Aleksei Malenko
More than six months has passed since the launch of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine and there were hardly any people left who have not chosen their side, which were now fashionably called “sides of history”.
Despite the fact that arguments and evidence are unlikely to change the chosen positions, I would like to recall that Moscow has been trying for years to achieve a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Ukraine.
While Kyiv authorities continued to shell the Russian-speaking population of the DPR and LPR, we were looking for a diplomatic solution through the development and signing of the Minsk agreements.
Unfortunately, for the Ukrainian side the peace talks were just a way to stall for time and prepare for a full scale conflict, and this was admitted by the former president of Ukraine Petr Poroshenko.
As for the events of February 2022, Moscow also insisted on a diplomatic settlement of the growing conflict, repeatedly offered to sign documents guaranteeing the security of our country, and put forward relevant projects.
Russian Ambassador to South Africa, the Honourable Ilya Rogachev, wrote about this in his recent article (Cape Times, August 31) in the best possible way: “Western leaders laughed off Russia's ‘last minute’ diplomatic proposals aimed at initiating talks on crucial security issues of mutual, as we thought, interest; violated all possible trade and financial agreements ... ”
Instead of negotiations there is a firmly voiced desire to acquire nuclear weapons and accuse Russia of all mortal sins.
Thus, Kyiv and its Western patrons repeated the thesis like a mantra that as a result of Russia’s actions to allegedly block Ukrainian grain, the world was on the verge of starvation.
Let us note that throughout the world 800 million tons of wheat are produced a year, and the share of Ukraine, ready to export 20 million tons, is only 2.5%. It is obvious such a promoted grain could not play any decisive role regarding the global scale, while remaining an excellent target for the propaganda tools of the West.
This year in July in Istanbul, through the mediation of the Turkish authorities, the negotiations were held on the export of grain from Ukrainian ports. As a result of constructive positions taken by Russia, they were crowned with success: deliveries began.
It would seem the most discussed cause of hunger in the media has been levelled, and the indigent will receive the long-awaited grain. But bad luck occurred – ships from the Ukrainian ports went anywhere but to the most famine-prone regions of the planet.
At the same time, the card of famine allegedly unfolding through the fault of Russia and rising food prices was actively played by Western diplomats in their appeals to the leaders of African states. It is ironic that the grain from the only ship sent towards Africa did not fit in well: instead of wheat that the Lebanese needed, maize was delivered to them.
By the way, according to German weekly news magazine Spiegel, and not “Russian propaganda”, out of 63 ships that left Ukrainian ports on September 1, only 13 had wheat; the rest were filled with corn, soybeans and sunflower, which are used for feeding livestock or production. This was not so actively covered in the mass media. What is this if not another act of Western hypocrisy?
Throughout the month, Russia was being accused of creating tensions around the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP). According to Kyiv’s patrons, Western politicians and the press who have joined them, the Russian army is shelling the ZNPP, putting the region on the brink of a nuclear catastrophe.
At the same time, none of the parties expresses doubts that the station is currently under the protection of the Russian armed forces.
Does it mean that the Russian army is shelling itself? These preposterous statements in no way explain the fact that Russia was the first to convene an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council on August 11, and subsequently invited international experts from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to the plant.
It is quite logical to assume that the true culprit will by all means hide the evidence of his crimes, and not provide them for the investigation. At the end of August, the unbelievable happened: the first deputy official representative of the US Department of Defence, Mr Patel, during a briefing did not rule out that the shelling could be carried out by Ukrainian forces, which from the lips of the American military sounds almost like a sincere confession.
Ultimately, despite the obstacles created by Kyiv, the IAEA delegation managed to visit the ZNPP. The report published on September 6, however, did not name those who shelled the station – the authors kept to a neutral call to stop the shelling.
There is every reason to believe that such streamlined formulations are due to the fact that objective reality does not allow accusing Russia of nuclear terrorism, while public opinion and fears of being obstructed by Kyiv and its support group do not allow naming the true culprits of what is happening.
These examples are the most relevant in the list of articles designed to shape anti-Russian public opinion and to justify their own economic failures and the crimes of the Kyiv regime, as well as to justify the abolition of everything Russian. Russophobia cannot be spread on bread, but that is the subject of another discussion. I just propose to look at what is happening in a broader context, or to think out of the box, and talk about the true beneficiaries of what is happening.
One of the most common accusations levelled against Russia touches on the rising of fuel prices. At the same time, our country, despite the thousands of sanctions imposed against it, continued and continues to conscientiously fulfil its obligations by supplying gas even to openly Russophobic European regimes (obviously subject to payment terms on their side).
Despite Moscow’s efforts to balance the energy markets, the price of fuel has begun to break all conceivable records. According to CNN, which is quite difficult to suspect of love towards Russia, in August the cost of gas in Europe was seven times higher than the cost of gas in the US.
Numerous and obviously self-imposed European sanctions either directly prohibit or severely limit the possibility of purchasing cheap high-quality Russian gas and force them to look for new markets.
The Middle East region is not able to fill the emerging “gas” gap, and the European media are full of articles on the severity of the coming winter.
As a result, the course chosen by the EU leads it to an energy catastrophe and forces it to turn to its overseas partner (or patron?) for help.
It is no secret that the US possesses the richest natural gas reserves, but the markets of Europe and the Middle East would always be more or less closed for American resources, should stability persist in the regions.
In the present, all necessary conditions have been created for the Old World to fall into the gas dependence on the New World.
Back in July, according to the International Energy Agency, gas imports to Europe from the US exceeded supplies from Russia. But winter is coming.
Thus, being thousands of kilometres away from Europe, the Americans, without putting themselves under any threat, interfere in the internal affairs of the continent, and pursue their goals which were put together by the American-Polish geostrategist Zbigniew Brzezinski in his book The Grand Chessboard.
According to numerous statements by European officials, the military resources of the EU for pumping up the Kyiv regime with weapons are depleted. But that does not prevent Americans sending more and more batches of weapons to Ukraine. At the same time, even the Pentagon admits that weapons delivered to Europe may disappear in an unknown direction.
Thus, the official representative of the US Department of Defence, Mr Chris O’Donnell, stated recently that the Ukrainians keep records of deliveries on paper, which leaves no chance for any comprehensive control.
However, Washington hardly considers this a reason for concern, though the missing weapons are sold on the dark net and can fall into the hands of terrorists and criminals of all stripes in any region of the world.
And this lays the seeds of chaos and the basis for future conflicts that can be reopened and rekindled at the most appropriate moment.
Let us recall the recent statements of former US president Donald Trump’s national security assistant, Mr John Bolton, and former director of the CIA, Mr James Woolsey. They have already admitted in front of cameras to toppling governments elsewhere in the interests of democracy.
Here is Bolton’s quote dated July from an interview regarding the attack on the Capitol by the former US president’s supporters: “I disagree with that, as somebody who has helped plan coups d’état, not here, but you know, other places. It takes a lot of work and that’s not what (Trump) did. It was just stumbling around from one idea to another.”
As for Mr Woolsey, he noted in an interview with Fox News that interference in the domestic affairs of other states took place “for the sake of noble goals in the interests of democracy”.
Meanwhile, democratic criteria are different from time to time and are to be determined depending on the current geopolitical situation in the US’s interests.
These interests have already provoked the destruction of Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen – the imposition of democracy by Washington and its allies in these countries has led to the most obvious and sad results, while dozens of less odious intrusions into the internal affairs of other states remain “behind the scenes”.
It is the destructive coalition headed by the US that continues to teach other countries how to live, guided by the postulates of the already mentioned.
Here is a quote from Mr Brzezinski’s guide to American hegemony, The Grand Chessboard: “In addition, one must consider as part of the American system the global web of specialised organisations, especially the ‘international’ financial institutions.
“The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank can be said to represent ‘global’ interests, and their constituency may be construed as the world.
“In reality, however, they are heavily American dominated and their origins are traceable to the American initiative, particularly the Bretton Woods Conference of 1944.”
Without any hesitation and consent of the world community, which, let me remind you, is not limited by the G7 countries, the US, with the approval of several of its satellites, plays the role of world arbiter, decides who is to be punished or pardoned.
Is the Western world, whose prosperity and hegemony are based on the ideas of colonialism, on shamelessly draining resources and interfering in the domestic affairs of other states through, among other things, organising colour revolutions, really on the “true” side of history?
Malenko is the consul-general of Russia in Cape Town.