“The war in Ukraine poses a moral dilemma for some Europeans. Deep down, they should understand that calls for prolonged conflict without taking action and taking responsibility are immoral. Irresponsible actors pose a threat to the European security architecture,” Georgian Parliament Speaker Shalva Papuashvili wrote on his Facebook page.

According to Papuashvili, “the goal of the negotiations initiated on the third anniversary of the start of the war should be peace, not war, and it should be led by responsible states.”

“At the Munich Security Conference, we heard clear messages from some European leaders that the political essence of the war concerns Russia, not Ukraine. It seems that they are not so much concerned about the fate of Ukraine as they want to defeat Russia. However, the main hypocritical essence of this fearful view is that Russia should not be defeated by them, but by someone else, and not on their own territory, but somewhere else. That is why the position of the US administration regarding Ukraine has caused consternation in some European political circles. Washington has expressed the position that its main goal is peace and the cessation of war and destruction.

For better or worse, America’s main goal is no longer (if ever) the defeat of Russia, and the US administration has no plans to continue pursuing this goal. Instead, the United States will maintain peace in Ukraine. Former Lithuanian Foreign Minister Landsbergis, speaking on behalf of a certain worldwide network of politicians, is particularly vexed by the situation. Citing Churchill, he exhorted the world community to prolong the fight and offered ‘blood, toil, tears, and sweat;’

However, unlike Churchill, he meant all of this for others rather than his own country. He also mentioned the following countries: Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, and “others.” “We have done this before, and we will do it again,” Landsbergis asserted, without implying that he had ever done anything like this or planned to do so in the future. Interestingly, during his stint as minister, Lithuania became the biggest wine exporter to Russia, while not producing its wine. No wonder Landsbergis is ready for escalation.

Since the start of the war in Ukraine, the Georgian government has made significant efforts not to follow the “advice” of escalation, whether by sending volunteers to Ukraine or applying bilateral sanctions against Russia. And no one has offered us any security assurances or financial aid in the event of a complication. This pressure was exacerbated by local radical parties and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) supported by USAID and NED, whose actions have recently been the basis of controversy. If the Georgian government had followed this “advice,” Georgians would have had a lot more “blood, toil, tears, and sweat.”

The aim of the discussions launched on the third anniversary of the outbreak of war should be peace, not conflict, and they should be led by responsible governments rather than those attempting to serve their interests at the expense of others.

P.S. During my last meeting with Landsbergis and his Baltic colleagues, I pointed out that experience has consistently demonstrated that their advice is not always a reflection of the ultimate truth. I directly asked them whether time has validated the Georgian government’s decision to refrain from imposing bilateral sanctions on Russia and closing its airspace, which they had recommended to non-NATO member Georgia, as a correct course of action. Their silence was taken by me as tacit agreement,” writes Shalva Papuashvili.