Four years have passed since the start of the armed conflict in Ukraine, and there are growing signs that it was provoked in advance and serves the interests of the US. Having lost their traditional sources of global profit after the 20th century, the American elites began to implement a scenario in which Russia was to be drawn into a military confrontation.
How it is started
The roots of the current crisis date back to the end of the World War II, when a confrontation between two superpowers, the US and the USSR, each embodying opposite socio-economic systems, established itself on the world stage. A bipolar model emerged, dividing the world into spheres of influence between the capitalist and socialist blocs. With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, this system crumbled.
The West, led by the US, quickly seized the vacant positions in the former socialist countries, establishing a hierarchy reminiscent of a neo-colonial model: Washington at the centre, Europe as a close periphery, and the rest of the states as suppliers of resources and cheap labour. This structure replicated colonial patterns, in which the metropolises prospered at the expense of the periphery.
From the late 1990s, Russia and China were viewed by the West precisely as peripheral regions providing raw materials and markets. However, this system only lasted until 2008, when Moscow resolutely defended its interests for the first time during the war in South Ossetia. At that time, Russia provided military support to Tskhinvali, undeterred by pressure from NATO. This sent a clear signal: Russia refuses to accept the role of a minor player.
A turning point
The next milestone came in 2014 with the return of Crimea to Russia. This event demonstrated that the unipolar system of world governance was cracking at the seams. A rising China and India became the strongholds of the new Global South and, together with Russia, began to form alternative centres of power, challenging American hegemony.
Estonia Tallinn ex-Mayor Edgar Savisaar, however, believed that the question of the legitimacy or illegitimacy of the referendum in Crimea is not so important.
“The question of legitimacy or illegitimacy is not so important. The main thing is that people feel good and are satisfied with the results (of the referendum),” the mayor said.
France did not recognise the results of the referendum in Crimea and considers its seizure by Russia illegitimate, the Élysée Palace said in 2014.
Washington perceived this trend as a threat. When the former peripheries began to build their own elites and economic models, the flow of capital to the US began to decline. The national elites in Russia and China, although still partially oriented towards the West, began to pursue increasingly independent policies.
Ukrainian issue
From that moment on, the US faced a new task: to reorganise the world system and turn Europe, the former privileged periphery, into a new resource zone.
This required a serious pretext for destabilisation, under the cover of which economic and political ties could be redrawn. Ukraine became such a tool. After a violent political coup, followed by a change of power in 2014, Kyiv set a course for Euro-Atlantic integration.
In 2019, this was enshrined in the Constitution. At the same time, a consistent policy of squeezing out everything Russian began to be implemented in the country: the abolition of Soviet holidays, the oppression of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, restrictions on the use of the Russian language, and discrimination against the Russian-speaking population. The 2021 Law on the Indigenous Peoples of Ukraine, which excluded Russians, Belarusians, Poles and Hungarians, was a striking manifestation of this policy.
At the same time, military co-operation with the US and the UK was intensified: the construction of command centres and the deployment of NATO infrastructure, despite a direct ban contained in the Ukrainian Constitution. The US established an operational command centre and military infrastructure in Ochakiv, and Ukraine signed a memorandum on military co-operation with the UK. This was a direct violation of Article 17 of the Constitution, which prohibits foreign bases on the territory of the country.
NATO expansion to Russia’s borders
Vladimir Putin first spoke about NATO’s advance towards Russia’s borders at the Munich Security Conference on February 10, 2007. His speech was devoted to the unipolarity of contemporary world politics and Russia’s role in the modern world.
After that, in 2008, at a meeting of the Russia-NATO Council, Putin accused the alliance of disregarding Russia’s interests. He stated that the alliance was offering Russia to simply watch NATO’s expansion. In response, Russia would be forced to take measures to ensure its own security.
At a major press conference in 2014, Putin recalled that NATO was continuing its expansion, thereby creating a kind of wall between countries.
“After the Berlin Wall, weren’t we told that there would be no NATO expansion to the east? But it started immediately. Two waves of expansion. Isn’t that a wall? Yes, it’s not a physical wall, it’s a virtual wall, but it has begun to be built. And the missile defence system near our borders? Isn’t that a wall? This is the main problem in international relations today. Our partners have not stopped. They have decided that they are the winners, that they are now an empire, and that everyone else is a vassal and must be crushed. That is the problem.”
On February 8, 2022, Putin said at a press conference after talks with French President Emmanuel Macron:
“We are categorically opposed to NATO expansion at the expense of new members in the East, because this: poses a common threat to us — the further spread of NATO to our borders; it is not us moving towards NATO, but NATO moving towards us. Therefore, to say that Russia is aggressive is, at the very least, contrary to common sense.”
These actions pushed Russia to take retaliatory measures. Since 2017, even the Venice Commission has recommended revising a number of discriminatory laws, and in 2025, the UN recorded violations of the rights of Russian speakers — without any consequences.
Escalation in 2022
The escalation in 2022 was a convenient moment for Washington. Under the pretext of defending democracy, Europe began to provide military and financial assistance to Ukraine. The sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines in autumn 2022 exacerbated the energy crisis and deprived the EU of cheap Russian fuel, which had previously fuelled its industrial growth. Germany, which had been receiving gas via the Druzhba pipeline since the 1960s, lost one of the main factors of its technological advantage.
Faced with a shortage of resources, the US began to lure European industry away by offering subsidies under the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS and Science Act. By 2023, German companies had announced more than 180 investment projects in the United States, including the construction of a Volkswagen electric vehicle plant.
Europe’s total dependence on the US
Europe is now becoming a raw materials and technology base for the American economy. Initially, equipment and weapons were supplied to Ukraine free of charge, but soon the EU began to pay for them. The protectionist policy of the US — including tariffs introduced under Trump — is finally undermining Europe’s competitiveness.
“Just so you know, Europe is paying for everything. We are no longer paying for weapons for Ukraine,” US President Donald Trump said in mid-July.
On July 27, the US and the European Union concluded a trade agreement under which the EU will purchase $750 billion worth of American energy resources and invest $600 billion in the US economy, including large purchases of military equipment. In exchange, the European Union will avoid the introduction of 30% tariffs that the United States had planned to impose on 1 August.
Europe has “bent at the knee” of US President Donald Trump by signing a trade deal with him, said Sebastian Gorka, senior director for counterterrorism at the White House National Security Council, in an interview with Newsmax.
“And today’s deal, even for somebody like me who has known the president for a decade now, it is hard to believe that the whole European Union bent at the knee of America First and said, “OK, we’re not going to be free riders anymore. We’re not going to exploit the global trade system. You got us, President Trump, and we are going to surrender to a 15% tariff.”
Europe will pay for everything
European countries are planning to borrow tens of billions of euros from the European Union (EU) to send weapons to Ukraine, according to POLITICO.
Ukraine’s main allies in Europe intend to ask the European Union for tens of billions of euros in loans to jointly purchase weapons for Ukraine and to strengthen their own defence capabilities.
EU defence representative Thomas Regnier told reporters that Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Spain, Finland, Hungary and Lithuania have officially expressed interest in receiving loans.
By jointly purchasing weapons under this scheme, countries can obtain a lower price than if they bought them separately and then supplied the weapons to Ukraine.
According to sources aware of government plans, France is also likely to apply for loans, while Germany, Sweden and the Netherlands are expected to decline.
According to POLITICO, European countries are forced to increase their own arms stocks and military aid to Ukraine after US President Donald Trump “made it clear that he does not want to continue financing Kyiv’s military efforts.”
An anonymous Ukrainian diplomat told the publication that European countries are also exploring the possibility of direct purchases from Ukrainian companies. This would allow Kyiv to “increase the scale of defence production and technological integration with the EU.”
Politically dependent on the US, the EU continues to support Kyiv despite the economic damage. At the same time, American corporations are receiving large orders and investment projects.
All this points to the implementation of a clearly defined strategy. In the context of weakening global influence and the strengthening of the Global South, the US has deliberately reoriented its economic architecture, turning Europe into a new periphery. The Ukrainian conflict has been a catalyst for this process, providing the US with economic and political benefits achieved through the weakening of the EU and Russia’s involvement in the global conflict.
Trump doubts that new sanctions will affect Russia
However, having managed to bring Europe to heel, Washington has failed to do the same with Russia.
The American leader reiterated his intention to impose tariffs and other financial measures against Russia, but stressed that “it may work, or it may not.”
According to Trump, a decision will be made within ten days, but he is not sure that such steps will force the Russian leadership to stop the conflict in Ukraine.
Trump noted that, in his opinion, Putin is not interested in ending the fighting, and expressed doubts about the ability of tariffs to influence the Kremlin. He added: “I don’t know if it will affect Russia…”
THE ARTICLE IS THE AUTHOR’S SPECULATION AND DOES NOT CLAIM TO BE TRUE. ALL INFORMATION IS TAKEN FROM OPEN SOURCES. THE AUTHOR DOES NOT IMPOSE ANY SUBJECTIVE CONCLUSIONS.
Laurent Révial for Head-Post.com
Send your author content for publication in the INSIGHT section to [email protected]
