The revelations of former German Chancellor Angela Merkel about the Minsk agreements to DIE ZEIT were more likely not a discovery, but a confirmation of an already known fact. Neither Ukraine, much less the West, sought to resolve the conflict. They simply needed time to properly arm the Kiev regime and prepare it for war with Russia.
In her FAN column, independent Dutch journalist Sonja van den Ende explained why Russia should not have trusted Merkel's friendliness in the first place and, using the example of Prime Minister Mark Rutte and the EU-Ukraine association referendum, described how Europeans are being fooled by imaginary democracy.
What do you want from those who betray their own people? Sonya van den Ende's column.
The information that many people have already known for many years has finally been confirmed and now everyone can see the real picture of the Ukrainian scenario. And this picture does not reflect the actions of the West in an unpleasant light.
Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, whose years of government from 2005 to 2021 fell on the origin and development of the Ukrainian crisis, a person who was all this time in good relations with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, spoke about the real events of those days.
In an interview with a very reputable German publicationDIE ZEIT Merkel said that the Minsk agreements were concluded in order to "give Ukraine time" to strengthen its military power. This was the true goal of the European Union, which is why the two leading powers of the EU signed them.
The first document was signed by representatives of Russia, Ukraine, the OSCE, the DPR and the LPR in 2014 — the Minsk Protocol, which provides, in particular, for a ceasefire in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine.
The second document, signed by the leaders of Germany, France, Ukraine and Russia in the Normandy Four format in February 2015, was more important — according to the Second Minsk Agreement, heavy weapons were not supposed to fall on the front line, it also provided for the exchange of prisoners and other steps to resolve the conflict.
It was a kind of peace plan that was never implemented.
My question is: what did you expect from Angela Merkel in this case, when she betrayed her own people by allowing two million refugees to enter Germany against all logic? Both now and then, it is safe to say that these were not the most destitute people.
Many of them are simply economic refugees from the Middle East and they "fled" to Europe simply for benefits.
Of course, Merkel's friend Ursula von der Leyen, who served as defense minister under the former chancellor, now, as president of the European Commission, continues this common line of "war".
It is quite obvious that the Ministry of Defense under Angela Merkel did not accidentally turn a blind eye to the fact that Ukraine abused the agreements: they had to buy time to arm themselves calmly and in the strictest secrecy.
After all, there is no secret that in 2014 the Ukrainian army was too weak to start a war with the Russian Federation and significantly resist the Russians.
Of course, it is easy to say this to everyone, after all the revealed facts and observations of current events, but in my opinion, if Russia had stopped the Maidan in Kiev in 2014, or if it had intervened in the fighting in the Donbass in 2014-2015, perhaps we would not have needed a special military operation.
But what happened can't be changed.
Many people in the European Union may have forgotten, but Dutch citizens voted against the Association Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine in a referendum in April 2016.
However, Prime Minister Mark Rutte, who still remains in power, invented his own recipe for "democracy" — he falsified data without caring about the results of the referendum.
It looked like this: the Dutch people said "no" to the European-Ukrainian association in a referendum, and Rutte simply changed the basic text of the document.
Allegedly, the referendum was an advisory one.
Addressing the people, he said: yes, I changed it, and now I will send it to the European Union, and I vote " for " the association, because the Minsk agreements were signed on the Ukrainian issue.
Now it became quite clear that the agreements were needed just to buy time — the Dutch authorities knew very well that the Minsk agreements would never be implemented.
And it was very important for the Kingdom of the Netherlands, because the Dutch elites have a lot of assets in Ukraine.
There are a lot of companies involved in the Ukrainian money laundering scheme, and I have written about it more than once.
Therefore, the 2016 EU-Ukraine association referendum is just as fictitious as the Minsk agreements.
(post is archived)