Putin's decision was more or less expected, since The Key Features of the Ukrainian Crisis – which is not a bilateral dispute but a broader systemic conflictual process – have presented Russia with extremely difficult dilemmas, which he could not possibly have surpassed…
In essence and, speaking specifically of Ukraine, the decision to recognize the Donbas Republics, constitutes a clear escalation since Through this, Russia «legitimizes its right» to intervene militarily, while in terms of offensive diplomacy, made it clear to everyone, in no uncertain terms, that if provoked, she is determined to do so.
So, those who believe it would be reasonable to expect a different outcome, they should probably list actions that could demonstrate Russia's uncompromising resolve. In the author's opinion, there were no alternative options except perhaps for a hasty military intervention, which, however, would be merely a formality delegitimized. But the most important thing is that Such an intervention would be characterized by fragmentation and, above all, strategic short-sightedness. Obviously, something like that That is not Putin's intention.
In the new landscape that is taking shape, everything is different now. The deterioration It is expected to be rapid. Strategic Characteristics of this conflictual process are intensified. The geopolitical instability will spread. And the top players are already preparing to demonstrate a a new way of thinking that shapes their understanding of the international environment.
It is obvious that Putin's decision opened Pandora's box. Mainly because Its influence extends far beyond Ukraine. There are, however, certain critical questions that need to be answered, but The Western Alliance's initial reactions, the one that demonstrate, is that its leaders do not have the elementary ability, not even to put them into words. So let's do it ourselves…
Was this decision the only option for the Russian leader???; Theoretically, no. The degenerate diplomacy practiced by the Americans left him with no other choice, through which, in essence, They led the Western alliance into a double mistake.
- On the one hand, they confirmed the finiteness of thought and the fact that their reactions are entirely predictable…
- On the other hand, they eliminated the possibility of the time factor having a productive effect in exploring solutions, thus demonstrating that they possess the necessary strategic flexibility in order to look for them.
Regarding the Russian president It had by then become clear that The game of time would be a game of attrition for him as well and dead ends. No serious strategist he wouldn't choose to get stuck in such a muddy place. What he would choose would be to move forward. And that was exactly the choice Putin made with his decision.
Of course, he was able to ignore the consequences, despite the warnings and constant threats from the Americans. First and foremost, because The Americans themselves seem unaware of the consequences this will have for themselves and their allies the risky choices they resort to. And to be more specific…
The Russian leader did not decide to get involved in a predictable game invading Ukraine on the terms the Americans wanted to imagine it. He refused to play on the field they had prepared for him.
His choice was to launch a HARD-HITTING game, with the inherent ability to unleash its potential and fundamentally disrupt Western architecture. So how certain is it that the Americans and their allies truly understand the consequences of the day after????;
There is a view that Putin it could continue with the same diversionary tactics, seeking to maintain its advantage and undermine the cohesion of the Western alliance which, from the outset, appeared divided and reluctant to fully embrace the Americans' rhetoric.
Yes, it could… But when it comes to tactical options, there is always a corresponding one «for these reasons» that must be served. And In an environment that does not seem particularly «flexible»—and therefore lacks the ability to offer solutions—such a choice would amount to a compromise by creating ambiguity and giving valuable time to all those who would like to see Russia weakened geopolitically. It follows from the facts that The Russian president did not choose that path.
It is obvious that The path he has chosen should be a cause for concern. The decision to recognize the Donbas Republics, with all that is sure to follow, introduces a new approach to power management and its impact on the international environment, while literally opening Aeolus’s bag of winds across the whole of Eurasia.
Putin did not choose to prolong a war of attrition in order to wear down the cohesion of the Western Alliance. He chose to foster a specific political culture that would awaken latent sources of division and destabilizing forces within Western societies capable of posing a threat, not merely the cohesion of the alliance but the very geopolitical existence of entire regions, with unpredictable consequences for Euro-Atlantic structures as a whole. Everyone realizes the true magnitude of the emerging problem, if one also takes into account the existence of openly revisionist forces who are lying in wait, ready to take action.
However, his choice should also serve as an example to us… First and foremost We should take inspiration from the way a leader chose to address his citizens, using historical memory as a tool, to highlight the nature and, above all, the national character of the conflict that is about to unfold.
It should serve as an example, especially to us. In a country where ministers leave the flag lying on the ground and walk away from the unveiling of a monument and no one sent them home after that disgrace. In a country where Everyone is working to erase the national memory so that citizens do not feel that the surrounding area, it doesn't just have the most brazen hooligans to show for itself that cause. There are also historical injustices where people expect the obvious from later generations…
But… Citizens are partners in a power struggle with clear systemic characteristics;;; Yes… Fellow Believers and defenders of national laws AND the citizens… Mainly the citizens. Because, and the threat that their country receives it is systemic… The consequences of the defeat will also be systemic unless everyone gives it their all for the VICTORY… If they ignore their obligation to contribute to it and if they ultimately dismiss it on the pretext that it is systemic…
And we're not just saying this off the cuff. Putin's address was not yet over, and the voices that rushed to call for an uncritical alignment with the West’s response, had already begun to make their presence felt in a provocative manner, under the pretext of What else… Erdogan's threat… A threat that it was not reined in by the reckless offers we, as a country, laid at the feet of our «allies» and that some people insist on ignoring the fact that Only national resolve can consign it once and for all to the dustbin of history.
By Mr Kyriakopoulos
