The situation around Ukraine is changing so fast that it is difficult not only to predict something, but also to record it definitively. In my opinion, Putin’s plans are to occupy Kyiv and establish a pro-Russian government there. The Russian president’s hints that the military in Ukraine should seize power from a “drug gang” (such a “respectful” attitude of a head of state towards the leadership of another state) speaks in favor of this hypothesis. The Kremlin is also likely to expect a defeated Ukraine to recognize Crimea, as well as the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, as an integral part of Russia, as well as to declare a neutral status for the country.
In the latest issue, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky seems to have “matured.” I think it is clear. The later Zelensky makes “painful concessions,” the more “painful” they will be. Let me remind you that in the 44-day war, Russia’s goal was to ensure its military presence in Artsakh, which is a serious lever in the case of Azerbaijan and finally ties Armenia’s hands. Pashinyan initially resisted the plan, but later, when things got worse on the battlefield, he agreed. The current leaders of Armenia and Ukraine are really similar in terms of amateurism and miscalculations.
Many in Armenia today say that the Ukrainian army is not resisting a Russian invasion. I do not think that we, sitting here and not being military experts, can make harsh judgments on this issue. It is clear that Russian propaganda wants to create the impression that this is not an invasion, but liberation, and that the people of Ukraine do not mind having foreign troops on their soil. I will refer again to Putin, who says that the Ukrainian side is fighting not the regular army, but the “neo-Nazis” and the “Benderists” (it seems to me that these two are just propaganda labels that have no real context). Russian federal TV channels have not yet broadcast footage of Ukrainians welcoming Russian tanks with flowers, but everything is still ahead.
And last but not least, the headline made you read this article. Perhaps from the point of view of “high politics” it is right to say, “Well, we were in trouble, why did you support our opponent?” But from a purely human point of view, I think such logic is vulnerable.
Read also
Aram Abrahamyan
