THE WESTERN MEDIA’S SUDDEN NARRATIVE SHIFT

Have you noticed? The Western Media is suddenly preparing the public for a Russian victory and a defeated, amputated Ukraine

This shift is very recent and unmistakable.

Even a few weeks ago the fighting around Pokrovsk – a key logistical hub that is a cornerstone of Ukraine’s defensive line – was spun by CNN as very costly to Russia and strategically meaningless.

Now you can see a clear shift to preparing the public for Ukraine having to cede some territory.

This goes against the narrative the West has peddled until now. The narrative was always: Putin cannot be allowed to gain one acre of ground, because it will only wet his appetite. Apparently the west is now ready to make a deal, after having let Ukraine bleed.

THE WEST’S HALF-HEARTED WAR STRATEGY

The west only aided Ukraine incrementally, in stages. Ukraine received enough military so as not to lose, but never what it needed to win. One can even wonder if the West could ever give Ukraine what it needed to win decisively. It’s an old pattern, they did the same with the South-Vietnamese, the Kurds, local forces opposed to the Taliban, etc, they get people to die for whatever aligns with the western agenda of the moment and when fatigue creeps in or other things become more interesting these proxy allies are abandoned. It’s bad to be America’s enemy, but it’s when America wants to be your friend you have to really be watching out.

Scott Ritter and colonel McGregor have taken predictions of Russian success to absurd heights for views and clicks and attention and to make their contrast with the western legacy media as stark as possible. They have been predicted for almost four years that Ukraine was about to completely collapse in the next two weeks or so, but if you dismiss all that bombastic talk as a necessary tactic to build an audience, they are right that Russia was bound to achieve some degree of victory eventually.

The industrial advantage Russia holds is 10:1.

Sanctions have only pushed Russia to become more self-sufficient and to find partners elsewhere.

The war has led to divisions inside the EU.

To name just one example: In recent weeks Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has on the one hand called on NATO to beef up Slovak air defenses and on the other hand he is firmly against the EU restricting the flow of Russian energy sources to Slovakia. This is exactly what Putin loves to see: individual European states acting purely in their self-interest.

The EU has been de facto at war with Russia since 2022, but without willing to bleed in any way. The Ukrainians had to do the dying and they got some weapons and a lot of ‘inspiring’ rhetoric and at times cringe level pathos. Sanctions were slammed on Russia that could never really stop Russia. The media rallied to the Ukrainian cause. To name another example from inside a much overlooked EU member: in Slovakia one of the main newspapers, DennikN, did away with any semblance of journalistic objectivity and wrapped its newspaper’s icon in the Ukrainian flag. For all the good it did for the men and women struggling on the front lines.

THE ORIGINS OF THE CONFLICT AND THE MANUFACTURED BOOGEYMAN

I firmly agree with Chris Hedges that Russia was provoked into attacking Ukraine. As far back as 2011 I could see with my own eyes, at the Globsec Security conference in Bratislava that Russia was being demonized, especially by the US, and that European states and former now pro-western Soviet republics were being pushed to invest more in weaponry, with Russia being dangled in front of them as the threat. It’s almost as if the West wanted to have boogie man on its borders and did its very best to create a real one out of what could have been and should have been a very useful economic partner.

The details of how Ukraine was basically torn apart by American-European interests and Russian interests are well known.

It’s also well known how the west was genuinely surprised when it came to an actual invasion. Especially Europe lived under the illusion that all out ground wars on the European continent were a thing of the past and they assumed Putin was some tactical mastermind who would surely not invade Ukraine with a force that was far too small to get the job done.

WESTERN MISREADING OF RUSSIA’S WARFARE CULTURE

When his offensive failed they then underestimated his willingness to let the Russians bleed for what many saw as marginal, empty, gains. We have also seen that many Russians have a completely different connection to life. Where Europeans have made comfort seeking central to their existence the Russians still have national myths that they are willing to die for. Other than for their closest family members I don’t think Europeans want to lay down their life for anything at all. Not so with many Russians as we have seen. Even if you take into account that many have next to no appealing alternatives other than to accept front line roles and bloody meat assaults. I can’t think of any western population which would be able to sustain such a bloodletting and keep pushing. Leaving morality aside, there is clearly a national story left in Russia that is strong enough to keep a costly war effort going.

Most of Europe does not have this. That’s why they fought this war with one hand tied tightly round their balls and didn’t cut all economic ties with Russia, didn’t directly intervene, while at the same time stoking the fire, giving Ukraine enough to keep going, having media narratives that made the public embrace war, and a categoric no to any concessions to Russia.

THE GHOST OF MUNICH AND THE LIMITS OF EUROPEAN MORALITY

In a way Chamberlain’s Munich deal with Hitler hung over Europe. The idea was that an unsatiable dictator got his way then and surely the result would be the same now if Putin received anything he demanded.

To put it bluntly, Europe and the US have been half-assing their approach to this conflict from the start and have played an active part in getting us this far.

That’s why dead Ukrainian children made headlines and their tragic deaths were instantly branded as war crimes, but Israel could kill far more children and no western official or media dared to even begin to say Israel was committing war crimes. That should tell you a lot. Clearly the West had a stake in propping up Ukraine and in giving Israel carte blanche to do even worse than Russia.

THE MORAL BLINDNESS OF TRIBAL THINKING

I am aware that some people like to see these things in black and white terms. Because Russia was indeed provoked, they automatically can’t admit that Russia committed war crimes. Bucha was real. Mass execution, war crimes, rapes, even of children, even instances of Ukrainian fighters being castrated, all real. Israel did the same and worse. You have all seen the completely different treatment Russia and Israel got in the media. To me Israel is run by the most flagrantly psychopathic individuals alive today. Compared to Israel I find Russia to have some legitimate claims, but to also be delusional and archaic in its behaviour with a stunning disdain for the lives of any Russian who isn’t rich or well-connected. The way Russia throws away the lives of its own young men makes you think they don’t know Nazi-Germany has long been defeated, Stalingrad has been rebuilt and rebuilt, Berlin has long fallen and there’s no serious threat to Russia’s survival in the Führerbunker left.

THE COMING PEACE AND UKRAINE’S BITTER REALITY

So with the media signalling that it’s time to make peace, what will likely happen?

For Ukraine agreeing to peace is a very bitter pill.

Right now it can still continue the fight even if the US drops all assistance right now. This would likely especially hurt in terms of intelligence gathering, also in terms of morale. Many Ukrainians will feel abandoned. How things will unfold depends on European reactions. France has recently agreed to donate circa 100 Rafale jets. That doesn’t mean those will be flying over Ukraine any time soon. Pokrovsk is a very serious situation. If it falls, combined with pressure from the US to agree to peace, it may very well be over. Things could go very quickly now and we might well see a very nervous, fragile peace in 2026, more like a permanent low intensity war for x years to come than real peace.

THE PSYCHOLOGICAL AFTERMATH FOR EUROPE

Psychologically such an outcome could have far reaching consequences for European minds.

It’s an other failure of a continent that imagines itself the only true source for preaching to the world what the right human values are.

Yet this same rather arrogant rhetoric loving part of the world has repeatedly failed to stop insane catastrophes. Rwanda, Bosnia, the sickening two year Israeli rampage in Gaza, the chaos left in Libya, Iraq, Syria after dethroning morally very tainted leaders who, dirty as they were, did do a somewhat better job running than their country than the chaos that usually follows later when you decapitate a state with no real plan for the day after.

Ukraine proves again that Europe can preach, but barely knows what it really wants, doesn’t want its citizens to pay for anything in blood, sweat and tears, thinks it can solve everything by ‘condemning’, has proven itself to be shamelessly hyprocrite >>> Russia is insanely unhinged, yet Israel MAY, at the very worst, here and there have gone a bit too far in its right to ‘self-defense’.

THE PATTERNS THIS WAR REVEALED ABOUT THE WESTERN SOUL

For me personally the most interesting patterns this conflict has stripped bare, are:

• the west preaches about values only when its monetary elites have skin in the game
• western media do not outright lie, but spin things always in favor of what those who really pull the strings want you to think (child killing Israel is our greatest ally, but Russia is the most evil monster for killing a fraction of the number of children Israel has stamped out)
• how people have blindly sided with one side or the other. Most people who care about this issue either fully support Ukraine or fully support Russia and both sides are extremely triggered if you have some sympathy and some condemnation for both. This also applies to Palestine and Israel where I am for about 90 percent in agreement with the Palestinian camp, but even that remaining 10 percent of disagreement is pure blasphemy and treason (you HAVE TO believe Iran shot down Israeli F-35s, not because there is real proof of that, but because you have to be loyal with the tribe…)
• The first victim of any war is the truth and we have seen that here again
• A very interesting part for me is how people who feel that the west has failed them personally will embrace absolutely any anti-western narrative without questioning their emotional motives for doing so. I am for example wired to side with scrappy underdogs, but am aware of that, I know where it comes from, I know it has a toxic element, and I try not to have this emotional reflex blur my sense of reality (which is a life long exercise). I repeat what am trying to say here: there is a certain segment of the European population that feels personally let down by western society – their life doesn’t match what they hoped for – and therefore find some pleasure in any anti-western narratives, some of them true, some half true, and some false.

If this makes you balk: in Slovak we say:

if you hit a goose it will make noise.