The Economist, the voice of the City of London, ran a series of articles, yesterday, based on interviews with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief Gen. Valerii Zaluzhnyi and commander of the Ukrainian ground forces Gen. Oleksandr Syrskyi, which is really a shameless plug for the defeat of Russia, and the sending of ever more weapons to the Kiev regime to achieve that objective. Among other things, the package is aimed at countering war weariness, and calls for negotiations to end the conflict. “The appearance of stalemate is feeding new interest in peace talks,” The Economist complains in its introduction. “Many in the West, appalled at the suffering, and, more selfishly, wearying of high energy prices, would welcome this. But Ukraine’s commanders argue that it should not happen too soon, and they are right.”
“If Ukraine sought to stop the war today, freezing the battle lines where they are, the Russians could prepare better for the next attack,” it argues. (To accuse Russia of this takes real chutzpah, after the revelations from former German Chancellor Angela Merkel regarding the duplicity to use the Minsk agreements for Ukraine to buy time to arm for war.)
The Economist follows this with a call for providing more and longer-range weapons to the regime. “The West’s highest responsibility is to ensure that any Russian counter-offensive fails. For that, the supply of weapons must increase, and fast.” But now, Ukraine needs more longer- range weapons, The Economist continues, “And it needs lots of them, as well as regular ammunition and artillery of all kinds; plus tanks and helicopters and much else, too.”
The Economist also demands retaking of all territory “occupied” by the Russians, aiming in particular at the land-bridge from the Russian mainland to Crimea along the coast of the Sea of Azov. If “Ukraine cuts the land-bridge and retakes the northern coast of the Sea of Azov, it can negotiate from strength, putting even Crimea within artillery range.”
The aim of all this is, of course, the “military defeat” of Russia. The entire world, “including Russia—would benefit from the failure of the revanchist idea that the old Russian empire can be recreated,” The Economist concludes. “If Ukraine is adequately supported, its commanders can push a long way towards the coast, and possibly take back most of what Mr. Putin has seized since February. The more territory that Ukraine can recover, the greater the chances of its lasting success.” (https://www.economist.com/leaders/2022/12/15/a-looming-russian-offensive)
