Speaking of patterns emerging, here's an opinion piece from the Kyiv Post, March 22:
In a worst-case scenario, if Russian forces get the upper hand over a depleted Ukraine, NATO will need to intervene. Poland, of course, would have to be the spearhead.“It is not NATO, Poland or Slovakia that are mounting ever more pressure, but Russia, which has invaded Ukraine. Russia, which is seizing its territories. Russia, which is killing its people. And Russia, which is abducting Ukrainian children. Therefore, either Ukraine will defend its independence today, or we will have to enter this conflict. Because our main values, which were the basis of our civilization and our culture will be threatened. Therefore, we will have no choice but to enter the conflict,” the Polish Ambassador to France, Jan Emeryk Rościszewski, stated in an interview on March 18.There is nothing alarming or extraordinary about the statement except its level of clarity. Eastern European countries do not support the Ukrainian fight for its right to exist – its sovereignty and independence – out of kindness alone, but primarily as a defense of their own country.
They are doing their uttermost to avoid the dramatic consequences of a potential Ukrainian defeat.
As I have previously argued, this would result in Russian forces being deployed along their borders; Russian military power moving 1,000 kilometers closer to Warsaw, Berlin, Paris, Brussels and London; Russian air defense systems covering a greater part of Central Europe; the Black Sea turning into a Russian lake. It would create a belt of constant instability along the border of the EU and NATO.
Equally important, it would give Russia access to an immense wealth of rare minerals, gas, oil and coal resources, as well as the “breadbasket of Europe.” It would gain control over the Ukrainian defense industry helping it to restore its military power.
Perhaps more importantly, a hypothetical Russian victory in Ukraine would be seen as a victory over NATO.NATO discord
The statement by Ambassador Rościszewski follows the logic of NATO’s previous strategic concept, in which the Alliance undertook to stop conflicts that threaten the security and stability of its member states. The Russian conventional war in Ukraine and its hybrid war across Europe does exactly that: It threatens the security and stability of its member states....
....MUCH MORE
HT: Michael Tracey who examines the author of this piece:
Fun fact: this person lobbying for direct NATO intervention in Ukraine (WWIII) just so happens to be a "fellow" at some "defense" Think Tank in Kyiv funded by the US and UK governments. So congratulations, taxpayers -- you're also *paying* for the WWIII lobbying...
....THREAD
Have you ever noticed that "fun facts" on Twitter usually aren't very much fun?
Previously: "Poland's Ambassador To France May Have Gone Insane"
And three months after the Russian invasion:Polish President: There will be no border between our countries — Poland and Ukraine.
If the 'borderless' references are not metaphorical he risks this (please note, Polish flag is upside down, I did not draw it!):
I stole it. From The Fly, who appears to be quite the Russophile.
If Poland is going to go as far as the Ambassador said they would, Poland should just take back western Ukraine, give the territory its old names: Volhynia and Galicia, maybe Lviv/Lvov/Lwów/Lemberg as well, and tell the Russians and the rest of the world: "We don't really care where some damn Bolshevik drew lines on the map."
