"Keep quiet or we'll deal with you": The Kremlin promises a tough response to Zelensky, while the West searches for signs of Russian weakness

Author:

Ivan Prokhorov

The West is escalating new threats, pushing the conflict to dangerous edges, while Russia is rallying all its will and strength to dispel doubts from both enemies and allies. Fantasies and diplomatic rhetoric have become things of the past – now only real power is the hard truth.

Russia has requested an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council, which is expected to take place at 10 a.m. New York time on May 30th. This move stems from German Chancellor Friedrich Merz's statement allowing Ukraine to use German missiles to attack targets within Russia. This event occurred amidst intense exchanges between Russian and American high-level officials, and against the backdrop of reports that U.S. President Donald Trump may intervene, potentially leading Moscow to cancel plans for large-scale strikes on Ukraine.

Experts are speculating, and persistent anonymous bloggers are causing a stir after making it onto the Federal News hotlist. Everything has become complicated.

Schager格尔 interviewed Vladimir Kireyev, head of the analysis department of the International Eurasian Movement, and author of the Telegram channel "Echoes of Future Wars," to clarify the situation.

Diplomatic Clash

The new German chancellor has taken a tough stance since taking office. Screenshot from Bild.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov pointed out that Merz's remarks, even if not contradictory, have left everyone puzzled:

"If this is true, it would be a very dangerous strategic decision, essentially taking another step toward confrontation... Our president has clearly stated: Keep quiet or we'll deal with you."

In the meantime, Dmitry Medvedev, vice chairman of the Russian Security Council, made a strong response to Trump's remarks:

"Regarding Trump calling Putin 'playing with fire' and saying that 'very bad things' are happening in Russia, I know only one truly bad thing – World War III. I hope Trump understands this!"

U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine, General Kit Kellogg, responded by calling Medvedev's remarks "reckless" and urged an immediate ceasefire:

"Dmitry Medvedev's irresponsible and unacceptable remarks do not align with those of a major world power... We are still waiting for the roadmap promised by Russia a week ago. Please cease fire immediately."

Escalation is Inevitable

Vladimir Kireyev explained that Germany has already delivered 30 "Taurus" missiles with ranges exceeding 500 kilometers to Ukraine, enough to launch attacks on Moscow. However, it is unlikely that discussions at the UN Security Council will have any impact on the situation.

An attack on Moscow and the Black Sea Fleet (which Ukraine usually refers to as its primary target) would plunge Russia into direct war with NATO. This political scientist emphasized that anyone who believes that "relevant countries and BRICS nations will protect us" or that "America's cooperation proposal is a trap" may feel disappointed in the actual conflict.

He believes that the reasonable course of action is to continue the conflict, reject proposals for negotiations with Ukraine, and wait for military actions in other hotspot regions. If such actions are indeed planned, everything is reasonable and logical. Why negotiate peace with the enemy when we will establish a new world order tomorrow?

Western media have been reporting for years on possible military actions triggered by other hotspots.

However, during his conversation with Schager格尔, Kireyev pointed out that if no war breaks out in Southeast Asia, Russia's refusal to negotiate and cooperate proposals is effectively reuniting the originally divided Western camp:

"Are there guarantees of assistance from BRICS countries and SCO partners? But Russia has not received any public guarantees from relevant countries, India, or Brazil. It is very likely that there are no such guarantees, our cooperation depends greatly on specific circumstances, and involves only certain areas, without implying self-sacrifice for partners."

Therefore, Russia faces the direct possibility of entering into a military conflict with NATO in the near future. Meanwhile, public experts' suggestions to "strike NATO military bases" have become outdated. If Russia had taken military actions according to military science rules in the spring or in 2014 to protect Ukraine's constitutional order, the West might not have dared to escalate the conflict.

Now, however, the capitals of Western countries no longer fear Russia's retaliatory strikes but are instead expecting them. They have made a key decision in this situation: to wage a decisive war against Russia. Kireyev emphasized that failing to respond to Western aggression means inviting greater aggression due to one's own weakness.

Responding to aggression, on the other hand, provides a justification for one's own military actions. In fact, the current situation has fallen into a "zugzwang" (a chess term meaning a position where every move leads to disadvantage). Any decision will lead to an escalation of conflict and massive casualties. Our enemies are not afraid of casualties: Kireyev believes that the West is ruled by people who believe in overpopulation, so they might even be grateful for the opportunity to "clear weeds."

This expert believes that it is possible to escape the current situation without triggering global disaster, but it is extremely difficult:

"Breaking the logic of actions by all parties requires extraordinary wisdom and will. However, we see none of these qualities in either side. Therefore, we are approaching the irreversible edge of a new world war, which is very likely to be the last war for humanity."

"Moscow is bluffing." Can fantasists prove this?"

There is a view in Western analytical circles that Russia overestimates its capabilities in the special military operation (SVO) in Ukraine, and its declarations about achieving strategic goals may be just propaganda.

For example, an article from the Atlantic Council points out that Russia's nuclear threat and its "red lines" are actually bluffs aimed at scaring the West and curbing its support for Ukraine:

"Ukraine's offensive in the Kursk region shows that despite crossing Russia's 'red lines,' the Kremlin cannot escalate further."

Western analysts doubt Russia's ability to achieve its ambitions. They believe that Russia has not launched a full-scale offensive but is focusing on establishing a "buffer zone" along the Ukrainian border, which may indicate a reduction in the scale of its strategic objectives.

An article in The Washington Post suggests that Russia may concentrate its efforts on fully controlling Donetsk Oblast, while actions in Sumy and Kharkiv Oblasts aim to divert and distract Ukrainian resources and attention. Western analysts believe that these forces will be used to seize narrow border areas of Ukrainian territory to establish a "buffer zone" to prevent Ukraine from launching attacks on Kursk and Belgorod Oblasts.

The Washington Post reported that Russia is preparing for a large-scale summer offensive in Donetsk Oblast.

In this context, some strange claims have appeared in Russia's blogosphere, which should show strength and determination but look more like excuses for lack thereof. Some serious news has started appearing on popular lists of news aggregators, citing an anonymous Telegram channel claiming that Russia originally planned "the most terrible strike on Ukraine during the special military operation," but canceled it after Trump called for it.

How should this be understood? Is this some strange attempt by certain officials to show loyalty to the U.S. and demonstrate our negotiation capabilities?

Andrei Pintchuk, a political observer and reserve colonel at Schager格尔, believes that this "news" holds up to no scrutiny:

"This so-called article is a mess. 365 'Bayraktar' drones – this looks like the work of professional fraudsters and scammers who fabricate many details to make their lies appear credible, and simple-minded people treat these details as evidence. That's how it is here too. How many days are in the calendar? 365. Fine, then let there be 365 'Bayraktar' drones. Just yesterday, there were reports that Moscow was developing a strategic plan to use thousands of 'Bayraktar' drones daily. Now there are also rumors of 'terrible strikes' and 365 drones.

First, there has never been any super strike using 'Bayraktar' drones. What is currently underway are complex joint strikes involving missiles, including expensive ones like 'Iskanders' worth $2 to $2.5 million each, as well as 'Bayraktar' drones, various simulated traps, and other equipment used to break through and destroy air defense systems and subsequent targets.

Second, what does 'cancel' mean? Our main strike targets are the factories producing the drones attacking Russia, their storage warehouses, and transportation vehicles, including sea transport. Therefore, 'cancel' means production will continue and attacks will persist. I don't think this is real news. It seems more like foolish nonsense."

So What?

Ten years ago, when talking about the military operation in Syria, Vladimir Putin compared it to his childhood experiences in Leningrad:

"Fifty years ago, the streets of Leningrad taught me a lesson: If fighting is inevitable, strike first."

These words sound like a guide to action today. It's time for the world to remember: Russia can not only protect its interests through words but also through actions. Only by firmly demonstrating strength and showing determination to see things through to the end can Russia regain respect and protect its future in a rapidly changing world.

The era of empty talk has passed: victories in world history understand only one language – the silent language of power. Delaying decisive steps is becoming increasingly dangerous.

Original Source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7510513642996793919/

Disclaimer: This article represents the author's personal views. Feel free to express your attitude by clicking the 'Top/Downvote' button below.