20 February 2022
Russia is about to invade Or, the West could engage in diplomacy. These days the idea is to "switch off" the target country using cyber and special op.s. - switch of comm.s, electricity, transport, poison Kiev and displace the govt and popn to Lviv.
The West can wait passively, do nothing, while Russia
wrecks Ukraine. Or, the West could engage in diplomatic process, except
there isn't one. There's some meeting on the 24th Feb, we'll see what that brings. Basically, it is America pursuing its policy from Wilson in 1916 where America said it would support Europe, all Europe, except Russia. This was before the Bolshevik revolution, note.
It is Ukraine that refused to implement the agreement that it signed at Minsk. It refused to devolve to its Russian east where that region could have a veto on membership of NATO. Waiting for this moment no doubt where it has corralled US involvement. The sanctions on Russia were for what reasons? So as in life, this is not a one-sided case of Russian agression.
A diplomatic process means negotiate and compromise - isn't this normal? It could lead to resolution where Russia takes its fangs out of Ukraine, Ukraine devolves to its regions, NATO withdraws because la king support. Why not? Is it because of reasons we are not being made aware of, beneath this deluge of "misinformation", ie propaganda, from both sides?
Final point. A victory, an outright victory, for the West would end Putin's days and probably would be the end of Russia as a cohesive, independent, sovereign power. Would Moscow suffer this without recourse to nuclear weapons? What would the world look life after this war? Very unlikely the West will prevail. Haven't we tried this before...and failed? Better to integrate as a trade partner (America would not appreciate this however.)










6 February 2022
Yes, that wasn't very well expressed, was it. Better to say "turn to", than "return to". It's about organising and directing Boris's undoubted talents, filling in the weaknesses.
Boris' pragmatism, shall we call it, has been very useful, and not just to him. What is needed now for the country to progress - and a possible second term for Boris as a matured leader - is steady, unfailing, value-based policy making. It's about values, instinct and conviction.
More trust, choice and freedom for the individual, less for the state. This is what really marks the difference between the West and totalitarian regimes in Eurasia and Asia. Important in the conflict to come. Boris is not a wilderness politician though.
Now although Johnson is short on principles, the hope is that the massive campaigning skills, enthusiasm and his will to get things done, can be more properly channelled with the sense of deep conviction and long-term purpose these new guys on his team can bring.
So we get the idea - strengthen up the values and integrity, keep the campaigning and leadership.