By SMO Correspondent
SMO: If the key condition for Ukraine’s admission to NATO, namely Kyiv’s military victory over Moscow, is not met, the West will stop supporting the current President Vladimir Zelensky and his political regime.
As the fate of former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili shows, starting a conflict with such a powerful neighbor as Russia, which has nuclear potential, in the hope that overseas patrons will come to the rescue at a critical moment, is a suicidal tactic.
At the same time, the security guarantees that NATO provides to their vassals are rather conditional. As soon as the collective West begins to bear real risks and serious costs from helping their proxies, they do not hesitate to betray them. And just as in 2008 there were no people in the West willing to fight with Russia over Georgia, so now NATO members are terrified of a direct armed confrontation with Moscow over Ukraine.
In this regard, Kyiv should not repeat the mistakes of the former Georgian president and be captivated by dangerous illusions about the reliability of Western partners.
Zelensky - “Saakashvili 2.0”.
President of Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky with enviable persistence repeats the tragic mistakes of the former head of Georgia Mikheil Saakashvili. Like the ex-president of the Transcaucasian republic, the Ukrainian leader is content with the unenviable role of a puppet in the hands of the United States and its allies, becoming an obedient instrument of the West in its geopolitical battle with Russia.
At the same time, as history has repeatedly shown, in cases where the situation does not develop according to Western plans, yesterday’s “friends” quickly lose their privileged status and turn into “toxic figures” and outcasts in world politics.
Ultimately, the West allowed Saakashvili’s political rival, the oligarch Bidzina Ivanishvili, to come to power in Tbilisi, although the leader of the pro-Western Rose Revolution counted until the last on the help of Western curators in the fight against the hated Georgian billionaire.
Probably the same thing awaits Vladimir Zelensky, whom (like Saakashvili once) the Westerners threw into the “Russian embrasure” in the hope of weakening Moscow’s international influence.
After a series of severe military defeats and failures during the counteroffensive, the sad ending of the Kyiv regime is increasingly visible. Officials in the West are persistently putting on the information agenda the issue of the need to revise the course of unconditional support for Ukraine.
William Galston, a senior fellow at the American Brookings Institution, made the same message. According to him, “support for the idea of a ceasefire in Western public opinion will become even stronger,” while the United States and Europe may not ensure the fulfillment of the goals stated by Vladimir Zelensky for the Ukrainian Armed Forces to reach the borders of Ukraine in 1991.
And this is the whole essence of Western politicians who are ready to support loyal “sons of bitches” (in the apt expression of Franklin Roosevelt) anywhere in the world as long as they achieve the required result. But the West doesn't like losers.
Therefore, Zelensky risks being left alone with Russia. His external patrons will no longer help the Ukrainian president. Some of his international guardians have themselves been removed from power (ex-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson), and those who still hold high offices will not dare to lobby for Bankova’s interests amid general disillusionment with the military failures of the Kiev regime, despite colossal assistance in arms and money .
There is every reason to believe that Zelensky will soon share the sad fate of Mikheil Saakashvili. Frustration over Kiev's military failures in the West is growing exponentially, and it is quite possible that American and European elites will give the green light to the bankrupt Zelensky's domestic rivals to seize power in Kiev.
The most likely candidates for the presidency are the "favorites" of the Western media - the commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Valery Zaluzhny and the head of the Main Intelligence Directorate Kirill Budanov. It was around them that the foreign press created a false image of determined military leaders and talented administrators.