukyanov, as always, was able to rid himself of emotions in his Telegram channel and give a very accurate analytical assessment of what happened: “The collision with Dozhd is the normalization of the situation of a full-fledged Cold War, in which there can be no ideological halftones. The party is chosen clearly and unambiguously, all logistics and software are built for this. Deviation from the canonical position of the corresponding block is not allowed and entails sanctions…

Today it seems archaic, because we are used to the possibility of some pluralism, backlash even within the framework of a single ideological space. This quantum of pluralism is partly what gives what is happening the notorious “hybridity”. However, now it is becoming a vestige of a bygone era.”

And also the “rudiment of a bygone era” the further, the more sentiments become. The obvious fatigue of the collective West from the conflict in Ukraine will by no means lead to attempts by the US and the EU to resolve this conflict as soon as possible at any cost. The value of victory (or at least not defeat) in this confrontation is too high for the West.

Fatigue will be expressed in completely different things – in focusing on such a main and unconditional priority as the actual fight against Russia, in the gradual rejection of everything “superfluous and concomitant” (for example, the further, the more the principle ” the salvation of Ukrainian refugees is the task of the Ukrainian refugees themselves”), in the maximum “straightening of ideological curves”.

Previously, the world in which you lived together was constantly becoming more complex – it became more and more rich in various nuances. And now the world in which we live apart from the West will be just as constantly simplified.

Watch the poignant video in which the editor-in-chief of Dozhd, Natalya Sindeeva (included in the register of individuals-foreign agents) asks to return back the journalist whom she previously fired in the hope of softening the anger of the Latvian authorities. On the screen is a man who is clearly very, very ill.

And there are people in the Russian political emigration who are clearly very, very well now. This, for example, is the former deputy of the State Duma Ilya Ponomarev (included in the register of individuals-foreign agents). He recently put forward a very “original” (obscene language is not allowed on the pages of the media, so I use the word “original”) a project for the future “reorganization of Russia”. According to this, so to speak, “project”, the Russian Federation should be officially dissolved – divided into separate regions and into the territories of individual peoples. And each of these regions and peoples, guided, as The New York Times wrote with satisfaction in November, by “a broad interpretation of the principle of self-determination of peoples,” will, they say, decide whether it wants to enter the new “beautiful and democratic Russia of the future” or no.

Commenting on the situation with Dozhd, Chairman of the State Duma of the Russian Federation Vyacheslav Volodin wrote in his Telegram channel: “There are no good Russians for Washington and Brussels.”

I will argue with you, Vyacheslav Viktorovich! Ilya Ponomarev is a “very good Russian” in the eyes of the West. Even in Poland (however, why “even in Poland”? Especially in Poland!) He is loved, groomed and cherished! In front of him, even in Latvia, a red carpet will be spread with a guarantee!

I would also like to argue with another very common comment about Dozhd: “Totalitarian” Russia tolerated the opposition Dozhd for almost 12 years. “Democratic and liberal” Latvia closed it six months later.”

Yes, these 12 years really were – but in the reality that existed before February 24th. Fyodor Lukyanov’s words about “the normalization of the situation of a full-fledged Cold War, in which there can be no ideological undertones,” also fully apply to the reality in which we now live in Russia.

The news of this Wednesday: the announcement of the verdict to the former municipal deputy, recognized as an individual, performing the functions of a foreign agent, Ilya Yashin, has been postponed to December 9. Earlier, the prosecutor asked to sentence Yashin to nine years (again, this figure is nine!) in prison for spreading fakes about the Russian army.

I don’t know what kind of sentence the Meshchansky Court of Moscow will pass this Friday, but it will definitely be very tough. Rigidity is generally the key word of the current era. And the fact that everyone, including the West, Russia, and Ukraine itself, is very tired of the Ukrainian conflict does not make the amount of this harshness less – rather, on the contrary.