February 14 is Valentine's Day, but on that day Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's national speech was completely impersonal: on this day, he declared February 16 a "day of unity" and praised the combat effectiveness of the Ukrainian army.
Zelenskiy specifically emphasized the day of February 16 because the United States had warned that Russia would launch a military offensive against Ukraine as early as this day.
The "day of war" in the United States is not accurate
Although since the end of December last year, US politicians and intelligence departments have been constantly blowing the wind, saying that there are "definite clues" to prove that Russia is "likely to invade Ukraine", but it is conclusive that "there is a high probability of using force" and giving a specific "war day", but it began on February 11.
On this day, Jake Sullivan, the NATIONAL security adviser at the Us White House, told the media in Washington that Russia has gathered heavy troops on the Russian-Ukrainian border and launched an attack on Ukraine "at any time", and he also specifically mentioned that "Vladimir Putin will not deliberately avoid the Beijing Winter Olympics because of his concerns about Russian-Chinese relations", so the attack on Ukraine is "likely to be launched before the conclusion of the Beijing Winter Olympics (before February 20)." Subsequently, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken made almost identical predictions.
The next day, NatSec Daily, Politico and other media said that before Sullivan "blew the wind" on the 11th, US President Joe Biden and 6 European leaders, NATO and European Union (EU) leaders held a 1-hour conference call, during which he quoted the ANALYSIS language of the US intelligence agency, Russia "will launch a 'physical attack' on Ukraine on February 16", and "physical attack" It could start with a barrage of missiles and cyberattacks.
In fact, even slightly before Sullivan "blew the wind", Nick Schifrin, the host of the "NewsHour" program in the United States, said that the official judgment of the United States putin "has made the decision to attack Ukraine and has issued orders to the army." But then Sullivan clarified that he "does not think that Putin has made any final decision, or simply said, I do not know whether he has made such a decision". Nevertheless, on the same day he declared that the risk is quite high, the threat is quite immediate, calling on the United States to leave the country within 48 hours of Ukrainian citizens, and even warned that "if Ukraine is really attacked, the United States will not send personnel to evacuate American citizens", such a blatant war warning, by no one to disbelieve the three points, the German "Mirror" said that although the United States as usual did not give any evidence and clues, but this judgment, which is said to come from the CIA, is "so detailed and should be based on evidence.".
However, the US "war day" prediction was almost immediately refuted by the Russian side.
On the evening of the 11th, the Russian Federal Foreign Ministry called the US "War Day" warning "false news spread by Western countries with the help of the media", countering that Western countries were "trying to divert people's attention from their acts of aggression".
In any case, no one dares to take February 16, the "day of predicting the start of war", as a sideline: Ukraine announced "diplomatic efforts" and called for "no war" on the one hand, and on the other hand, it set the "war day" as "unity day" and posed as a "even if war is not afraid"; the United States has frequently met with the leaders of various countries since President Joe Biden, constantly sending signals that "once Russia uses force, it will increase international sanctions"; British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on February 15 (that is, "war day"). The day before), the so-called "Cobra Conference" was held to discuss Britain's response to the pressure and constantly send out tough signals against Russia; German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who was jokingly called "the last peacemaker" and who had been criticized in the West and Ukraine for a series of recent "inactions", hastily visited Ukraine and Russia from the 14th, making a busy gesture of "calling a halt to the war while there is still time".
However, the 16th was fleeting, and the "war day" did not go to war: indeed, it is said that a number of Ukrainian government and media websites have been hacked, but this kind of thing happens occasionally; Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov2 said that "diplomatic solution is still possible", while Putin said that "of course he does not want to see war", saying that given that the exercise has ended, Russia is "withdrawing some troops from the Russian-Ukrainian border", and said that this is "the same normal transfer as sending troops there". On the same day, the Russian Federal Defense Ministry also announced that it would withdraw some troops from the Russian-Ukrainian border in order to "expose some false rumors", but did not disclose how many troops would be withdrawn.
Although some people who still firmly believe in the "Emperor Pu" wenzhi martial arts still believe that Russia is only "shaking a false shot" and will "issue a fatal blow" when the opponent is paralyzed, the "war day" of February 16 is obviously "unpredictable", and it is difficult to say whether there will be war in the near future - it is true that Russia does not seem to have a good reputation for keeping its diplomatic commitments, but it turns its face before it is dried in full view of the public, and this kind of thing does not see any benefit from the aspects of "righteousness" and "profit". Only a few self-media people who are not too big are willing to do it.
Intriguing "Eagle Pigeon Role Swapping"
Careful observers should not overlook an interesting phenomenon: "eagle pigeon role swapping".
When the Russian-Ukrainian crisis escalated at the end of last year, it was Russia and Ukraine that "shouted and shouted" to kill: the Russian side not only frequently dispatched troops, but also constantly made such irritating remarks as "Ukraine threatens Russia's national security" and "Russia will not tolerate decisive action", and Alexander Grushko, head of the Russian delegation and deputy foreign minister, declared at the collapse of the Russian-American talks in Geneva on January 10 that if political measures were not enough to "eliminate all the threats it faces", Alexander Grushko, head of the Russian delegation and deputy foreign minister, declared at the break of the Russian-American talks in Geneva on January 10. Russia will take military measures, saying that it has warned NATO representatives that "the further deterioration of the situation may deny the most unpredictable and serious consequences for European security", while Russian Deputy Defense Minister Alexander Fomin said that Russia's relations with NATO are at a "very low level", a Russian Foreign Ministry official described the two sides as "no positive agenda at all"; Ukrainian politicians frequently played up the tense atmosphere of "Russia is about to use force on a large scale", and engaged in militia mobilization and everywhere for help. As if Russia were going to invade the next day, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba warned that Putin had developed a plan to hurt Ukraine, "his Plan A is to destabilize Ukraine without bloodshed," that Ukraine "has reached the point of needing hard power (aid), not just soft power," and urging Western partners to "send a coordinated message to Russia" — that is, a tough message.
On the contrary, at that time, the United States and its Western European allies acted like "peace doves", emphasizing that "there is a broad space for diplomatic and political settlement of the Ukrainian crisis" and expressing "willingness to listen to the opinions of the Russian side", especially represented by the Biden-Putin video meeting on December 7 last year, and the "warm tone speech" of Biden "willing to consult with Russia" the next day.
However, with the prediction of the "War Day", the Ukrainian crisis has a dramatic phenomenon of "eagle pigeon role swapping": Russian military and political leaders who have been "shouting, fighting, shouting and killing" since the end of last year have tried their best to convince the world that Russia has no intention of using force against Ukraine, "the United States and Europe are stirring up fire", interestingly, those voices on the Internet that promote Russia and Putin have also begun to praise Russia's "peace sincerity", attacking the United States and Europe for "fear of not being able to fight" and "fanning the flames", as if once upon a time "Russia has N major killer skills against NATO". "Russia can easily sweep away Ukraine" and other sweaty and bullish belligerent tone words, not they follow the trend to write and issue.
What is even more interesting is that the other that has gone from "shouting and shouting" to "peace-loving" is Ukraine: although Zelenskiy announced "Solidarity Day", he also expressed in an unusual tone that "sacrifice is not at the last moment", emphasizing that "Ukraine certainly wants peace".
On the contrary, the United States (and Britain) try their best to play the "day of war", even if the 16th does not fight does not mean the 17th, 18th... "Prepare for the worst" – this of course does not include sending military aid to Ukraine, but to increase troops around Ukraine, additional sanctions against Russia, and so on.
Just as the so-called abnormal things must have demons, "eagle pigeon role exchange" is so thorough, what is the mystery behind it?
Prematurely exposed Russian hole cards
All this is because the confrontation has been too long, and the Russian strategic intentions have been exposed prematurely and too unrealistically, so that NATO, which was initially passive, especially the United States, has found a lifeline for anti-guests and waiting for work.
The real intention of Russia to make a big Ukrainian crisis is to use the Ukrainian crisis and the European gas crisis as a chip to force NATO to "go back to before 1997", that is, to withdraw all military presence from the member states that joined NATO after 1997 (including Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Slovenia, Croatia, Montenegro, Albania, North Macedonia, Bulgaria and other 14 countries). New members may not be admitted without Russia's consent and "signed". If it can be said that at the "General Visitation Meeting" at the end of last year, Putin only summed up the vague words of "Russia's security concerns", and once exchanged the same vague echoes of the unresponsive Biden, but on December 15 last year, the Russian Foreign Ministry officially issued to the United States the so-called "Draft Treaty on Security Guarantees between the Russian Federation and the United States of America" and the "Agreement on Measures to Ensure the Security of the Russian Federation and Member States", but completely erased this "ambiguous space".
The requirements of the two written agreements are succinct, that is, the hope that NATO will "go back to before 1997", that is, withdraw all military presence from member states that joined NATO after 1997, not admit new members without Russia's consent, and "sign pledges". On December 16, the Russian Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs declared that NATO had "made such a pledge" as early as 1990 (but neither NATO nor mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet party at the time, denied this), and solemnly issued an official statement that "it hopes that the United States will take the russian draft treaty and agreement as a starting point and hold serious talks with the Russian side in the near future on this issue of vital importance to the maintenance of peace and stability."
This demand obviously far exceeds Russia's national strength and military load, and makes the Western countries in the "electoral society" unable to retreat - once they compromise and make concessions, or even make a gesture that can be interpreted as compromise and concession, it is equivalent to showing weakness to geopolitical old enemies and will face a huge political crisis in their respective countries, and this demand with strong hegemonic overtones has also stimulated and angered the vast majority of Russia's western neighbors to a large extent, prompting them to more actively seek cooperation with NATO, before the Russian side proposed to "go back to before 1997." After the request, not only Poland and the Baltic countries that have always hated Russia and the United States have put up their faces, but even Bulgaria, Finland and other countries that have always been neutral or friendly to Russia have also issued voices of dissatisfaction and condemnation.
The original concept of the Russian side was to use the Ukraine crisis and the European gas crisis, which was also amplified by it, as "robbery material" to force the United States and Europe to make substantive and "irreversible" major strategic concessions on the issue of NATO's eastward expansion, so that Russia's soldiers could bloodlessly retake the former Soviet Union and Eastern European spheres of influence (except for the former East Germany) lost due to the defeat of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, and further shape the "national design" and "human design" of Russia's "superpowers" and Putin's "national heroes". However, the lack of strength and the premature exposure of the bottom card have allowed the once overwhelmed West to find the life of "encircling Wei and saving Zhao".
The countermeasures of the United States and NATO are to take advantage of the fear of Russia by the members of the Soviet Union and the Eastern European bloc in the central plains of NATO, constantly play up the threat of war and increase troops to these countries in a big way, so that they can clearly counter Russia's "return to the price before 1997" and show that they are "tough on Russia", and they are still acting within nato's scope, and there is no risk of direct military intervention in Ukraine, so that the burden will be thrown to Russia, and Russia's invasion of Ukraine will become the first party to launch a war of aggression and will be subject to severe international sanctions. Standing still means the failure of the entire strategy.
Before the crisis, NATO had deployed about 4,000 troops in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, supported by tanks, air defense and intelligence surveillance, and after all three meetings between Russia and the West broke down in January, the United States announced that it had "put 8,500 troops on high alert and was ready to go to Eastern Europe to support NATO troops at any time." On February 14, two days before the "start of the war," the United States announced that it would send an additional eight F15 fighter jets to Poland to participate in NATO air patrols, and would send an additional 3,000 troops to Poland in the coming days to "enhance NATO's military strength in the region."
In sharp contrast, instead of increasing their troops to Ukraine, which they say is "immediately beaten," the United States and Europe have declared that "even if Ukraine is invaded, they will not send troops to help the war," and on the other hand, they have hastily withdrawn a small number of their own soldiers sent to Ukraine to help train to safety.
The reason is very simple: for the United States and Europe, especially the United States, since it is clear that Russia's "drunken intention" is not in Ukraine but in the "1997 line", then there is no need to risk a direct military conflict with Russia or even the danger of nuclear war to directly reinforce Ukraine, as long as there is no risk, or even no cost (because the Eastern European countries of the bird of fright will be upside down) to increase the number of troops to nato countries east of the "1997 line", it is enough to show that "we are not afraid of Russia's blackmail" and "we have a way and act", even if Russia really invades Ukraine. The United States and its allies can seize the "great righteous name" to launch more severe sanctions against Russia, and at the same time tie the more frightened Eastern European "front-line countries" more firmly to their chariots - as for the death of Ukraine, is it really important to them?
On the contrary, it is embarrassing for Russia not to fight now (the real fighter is nameless and perfidious, bound to pay a tragic price; if it does not fight, it is difficult to end and justify itself, and its most valued domestic populist support will be hit hard), and Ukraine will become a victim no matter what, so these two former "shouting and shouting and killing factions" are now on the same path, and they have become "peace doves" that vigorously advocate "diplomatic solutions".
The steps are also not easy to find
However, the steps are not so easy to find.
The attitude of Western countries toward war is inversely proportional to the geographical distance between Russia and Ukraine, with the United States and Britain, the farthest, the most warlike, and Germany and Hungary, which are closest, most afraid of fighting. The problem is that the United States, which has tasted the sweetness of "encircling Wei and saving Zhao" and dominating the direction of Western topics, is "picking up the fire to gain profits", and the fire cannot burn itself, so they will not easily give the Russian side a more decent step. After the Russian side issued a tentative signal of "partial withdrawal," the United States and Britain have successively blown the wind, warning that "the withdrawal may only be symbolic," saying that "60 percent of the Russian army is concentrated on the Russian-Ukrainian border," while continuing to make a tough posture of "not talking about the Russian side's '1997 line' asking price" and only agreeing to such a "security guarantee issue" as a large-scale framework such as returning to the nuclear arms control treaty and the INF treaty, and this kind of "concession" that is better than nothing is obviously far from Putin's expectations.
Russia is also trying to find a way for itself by unilaterally declaring that it has "achieved a diplomatic breakthrough." On February 14, Russian satellite news broke the news, saying that The Ukrainian ambassador to the United Kingdom, Vadym Prystaiko, said that "Ukraine can promise not to join NATO in exchange for peace", and on the 15th, Putin also declared that he had "received assurances from the Ukrainian side that it would not join NATO." But this self-proclaimed "victory" was quickly denied by the Ukrainian side: Prestec later told the BBC that the commitment to NATO was "part of Ukraine's constitution" and that no one had the right to change it at will. Whether he has expressed anything to Russia before, he can only change his mouth due to strong domestic pressure, especially when President Zelenskiy reiterated that "it is the right of Ukraine to join NATO as a sovereign state".
To this day, Russia and NATO seem to have completely turned over the next game of "land war chess", and the river boundary of this "land war chess" has been inserted with the sign of "mine danger", no matter how to make a gesture of mutual threat, it is difficult to really fight. However, the two sides have a clear price and bottom line, and they are intolerable to each other, and talking about eyebrows and even serious conversation has actually become a luxury.
Under such circumstances, the two sides are afraid that for the time being, they can only "not fight, do not reconcile, do not talk, do not go, do not die" with big eyes and small eyes, and leave the trouble of repeatedly frying cold rice and deleting old posts to the tireless self-media.