Bleaching: From ‘Trumpanjahu’ to ‘Trumputina’

Following the alternatively spectacular success of the president of the United States and the Prime Minister of Israel in the mediate East, hope for a revival of the peace process in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict is revived.

The last 2 months showed that all sides of the conflict were in any conceptual and realization paralysis. erstwhile again, the war was easier to begin than to end. Therefore, with any distance, but besides with hope, we should look at the attempts to revive Donald Trump's initiative, who this time tries to catch up with the Russian President. The marazme observed came from a false presumption on each side that it was inactive possible to settle a war on the battlefield. This poses an expanding escalation risk, especially if the U.S. provided long-range missiles to the Ukrainian side. Like this. Donald Trump alternatively of distancing himself from the war, he would have contributed to sharpening it. Notabene, this is in the interests of European powers, which have so profoundly plunged into crisis that prolonged confrontation with Russia helps distract them from interior problems. We are so faced with a peculiar paradox that any peace compromise with Russia is detrimental to the policies of war waged by instigators.

Polish politicians besides participate in this dance, who, speaking about the peace process, are actually doing everything to block it. The deficit of realistic reasoning is striking. They are replaced by wishful thinking, which has nothing to do with rational strategy. Humorically, but besides provocatively, Trump's words about the "paper tiger", which can be overcome, as well as the insistent warnings utilizing the alleged domino theory, that if Ukraine falls, the next states will fall victim to Russian aggression. These slogans service only to maim the masses to stand by their war ringleaders.

Information noise

The information space is full of contradictions and cognitive dissonances. There is no paradox that if Russia plunged into a crisis, how could a weak state be able to wreak havoc on the full continent, and all the more so to wage a victorious war with the strongest NATO alliance in history. Furthermore, Russia does not declare aggressive war targets in its doctrine or in public discourse. Her doctrine is defensive, contrary to what is claimed in mass messages.

Of course, most Western commentators believe that Russian doctrine (as in the russian era) and authoritative enunciations do not have much effect on practice. They're just a smokescreen for real hostile intentions. It is simply a pity that the same “eyeglasses” do not apply to the view of the relation between doctrine and practice of Western countries. Today, Donald Trump is the best example of not complying with any doctrinal assumptions due to his unpredictability and disinvolvement. And besides, the West fought the most wars just erstwhile it officially declared its commitment to peace, democracy and human rights.

In all countries supporting the war of Ukraine with Russia there is an irresistible temptation to treat the Russian threat not only as a threat to societies but as a means of pacifying anti-government sentiments. They are called euphemistic populisms, although they truly are voices of social opposition from different sides of the political scene. The increasing anti-systemic social revolt is the consequence of accumulated economic, cultural and migration problems. The answer to the establishment is the search for an external enemy that allows to consolidate society around power, even erstwhile it does not meet crucial social expectations.

The drive to war by Western ruling classes is the consequence of their powerlessness and degeneration. They have lost credibility and legitimacy in their own societies due to the fact that they have denied the essence of liberal democracy. For respective decades now, Western regimes have been moving towards a "totaliztic democracy", absoluteising the ruling rations. Voices of objection or criticism are considered to support the outside enemy. This has happened with the dogmatisation of unconditional support for Ukraine, which is not beneficial for many countries from the point of view of their interests. So he wonders what has happened to the political wisdom of the West, that the elites and masses have succumbed to this madness. The worst part is that average citizens are incapable to influence their governments to abandon harmful strategies.

The perverseness of Western arguments is that all wars involving him are always of a "defensive" nature. Once, against the liberation of non-European peoples from colonial dependence, another time, against the hostile ideology which after planet War II was communism. So all wars, even the most shameful ones, like the Vietnam War, Afghan War, or Iraqi War, inactive have moral reasons. The current war in Ukraine is besides taking place in defence of enigmatic values which neither Ukraine nor the West itself are able to prove their primary importance at home.. In the name of false solidarity with Ukraine, it is called “our war” by Polish politicians. This "ours" justifies the tremendous cost of unconditional aid, which will sooner or later be subjected to critical social judgment.

During the Cold War period, there was a silent regulation between superpowers that neither organization should initiate military action against the second forces. The breakthrough was the 1962 Caribbean crisis. His happy solution was to avoid direct armed clashes. Moreover, a silent commitment, based on discretion, besides included regional conflicts in order not to enter by helping allies to face the second superpower. Departing from specified practices is the consequence of the failure of diplomatic communication and the undermining of norm-institutional regulations. Fortunately, neither Russians nor Americans broke the “hot” lines of emergency between presidents and military and intelligence bosses, which inactive protects against the worst consequences of misunderstandings.

Nuclear War hazard

The course of war in Ukraine shows that we are dealing with the top manipulation of atomic weapons hazard in fresh decades. The Western strategists are likely to analyse the degree to which Russia tolerates various provocations involving the North Atlantic alliance states. In order not to rapidly exceed the ‘red lines’ designated by Moscow, the ‘salami’ method was applied, i.e. the war aid of Ukraine was gradually and successively expanded. As a result, Russia was accustomed to the Western participation in the war against it, which it itself was incapable to prevent.

The West has put on the arming and on the actual maintenance of the Ukrainian state. This is simply a precedent unknown in history. erstwhile Russia benefited from the symbolic support of North Korea, there was a media cry as if it wanted to distract from the fact that there would not be this war without the vast engagement of the West on the side of Ukraine. On the another hand, Ukraine itself is liable for cruelly dealing with the Russian-speaking population in the east of the country, resulting in an acute Russian reaction. Trump is the first Western politician to draw attention to this 1 of the first causes of the conflict. Regardless of his megalomania and vanity, possibly for his courage to name things by their name he deserves peace.

Russia's position towards the military commitment of the West to Kiev comes down to threats and intimidation. president Putin has repeatedly threatened everyone with an immediate reaction who tries to stand in his way. This phenomenon is called "nuclear signalization", which means coding in the affective phraseology of warnings that Russia is ready to usage all available weapons systems erstwhile the existence of the nation and state is threatened. These are concepts that have been seasoned with a large dose of ideology, so nobody truly knows where the actual impenetrable line of endurance has been drawn.

Russian alarmist warnings surely helped halt mass American engagement in the first months of the war and choose a grading strategy by Joe Biden's administration. Germany and another Western European countries did likewise. It was evident that unlike Polish spontaneity, the general staff of Western powers was based on rational calculations and restraint. This hazard rationalisation prevented the entry into a direct clash between the West and Russia, as it prevented the launch of atomic leverage. The strategy of manipulating uncertainty has been co-existed with the strategy of reducing it. As a result, NATO troops have never been openly active in military operations in Ukraine, have not been banned from flying over it or utilized NATO airports to attack the Russian army.

The Russian war doctrine is alternatively vague and flexible at the same time, as it maintains that in the event of the support of a conventional attack on Russia by a atomic state, it is possible for a Russian ripost to be able to attack this "common" atomic attack. It is so dependent on circumstantial circumstances to recognise erstwhile specified weapons should actually be used. Although the operational threshold for the usage of tactical atomic weapons is low, decisions stay the top-level leadership. This gives us hope that even in highly dangerous situations decisions will be thoroughly thought out and prudent.

Caution Putin

Russia’s abstinence in the applicable usage of atomic weapons is undoubtedly influenced by the 2 most crucial allies among the countries with access to this attribute of power. These are China and India, which do not see the benefits of lowering the atomic weapons threshold or utilizing atomic coercion. The positions of these countries give the West the chance to usage "silent diplomacy" to modify the Russian strategy.

Russia's reluctance to extremist retaliation is an crucial origin in hazard calculations in the US. If earlier moves, specified as the usage of ATACMS (Army Tactical rocket System) rockets in 2024 against Crimea and Russia itself, did not trigger an utmost reaction, that is, the "red lines" are variable and extensible. However, American strategists know from confidential messages that Russia, backed against the wall, will strike with all its might. Therefore, the possible firing on Russia from long-range weapons produced in the US and guided with the aid of American specialists could be the Rubicon, after which Russian decision-makers will feel relieved of their erstwhile inhibitions. So, despite the flexibility so far, there are limits that must not be exceeded.

By the way, it is worth paying attention to another forms of arms of Ukraine, which let it to legally attack Russian military targets outside its borders as part of self-defense. Well, Western arms companies are presently backing the improvement of their native drone production in Ukraine so that it can wage war without the work of external sponsors. This is 1 of the innovations that appear in military cooperation of countries indirectly active in the war.

Due to the large commitment of the West, the war in Ukraine has exposed many issues that are not regulated by global law. First of all, the work of producers for deadly weapons, which is utilized for offensive purposes without their consent. Another issue is the presence of Western military instructors without whom it would be impossible to usage this weapon. The problem that gives emergence to global work is besides the recruitment of mercenaries from third-country nationals.

Coalition of States for Ukraine

...does not quit its activity in both the aid dimension and the diplomatic diversion, that is, the harm to Russia, where and as far as possible. First of all, Western politicians are trying to prevent the clear defeat of Ukraine, which does not mean – despite the rebellious declarations – to guarantee its triumph or reconstruct sovereignty over the lost lands. Even erstwhile the war is put to an end, NATO and the European Union are facing a long-term confrontation with Russia, which proves that European integration will be based on the “permanent siege” and “frontal” syndrome.

Allowed to form a social opinion in many European countries, unwise army generals and peculiar services officers give a speech of uncertainty and obsessive anticipation of another Russian aggression. In a planet filled with disinformation and utmost emotions of hatred, there are no shortages of provocations that can origin misrecognition of threats and highly dangerous, inadequate reactions. 1 can get the impression that despite the importance of perceptional errors and the negative effects of unintentional actions, many political, military and economical circles The West deliberately and consciously opposes lowering the conflict rate.

It is not easy to survey the hazard of escalating war, as it is accompanied by a immense information noise, a feature of which is conceptual confusion and misinformation on a scale so far unprecedented in global relations. It is hard to read the actual intentions of the pages, and all verbal signals and messages are formulated in defamation and intimidation language. The emergence in the climate of hostility is intended to justify the elimination of Russia from a group of partners and participants in joint ventures. This is simply a peculiar curiosium in the planet of diplomacy, given that even after the large wars, agreements were made to let countries defeated to return to global trade. So far, Russia has not lost this war. The more efforts they make, the greater the threat of sinking another countries into crisis. In addition, most countries outside the alleged collective West keep good relations with Russia in various areas. But even the West itself does not quit cooperation with Russia, even in the sphere of exploration of space or the Arctic.

In the Ukrainian conflict, therefore, we are dealing with a peculiar dialectic of political will of participants. On the 1 hand, it is with restraint not to turn war into a global disaster, but on the another hand with determination to defeat Russia. Ukraine is only an object and pretext in this dramatic game. However, it shows the most disrespectful attitude to the "risk thresholds" associated with the usage of atomic weapons. Russia continues to set concessions limits, while “collective” The West considers Russian atomic intimidation and alleged atomic compulsion to be a bluff. In this situation, it can be assumed that even if tactical atomic weapons were used, Ukraine would not be worth atomic retaliation from Western atomic powers. Knowing the cynicism and calculating of Western politicians and observing the brazen transactionism of Donald Trump, this should not surprise the Ukrainians themselves or their zealous supporters.

Psychological factor

Looking at Russian-American relations, it is clear that despite individual differences between leaders, intellectual factors play a immense function in the process of deescalating tensions. The merit of Trump and Putin is that regardless of the course of the conflict, they demonstrated emotional self-control and opposition to political and media force during the Alaska gathering on August 15, 2025. This gave us an chance not so much to conclude a circumstantial agreement, but to make a space for the alleged silent negotiations, subsequent consultations and meetings as planned in Budapest.

The most crucial thing is that the parties see the point in defending the common interest, i.e. stopping participation in intensifying and expanding confrontation. This is expressed in a intellectual climate that creates alluding and metaphorical messages and diplomatic activity with a large amount of confidentiality. "Silent diplomacy" allows you to communicate firmness, determination and threats and to form expectations, preferences and beliefs. In fact, it takes place through alleged discriminating signaling, i.e. speaking prominent characters through various media, especially social ones.

In another words, investigating the limits of endurance and endurance of the players of the game at the highest endurance rate proves that they have not lost their self-preservation instinct so far. It is now Western Europe (mainly the triumvirate of large Britain, France and Germany with their acolytes) through its insecurity and blind attachment to the interests of Ukrainian oligarchy loses its orientation and forgets that hazard manipulation is an irrational strategy threatening suicide. Poland, unlike its partners from the Visegrad Group, was unfortunately among the countries lacking a rational strategy and common sense.

Prof. Stanisław Bielen

Think Poland, No. 43-44 (26.10-2.11.2025)