The defeatist messages in the mainstream media are gradually multiplying, which means that someone very important has given the order to prepare the public for the worst.

❗️Join us on Telegram, Twitter , and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

“What if Putin wins?”, Bloomberg asked a few days ago. But, this simple question cannot be taken lightly or simplistically. It’s not just a speculative exercise, it’s a red alert! A desperate warning, based on an increasingly inexorable reality: there is more and more Russia on NATO’s borders; there is less and less NATO on Russia’s borders! Just like that!

“If Putin,” they said, attributing absolute power to the Russian president, “wanted less NATO” away from Russia’s borders, he has in fact achieved the opposite. The usual propagandists referred to the fact that NATO is “more united than ever” and that Finland and Sweden had joined the Alliance. At the time, they were saying things like “if he didn’t want NATO on his borders, Putin now has the opposite of what he always wanted”. For the Western propaganda, the circus was over. NATO had won, we could all rest assured that the Atlantic alliance was as strong and vigorous as ever. Putin would fall, he would never survive the “sanctions from hell”.

If the fighting had ended in the first year of the Special Military Operation, on the surface, we would have had to admit that things had not, in fact, gone well for Russia. If we add the quasi-religious belief that “Ukraine was winning the war”, the Russian forces were walking around barefoot, fighting with shovels, in unarmed masses of people and didn’t even have fuel for their outdated vehicles… To make matters worse, the “CEO” of the European Commission – the bureaucratic structure used by the U.S. to manage its interests in Europe – Ursula von der Leyen, even argued that “the Russian military is taking chips out of dishwashers and fridges to repair its military equipment, because it has run out of conductors. Russian industry is in tatters.”

Meanwhile, Russia had withdrawn from Kherson and the Kharkov region, as a way of consolidating and solidifying its defensive line. In the fantasy world of the Western media, this regrouping operation was seen as a “devastating defeat” suffered at the hands of troops loyal to the Kiev regime, presented as the ultimate example of bravery and military proficiency. Those who based their analysis on concrete reality lived in a suffocating hell. The regime’s propagandists couldn’t contain themselves and brutally vilified anyone who tried to bring them into the real world. On CNN Portugal, regime commentators were calling for the expulsion of colleagues who disagreed with them. Journalists, generals and analysts were branded, at the very least, “Putin propagandists.”

But, as with everything to do with the collective West, illusion quickly leads to disillusionment and promise quickly results in debt. Imprisoned by a short-term vision, based on a logic of political survival at any cost, in which power is justified only by the objective of its own conquest or maintenance…. Today, we often see the Collective West falling into this opportunistic trap. So it wasn’t long before reality began to impose itself over the narrative.

The same corporate media that had previously forgotten that post-Maidan Ukraine had become a haven for the extreme right, fascism and Nazism, was the same one that effusively celebrated Stepan Bandera’s “slava Ukraini”. Paradoxical as it may seem, it is also the same one that today says there is no hope for Ukraine “without U.S. help” and that “without additional funding” the capacity to help Ukraine meet its urgent operational requirements will soon be exhausted.

Such paradoxes, translated politically, can only lead to bad results. And the bad outcome is already beginning to appear on the horizon. Little by little, this same subservient ruling elite, spoiled, arrogant and disconnected from ordinary life, is beginning to assume the opposite of what it has always said: “Western officials warn that Ukraine will ‘surely fail’ against Russia if the U.S. doesn’t provide more aid,” says CNN.

But that’s not all! Bloomberg reported that “more Ukrainians are ready for territorial concessions to Russia”. In other words, the defeatist messages in the mainstream media are gradually multiplying, which means that someone very important has given the order to prepare the public for the worst. General Pat Ryder, in a briefing at the Pentagon, acknowledged that if the disagreement over financial support for Ukraine persists, “ultimately, the United States will have to choose between its own combat readiness and supplying arms to Ukraine” due to the depletion of funds to support Kiev.

Meanwhile, the New York Times published an article in which, directly or indirectly, it acknowledged that: the majority of foreign companies remain in Russia, not wanting to lose their investments; the companies that have been sold are now mirrored, i.e. taken over by others that are almost the same, and not much difference is felt; Putin was prepared for the departure of Western companies, as there was tight control of capital flows; Russia emerged from the crisis, the economy stabilized in 2022 and Western companies, on the other hand, lost a total of more than 103 billion dollars by leaving the Russian Federation.

In addition to the financial losses on Russian territory, there is also the relative weakening of Western Europe in relation to the Russian Federation. The losses suffered by European industry resulting from the Nord Stream explosion, the irrational 12 sanctions packages and a whole series of internal economic acts of self-mutilation, by doing without or increasing the price of energy, raw materials and components from Russia, have weakened European economies and made them less competitive. While Russia will already grow by 3.5% in 2023, the EU will only grow by 0.5%. In the third quarter of 2023, the Russian economy grew by 5.5% and wages by 5.1%.

Now, the mathematical result is very simple and easy to achieve: if, at the beginning of the Special Military Operation, NATO’s use of Ukraine and its instrumentalization led many people to believe that there would be more NATO next to Russia, today, more and more, we will be forced to consider that it will be the other way around. In fact, there will be more Russia next to NATO! And this reversal is happening for the following reasons:

• Russia has integrated (for now) 4 new regions into its territory, geographically moving its border towards NATO countries;
• Ukraine will become smaller or even non-existent as a viable state, which makes NATO’s border with Russia less reliable, with greater discomfort for the West, given the greater unpreparedness and lack of military cohesion;
• The defeat of the west’s Ukrainian project will not only demonstrate to the world NATO’s obsolescence and its inability to defend its allies, but it will also leave Russia in a position of strength and greater credibility in political-military matters, and it will have a reason to feel more comfortable with its border coming closer to NATO’s border;
• Russia will simply come out of this war better prepared as a military, economic and political power, assuming a leadership position and sharing a leading role in global decision-making; NATO, on the other hand, will come out discredited, with empty arsenals and discredited wonder weapons;
• With Russia’s military superiority, demonstrated on the battlefield and not in propaganda, what was once an attempt at encirclement, such as Finland and Sweden joining NATO, is now a greater danger to both countries; these previously neutral countries will now be in the firing line of Russia’s weapons – proven to be superior – without being able to benefit from NATO’s promised ability to defend them – they have exchanged neutrality and peace for insecurity;
• Faced with the economic strengthening of Russia, the weakening of the EU and the change in the balance of power between the two blocs, it will be the Russian Federation that will come out on top of this relationship, having proved itself capable of living and prevailing independently and without submitting to the dictates of the U.S./EU/NATO; it will be the collective West that will have to learn to live in a shared world in which Russia is a major player, since Russia took advantage of the war to successfully make this journey;
• Considering Russia’s victory – which was expected and presumed from the outset – it will be proven to the full that NATO’s military supremacy does not exist, that its strength is fallible and that it is, in fact, an alliance without a project and without a future, incapable of protecting anyone; in this way, it will be Russia that will come out on top, which will put unprecedented pressure on the EU first and the U.S. second, which will lose its aura as the protector of the “free world”;
• The prestige gained by Russia in this process will bring it numerous negotiating advantages, both with the rest of the world and with the EU, since a Europe that wants to recover cannot afford to do without Russia as a partner.

So it’s the EU that will have to live with “more Russia” on its borders, it’s the U.S. that will have to learn to deal with a world with “more Russia”. Contrary to what they so loudly propagandized at the beginning!

You don’t win games at the start, you win them at the end!