Zelensky’s peace-plan calls for Ukraine to replace the U.S. as Europe’s ‘protector’.

27 October 2024, by Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)

A very fine historian, Roman Shumov, who earlier had presented at RT News the best summary I’ve yet seen of the breakup of Yugoslavia, has published on October 24th at RT News the most comprehensive article that I have seen on the “Victory Plan” that Ukraine’s leader, Volodmyr Zelensky, has been trying unsuccessfully to sell to the Governments of the U.S. and in the EU. (The Governments of UK and of Denmark were the only ones that wanted to comply with Zelensky’s plan, but the permission from U.S. President Joe Biden was necessary in order to allow that; and, so, — at least until America’s November 5th elections — even those two countries won’t be able to comply with it.)

Zelensky’s plan has never yet been made public, but a number of articles have been published about it from well-informed sources, and the only thing that Shumov’s article adds to its details is his interpretation — which seems to me to be a very credible one — of Zelensky’s public statement that “We envisage, if the partners agree, to replace certain military contingents of the armed forces of the United States of America, which are stationed in Europe, with Ukrainian units.” Shumov’s reading of that statement is:

Point five: Deprive the US of control over Western Europe

Finally, the fifth point of the plan is quite intriguing: Zelensky suggests that the Armed Forces of Ukraine may guarantee the security of Western Europe in the future, and even replace US troops in the region. 

This isn’t entirely foolish — after all, Ukraine is currently one of the only [he probablhy meant “one of the few”] countries in the world aside from Russia with firsthand experience of modern warfare against an equally powerful adversary. This isn’t the same as battling a weak, crumbling army like Saddam Hussein’s troops, or insurgents in Afghanistan.

However, for the US, the military is a tool of political dominance, and it’s hard to imagine that it would hand that power over to Ukraine.

Though the world’s press has received nothing specifically to elucidate what Zelensky was referring to by his cryptic statement, one may reasonably assume that when Zelensky on September 26th at the White House met privately with Joe Biden and his intended successor Kamal Harris to describe the details of his plan, Biden and/or Harris would have grilled him for the details on what precisely he had meant by that point. Because, even what Zelensky had said publicly about the 5th point of his 5-point plan would be difficult to square with an interpretation of Zelensky as NOT being hostile toward America’s current role as being the nuclear guarantor of its European allies. Both Biden and Harris have been very public that America’s leadership of NATO must continue and that NATO must continue to grow and spread America’s empire, “The West.”

The main question that this situation reasonably presents is: When Russia does finally get Ukraine’s surrender, will the United States Government be willing to protect Zelensky in exile if he will have emerged that long as being still alive? And, if not, then what nation WILL be protecting him after Ukraine surrenders?

PS: If you like this article, please email it to all your friends or otherwise let others know about it. None of the U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media will likely publish it (nor link to it, since doing that might also hurt them with Google or etc.). I am not asking for money, but I am asking my readers to spread my articles far and wide, because I specialize in documenting what the Deep State is constantly hiding. This is, in fact, today’s samizdat.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.