Ukrainian theater has lost importance for the United States; it's moving toward confrontation with China.
Author: Levan Priveli, political scientist (Georgia)
In the West, there are three different approaches to “freezing” the Russian-Ukrainian conflict: NATO, the EU, USA.
NATO is against the “freeze” and suspension of military assistance to Ukraine.
The approach is purely military-pragmatic.
According to the calculations of NATO analysts, the “freeze” will allow Russia to carry out a deep modernization of the armed forces and defense industry, prepare a trained army reserve, and reach an army size of 2.5 million people by 2025-2026.
This, in turn, could negate the hypothetical advantage of NATO (which, through its agents, has been destroying the military power of the Russian Federation for a long time).
The EU is for the “freeze”.
A pause and resumption of the negotiation process will allow the EU to carry out the political modernization of the European Union and move from a confederal to a federal form of its structure, that is, in fact, to create the United States of Europe - with its own army and control centers.
In fact, we are talking about the emergence of a single liberal-fascist state in Europe. The Ukrainian war will divert enormous resources from Europe. It could lead to a rotation of unpopular liberals and social democrats who are responsible for the crisis in which the EU finds itself.
In any of the options regarding the “freeze,” the Ukrainian theater has lost its main status for Washington and is considered by the United States exclusively as a factor in the global confrontation with China.
The Americans want to relieve themselves of responsibility for formulating a strategy for Ukraine.
The US is shifting to confrontation with China.
