“We will not invade Ukraine”, “We will not invade Ukraine”, “We will not invade Ukraine” These three words I have heard countless times in different languages cause in Russia to the world media.
These denials came in the shadow of Western intelligence about a possible Russian invasion of Ukraine. This intelligence was led by the leaders of the United States and Britain, Biden and Johnson. On the other hand, in French intelligence for example, they were in no hurry to estimate that Russia would indeed invade. But it happened and Russia invaded Ukraine about 100 days ago. The Russians to some extent.However, the face of the world has changed, and the status of many countries has changed.
In a special review of the Shabbat Square project, we examined the status of prominent and interesting leaders from around the world, East and West whose status was affected by the invasion.
United States – Joe Biden
If there is anyone who has cried out all along the script of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and is accurate despite all the denials it is US President Joe Biden.
In about half a year there will be mid-term elections to Congress, and Biden knows that the chances of losing the majority are very likely, which could very well limit reforms he would like to ratify.
Biden’s unpopularity in public opinion polls (only 35-40 percent support) causes him to place more emphasis on the Ukrainian issue – in which he somehow manages to function, in contrast to the rampant inflation in the country for example.
Zlansky with US President Biden on Better Days Visiting the White House (White House)
A poll by the Washington Post found that only 14 percent of Americans think Biden is giving too much aid to Ukraine. In addition, polls show that Biden supports Ukraine just as the Americans would like. If, for example, he had chosen to intervene militarily in Ukraine, the political cost to him would probably have been heavy.
The war seems to be only improving Biden’s status, a status he particularly needs in the shadow of the upcoming midterm elections. The question of whether this will indeed provide in the shadow of rampant inflation in the US.
India – Narendra Modi
Eat the cake and leave it whole? It’s not impossible, but it’s very, very difficult. Only a few around the world have managed to maintain relative neutrality – with great difficulty.
Since the invasion of Ukraine Moody refuses to come out a buffer against the invasion of Ukraine and he knows perfectly well why. Yes, he still maintains a great open channel with Ukraine but why should he help Ukraine if he can help himself and India.
Moody understands – a reduction or complete cessation of the flow of Russian oil to Europe and the West means the ability to buy from Russia oil and other products at ‘landlord’s crazy prices.
Putin and Modi (Shatterstock)
In addition, over the years, the West has taken India a bit for granted. Now, India is taking a position that annoys the West a bit, but the West has no choice but to try to persuade India to side with the West.
This created a situation in which since the invasion Modi hosted Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, and went on a political campaign throughout Europe and met with senior Western leaders. Everyone wants India’s support.
The situation created by Modi is completely different from the situation in which Israel and Turkey are trying to maintain a relatively neutral status as negotiators. Turkey and Israel are completely dependent on the West, each for its own reasons – allowing the West to press for support of Ukraine, something that is impossible to do for Moody and the Indians.
China – Xi Jinping
Unlike India, China sets a more pro-Russian line, and it is understandable. China is trying to establish an economic infrastructure similar to that of the United States – but why would Europe cooperate if it is already connected to American systems?
For example, after the decision to cut off large banks in Russia from the Swift system, the President of China called the President of Russia and offered to connect Russia to a similar system – made in China.
True, China also has red lines and their support for Russia does not reach the dimensions of Syria (come on, it has already become a Russian province) – and still does.
Eastern Alliance? Shay, Putin and Moody (Shatterstock)
And let’s not forget Xi Jiffing, who has since been appointed President of Communist China almost a decade ago, Xi tried to portray the United States as the mother of all evil and only he can fight it and defeat it – even in the trade war. So how can Shai reach out to the Chinese people and say we prefer to be neutral? After all, Shai is the great fighter against the West – and must automatically support Russia.
(Shatterstock)
In conclusion, China supports Russia, but with borders. At the same time, China has a lot of interests vis-à-vis Russia – commercial, political, along with the personal interest of the Chinese president.
United Kingdom – Boris Johnson
Just last week, the findings of the quarantine report were released at the British Prime Minister’s residence.
Calls for Johnson to resign are growing – and like US President Biden, his domestic problems take precedence over leading the discourse to war in Ukraine.
Johnson and French President Macron (Shatterstock)
It is not known what Johnson’s political future is, but in the history of Ukraine he will be remembered as the leader who drew the hardest line against Russia following the invasion – both in speech and deeds.
Even the militant opposition in Britain almost always supports Johnson’s tough steps in Ukraine – which only encourages him to continue to support the Ukrainians.
France – Emanuel Macron
If we divide the coalition of countries that support Ukraine into two parts, we will find in the first part the United States and Britain, which have a hard line with the Russians, and on the other side, we see France and Germany, which are very hesitant about supporting Ukraine and afraid of the consequences.
French President Macron responded to Putin’s threats to invade and later invade in the shadow of a presidential election – and the truth is, Macron would have preferred not to try to be a world leader but to focus on France’s internal problems, as the war in Ukraine did not stop him from the first moment.
Macron and Putin (Shatterstock)
For example, the head of intelligence in the French army treated with contempt the possibility that Russia would indeed invade Ukraine, in contrast to British and American intelligence.
This led Macron to talk to Putin non-stop in an attempt to mediate against Ukraine. Hours after the meeting with Macron, Putin announced recognition of separatist territories in Ukraine, the first step toward the invasion. Macron had nowhere to take the insult he inflicted on himself and France.
And he did not stop and throughout the months of the invasion of Ukraine he continued to try and pressure Putin, with almost no success. Truth be told, Macron’s steps seem to have puzzled European and Western leaders.
Israel – Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid
Well, you probably already know the answer to Israel’s question. A prime minister without too much internal legitimacy alongside a foreign minister who over the years has tried to show that Israel should act not only in realism, but also out of a place of values. Now he had to keep his word.
While Bennett tried to position himself as a world leader who could mediate between Russia and Ukraine, Lapid apparently gritted his teeth not to go out against Russia.
At the end of the day, Turkey became a mediator and removed Israel from the role of mediator, which left Israel under atomic pressure from the West to support Ukraine.
Torch had no problem condemning – but in Ukraine they pressed and pressed to provide them with weapons and an iron dome. In Israel, as of this writing, they were content with shipping helmets. Very pathetic – but does the war in Ukraine really affect Israel, which is surrounded by its own problems? Good question.
• Like the ‘News’ Facebook page and stay up to date
Germany – Olaf Schultz
About an hour after the invasion of Ukraine, longing began for former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who had served in the post for many years: “She is the only one who could have resolved this crisis,” many said.
And that’s true to some extent. Merkel was indeed an excellent statesman and knew how to resolve many conflicts, but it is doubtful that she would have prevented a war. What is interesting is whether she would have behaved in such critical moves as the new Chancellor Schultz and the new Secretary of State Barbrook.
With Merkel it was different? (Office of the President of Ukraine)
Schultz and Barbock really had a hard time fully supporting Ukraine, in part due to Germany’s dependence on Russian gas – but eventually announced the cancellation of the Nord Stream 2 joint gas pipeline project, causing enormous economic damage to Russia but also to Germany itself.
Be that as it may, Germany is now tethered to Ukraine, but far from taking a line similar to that of the United States or Britain.