| Submit your comments on this article |
| Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia |
| Ukraine and Europe 'play' in a terrorist attack at the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant for various reasons |
| 2023-07-07 |
| Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited. by Gevorg Mirzayan [REGNUM] Over the past weeks, Russians and the whole world have been convinced that the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant is about to blow up. Moreover, both the potential terrorist (that is, Ukraine) convinces, and Europe, which simultaneously sponsors this terrorist and is at the same time one of the victims of a potential terrorist attack. The night from 4 to 5 July passed in Russia, to put it mildly, restlessly. The reason for this is the fear that Ukraine may realize its threat - either to blow up or seriously damage the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant. “On July 5, literally at night, in the dark, the Armed Forces of Ukraine will try to attack the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant,” Renat Karchaa, an adviser to the head of Rosenergoatom, said on July 4. As a result, the attack did not happen - according to rumors, due to a series of calls to the Kiev leadership from various EU leaders and European officials who did not want their country to be covered with a nuclear cloud. The head of the Kyiv regime could not ignore the calls of his sponsors, who supplied him with money and weapons. However, the end of the terrorist attack does not mean Kyiv's refusal from the information campaign to inflate the threat. In Ukraine, they are still talking about the possibility of undermining the station (naturally, the Russian side is called the executor of the undermining), they are conducting various exercises to neutralize the consequences of the undermining. Moreover, the European media here continue to relay the nuclear myths of Ukrainian propaganda. And in this regard, two questions arise. First, why is Ukraine engaged in nuclear blackmail, constantly exaggerating the topic of a terrorist attack at a nuclear power plant? Second, why is Europe playing these nuclear games, supporting the Kyiv games and at the same time risking a real explosion near its borders? Kiev faces several challenges. The conditional optimum program is to create a situation of a kind of "principle of guaranteed retaliatory destruction" at the minimum. The fact is that during the Cold War, peace was maintained precisely due to this principle. Each side understood the impossibility of victory (including through a nuclear strike) over the other side simply because the other side could inflict unacceptable damage on it. That is why the Soviet Union did not attack the US, and that is why the US is not attacking North Korea now. Ukraine does not have nuclear weapons, but it is possible to inflict this unacceptable damage through nuclear terrorism, that is, the contamination of vast Russian territory. Yes, here, in addition to the possibility, the opponent’s faith in your readiness to deliver this blow is also needed - but Kyiv has no problems with this. The recent destruction by the Ukrainian side of the Kakhovskaya hydroelectric power station, which caused serious damage to the regional ecology, showed that the Kiev regime is quite capable of taking radical inhuman steps. So, according to this regime, Moscow should be afraid and abandon plans for its own large-scale offensive. Must sit down at the negotiating table with nuclear terrorists and at least guarantee the survival of this terrorist regime. The maximum program is through nuclear blackmail to achieve not only its own survival, not only Moscow's refusal from offensive operations, but also to force Russia to make territorial concessions. In particular, to transfer the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant under the control of the Kyiv regime. In 2022, the Kiev regime tried to pull off this scheme with the help of the IAEA - first it shelled the station, and then international officials put forward the idea of its demilitarization. And if Moscow had agreed, then immediately after the withdrawal of Russian units from there and the transfer of the station to the control of the IAEA, it would have been occupied by the Ukrainian military. Finally, the minimum program is not blackmailing Russia (which does not succumb to it), but Western allies. The Kiev regime is making it clear that the West, which is becoming more and more concerned about how effective its financial and political investments in Ukraine are, should not refuse to support the regime. That the regime, if you do not talk to it and if you do not feed it, is quite ready to arrange a nuclear terrorist attack. That the regime, strictly speaking, does not care about the lives and health of not only the “Russian aggressors”, but also European sponsors. Europe understands all this, which is partly why it feeds. But why then do the European media and some politicians help the Kyiv regime to disperse the stories around the alleged readiness of Russia to blow up the nuclear power plant? Apparently, for the sake of the effect of demonization and mobilization. The fact is that Western leaders have invested a huge amount of money in denigrating the global image of Russia. They tried to present Moscow as a barbaric aggressive country, opposing everything human and civilized. To date, however, this campaign has been only partially successful. Polls indeed showed a serious drop in sympathy for Russia, but only in the countries of the Western coalition. In the states of the Global South, Moscow is treated either neutrally or positively. They are absolutely unmoved by Western "human rights", "liberal" or "democratic" narratives. But the nuclear narrative may well have an impact on them. It is no coincidence that one of the main factors preventing Russia from using tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine is the position of the Global South - Africa, Asia and Latin America (which for the most part do not have their own nuclear bomb) fear that the use of any nuclear weapon in Ukraine will release post-nuclear world a genie in a bottle. It will become a dangerous precedent. The West needs mobilization for domestic consumption. Yes, the image of Russia in the eyes of European residents has suffered, but now the Ukrainian one is also suffering. Its own economic crisis, the inappropriate behavior of the Kyiv regime, Russian victories - all this makes European politicians and ordinary people more and more doubt the advisability of further support for Ukraine. Groundless arguments that “Russia is going to go to Berlin” do not impress them, so they need to somehow prove that the Russian government poses a real existential threat to Europe. Therefore, the Ukrainian narrative was picked up that Moscow allegedly threatened to blow up the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant. Yes, Europe is playing with fire here. Yes, it relays the propaganda of a nuclear terrorist who is trying to shift the blame for his terrorism onto a potential victim - and at the same time is trying to prevent this terrorist attack. But what else is left for European leaders? To admit that all these years and a half they openly sponsored the war of a terrorist organization against the Russian state? None of the leaders of the EU member states is ready to go for this. At least for now. |
| Posted by:badanov |