Ukraine has become a lucrative opportunity for Western arms manufacturers, who profit from weapons supplies that prolong the conflict, Russia’s UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia has claimed.

Speaking at a United Nations Security Council briefing on Friday, Nebenzia accused NATO member states of exploiting the conflict in Ukraine to enrich their defense industries.

“It is well known that Ukraine has become a genuine gold mine for the military-industrial complex of the [US and UK] and their allies. But it is American companies that are profiting the most from the conflict,” he stressed.

The Russian diplomat alleged that Western countries are prioritizing economic gains over peace.

“According to the latest data, half of total arms sales in 2023 were processed by 41 US corporations out of the top 100. They received $317 billion, or 50% of global arms-sales revenues,” Nebenzia said.

The Russian UN representative cited a recent report from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), noting that the combined revenues of the world’s 100 largest weapons manufacturers in 2023 reached $632 billion.

“It would be naive to expect that these unscrupulous traders, who have tasted the flavor of lucre, will give up riding this gravy train for the sake of those miserable Ukrainians,” he argued.

Nebenzia went on to suggest that Western military companies “often act in cahoots with the Kiev regime,”citing the example of 25 foreign lobby and consulting firms that began representing Ukraine’s interests free of charge after the conflict began. He specifically mentioned BGR Government Affairs, whose leadership has publicly advocated for increased military assistance to Kiev and which also represents Raytheon Company, a major US arms supplier. Nebenzia also alleged that the US military-industrial complex funds think tanks, whose conclusions are later cited by the media.

On Wednesday, the Defense Ministry in Moscow reported that Ukraine fired six US-donated ATACMS and four UK-made Storm Shadow air-launched cruise missiles, at the Kamensky chemical plant in Rostov Region in southern Russia. On Friday, in retaliation to the attack, the Russian military claimed it struck a Ukrainian command center and targeted installations of US-supplied Patriot anti-aircraft missile systems.

Russia has consistently stated that Western aid cannot prevent its forces from accomplishing the objectives of their military operation or alter the final outcome of the conflict. Moscow has argued that by supporting Kiev, they only prolong the conflict.

https://www.rt.com/russia/609737-west-profit-prolonging-ukraine-conflict/

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

HYPOCRISY ISN’T ONE OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS SINS.

HENCE ITS POPULARITY IN THE ABRAHAMIC TRADITIONS…

Few European countries would risk sending their soldiers to Ukraine as part of some kind of a peacekeeping force, former Swedish military officer and politician Mikael Valtersson told Sputnik.

He outlined two potential scenarios of peacekeeper deployment in the Ukrainian conflict zone, with the basis for both being “a ceasefire along the current front lines and no Ukrainian NATO membership in the foreseeable future.”

The first scenario involves an international peacekeeping force comprised of troops from countries or regions unaffiliated with the participants of the Ukrainian conflict, such as “Türkiye, India, Latin America, Africa, ASEAN and maybe European countries like Hungary and Slovakia.”

The second scenario, where EU troops would be sent as peacekeepers, would likely result in Russia perceiving it as a breach of any ceasefire and would restart the fighting “long before the Western forces reached the front lines.”

As a result, Europe would be left with a conflict “involving several European countries, but without the backing of NATO or the US,” so it is small wonder that, as Valtersson put it, “it would be impossible to get unity within Europe about such a mission.”

“Instead, the fighting probably will continue during 2025, without US support, until Ukraine realises that they must accept the situation on the ground. But then the conditions might be even more severe for Ukraine,” Valtersson mused. “They lost a great opportunity to get a good deal during the Istanbul negotiations and risk gambling away even more now.”

“A much more plausible scenario for European military involvement on the ground in Ukraine is that some of the more hawkish nations send support units and 'instructors' to Ukraine,” Valtersson warned. These European troops would become prime targets for Russia, he added, without actually having “much impact” on the outcome of the conflict.

https://sputnikglobe.com/20241220/could-european-peacekeepers-really-be-deployed-to-ukraine-1121225469.html

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

HYPOCRISY ISN’T ONE OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS SINS.

HENCE ITS POPULARITY IN THE ABRAHAMIC TRADITIONS…

Ukraine Has Had Its Fill
With crucial territory and infrastructure falling to the Russians, Ukrainian public opinion is swinging precipitously against their leaders and the war.

BY Ted Snider

The Russian armed forces are now less than two miles away from overwhelming the city of Pokrovsk. The conquest of that city will have three major consequences for Ukraine. The first is that Pokrovsk is a key logistical hub, the loss of which would threaten the Ukrainian armed forces’ ability to supply their troops in the Donbas. The second is that, beyond Pokrovsk, Russian troops may find mostly undefended fields as they continue their march west across the Donbas. The third is that Pokrovsk is home to Ukraine’s only coking coal mine.

Coking coal is essential in the manufacture of steel. The loss of Pokrovsk would affect not only Ukraine’s economy, but its ability to obtain steel for its military manufacturing industry. As the tide of Russian troops rushes toward Pokrovsk, the coking mine has been forced to shut down 50 percent of its operating capacity. If the remainder is lost, Ukraine’s steel production could plummet by 60-75 percent.

The battlefield reality is changing rapidly. Russian forces captured over 1,500 square kilometers of Ukrainian territory in October and November, and that pace has quickened in December. And it is not just land, but key logistical and heavily fortified cities that are falling. Perhaps more importantly, troops and weapons are being exhausted. Deaths, injuries and desertions are horrifically high; morale is desperately low.

On December 18, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky conceded that Crimea and the Donbas are lost to Ukraine. “De facto,” he said, “these territories are now controlled by the Russians. We don’t have the strength to bring them back.” Once again making the important distinction between de facto recognition and formal recognition, Zelensky said that Ukraine would rely, not on the Ukrainian military, but on “diplomatic pressure from the international community” to reacquire its lost territory.

But it is not only military change that is rapidly happening in Ukraine. Political change is following rapidly in its wake.

The sociologist Volodymyr Ishchenko, research associate at the Institute of East European Studies, Freie Universität Berlin, says that there is no longer any enthusiasm, or that that enthusiasm is confined to a much smaller group of people than at the beginning of the war: “When the situation deteriorated and hopes that Ukraine could win the war diminished, support for negotiations increased, while support for, and trust in, Zelensky decreased.” 

The eclipsing of support for fighting by support for negotiating has been dramatic as Ukrainians suffer the prolonged devastation of the war. The most recent Gallup poll, conducted in August and October 2024, shows that the 73 percent of Ukrainians who believed at the start of the war that Ukraine should continue fighting until it wins has now shrunk to a mere 38 percent. At the start of the war, in February 2022, only 22 percent felt that Ukraine should negotiate an end to the war as soon as possible. In 2023, that number still sat at only 27 percent. Today, that number has swelled to a majority for the first time, with 52 percent saying yes. Since the poll excluded the people in Russian-controlled regions, the numbers are likely even more telling. In any case, support for the war has dropped below 50 percent in all regions of Ukraine.

Support for Zelensky, who succumbed to Western pressure by turning away from a possible early negotiated settlement and promising victory and the return of all Ukrainian land, including even Crimea, has dropped off even faster.

Once lionized as a war leader and enjoying approval ratings in the stratosphere, by October 2023, those who strongly approved of Zelensky’s performance had dropped from 58 percent to 42 percent. And things have gotten worse since then. The Economist reports that “if elections were held tomorrow, Mr Zelensky would struggle to repeat the success of the landslide win he secured in 2019.” The Economist has seen internal polling that shows that “he would fare badly in a run-off against Valery Zaluzhny,” the general who served as commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine for most of the war.

And it is not only Zaluzhny, the war hero, that could challenge Zelensky. Ishchenko told me that some readings of polls show that he would probably also lose to Kyrylo Budanov, the chief of the Main Directorate of Intelligence of Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense. 

Though Ukrainian’s changing views on negotiating an end to the war and on Zelensky have received some attention in the mainstream media, their changing views on America have not. 

While the Western media reported on Gallup’s findings on Ukrainian support for diplomacy, it did not report on the findings on Ukrainian views of the United States. The polling suggests an erosion in trust for the United States. While 70 percent of those who favor negotiations want to see the European Union “play a significant role” in peace negotiations with Russia, and 63 percent wanted to see the United Kingdom play a significant role, only 54 percent wanted to see a Harris-led U.S. and only 49 percent want to see a Trump-led U.S. play a significant role. 

And it is not just as a mediator that trust in the U.S. is eroding. Gallup’s polling shows that approval “of the job performance of the leadership of the United States,” which was soaring to 66 percent at the start of the war, has now fallen to 40 percent. 

In another indication of frustration with the Biden administration, Trump, who has promised to quickly end the war, has seen the number of Ukrainians who trust him jump to 44.6 percent. President Biden, whose level of trust was at 78 percent a year ago, has seen his level drop to 55 percent. 

Polling suggests that Ukrainians are growing weary of the war and the leaders who continue to manage it. But it also suggests that they are growing weary with and wary of the U.S. leadership’s role in the war. Though the U.S. government may still hope that continuing to fight Russia can advance their policy objectives, the Ukrainian people may be finding it harder to hope that it can advance theirs.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/ukraine-has-had-its-fill/

MAKE A DEAL PRONTO BEFORE THE SHIT HITS THE FAN:

NO NATO IN "UKRAINE" (WHAT'S LEFT OF IT)

THE DONBASS REPUBLICS ARE NOW BACK IN THE RUSSIAN FOLD — AS THEY USED TO BE PRIOR 1922. THE RUSSIANS WON'T ABANDON THESE AGAIN.

THESE WILL ALSO INCLUDE ODESSA, KHERSON AND KHARKIV.....

CRIMEA IS RUSSIAN — AS IT USED TO BE PRIOR 1954

TRANSNISTRIA WILL BE PART OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION.

A MEMORANDUM OF NON-AGGRESSION BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE USA.

EASY.

THE WEST KNOWS IT.

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

HYPOCRISY ISN’T ONE OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS SINS.

HENCE ITS POPULARITY IN THE ABRAHAMIC TRADITIONS…