Why We Should Re-read History Lessons

With the Russian-Ukrainian conflict entering its tenth month, the lack of any hope for a diplomatic or military solution, and the arrival of all parties to a dead end, it has become clear that this war has become a game of finger-biting, not between Russia and Ukraine, but between Russia and NATO and the countries that revolve in its orbit.

As for Ukraine as a state, it is a minor detail. No one cares about the scale of its destruction or the number of its refugees. Rather, the West must defeat Russian willpower now and forever in a war of depleting human, natural and political resources as shown by the departure of two British prime ministers, as well as the fall of Pakistan's Imran Khan and so on.

Moreover, there is lack of a political vision in dealing with the Ukrainian crisis, in conjunction with a Ukrainian president with no political experience who does not question Western intentions and motives encouraging him to wage war, and who has an unwavering belief in his ability to defeat Russia. He didn't even pause to consider why the West forbids him from bombing targets inside Russian territory. Moreover, why, even before investigations began, was Biden so quick to deny Russia's targeting of Polish lands? The reason is because the West seeks to drain Russia without engaging in military operations, the President of Ukraine serves as a Trojan horse which the West rides and controls.

The West, on the other hand, is certain that pushing Russia to the brink of nuclear war is tantamount to pressing the nuclear button, which has no mercy or consolation for the helpless world.

So, we must re-read history for the sake of Ukraine and the world, learning from its lessons and absorbing its wisdom, because history does not lie.

When the Treaty of Versailles was signed after the German-led axis surrendered in World War I, and the peace conference was held in 1919 in the Palace of Versailles on the outskirts of Paris, it ended with a reasonable treaty for Germany's surrender.  However, the Allies decided that this was insufficient, so the treaty was amended in 1920 to force Germany to pay compensation for the Allies' losses in the war. As a result, Germany experienced depression and economic crises, which aided Hitler's ascension to the throne and heralded the start of World War II.

Isn't this reminiscent of the West's statements about not allowing Russia to achieve a military victory and the threat to seize Russian funds in the West to fund Ukraine's reconstruction? What's the point? So, did the West follow the plan of Kissinger, the Fox of American Politics, following the October 1973 war and his declaration that the Arabs would not be allowed to use oil as a weapon again and would be forced to drink it if they did? As a result, America rushed to stockpile oil in strategic warehouses, while Europe turned to Russia to rely on Russian oil and gas via pipelines to ensure its flow in all conditions.

No one considered the possibility of a Russian-Ukrainian war, which would halt oil supplies and force the West to rely on Arab energy sources without blinking an eye at the failure of their plans and require the Russians to sell their oil to Europe for no more than a low price ceiling of sixty dollars.

Of course, the shipping companies, the majority of which are owned by Europe, will be compelled not to carry Russian oil if the price of a barrel exceeds sixty dollars, forcing the Third World to open its markets to their goods and using the International Monetary Fund as a cover for their economic greed while denying their colonial ambitions under the guise of free trade.

Despite the weak infrastructure of most Third World economies, it appears that Third World countries are doomed to apply market policies whenever the West wants, but this is only political hypocrisy.

While the Third World is suffering from the consequences of the Ukrainian-Russian war, the West did not attempt to compensate the weak countries whose economies are on the verge of collapse due to high fuel prices, the difficulty of obtaining adequate alternatives to Ukrainian grain, and the shrinking of Western aid due to economic crises no less severe than those experienced by the Third World. So the Europeans began to complain to their governments about their situation and the people are ready to revolt if they don't get their afternoon tea with Black Forest cake.

As a result, we are facing a conflict between elephants which will break the glass, that is, the Third World and of course Ukraine. Unless America forces Ukraine to bear the burdens of war and begin a political process that begins with a mandatory review of history lessons, China will grow stronger, the multipolar world will return, Russia will further engage in the military conflict, and the Ukrainian people will spend a harsh winter without a clear goal.