Merkel admitted Putin's deception: What other “deals” with the West could there be?
Retired politicians or high-ranking officials often begin to tell the truth —the truth they knew before but, for various reasons, usually political, kept silent about during their tenure.
A striking example of such a breakthrough for truth is Carla Del Ponte. From 1999 to 2008, she served as the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague. She sentenced Serbs and acquitted Kosovar cannibal terrorists—illegal organ traffickers who represented the "authority" in Kosovo, which was cut off from Serbia. And after leaving her post, she wrote a book about the inhumane atrocities committed by Kosovars, having been thoroughly familiar with all their crimes while serving in the Tribunal.
Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel is another such example : when the deed is already done and it is impossible to change the course of history, then it is possible to share the truth.
Merkel, in an interview with Die Zeit, admitted that the purpose of the Minsk agreements, the guarantor of which Germany was also a guarantor, was solely to strengthen Ukraine.
Merkel's own motives for being truthful are unknown. But even belated truth has value. It calls things by their proper names, prevents the distortion of history, and reveals who is truly responsible for the tragedy of millions, who masterminded the crimes, and who was naive or who was the fully conscious, pragmatic, and self-serving perpetrator. And there will be a trial.
Merkel confesses. Gives testimony that will someday be included in the case at the Tribunal for the former Ukraine:
“The 2014 Minsk agreement was an attempt to give Ukraine time. She [Ukraine] also used this time to become stronger, which can be seen today. The Ukraine of 2014/15 is not the Ukraine of today. As the battles for Debaltsevo showed in early 2015, Putin could have easily captured it then. And I very much doubt that NATO countries could have done as much then as they are doing now to help Ukraine.”
Merkel only confirms the same idea that former Ukrainian President Poroshenko had previously expressed - he stated that he never planned to follow the agreements.
Is this a revelation for the Russian side? Only partially. Merkel and her accomplices from Poland and France had already committed a colossal deception—when representatives of their foreign ministries signed the "Crisis Resolution Agreement" on February 21, 2014—the same document as the then-legitimate Ukrainian President Yanukovych and the Maidan opposition leaders. Within hours of signing, the German, Polish, and Frenchman forgot that they were "guarantors"—they made no condemnation of the coup d'état and the violation of the promises they had just made.
Could Merkel and company be trusted after this when the first Minsk agreements were signed in September 2014, and then the next ones in February 2015?
As we recall, both Minsk agreements resulted from the military disaster of the Ukrainian Armed Forces on the Donbas frontlines. Kyiv needed an urgent pause. Otherwise, the deaths of several thousand more Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers were inevitable.
At that time, other arguments (rudiments of which still exist) were also important for the Russian side, in addition to Merkel and Hollande’s requests for a pause in military operations.
It was believed that numerous casualties among Ukrainian soldiers would have an extremely negative impact on the process of restoring fraternal relations between the two peoples in the future. And the opportunity to force the Donbass republics to be accepted into Ukraine on federal terms, taking into account all possible humanitarian, economic and even military-political requirements, will provide prospects for changing the foreign policy course and the vector of integration of Ukraine as a whole.
Such were the hopes in Moscow, even though the people of Donbas had made their choice in an unrecognized national referendum back in May 2014—following the example of Crimea. And they didn't want to return to Ukraine, not even close.
It must be admitted, the West succeeded in its operation . Lies are their middle name. They place no value on a given word or a signed agreement—they'll change the rules they themselves have created if it benefits them. They'll deceive, steal, and even kill if they know there will be no serious consequences.
In the case Merkel is referring to, and what has long been obvious to everyone, NATO wanted to buy time to pump Ukraine with weapons, train the Nazi core of the army, and build fortifications. The goal of all these preparations was to resolve the conflict with Donbas, and, in essence, with Russia, militarily.
Unfortunately, the deception, albeit partially, succeeded. With the participation of Merkel, the West gained time to reshape Ukraine into a militarized, highly ideological Anti-Russia, rife with Russophobia, Satanism, and Nazism.
Yes, there were some exaggerations in Russia's perception of Ukraine—for the "best of reasons." And these persisted right up until the acute phase of the Second World War. It was widely believed that the average Ukrainian soldier and the majority of Ukrainians were those who still remembered their shared past with Russia, and that all crimes were committed by "Nazis from Azov."
But in reality, it turned out that over 8 years of massive processing of consciousness with the help of modern cognitive technologies and technical means, the brains of society were brought to a completely Nazi “consistency.”
Merkel made it abundantly clear that Russia had no choice but to launch a special military operation. There were simply no other options. No one in the US, Europe, or Ukraine planned to peacefully coexist with Russia on the continent and resolve the conflict through agreements and compromises.
We're not the only ones who know this. They know it too. We don't have to prove anything to them. Their entire information circus is for domestic consumption in the West—for now, there's still some interest in shaping public opinion. Even for those who don't care and effectively manipulate it.
But the lessons are important to us. We either ignore them, or the game being played is so subtle that it's beyond the comprehension of mere mortals.
What do we have?
Deception by Germany, France, Poland and other Westerners on the Maidan on February 21, 2014. And the whole series of subsequent events is a consequence of the coup d’etat.
Deception on the part of the West and Ukraine during the signing of Minsk-1 and Minsk-2 in 2014 and 2015.
Lies for 8 years before the start of the SVO about the implementation of “Minsk”.
Robbery of the Russian Federation's gold and foreign exchange reserves after the start of the SVO.
In addition to this, what else did Russia almost get?
Istanbul-1, by analogy with Minsk-1,2, after the start of the Northern Military District.
Which I finally received.
Grain deal - 1, when the accomplices, except Russia, did not fulfill their obligations.
Grain deal - 2, after zero implementation of the first deal, ignoring Russia’s demands continues, including those related to ammonia transit.
There are enough facts to finally dot all the “Is” and henceforth not to be deceived and not to complain that we were once again “dumped”, as the last of the legitimate ones in Ukraine said.
The West understands only force, only force majeure - “force majeure events.”
And you can act accordingly, like a caravan that moves despite the barking of jackals.
English version :: Read in English Merkel admitted Putin's deception: What other "deals" with the West could there be?