Professor and senior researcher at the University of Delaware Sergey Lopatnikov - himself a former Soviet scholar who lived in Moscow - revealed the true goals of the 'peace plan' that the Kremlin is ready to sign. The professor also pointed out the lies emanating from the Kremlin through propaganda media.
Here is what American and Soviet scholar Sergey Lopatnikov writes on his "Antidote SL" page on Telegram regarding the current points of the "peace plan" for Ukraine, followed by a quote with minor omissions:
"1. Russia believes that all it needs is to ensure a minimal presence in the Black Sea, for which the preservation of Sevastopol as a naval base and a land route to Crimea is sufficient to achieve this goal. Moreover, Russia has not only come to terms with the emergence of another state of Poland's class at its borders. It is granting this state maritime status, leaving it with Odessa, Nikolaev, and Kherson.
-
Russia has actually lost the military-political game, which we are not being told about. And there are grounds for this: over four years, Russia's 'successes' are utterly negligible. One can lie as much as one wants to the most honorable public about 'goodwill' when leaving Kyiv, but where is Izyum, for example, where is Kherson? Russia has not achieved any of the stated objectives in four years. I won't even mention December 17, 1991 — that's just not funny anymore. But even what Russia has declared as its so-called 'constitutional regions' is not liberated. The defensive line has not been breached. What about Sloviansk? — Russia is as far from it as the Moon — it’s a hundred years' walk to Kyiv! - And that’s where it all started. And the sanctions are working — we don’t know the effectiveness...
-
I don’t know about others, but the ghost of Moscow-2042 (a scenario of the collapse of Russia written in a literary form and published in 1986 in the USA by Soviet writer Vladimir Voinovich - ed.) is really haunting me. And the loss of this war — like the creation of a deficit in late USSR - is a tool for the final liquidation of Russia. The Soviet generation has already, consider it gone. And the new one seems to not care at all. And this could very well be a calculated move.
-
The salvation of someone's capital. A deal, perhaps. Favorable business proposals from Trump to someone. And so on. In short — buy-sell.
As for the grand successes of Russia on the battlefield — I would remain silent. They are non-existent in substantive terms. This is the infamous battle for the forester's hut."
The professor also exposed the lies in Russian media like "Lenta.ru", pointing out the points of the agreement — which few read. "The agreement doesn’t even mention the recognition of 'Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk' (Donetsk and Luhansk are, by the way, cities, not regions). De facto recognition is not recognition. What about the NATO refusal they are talking about, when in reality Ukraine has been provided with more than Article Five: an unconditional military collective response if anything happens," noted the Soviet and American scholar.
"The terrible thing is that no one discusses the MEANING of the provisions included in the proposals. And there — each point, to put it mildly, is multilayered. Plus the interdependence of these points. And these idiots are really convincing themselves that this is 'Ukraine's defeat' and oh what a victory for Russia! I’m just flabbergasted. If Russia has diplomats like this, then I don’t even know..." said the American professor.
"... I suspect that judging by the multilayered nature, these 28 points are actually a product of the Murky Albion. The political style is similar," believes senior researcher at an American university Sergey Lopatnikov.
"As Marshal Foch said in 1918, 'This is not peace. This is an armistice...' - Just not 'for twenty years', as during Versailles, but hopefully for five, at most ten. And then it’s already a stone's throw to 'Moscow-2042' (the scenario of the collapse of Russia under the leadership of a president from the special services described by Vladimir Voinovich in literary form - ed.)," emphasized the professor.
The professor also pointed to a special clause in the agreement that the media is ignoring. "Among the points, there is one that seemed extremely strange to me: it is the point about Ukraine striking 'a missile (?!) at Moscow and Petersburg' in case Russia refuses to sign the paper. What kind of missile (one) is this that needs to be included in the framework agreement!? As they say, guess three times," - said the scholar.
Leave a comment