Translation:
Ukraine: The British war
The Ukrainian war serves London to wear down the European Union. The similarities between Zelensky and Netanyahu
Needless to say, Starmer reiterated his support for Zelensky's cause, which is different from the Ukrainian cause, promising more weapons and more money to Kiev. A way to revive the fate of the infinite war in parallel with the re-election of Ursula von der Leyen as European Commissioner, who owes her political fortune to this cause.
The latter's appointment, which pairs with that of the Estonian Kaja Kallas as EU Foreign Minister, another priestess of the anti-Russian war cause, called to manage the geopolitics of the Old Continent despite her previous experience stopping at management of a country with 1.3 million inhabitants.
But beyond the masochistic tendencies of the Union, what remains is the sense of the new English Prime Minister for the Ukrainian massacre, which he intends to continue ad libitum (after all, we had noted that his model was Tony Blair, standard bearer of the massacre Iraqi).
We have written it several times, but perhaps it is useful to repeat it: London's interest in the Ukrainian war is existential. This conflict is destroying Europe, forced to sever the umbilical cord that connected it to Moscow and its low-cost energy sources, and to bleed itself dry by using resources to support Kiev and the same amount to strengthen its own defense, thus diverting it from the real needs of its citizens. .
The European Union is Great Britain's number one competitor which, after having distanced itself from it, is attempting to carve out a primary role for itself in the global arena through the relaunch of the Anglosphere. It is obvious that this relaunch envisages an exclusively ancillary role for the European Union to the Anglo-Saxon domination of the West.
The longer the war continues, the more the EU will be harmed. Hence the need to rescind all the paths that could lead to peace, despite the evident impossibility for Kiev to achieve the declared objectives and the evidence that the continuation of hostilities, in addition to causing more pain and more victims to the country, will cause it only lose even more territory and, in perspective, risks making Ukraine disappear from the maps.
For his part, Zelensky used the opportunity offered by the visit to reiterate his call for the West to lift restrictions on long-range weapons, allowing Kiev to strike deeper into Russia.
His request is equivalent to demanding that the West go to war with Russia, since the Russians could not remain inert if NATO missiles started raining down on Moscow's buildings.
To date it does not seem that Zelensky's requests have any chance of being fulfilled, at least in the short term, but what matters is the attempt to relaunch the endless war to counter the opposite signals that have recently emerged.
First of all, the success of the miraculous Trump who, in addition to reiterating his rejection of the endless war in Ukraine, chose as his deputy a politician who declared his clear and intelligent rejection of aid to Kiev. Added to this signal is Germany's decision to halve aid to Ukraine for next year (Guardian), the activism of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbàn for peace and other less obvious things.
Zelensky & Netanyahu
Beyond subordination to neocon-liberal circles, Zelensky has his own specific interest in evading peace: if a truce were reached he would lose power. He couldn't last a single day, because the end of the war regime would bring out all the rot that was hidden under the carpet to avoid disturbing the driver. Furthermore, the truce would allow us to quantify the Ukrainian victims of the conflict, which are tragically much larger than those that are occasionally declared. The emergence of the reality of what really happened in recent years would be unbearable for the Ukrainian president.
In this we can find an analogy with what happens in Israel and, specifically, between Zelensky and Netanyahu. Anshel Pfeffer drew this analogy in Haaretz last February, explaining that the first and most important struggle they both face is against reality.
In fact, writes Pfeffer, for "both, the need to prevent reality from emerging pushes them towards increasingly autocratic tendencies, hence the commitment to silence anyone - generals, politicians and journalists - who tries to present public opinion with a different picture."
Furthermore, a further analogy is also evident, with Netanyahu who, similarly to Zelensky, is trying to prolong the war in every way to retain the power that the truce can take away from him.
Not only that, as with Zelensky's war, Netanyahu's war could not last a single day longer without the assistance of the West. Finally, Netanyahu, like Zelensky, is also trying to drag the West, in this specific case America, into a broader conflict, as was evident when he wanted to push the US to strike Iran - to respond to Tehran's reaction to the attack on his consulate in Syria – with Biden, in a rare moment of clarity, firing back (Axios).
But, to return to Pfeffer's reference, it seems humorous, if not tragic, to note how Biden's America, having launched a crusade against the autocracies of the world, is supporting and consolidating two autocracies that feed on war.
It goes without saying that both autocracies have created a real butcher's shop: the Palestinian one made by Netanyahu corresponds to that of his own people consumed by the Ukrainian president.