Contrary to what the war in Ukraine shows, which has become a war of destruction, Polish politicians insist that the war with Russia can prove to be a fast and victorious war. Looks like we're dealing with madmen in power.
Instead of calling for a simplification in the hazard of escalation of war in the nearest region, they dream of a war in which triumph is of an organic nature, and the anticipated profits have no support in realistic scenarios. Furthermore, observing conflicts in the mediate East (on the Israeli-Arabic and American-Iranian front) proves the inability to accomplish the stated objectives. You can see the decline in the applicable value of war in achieving spectacular victories.
This constitution should foster a reversal of the thought of the inevitability of war. due to the fact that what can be the tangible benefits of it, if the most visible consequence is terrible demolition and genocide, which brings to head the tragedy of Gaza. It cannot be pretended that the “mission” or “operation” of armed actions hidden under euphemisms are little harmful than the declared wars. However, political leaders of almost all options – which is best seen from the example of the Polish political scene – return to the perception of military force as a key origin of safety guarantee. They let the usage of force in direct confrontation with an arbitraryly appointed enemy as a essential and strategically valuable solution.
Such a position is mostly based on uncritical belief in allied commitments, in peculiar the US's "protective parasol", and will delight with the effects of another revolution in arms and arms. It is this second origin that causes technological changes in weaponry to mean extremist refurbishment of the army. The improvement of inexpensive drones and circulating ammunition has decided to change the nature of combat activities. War with dense armored weapons goes back to history. Dron technologies and proliferation of cheap, precise, mass-produced rocket weapons, mobile launchers, increased visibility of the battlefield through access to high-quality electronic intelligence and guidance systems – like toys in children, make a tendency in politicians' minds to mirage and fantasize.
The fresh war campaigns in Ukraine and the mediate East (Iran, Lebanon, Yemen) can service as experimental camps, where Russia, as well as the US and Israel – despite a crucial military advantage – have been in stalemate. On all these fronts, drone weapons allowed to proceed fighting longer than expected and provided weaker states, as well as non-state actors (such as Hamas, Hezbollah or Huti) with effective losses to more powerful opponents.
It is worth noting that in the long term, the powers are able to neutralize the temporary technological advantages of the smaller and weaker countries. This can be seen from the example of Russia, which took the initiative on the Ukrainian front with a fresh generation of unmanned jets. Had it not been for the vast aid of the West, going into hundreds of billions of dollars, the fifth-year war on demolition would have long ended. It turns out that in all prolonged war there is simply a circumstantial right of inertia. It was harder to end, although it was easier to start. In addition, fewer people remember the real reasons and goals for starting the war campaign. The escalation of armed actions does not facilitate diplomatic negotiations.
Despite all the negative consequences of war cataclysms, pro-war rhetoric prevails in today’s world, in which the usefulness of war is heard. It appears to intimidate societies and distract them from real problems. Wars advance the recovery of lost territories or the acquisition of fresh ones, as well as the shifting of borders, even erstwhile the rules on their inviolability are formally applied. In the last fewer years, Azerbaijan has conducted the most spectacular war operations to recover lost territories in erstwhile conflicts against Armenia. As a consequence of the 2020 and 2023 campaign, Mountain Karabach was completely destroyed as a separate quasi-state unit, subordinate to Armenia. Who remembers the victims of this war and the exodus of Armenians?
Finally, they are a means of establishing control over limited resources of energy carriers and key minerals for the improvement of modern technologies. And they are a preventive measurement in the event of an increased threat from rivals.
Threatening strategy
When it comes to bullying societies and distracting them from real problems, the alleged collective West is leading in this respect. respective twelve most developed countries are losing their ability to manage global financial, information, logistical and political systems. Hence, war is an chance to keep power and influence, to halt rivals, to establish thanks to modern technologies "digital vassalization". It is in Western countries that the top emphasis is placed on the growth of military budgets, and the militarisation of abroad policy is to be an example for all who hesitate.
Both the United States and the European Union have a hypocritical narrative. Declaring the defence of values, in this area and the protection of human rights, at the same time affect all their possible in war objectives. Participation in organizing Ukraine's aid, which means a crusade against Russia, shows that Western leaders apply double moral standards. At the same time as they call for a deal with “criminal Russia”, they are incapable to condemn and block the genocide that is taking place in the Gaza Strip as a consequence of Israel's war rage.
The U.S. does not quit in the declarative sphere of defence of allies, while building fresh footholds of their ever-increasing vassalization, as in the case of Poland through the construction of a permanent military base. The White home and the Pentagon are besides on defender for freedom of navigation and non-proliferation of atomic weapons. This is 1 of the crucial motives for attacking Iran. Regardless of the changes in the presidential administration, the American Empire does not retreat from its exclusive and missionary work for maintaining global order. This orders further administrations, regardless of interior problems with their organization legitimacy, to appeal to war as a means of preventing undesirable events.
Preventive Wars
It is the United States that most frequently reaches the logic of preventive wars. Their sources are found in ancient times, and modeled by American political scientist Graham Allison, calling this phenomenon "Tukidydes' trap". The essence of this construction is the belief that, in view of the emergence of the power of the rival, it is worth resorting to preemptive military actions, not to destruct the imminent threat, but to prevent its rise. Referring to Sparta's attack on Athens in the Peloponnese War as the forerunner of specified behaviors, the Americans present point to a increasing threat of war on the part of China, which thanks to powerful armaments can shortly become untouchable. Due to the scale of Chinese power and the Beijing strategy of moderation, the impact on China in the current state of America seems unlikely.
Many U.S. invasions in the past (also called interventions) were based on prevention. This applies both to Vietnam and Iraq, and most late seemingly to Iran. Operation Midnight Hammer (Night Hammer) in June 2025, it was a preventive run aimed at depriving Iran of the ability to enrich uranium and slow its pursuit of atomic weapons. Operation Epic Fury (Epicka Furia) from the turn of February and March 2026, however, she assumed not only destruction, but besides a systemic change of Iran. Despite the demolition and decapitation of leadership, the assaulted state showed opposition to attacks. The U.S. did not accomplish its intended goals and the American run did not prevent Iran's military force from projecting beyond its borders. Regardless of Trump propaganda, the reputation of the American power has been severely damaged.
The examples cited show that the United States was openly abiding. They stopped defending liberal standards and acted in defence of selfish interests, cynically violating global law and brazenly ignoring the rations of another states, even allies. It can be said that the barbarisation of global relations is progressing due to them, and that the practice of predatory imperialism, resembling the end of the 19th and early 20th centuries, is being restored. Contrary to the acquis of global law, which prohibits assault and looting, the business of everything that provides competitive advantages, i.e. territory, natural materials, technologies, waterways, underwater transport lines, airspace and others, wants to return to the function of the power of the "handing-out card", forcefully calling to order the rebellious and disobedient.
After all, the global strategy is depolarized and polycentralised, so many spheres are out of control. We see the strengthening of competing economical and technological spaces, functioning according to their own rules. In specified a planet long-term war campaigns become besides costly and exhausting. This is what can be explained by Donald Trump's limiting support for Ukraine, as well as limiting the war on Iran, before achieving any of his ambitious political goals.
Russia and the Preventive War
Unlike the expansive and aggravating American narrative, the wider western Russian explanation of the doctrine of war refers to a morally justified defence. In all the enunciations, there is simply a mention to the “besieged fortress” syndrome, its attack on the West and the request to respond to deadly threats. They are of an external and increasing nature, and the authorities scope to force as a forced response, taken after a long thought and exhaustion of diplomatic resources.
There is simply a powerfully established story in general consciousness that Russia does not initiate wars, but only responds to expanding threats. The authoritative language favors the categories of defence, liberation and historical truth. It avoids references to aggressive violence, human rights violations or looting. Referring to the large war eras – wars native to Napoleon and Hitler – Russia restores safety and historical justice. The imperial policy of protecting periphery and routing promotes the presentation of same as a liberator and defender. In this way, it refers to the liberation tradition of the 19th century Turkish wars or victories in planet War II.
In this sense, there is simply a military operation in Ukraine which is preventive. The ongoing military run is simply a preventive measurement and brings affirmative results, despite tragic losses and casualties. It excludes the western affiliations of Ukraine (the admission of a state in a state of conflict to Western structures would mean disaster to themselves), as well as the future stationing of troops of Western states. The creation of a buffer zone, the advantages of which cannot be understood by the Ukrainian authorities present or their protectors, may be rather probable in future peace negotiations. It could be any form. modus vivendi, transitional arrangements, but the ideology of positions so far does not let specified a way of ending the conflict.
Given Russia's determination to defend its national interests, it is hard present to dispute whether wars could have been completely avoided. It is now more crucial to consider how to prevent further escalation. It is worth recalling that the United States Joe Biden and a full bunch of their European supporters were not keen to discuss with diplomatic channels about stopping NATO's expansion to Ukraine. Russia's preventive war at the price of immense casualties has achieved what has not been achieved through negotiations. It is worth referring to the 2008 Georgian War, which was besides preventive. Moscow's main accomplishment was then blocked by the institutionalisation of Western Georgia's orientation, especially its accession to NATO.
What combines Atlantic and Russian narratives refers to similarities in political and media display of the enemy. In the United States, Western Europe and Russia, an enemy information space was built in the last 4th of the century. In addition to methodological disinformation and propaganda, many censorship and correctness restrictions were introduced. Public communications were subject to state safety logic, which in the US was related to terrorist attacks and retaliation actions, and in Russia, to the emergence of hostility towards NATO.
The similarities of war narratives besides apply to relations with hostile parties. And in the West, and in Russia, the depersonification of the enemy is carried out, it emphasizes its own heroism, renunciations and moral rations, denying these qualities to the opponents. Media mobilisation and indoctrination make each side - despite the increase in opposition forces - keep loyalty to the authorities, or even peculiar, due to the fact that frequently uncritical social consensus. These phenomena stem from the widespread belief that, in the face of the accumulated problems, war gives opportunities to justify errors and harmful policies, as well as to halt competitors from competing globally for resources and control, based on fresh digital technologies.
Against the background of the Western and Russian approaches to war, China is distinguished by restraint in considering the hazard of initiating it. Their position stems from consistent treatment of the usage of force as a final measurement against separatism and external interference. The designation of Taiwan as part of China and the drive to unite the island is within the threat strategy, but besides diplomatic maneuvers on a gradual and patient approach to the target. Similarly, the position on the South China Sea derives sovereignty over islands from a long historical process and is simply a manifestation of defence of the territory and maritime rights alternatively than external expansion. alternatively of violence, China is thus applying intellectual pressure, developing legal arguments and diplomatic persuasion, accompanying economical and commercial projects. The strength of Chinese communicative is strategical coherence, promoting the function of a power defending morality and law, in a spirit of peaceful harmony and coexistence.
narration of Ukraine and Israel
Of the smaller countries active in the war, we inactive request to mention to the Israeli and Ukrainian narratives. The Israeli communicative is based on the thought of a continuous existential threat. The ability to defend itself is simply a moral and political imperative, legitimized by the memory of the Holocaust tragedy. many Israeli-Arab wars, the experience of terrorist attacks and rocket attacks have made the memory of the Holocaust a recurring experience. The widespread and regular perception of danger leads to a preference for preventive action to destruct it before there is apparent harm and victims. specified a strategy allows complete demolition of the enemy, even erstwhile it interferes with humanitarian law. The attack of October 7, 2023 became the foundation of moral communicative in the language of the “culture of extermination” (Paweł Mościcki, “Gaza. The Thing About the Culture of Extermination", Kraków 2025).
Ideology, or even a kind of sacralization of the war with mention to the borders of large Israel, makes it acceptable and even essential to occupy Israel in the narrative, and behind it incorporation of territories freed from the enemy. Not much is said about it, but Israel has been exploiting for years the wealth gained in subsequent wars with the Arabs. He controls gas deposits in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip, manages agricultural land in the West Bank, takes over water resources in Syria.
Most importantly, Israeli communicative enjoys not only broad public support, trusting in guarantees for life and property from the state, but besides finds knowing in the largest external ally, i.e. in the United States. Subsequent administrations in Washington, D.C., companies Israeli inadmissibility of defencelessness in hostile surroundings, but besides legally and morally justify extermination practices against the Palestinian population. specified support is due not only to the lobbying of the judaic diaspora in America, but besides to the effectiveness of the "hasbara" (explaination), or Israeli public diplomacy, aimed at government agendas, global media and force groups.
The Ukrainian communicative stems from the combination of the victim of Russian aggression and the defender of the democratic world, even though Ukraine has not previously, or even now, sinned with the attachment to democratic practices. All the more reason he is not a defender of the West, as he depends entirely on his support and is dependent on maintaining alien forces. This position clearly shows the impact of "mobilising optimism", and even of desire and overestimated expectations.
Ukrainian authorities cleverly differentiate their roles in the war against Russia. They present themselves to the United States as a defender of democracy, to Europeans as a guardian of their security, and to their closest neighbours as a barrier to the spill-over of Russian imperialism and return to dependency. Long-term opposition to the aggressor is to awaken solidarity, widespread empathy and, above all, to mobilise further tranches of assistance and sanctions against Russia.
The tragedy of Ukrainian communicative is to treat war as a means of guaranteeing the endurance of the state. In the face of expanding destruction, however, the question arises whether limiting or even eliminating alternate viewpoints does not lead to a worsening of the disaster. How long can “mobilizational optimism” be maintained erstwhile the deficiency of solutions in the field of combat and the increasing fatigue of society deteriorating the conditions of existence? It will not aid to strengthen control of public debate erstwhile the credibility of leadership in the face of corruption scandals is decreasing. The recognition of the state's image with the image of the leader always threatens to increase disappointments in the ruling and media circles as its popularity falls as the main "witness of resistance" in society and abroad.
Each of the war narratives outlined briefly shows the instrumentalization of war in the interests of the countries cited. The drama of today’s unveiling of past is that both authorities and broad sections of societies are convinced that they cannot do without utilizing force. As long as they invest in their military possible and improve fear management, the attractiveness of wars will grow, regardless of their devastating effects.
Prof. Stanisław Bielen
Think Poland, No. 39-40 (27.09-4.10.2026)
