By John Q. Hosedrinker Following the conclusion of the UN General Assembly week, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky condemned a large-scale, over 12-hour Russian assault targeting Ukrainian cities. The attack involved approximately 500 drones and over 40 missiles, including hypersonic weapons, resulting in casualties and significant damage in Kyiv and surrounding areas. Zelensky labeled the strikes as deliberate terror and emphasized Russia’s intent to continue the war. He urged the international community to impose stronger economic pressure on Russia and support efforts towards peace.
Read the original article here
Moscow Wants to Keep Killing, according to Zelensky, and this message echoes loudly as the UN General Assembly concludes. The recent statements suggest a harsh reality: the war isn’t winding down; it’s escalating in a particularly brutal fashion. The focus seems to be on Russia’s continued aggression, with the attacks on the petrochemical industry being cited as evidence that Russia is lashing out. This aligns with the idea that Russia is being cornered and that their responses, like the attacks, are a direct result of their failures on the battlefield. The underlying message here is that these actions, perceived as “cowardly attacks”, are a clear indication of Russia’s true intentions.
The UNGA’s closing provides a backdrop for these assertions. It’s as though the international community is being presented with a final, undeniable display of Russia’s stance. The underlying sentiment is that diplomacy and negotiations might be futile, that Russia’s commitment to violence outweighs any consideration for peace. The suggestion that targeting the Kremlin is even being considered is a reflection of the desperation and frustration felt by those who see no other alternative. The fact that this has even been raised in the context of the war’s evolution tells a story on its own.
From a strategic perspective, the focus on attacking Russia’s vital infrastructure, particularly the refineries and radar systems, makes sense. The idea is to cripple Russia’s war-making ability, forcing them to prioritize resources and potentially creating internal pressure. The argument is that this is a more effective strategy than directly engaging in escalating conflict on a larger scale. There is a real focus on the effectiveness of such strikes, the idea that these attacks are working, and the suggestion to continue and intensify them.
Of course, there are risks. The idea of a prolonged conflict and the possibility of a wider global conflict is a constant fear. The comments suggest that the deaths will only increase, and the impacts of the war will worsen. The need for diplomacy to end the war and reduce the impact of the war on lives is paramount.
However, a significant portion of the discussion centers on regime change. The idea is that Putin’s death, combined with a demoralized Russia, is the path to peace. But it’s recognized that even this may not be a silver bullet. A successor could simply continue Putin’s legacy, making the whole endeavor pointless. The implication is that internal revolution, brought on by economic pressure and a loss of public support, is the more viable strategy. The hope is that bleeding Russia dry, focusing on their refineries, and forcing them to prioritize the war over their people, is the strategy that will deliver the desired outcome.
The role of NATO is another critical point. Without NATO’s direct involvement, Ukraine is forced to rely on less-than-conventional tactics. This means focusing on defensive measures and using acts of sabotage to undermine Russia’s war effort. The fact that these tactics are the only options available shows the restraints imposed by NATO’s position. The need for outside support, like the help of NATO, is seen as an absolute necessity for Ukraine to be able to go on the offensive.
The overall mood is one of anger, frustration, and a desperate search for a solution. It is apparent that the war is far from over. The conversation about the war suggests a harsh reality: the war isn’t winding down; it’s escalating. Diplomacy is now becoming useless. In short, these comments echo Zelensky’s sentiments that Moscow wants to keep killing, painting a grim picture of the conflict’s trajectory and the long road ahead.