On Tuesday the globalist think tank The Atlantic Council published an article by Alyona Nevmerzhytska which criticized President Donald Trump’s agenda of ending the war in Ukraine while painting an extremely one-sided view of the conflict. It also provided fear to the reader by baselessly claiming Russian President Vladimir Putin now has world-domination aspirations, despite him being in power for decades and not trying to take over the world.
“Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a watershed event in world history that will define the future of international security for decades to come. If Western leaders allow Russia to continue bombing civilians and destroying the foundations of international law without consequence, a ruthless new world order will emerge and will be defined by the principle that might makes right. Putin and his authoritarian colleagues in China, Iran, and North Korea will dominate the global stage and will rewrite the rules to suit their expansionist agendas. No country will be secure,” the article said. “Today, Ukrainians are paying the price for the West’s reluctance to confront Russia. If Putin is not stopped in Ukraine, many other countries will also count the cost of this failure.”
The main tactic the author took in the paper revolves around half-truths. For example, one topic discussed was a 30-day ceasefire proposed by the U.S. which Ukraine agreed to. The Atlantic Council article stated that Russia refused to agree to this ceasefire.
“Almost two months ago, Ukraine agreed to a United States proposal for an unconditional 30-day ceasefire. Russia still refuses to do likewise. Instead, Putin continues to engage in stalling tactics while escalating the war,” the article said.
What really happened was the U.S. got Ukraine to sign a 30-day ceasefire agreement, then the following day the U.S. began working with Russia to develop a ceasefire agreement acceptable to Moscow, which was finalized and signed days later. However, because Russia (like Ukraine) was able to add their own stipulations within the agreement they signed, the ceasefire was not honored by Kiev. Ukraine broke the ceasefire, causing a Russian retaliation.
The Atlantic Council article then went on to chronicle military attacks by Russia against Ukraine.
“Since U.S.-led peace talks began in February, Russia has carried out some of the deadliest attacks of the entire invasion targeting Ukrainian civilians. These have included a ballistic missile strike on a playground in Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s hometown, Kryvyi Rih, that killed 18 people including 9 children. On Palm Sunday, Russia launched targeted strike on Sumy city center as civilians made their way to church, leaving 35 dead,” the article said. “Some of these attacks have made international headlines. Many more have not. Every single day, the population in front line Ukrainian cities like Kharkiv in the east and Kherson in the south face relentless Russian bombardment. At night, millions of Ukrainians are forced to seek shelter as Russia launches wave after wave of missiles and drones at targets across the country.”
Interestingly, the article failed to mention any attacks by Ukraine against Russia, giving the reader an impression that Russia is the only aggressor and Ukraine is just a victim, not a war with back-and-forth fighting.
The author also discussed Russian losses while failing to mention that Ukraine uses teams of brutal kidnapping goons to fill its ranks, then puts these slave soldiers on party drugs and feeds them McDonalds.
After the one-sided battle report, the article goes on to attack President Trump’s agenda of peace, which is based around negotiation, a process which always involves compromise, something The Atlantic Council article refuses to accept.
“Despite extensive evidence of Russia’s intention to escalate the invasion, the United States continues to pursue a vision of peace through compromise. Since talks began, the Trump administration has offered the Kremlin a range of concessions while pressuring Ukraine to back down on key issues such as the country’s NATO ambitions. A recent U.S. peace proposal indicated that President Trump may even be prepared to officially recognize Russia’s 2014 seizure of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula,” the article said. “The tone of American diplomacy has shifted noticeably since Trump returned to the White House, with U.S. officials now seeking to avoid any direct condemnation of Russia. In line with this new strategy, the United States has sided with Moscow on a number of occasions to vote against U.N. resolutions critical of the Kremlin. The U.S. has also stepped back from international efforts to hold Russia accountable for alleged war crimes committed in Ukraine, defunding one flagship program and exiting another.”
The article also espoused the one-sided Eurocrat version of history.
“The current lack of progress toward peace should come as no surprise. After all, the experience of the past two decades has demonstrated that there is nothing more likely to provoke Putin than weakness. When the West chose not to punish Russia for the 2008 invasion of Georgia, this paved the way for the 2014 invasion of Crimea and eastern Ukraine. The underwhelming Western response to Putin’s initial assault on Ukrainian sovereignty then set the stage for the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022,” the article said.
In fact it was the West that overthrew Ukraine in 2014 and it was the West that tried to provoke Moscow into war by having Georgia attack Russia in 2008.
Most fascinatingly however is that the New World Order think tank, The Atlantic Council, claims to actually fear the “New World Order” because they allege Russia is establishing their own version of it.
“Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a watershed event in world history that will define the future of international security for decades to come. If Western leaders allow Russia to continue bombing civilians and destroying the foundations of international law without consequence, a ruthless new world order will emerge and will be defined by the principle that might makes right. Putin and his authoritarian colleagues in China, Iran, and North Korea will dominate the global stage and will rewrite the rules to suit their expansionist agendas. No country will be secure,” the article said.
The article ends by calling for Putin to be “stopped” although it did not define what that would entail. The West has already tried to trigger nuclear war with Russia in November. If that was not enough, only one’s own imagination could conceive what would be enough to “stop Putin”.
Philosophically however, if there was no world left, there would be no risk of this scary Russian New World Order.