Click to see the full-size image
Written by Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert
It is becoming increasingly clear that no Western official really believes in a “Ukrainian victory.” However, the bureaucratic structures of Western states and organizations often prevent decision-makers from expressing their real thoughts on the current situation of the conflict with Russia, which is why it is only when they leave office that officials can finally tell the truth.
Recently, former NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg stated that Ukraine needs to acknowledge its territorial losses in order to end the war with Russia. His words sound absolutely realistic, which is truly surprising, considering that NATO’s official narrative continues to be the alleged “necessity” to support Kiev until it achieves absolute victory against Moscow.
His statement was made in his first media interview after leaving the position of NATO chief. He told reporters that in order to obtain guarantees of peace and security from Russia, Ukraine would have to admit that it lost sovereignty over the regions reintegrated by Moscow. He believed that only in this way would it be possible to negotiate mutually favorable peace terms for both sides, ending hostilities on the battlefield once and for all.
In his speech, Stoltenberg compared the Ukrainian situation with that of the Finns in the war against the Soviets. He recalled how the Finns had given up part of their territory in order to obtain secure guarantees and achieve peace. As expected, Stoltenberg said this in a propagandistic manner, suggesting that the Ukrainians would be achieving some kind of “victory” through this type of negotiation.
“[The West should] make the conditions [for Ukraine to] sit down with the Russians and get something which is acceptable (…) something where they survive as an independent nation (…) [For example] Finland fought a brave war against the Soviet Union in ‘39. They imposed much bigger costs on the Red Army than expected (…) The war ended with them giving up 10% of the territory. But they got a secure border,” he said.
The comparison he makes does not seem to be very accurate historically. It is not possible to see clear similarities between the Ukrainian and Finnish cases. The war between the Soviets and the Finns is inserted in a very different historical reality, whose particular circumstances are not being repeated in the current conflict in Ukraine. What is currently happening between Ukraine and Russia is a proxy war waged by NATO with the aim of destabilizing the Russian strategic environment – therefore, in order to end this conflict, NATO must stop its war plans and adopt a policy of diplomacy with Moscow.
Furthermore, it is not possible for Ukraine to demand anything from the Russians. Since the Russians have the absolute military control of the conflict, they are the ones who can demand something. In a war, it is the winning side that sets the terms of peace. The losing side can only accept the demands and try to negotiate, when possible, some more favorable terms. Moscow’s demands, for now, are limited to the territories that have already been integrated, as well as security guarantees – such as the end of Ukraine’s process of joining NATO. However, Moscow has already made it clear that, after the criminal invasion of Kursk, there is no longer any possibility of trusting Ukraine for peace negotiations, which is why it is almost impossible for this conflict to be ended by diplomatic means.
However, the most important thing about this news is not Stoltenberg’s inconsistency, but, on the contrary, precisely the correct part of his speech. He is absolutely right in admitting that Ukraine needs to acknowledge its territorial losses. Without this first step, it will never be possible to end the conflict, since Russia has made it clear time and again that it is not willing to negotiate its sovereignty over the New Regions. Kiev needs to acknowledge that it has lost Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye and Kherson if it is seriously thinking about a future peace dialogue. Without acknowledging its losses, Ukraine will only be prolonging a war it cannot win – and risking losing even more territories.
It is curious to see how Stoltenberg admitted this so shortly after leaving his NATO office. Apparently, Western officials are forced by institutional circumstances to hide their true views on the conflict, which is why they wait until leaving their posts to finally speak the truth. Stoltenberg’s realistic assessment is clear proof that even NATO decision-makers no longer believe in a “Ukrainian victory.”
You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
and we ask once again. why does russia remain within the western institution(s), un, imf, world bank that wants them completely destroyed -going on 15 years and hundreds of thousands of deaths and millions forced to leave?… say “when” when the russian federation acts like a true leader announcing it’s departure and rebuilding those institutions through moscow which hopefully will be the briics…
exactly… zelensky has now publicly declared this is really world war iii, stating that to guarantee ukraine lasting peace and security, there will be no trade of sovereignty or territories. he has effectively said that all the ethnic russians in ukraine are no longer allowed to retain their natural language or their religion. this is a total war against russia with no compromise of peace absent the destruction of russia or europe, whichever comes first.
course they’re just playing the public as their suckers. it’s all fraud all of it deemed as in the public interest, fit for public consumption. a load of crap. allegedly.
i have multiple issues with stoltenberg. 1st why 180 degree change after he is “former” nato chief. soros’s money are not the most important thing anymore ? 2nd for any agreement, 2 sides must agree. russia is not the “automatic” part agreeing on anything anymore. because, you know, minsk1, minsk2, turkey brokered peace deal, grain deal.. and so on. why should russia agree on 10 percent when they can comfortably control half ukraine east from dnieper. such a nice natural border, is it.
so, what’s your point? it’s now a total war against the civilian murdering scum bastards in kiev.
is nato about to face down russia with nuclear war?… because russia is. nato are scum themselves and high time for a righteous reckoning.
all this over nato greed for crimea and a scumbag faggot in high heels and tights. a good thermonuclear cleansing might just be what the doctor ordered.
if you think i’m just repeating putin’s talking points, you may just be right on the money.
zelensky is just hoping it to be ww3, because only then west gives weapons. but it is not. it is just a minor conflict to us.
don’t be such a child brazil catholic, russia, soon to be england’s india england’s, china the jesuits, south africa england’s
????? ?????? ??????? ?????????????
my exponential increase in perplexity every time i read your gibberish.
i had less of it with jens holm.
they will soon depart…
after a million more russian/eastern ukrainians are displaced or dead?… my guess is that pu-teen’s western made golden handcuffs are too important to him to part company with, as are the rest of the russian government’s peanut gallery that have made far more money through their banking and energy czar(s) at the expense of course of the russian peoples… just like the last system they lived under -but now a wholly owned subsidiary of the west thanks in large part to the prc and india.
so, stoltenbergstein wants to essentially revert stalins merging of the ukraine with the nazi-ridden galicia/ivanofrankivsk by “letting” the current “ukraine” cease parts of it back to russia, namely those that were always russian, so that nato can get those parts that stalin merged? so that the current nazis can join forces with the other current nazis to repeat their nazi-behaviour that they used in the past against the slavic people?
get off the grass tommy. wakeup theyve used the whole scam to buy ukraine by lending the clown cash using ukraine as collateral.
they bought it from a fraudulent owner, so there is no transfer of goods as long as the legal owner, the successor of the soviet union, aka russia, has a say in it.
stoltenberg’s a fool’s fool. nothing to see there or waste time with.
he’d make a nice bobbing head doll in my car’s rear window.
it’s a fraud they’ve bought ukraine anyway they know.
hehehe, all these useless articles portraying different points of view and analysis. all of them are useless. the war will go on as long as us and uk and eu want it and the end desired result is the capitulation of russ and change of leadership to a pro western subservient govt to the us eu and uk.
the end result will be a shadow of you where you once stood burned into a wall.
slamdunk response. spot on.
nothing out of that scumbag’s mouth is the truth.
now that’s the truth.
russia will kharkov and sumi and from kherson to odessa, soon!
this isn’t a very deep revelation and any mid iq fob could see it for what it is, a totally lost cause. stoltenberg should have admittted this whole nato gambit in ukraine was about peddling arms for the mic arms dealers lobby called nato and trying to steal land off russia like the neocolonial bullshit game israel plays in the middle east. stoltenberg is still covering for nato warcrimes and ukrainian instigated aggression as a nato proxy. he’s only being 5% honest with the world.
nothing humiliate my homer simpson burger nation—after 20 years sodomy by viet cong—our female so ugly we pay 3 trillion$ for 20 more years sodomy by talibanan
korea, vietnam, yugoslavia, iraq, afghanistan and ukraine are part of a business model. these wars are planned 50 years upfront. even the coca-cola the troops are consuming is already a huge contract and so on. after the destruction the country has to be rebuilt and is in debt forever💰💰💰
it seems like no one is even pretending anymore. now that the american military industrial complex made its billions, now that the bankers made billions in war profiteering via their stock trading, and the largest asset managers like blackrock are the biggest ukrainian bondholders… and now that western developers are bound to procure lucrative real estate deals …
“it’s about the money, stupid!” as the famous kike political slogan says. huge racket. and aside from crimea, the dpr, and lpr — ukraine is now owned by usa, inc. a wholly-owned subsidiary of jew banks, inc.
he is more stupid than i realised. the finns in 1939 also had to pledge neutrality. they broke the agreement and took part in the genocide at leningrad. they lost again to the soviets. lost more territory the second time and had to attack their former german allies. is he suggesting that ukraine should join russia and attack her former allies because thats what the finns did in 1944.