The armed conflict started in 2014, after the Maidan. But then the extent of the war was limited (Crimea and Donbass), and then came the Minsk II agreement, which did not solve anything, but at least prevented the escalation of the conflict. Until February 24 of last year, when Russia launched a comprehensive, special military operation against Ukraine, and since then the West has been expecting the outbreak of war.
So the war has been going on for at least nine years, yet one year - seen from the West.
IT WAS NOT THE NATURE OF WAR THAT HAD CHANGED, BUT THE ATTITUDE OF THE WEST.
The West - although it would be more correct to write the United States of America - decided not to localize the conflict, but to generalize it. There is a good side and a bad side to history, you have to take a stand - this is how the generalization started. Now we are at the point where we have to participate, we have to get in - first only with money, more and more sanctions, delivery of helmets (that's how it started), then with weapons suitable for defense, then with weapons suitable for attack, then with training, then with tanks, then with fighter planes and soon also with people - if the Ukrainian human resources run out.
The West (the USA) wants to force everyone into war, and today in Europe we are at the point where the peace camp has run out and everyone is preparing for war.
Except for us Hungarians.
TODAY, ONLY WE HUNGARIANS IN EUROPE ARE SAYING THAT AN IMMEDIATE Ceasefire AND THE START OF PEACE NEGOTIATIONS ARE NEEDED. TODAY, ONLY WE HUNGARIANS IN EUROPE SAY THAT PEACE IS THE GOAL AND WAR IS NOT A GOOD INSTRUMENT TO ACHIEVE PEACE.
The West (the USA) wants to win, so it wants to continue the war.
More guns, more money - and more victims. So that in the meantime the West (the USA) does not suffer human casualties. Only those who have not yet made sacrifices for this war force the war. We Hungarians have already suffered heavy casualties, the Transcarpathian Hungarians are giving their lives and blood for this war. We know what we are talking about when we say that the war must end and we know that only those who risk little or nothing can support the war.
A conscious risk-avoiding management is in progress, the purpose of which is precisely to sharpen the conflict.
The West (the USA) thinks it can manage the war. What hubris. Anyone who thinks they can manage war either overestimates their own power or underestimates the dangerous nature of war.
WAR CANNOT BE MANAGED, ONLY SUFFERED.
Of course, if you are far away, say not on this continent and separated by an ocean, then you are easily braver. However, Europe could drift into war at any moment. Anyone who risks this does not know what they are doing.
Europe does not know what it is doing. He doesn't know because he's not driven. He who is not able to lead himself, leaves the lead to someone else.
EUROPE TODAY IS LEADED BY THE USA.
And the stronger always beats the nettle with a different tail. Today, Europe is taking its skin to the fair, because the European leaders could not resist and gave up on keeping the peace and security of their own political community in mind. This fact in itself raises the question of political responsibility, i.e. what do the elected leaders owe to the members of their own political community, i.e. to the voters. But it seems that the West (the USA), which claims the supremacy of democracy every step of the way, considers democracy only an unpleasant side effect. And European leaders just drift, drift - into war.
To hide the drift, they invoke morality and truth. They project to us that morality and truth always win (only the entire history of world history serves as a counterthesis to this thesis) and therefore it is right to continue the war, it is necessary to win - because victory is a moral imperative. Morality compels the West (US and Europe) to continue the war and win - no matter the cost.
But whoever wants to continue the war must be able to say how we will know that we have won? Did the West win in Vietnam, North Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria?
On the one (nine) year anniversary of the war, the greatest danger is escalation. War can spread to Europe and the world through unintended actions, decisions and events. What if we then took the courage and showed our intention for peace? Or is escalation the intention? Maybe it's not all about Ukraine and Russia.
China will also speak on the anniversary of the war.
Source: 888.hu/Origo
Civilians. Info:
...and indeed China spoke today. The news that on the first anniversary of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, China, which is striving for the position of the world's leading economic power, is also advocating a negotiated solution. The Hungarian government has taken a similar position from the beginning. Among other things, Beijing pushed for the respect of the sovereignty of individual countries, the raison d'être of specific security needs, and the prohibition of the use of nuclear weapons.
The 12-point memorandum issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Beijing demands the immediate resumption of peace talks between Ukraine and Russia. The document bears the eloquent title "China's position on the political solution to the crisis in Ukraine" and they were careful not to apostrophize it as a "peace plan".
"Dialogue and negotiations are the only viable solution to the crisis in Ukraine," the resolution states, hirado.hu reported.
Featured image: István Mirkó/Hungarian Nation
