Romania Debunked Kiev’s Latest Lie Aimed At Escalating The NATO-Russian Proxy War
Last November’s precedent that was set by Poland and the US after they refused to bite the bait that Kiev dangled before them likely informed Romania’s response over the weekend, which hints that NATO doesn’t want to escalate the conflict, but that doesn’t mean that the bloc is against perpetuating it.
CNN reported on something immensely important during their online news stream on Monday that didn’t receive anywhere near the attention that it deserved, namely that Romania debunked Kiev’s latest lie aimed at escalating the NATO-Russian proxy war. This brief news blurb here noted that Romania’s condemnation of Russia’s latest Danube River strike clarified that this didn’t pose a threat to its territory despite Kiev claiming that some of Russia’s kamikaze drones fell and exploded in that NATO country.
If there was any truth to that allegation, then it could have led to a serious crisis, yet Bucharest debunked Kiev’s claim precisely because it was a bald-faced lie similar in spirit to the one that this regime dangerously spewed ten months ago in November 2022. Back then, a Ukrainian S-300 air defense missile misfired into Poland, but neither Washington nor Warsaw bit the bait that Kiev dangled before them as was explained here and here, thus averting a potentially apocalyptic scenario to their credit.
This latest provocation followed last week’s two drone attacks against Pskov that were also assessed here to have been aimed at escalating the conflict, albeit in that case by provoking Russia into attacking NATO out of self-defense instead of the inverse. Since it failed to achieve the desired response, Kiev decided to take a page from the last year’s Polish playbook by falsely alleging that Russia once again attacked NATO, but Romania also didn’t bite the bait this time around either.
Even though none of the past week’s three provocations tricked Russia and NATO into directly attacking one another, that doesn’t mean that everything might soon de-escalate once the rainy fall weather forces an end to the failing counteroffensive. Instead of seizing the opportunity to resume talks with Russia after President Putin made it abundantly clear earlier this summer that he’s interested in compromising, Kiev is arguably preparing to perpetuate the conflict into next year.
Three sequential developments in just as many days from Saturday through Monday provide evidence of this policy. They can respectively be read here, here, and here, but will be now be summarized for the reader’s convenience since they’re relevant to the present piece. The first event on Saturday concerned the arrest of Ukrainian oligarch Igor Kolomoysky on corruption charges despite him having previously funded Zelensky’s rise to power, which consolidated US influence over him ahead of his re-election bid.
The second took place the day later and involved Zelensky firing his Defense Minister, thereby further consolidating the US’ influence after it complained via unnamed officials who spoke to two leading media outlets that Kiev’s counteroffensive was in trouble because it didn’t follow the Pentagon’s advice. That same day, the Ukrainian leader also removed a raft of mild medical issues that hitherto exempted citizens from the draft and ordered that all medical personnel (mostly women) register for service.
Finally, Monday saw leading Polish media report about the likely possibility that Ukraine will issue international arrest warrants for the tens of thousands of its draft-dodging males in that country and perhaps eventually all across Europe too, which is aimed at replenishing its depleted armed forces. Taken together, these sequential developments compellingly prove that Kiev intends to perpetuate the proxy war after failing to escalate it, though that doesn’t mean more such provocations won’t be attempted.
This insight suggests that Kiev is pursuing a two-track policy: 1) it attempts to provoke an escalation of the conflict; but 2) it’s also preparing to perpetuate the conflict into next year if the former fails. Last November’s precedent that was set by Poland and the US after they refused to bite the bait that Kiev dangled before them likely informed Romania’s response over the weekend, which hints that NATO doesn’t want to escalate the conflict, but that doesn’t mean that the bloc is against perpetuating it.
"...that doesn’t mean that the bloc is against perpetuating it."
What, you mean a 'war of attrition', like Stoltenberg declared in February?
OK, it certainly looks like the Russians are up for it. It's done wonders for their sense of self and sovereignty. Can they match it on the other side? Well, if you look at the American states' desperate attempts at 'lawfare', for example, to undermine the democratic will of their very own people, it could be interpreted as a bad sign for Jens. I guess, in this case specifically, the question has to be, 'How stupid...', or 'credulous' if you prefer a less inflammatory tone, '...are the American people?'. Somebody once said, (something like) 'You can fool some of the people all the time..,' etc.
Good news on that front this morning: Kim Jong Un has finally put his money where his mouth is and found the balls to stick his head above the parapet: I'd like to think the railway line over the Tumen River, linking North Korea and Russia at https://goo.gl/maps/bHStKzyANwNWnpFN6 has been just choc-a-bloc stacked out with cargo trains carrying shells to destroy American and British mercenaries in the Ukraine, because the North Koreans are actually rather good at making such shells. That's the penchant which led to their development of missiles. If the big boys (Kim Jong Un and Putin) have now openly announced their intention to meet... Well, Jens... If you ever really believed you might somehow be able to overwhelm Russia in a war of attrition, and weren't simply intending to fatten up America's (the world's) military industrial complex for the long-term (Forever and ever!), this could be bad news for you. How are you going to match it: get the Mexicans to supply the 'Ukrainians' (American proxy) directly? It won't work: trains sink if you try to drive them across the sea without bridges. You reckon the American people, not just low-IQ (As Tucker Carlson put it — great interview!) Republicans, will continue to be defiant in their support of freedom and black-hole military spending (Forever and ever!)? I don't see it. But, hey, maybe you know something I don't?
Anyway, I digress. Sorry (not)! This was supposed to be about NATO-member Romania's staunch support for the Ukraine. OK, let's look at that.
"...likely informed Romania’s response..."
Yeah, 'likely', no doubt; you're right on that.
If I may be so bold, though, without wanting to be a smartarse, please don't take offence, but I'd like to suggest there's more to it than that: I don't think anyone pays too much attention to anything said or done in or from Kiev any more; I don't believe whatever 'track' Kiev might be trying to pursue, be it 'two-track' or anything else, will have had much influence on how Romania sees the potential outcome of this conflict. The bottom line: who cares and what's it got to do with them.
In pondering how the question immediately preceding might be answered, I've spent a lot of time looking at the map of between the (not-so-Blue-anymore) Danube and Dnestr rivers. Like all of the Ukraine, it's been criminally mishandled (Think, corruption.) these past couple of decades. The Romanians will be only too painfully aware of this. The live right there, after all, it's kinda hard to miss. Moldavia certainly suffers for it. When the Americans finally come to terms with how black holes work — that prolonging their existence as they've 'enjoyed' it since Bretton Woods, etc. is no longer a viable long-term option — they won't be able to simply turn their backs on what they've done and walk away from the Ukraine, as they have in, e.g. Afghanistan, etc. Someone's going to have to pay to fix the Ukraine, and it would hardly be fair to expect the Russians to do it (again, having done it already after WWII). It seems fair to me that the Ukraine should be re-divided to give access to the Black Sea back to Moldavia and let Moldavia become the part of Romania that it really is. I understand a lot of Russians in Moldavia won't like it, but I reckon that would be the best way to sort out Odessa and that tricky part of the Black Sea. I wouldn't be surprised if this has occurred to the Romanians, as well, and perhaps even played a more significant role in their thinking than anything Kiev has said or done since submitting itself to American occupation and surrendering its sovereignty to NATO (without getting much in return, except for a lot of dead, their own, people — corpses).
And, please, don't try to tell me one Ukrainian puppet (Zelensky) fired another Ukrainian puppet (Rezhiwhatshisname) because he doesn't want to follow NATO's (the Americans') orders, or imprisoned another (Kolinotarussky) for similar reasons. Just have another drink of Kool-Aid and pitch another penny into a black-hole wishing well.
(No, I know that's not you, Andrew. (And very much so NOT.) I'm just being figurative-like here.)