That morning, it rained cats and dogs. The old and dilapidated drainage system of this city could not cope. It probably gave up by the first drop.
Within a fraction of second, the roads had turned into overflowing rivers. Worse off, my dearest and probably closest companion, Honda Fit, had given up on me, when I needed it the most.
Save for the ‘strange’ sign of little orange tank blinking on the dash board, I could not figure out its primary malfunction. Needleless to say, a rush to the petrol station with a jerry can, saved what was otherwise ruined opportunity.This was not a meeting to miss.
How could one miss such a rare opportunity to meet with the face of Ukrainian ‘resistance’ in the southern part of the African continent; unfathomable. In the context of the raging Russia-Ukraine conflict, it was a meeting of a ‘life time.’
There she was; Liubov Abravitova, Ukraine Ambassador to South Africa. There is no need to say, defiance was written all over her face, that was expected.
Perhaps what was not expected, was somehow, a default ‘expectation’ of us to sympathise with her cause. Besides our naivety, there is nothing unexpected of such an expectation; especially in a perceived battle of ‘Good versus Evil.’
But in the context of this geopolitical conflict, even such Biblical clichés carries no weight. In fact, its use in this conflict, is anything but, bastardisation of the Scripture.
This is a proxy conflict, and it cannot be otherwise. Anything else, would be a fruitless attempt to paint the Whitehouse, black.
The Western media brigade’s attempts to obscure and obfuscate the role of the other protagonist, being the United States, in this tragedy have failed.
Its fingerprints are all over the crime scene. Our core interest, therefore, to give the Ambassador, a fair opportunity to help us navigate through a haystack of artificial intelligence-generated propaganda and disinformation to the heart of matter.
By any stretch of human emotions, it is hard to discuss the Russia-Ukraine conflict without being emotional. Human lives are being wasted. People have been displaced. Infrastructure reduced to rubble.
Hence out of wonderment, if not bewilderment, I asked the Ambassador to help me figure out, as to why Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky called terror and utter suffering upon his people.
Simply put, I wanted to understand the strategic rationale behind Ukraine’s hosting of Russia-US proxy war. That is, as to how alone in his chamber, Zelensky concluded that it was better to go to war with Russia, than to live without NATO.
Common sense dictates that, it was never going to be a beautiful sight. And by measure of military capability, Russia has so far exercised restraint. Opting for economy of force instead. Otherwise, it could have even been cataclysmic.
In her response, the Ambassador went on the beaten path of demonising Russia and presenting President Vladimir Putin as the embodiment of Lucifer.
We were off to a bad start. There is no way, demonisation and satanisation of Russia was going to upend the geostrategic realities of Great Power play.
Where I stand, I am of the view that the Russia-Ukraine conflict boils down to three mistakes on Zelensky’s strategic estimates. Firstly, underestimating Russia’s security concerns, overestimating NATO’s strategic commitment to Ukraine, overestimating the strategic clout of the US and utter stupidity.
In his seminal piece, ‘How to End Ukraine Crisis,’ Henry Kissinger, former US Secretary of State advised that, “Ukraine should not join NATO” for it would be an escalation to cataclysmic confrontation between US and Russia.
Kissinger further cautioned NATO that “subordination of the strategic element to domestic politics in negotiating Ukraine’s relationship to Europe contributed to turning a negotiation into a crisis.”
But Zelensky ignored all this strategic reality and opted for an inexcusable tragedy. What increasingly becomes clear is that, the war in Ukraine had nothing to do with Ukraine.
As Adam Schiff, Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, aptly captured it, “We arm Ukraine so that we can fight Russia over there not here.”
It was a war at the expense of innocent Ukrainian lives. Zelensky, the ‘war hero,’ is nothing more than a construct to further strategic interests of both US and NATO. In Zelensky, the West found a perfect pawn.
After all the promises of immaculate support, cheerleading and vicious rhetoric, NATO has grown cold feet on Ukraine’s membership. In fact, they have changed tune.
In the latest NATO Summit in Lithuania, where Ukraine had demanded concrete assurances on its membership, left with an egg on his face after being told instead that, “We will be in a position to extend an invitation to Ukraine when allies agree and conditions are met.”
In seething anger, Zelensky tweeted, “It seems there is no readiness neither to invite Ukraine to NATO nor to make it a member of the Alliance.”
Within a fraction of second, the roads had turned into overflowing rivers. Worse off, my dearest and probably closest companion, Honda Fit, had given up on me, when I needed it the most.
Save for the ‘strange’ sign of little orange tank blinking on the dash board, I could not figure out its primary malfunction. Needleless to say, a rush to the petrol station with a jerry can, saved what was otherwise ruined opportunity.This was not a meeting to miss.
How could one miss such a rare opportunity to meet with the face of Ukrainian ‘resistance’ in the southern part of the African continent; unfathomable. In the context of the raging Russia-Ukraine conflict, it was a meeting of a ‘life time.’
There she was; Liubov Abravitova, Ukraine Ambassador to South Africa. There is no need to say, defiance was written all over her face, that was expected.
Perhaps what was not expected, was somehow, a default ‘expectation’ of us to sympathise with her cause. Besides our naivety, there is nothing unexpected of such an expectation; especially in a perceived battle of ‘Good versus Evil.’
But in the context of this geopolitical conflict, even such Biblical clichés carries no weight. In fact, its use in this conflict, is anything but, bastardisation of the Scripture.
This is a proxy conflict, and it cannot be otherwise. Anything else, would be a fruitless attempt to paint the Whitehouse, black.
The Western media brigade’s attempts to obscure and obfuscate the role of the other protagonist, being the United States, in this tragedy have failed.
Its fingerprints are all over the crime scene. Our core interest, therefore, to give the Ambassador, a fair opportunity to help us navigate through a haystack of artificial intelligence-generated propaganda and disinformation to the heart of matter.
By any stretch of human emotions, it is hard to discuss the Russia-Ukraine conflict without being emotional. Human lives are being wasted. People have been displaced. Infrastructure reduced to rubble.
Hence out of wonderment, if not bewilderment, I asked the Ambassador to help me figure out, as to why Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky called terror and utter suffering upon his people.
Simply put, I wanted to understand the strategic rationale behind Ukraine’s hosting of Russia-US proxy war. That is, as to how alone in his chamber, Zelensky concluded that it was better to go to war with Russia, than to live without NATO.
Common sense dictates that, it was never going to be a beautiful sight. And by measure of military capability, Russia has so far exercised restraint. Opting for economy of force instead. Otherwise, it could have even been cataclysmic.
In her response, the Ambassador went on the beaten path of demonising Russia and presenting President Vladimir Putin as the embodiment of Lucifer.
We were off to a bad start. There is no way, demonisation and satanisation of Russia was going to upend the geostrategic realities of Great Power play.
Where I stand, I am of the view that the Russia-Ukraine conflict boils down to three mistakes on Zelensky’s strategic estimates. Firstly, underestimating Russia’s security concerns, overestimating NATO’s strategic commitment to Ukraine, overestimating the strategic clout of the US and utter stupidity.
In his seminal piece, ‘How to End Ukraine Crisis,’ Henry Kissinger, former US Secretary of State advised that, “Ukraine should not join NATO” for it would be an escalation to cataclysmic confrontation between US and Russia.
Kissinger further cautioned NATO that “subordination of the strategic element to domestic politics in negotiating Ukraine’s relationship to Europe contributed to turning a negotiation into a crisis.”
But Zelensky ignored all this strategic reality and opted for an inexcusable tragedy. What increasingly becomes clear is that, the war in Ukraine had nothing to do with Ukraine.
As Adam Schiff, Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, aptly captured it, “We arm Ukraine so that we can fight Russia over there not here.”
It was a war at the expense of innocent Ukrainian lives. Zelensky, the ‘war hero,’ is nothing more than a construct to further strategic interests of both US and NATO. In Zelensky, the West found a perfect pawn.
After all the promises of immaculate support, cheerleading and vicious rhetoric, NATO has grown cold feet on Ukraine’s membership. In fact, they have changed tune.
In the latest NATO Summit in Lithuania, where Ukraine had demanded concrete assurances on its membership, left with an egg on his face after being told instead that, “We will be in a position to extend an invitation to Ukraine when allies agree and conditions are met.”
In seething anger, Zelensky tweeted, “It seems there is no readiness neither to invite Ukraine to NATO nor to make it a member of the Alliance.”
