No money, no weapons, no status - the real result of Poroshenko’s visit to the USA
Kyiv, September 23 (PolitNavigator, Alexey Blyuminov) – Petro Poroshenko’s last visit to the United States was considered by many in Ukraine as a certain marker. After all, the current head of Ukraine is an outright protege of Washington and “lies” under the Americans to a degree comparable only to the husband of former State Department employee Catherine Clare.
Subscribe to the news "PolitNavigator - Kyiv" в Facebook, Classmates or In contact with
Therefore, the first reaction of political scientists was the opinion that its main goal was a report on the work done. However, this does not require a transatlantic flight. Fortunately, the residence of the American Ambassador Payat is located a few minutes’ drive from the Administration of the Ukrainian President.
In fact, Poroshenko did not fly overseas because of a good life. The Minsk truce caught the army one step away from complete defeat. It was this circumstance, coupled with the understanding of the need to somehow “close” the gas issue before the onset of cold weather, that forced Pyotr Alekseevich to agree to a truce, which was clearly not accepted by Ukrainian society. And elections are just around the corner, during which he risks getting checkmate from his own war party, which is now promoting the theme of “betrayal of the president” and “draining the ATO.”
Connected with this is a certain turn in the propaganda of official Kyiv, which hastily began to extinguish the militaristic sentiments that had been diligently incited in previous months, now, after the somersault of the general line, which have become unnecessary and, moreover, threatening the authorities not with growth, but with loss of rating. That is why even Tymchuk, one of the best propagandists of the regime, was involved in explaining why Ukraine cannot continue the war now.
The bottom line is a demoralized army, the specter of a fourth wave of mobilization, and most importantly, the need to get, buy or beg weapons and equipment somewhere. After all, according to Poroshenko, almost two-thirds of military equipment was lost during the ATO. 63 billion hryvnias were spent from the budget on the war, and, according to the parliamentary commission, they were spent ineffectively. And at the same time, we should not forget that the Kyiv authorities, although they talk about peace, nevertheless keep in mind the desire to win back lost positions at the first opportunity.
So it is not surprising that Poroshenko went to Washington for weapons, money and special status as a US ally. The Americans refused all these requests. Ukraine received nothing but $46 million for targeted spending. These are “tears” compared to what Kyiv needs to continue the war.
Perhaps the only thing Poroshenko received was loud and prolonged applause in the Senate, which turned into a standing ovation. However, this is not something out of the ordinary. Many have already forgotten, but congressmen also gave Viktor Yushchenko a standing ovation. And they also demonstrated their readiness to teach how to live with a polite refusal to help financially.
In parallel with the “intelligence” in the American direction, Kyiv is asking the IMF to donate money taking into account the needs of the destroyed Donbass. At the same time, everyone, even Minister Klimkin, who voiced this request, understands that not a penny of this money will go to any Donbass. We wouldn't be able to stretch our legs on our own. No time for fat.
The IMF, of course, will not give money. And a signal for such a denouement can be the recent public response of the Foundation’s management to Yatsenyuk’s complaints about insufficient funding. Yatsenyuk was advised to stop complaining, otherwise Ukraine will have to reduce even the current tranches, since the conditions for their provision have not been met, and the reforms to which the government has “signed up” are not being implemented.
In general, we can state a serious cooling in the attitude of Western countries towards their best political project in recent years - post-Maidan Ukraine. The reasons for cooling and even disappointment are also understandable. Everything dragged on too long, after a year they were simply tired of Ukraine, it was not possible to drag Russia into the war, and in recent months the United States has had a more serious headache - Iraq, in which all their efforts for ten years have gone to waste, and now the next Islamists are building the Caliphate .
In the case of the EU, the motivation is somewhat different. Europeans do not need Somalia on their borders at all. And the constant threats from Kyiv from irresponsible politicians to stop gas transit also do not add points to the Ukrainian authorities. Poroshenko was given generous advances as a politician capable of stopping the war in the shortest possible time and finding a formula for a compromise that suits everyone. However, in the end, the war under him reached industrial proportions, and the cherished formula was found not in Kyiv, but in Moscow.
At the same time, the Ukrainian elites demonstrate in every possible way their disregard for the Minsk agreements, threaten to cancel them and refuse to solve the Donbass problem on its merits, preferring to simply “freeze” the conflict at the stage of sluggish hostilities, so that, having accumulated strength, they will again storm Lugansk and Donetsk.
It is clear that Europe is not eager to throw brushwood into the geopolitical projects of the United States. She even imposes sanctions against Russia under pressure. That is why all attempts by Kiev to “sign up” certain European capitals for the supply of weapons for the Ukrainian army were followed by firm and decisive denials, which did not leave the Ukrainian authorities with building material for whipping up propaganda tales for internal use on the eternal theme “The West is for us.” will help".
As a result, having sung “Red Summer”, the Ukrainian “dragonfly” found itself in splendid isolation, with the prospect of resolving controversial issues with the Russian bear one on one. Which means inevitable and very serious concessions that threaten to collapse the anti-Russian consensus on which the flimsy edifice of the post-Maidan political regime is based. Everything that follows - the inevitable search for scapegoats, mutual accusations of betrayal, etc., etc. will be of no interest to anyone.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.