In the course of pushing those “disastrous consequences” threats this week, Belarus has become the latest excuse for the chorus of warnings emanating from the Moscow Kremlin and Foreign Ministry.

Yesterday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told reporters of her concern as to — in her words — increasingly “provocative” activity on the Belarus-Ukraine border, further stating that she would not rule out the possibility of attempts to “escalate” in the region. [Dmitry Antonov and Andrew Osborn, Reuters, September 20, 2024.]

Shortly after Ukraine’s counteroffensive into Russia’s Kursk region on August 6th, Belarusian leader Aleksandr Lukashenko — in what may have been another of his obsequious attempts to remain relevant to his idol, Vladimir Putin — suggested, without offering a shred of evidence, that Ukraine might be planning to attack Belarus. Or he may have been acting under Putin’s instructions from the get-go. It doesn’t really matter.

In either event, it was the excuse Russia and its puppet state, Belarus, needed. The Minsk government later said that it would be sending extra troops to its border with Ukraine, though Kyiv said it had not seen any sign of major changes. The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry also said last month that their country “has never taken and is not going to take any unfriendly actions against the Belarusian people.” [Id.]

But now, Russia’s Zakharova inexplicably offers this statement:

“We take due note of the information received about the intensification of the activities of Ukrainian forces in the border zone.

”We see these facts ourselves and are aware of constant attempts from the Ukrainian side to use drones and to send terrorists into the republic.” [Id.]

I’m sorry, but . . . What “information”? What “facts”?

Well, according to Zakharova, Ukrainian President Zelensky has already taken “reckless steps,” and she accused him of coordinating his actions with Washington — somehow relating it to the upcoming U.S. presidential election:

“Therefore, in line with this logic, we do not rule out the possibility that these destructive forces could set the situation in the region in motion and escalate.” [Id.]

Aha! Now I get it!

“In line with this logic . . .” “. . . do not rule out the possibility . . .” She’s talking about Russian logic, and possibilities. Not facts.

After all, who needs facts when you’ve got speculation, and conjecture, and inventiveness? You just make it up as you go along, creating the scenario that best suits your purposes.

Zakharova closed with some comments about Russia and Belarus being part of a “Union State” with a joint defense agreement and a joint regional military grouping — sort of a mini-NATO — but deployed in Belarus along with Russian tactical nuclear weapons (there’s that threat again), saying:

“The practical implementation of any scenarios which are aggressive towards Minsk is fraught with disastrous consequences not only for Ukraine, but also for its sponsors.” [Id.]

Sound familiar? Of course, it does. It’s another instance of SSDD:

Same Script, Different Day.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
9/21/24