Ukraine was not called to negotiate “peace” to end the war that is now in its third year on its own territory. Volodymyr Zelensky cannot even appear at the door of the negotiating room, much less take a seat at the historic table where they confront each other. face to face, the two nuclear powers, once protagonists, between 1948 and 1992, of the then called "Cold War”. The Ukrainian “dictator” (Trump dixit) will only be forced to sign whatever the Russian Federation and the US agree on. Zelensky and his promoters will have no “right to reply” on the final content of the document that ends the war. This was made abundantly clear by the dean of Russian diplomacy, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, when answering a journalist’s inquisitive question about the absence of the European Union in Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia: ““He who wants and promotes war cannot sit at the table to negotiate peace.”
The European Union, faced with a war that is taking place in “Eastern Europe”, has not had the slightest will to stop it in three years of mutual crossfire, has not done an ounce to stop this barbarity that sacrifices human lives in the present and creates uncertainty about the future of the sides on the battlefield, those who face each other between bullets and cannon fire. The other side, that of the bureaucratic rationality of Eurocentrism, the one that pulls the NATO “strings” of Zelensky to fan the flames of war, is very well protected from the shootings and its dead. The peoples of the Russian Federation and Ukraine, it seems, only have learned despair left, having in their midst hundreds of thousands of families who will never see the return from the battlefield of their sons and daughters to the warmth of home, to the family embrace, to family celebration, to the loving calm of intimate affections. A human carnage that, according to the most conservative estimates, has cut short the lives of at least 600000 men and women from both nations.
A war promoted, in the words of the US president himself, Donald Trump, by “Joe Biden and Europe”. A Europe that, governed by the extreme right and supporting the Israeli genocide against the Palestinian people of Gaza, rejected several peace proposals/projects promoted by Brazil, Turkey, Venezuela, Hungary, India and China. In geopolitical terms, a war motivated by NATO to destructure the Russian Federation and appropriate all its abundant and strategic energy, mining and natural resources. All are necessary resources for the hegemonic sustainability of the scientific-technological model that articulates relations of domination-dominated center-periphery from which the dialectic of development/underdevelopment of modernity/coloniality expressed in neoliberal capitalism is derived. All the countries of the European Union, moderate and fanatic, and supported by the financial-media-political-military power, have unleashed a Russophobia; and various processes of racialization, exclusion and denial against the diversity of peoples and cultures of the Russian Federation,These practices of exclusion and racism are also part of the “European values”"?
The European Union does not want to hear about “peace”. It only promotes, motivates and supplies Ukraine with weapons so that it continues to kill. It also assists Ukraine with its logistics, supports it with its military technologies, especially satellites, and sends military personnel as “advisers” to the battlefield. There is no multilateral, bilateral and media space or forum where the spokespeople of the European Union do not declare in the logic of the far-right President of the European Commission, whom no European people elected, Ursula von der Leyen: “There will only be peace with Putin's military defeat on the battlefield." The “European gardener”, Josep Borrell, leaves the chancellery of the European Union with a solid legacy on his conscience and in his pocket: the war and a well-off retirement away from the noise of weapons, well paid for by the European citizens. He cannot deny that he harvested some fruits from that “tidy garden”.
We cannot ignore the drastic change in the US-NATO “foreign policy”, which was very eloquent in Trump’s speech: “Zelensky has done very badly"; “His people are destroyed”; “His country could disappear if he doesn't act quickly”; “Without elections he is a dictator”; “He is very low in the polls”“… This change in US foreign policy has created tensions between kyiv and Washington. Trump says: "Zelensky, a dictator without elections, should act quickly or he will not have a country left." In politics, Trump tells Zelensky that he will not continue financing the war and quickly looks for the checkbook not precisely to continue extending favors to the “dictator” but to send him the bill book. Trump is telling Zelensky that the time has come to pay something more than 300000 billion dollars sent by Biden to support the NATO war. A clarification is needed: Trump is not doing this for Ukraine, to stop the deaths, but because his economic policy (election campaign promise) requires nearly two trillion dollars for the reindustrialization of the United States. The purpose of this economic-industrial-commercial policy is to “stop” the factory of the world, China.
¿What is really at stake in the geopolitics of the current capitalist world system for the US?? Faced with the de-dollarization of global trade transactions, the emergence of the BRICS, the recovery of energy and mining resources in Africa by their governments in a slow process of political and economic decolonization that fundamentally affects Europe and the US, the economic-technological solidity of several Asian countries hungry for energy resources, minerals, rare earths, etc., while requiring markets to “place” their products, and so many other factors, the US has a complicated panorama for its economic policy of “reindustrialization” and for creating the conditions of competitive possibility with China, which in some areas of technological development China has a historical distance of at least 15 years, given the public disinvestment in technology in the US. Trump is well aware of this, otherwise he would not be “having tea” with Elon Musk in the Oval Office.
Are we witnessing the formation of a G-3? The thesis of a supposed alliance between Russia and the US to be able to stop China is not sustainable. The US has a negative balance with its peers in the G-7 and with the countries invited on occasions to form the G-12. Trump wants to reverse this situation, hence the unilateral imposition of tariffs on several countries: Mexico and Canada (a decision postponed for 30 days), China, Colombia (for political rather than economic reasons), Brazil and Argentina. On the list are Japan, India, Vietnam, and, as a “dessert”, the entire European Union, which, along with the increase in tariffs, is demanding a 2% increase in GDP for NATO military expenditure.
It is certainly not the “end of NATO”, but a financial reengineering by Trump that weakens the blasphemy of the European Union: the so-called “strategic autonomy”, faced with the inalienable emergence of a G-3 (China-USA-Russia) that leaves the “orderly garden” of Europe out of the game, in a deep structural crisis and without an alternative Marshall Plan. Trump has 4 years to reverse the economic policy of the US vis-à-vis its industrialized peers; he will not have time to implement all the changes, but he will have started the task and will leave his most prominent colonies suffering: the European Union. The countries of the European Union will be forced, after the signing of the “Peace Treaty” in Russia, Ukraine and the USA, to look again towards the Russian Federation, towards the abundant energy and mineral resources required to recover after the Trump Tsunami.
Not everyone wins or loses with the peace in Ukraine. The US will be, as in the second European war, a winner: it will secure commercial contracts for more than 500000 billion dollars for rare earths and energy resources; another winner will be Russia: peace will return, it will maintain its red line of National Security, it will extend its borders and will ensure its military presence towards the Mediterranean, in addition to adding territories rich in energy and mineral resources; Ukraine will not enter NATO, it will not have nuclear weapons and will see its entry into the European Union postponed, at least not before 2030; they lose: Ukraine will be devastated, devastated, ruined and indebted and with a deep internal human sense crisis that will explode very soon:a civil war in the making?; The European Union loses: now, without Nord Stream II, it will have energy (gas and oil) at very high prices and will be dethroned from its borrowed “political hegemony”. Its people will pay dearly for their silence in the face of their rulers bent on consolidating the extreme right.
I can’t stop thinking about Peru in 1824, before the victory of the Liberation Army in Ayacucho: The Peruvian mantuanaje, the elite of the political-economic-military class, did not want independence and Simon Bolivar (who was called by the Peruvian Congress and delegated full powers to him), in response to inalienable factors of the geopolitics of the time in the face of imperialist threats from the US and Europe, imposed independence on those who did not want it. This is where the “Peruvian syndrome” was born: historical hatred of the elites, without historical reasons, against Venezuelans. Will this “syndrome” be repeated in relation to the European Union and the countries that do want peace?
