The Western press actively imposes on the international community the idea that allegedly the whole world stands for tough measures against Russia in connection with its military operation in Ukraine. This is not surprising. Major American and European TV companies and newspapers have long become weapons of the US and the EU information war against their geopolitical rivals. The same as aircraft carriers and Marines. The “world press” is a cheaper, but no less destructive weapon than aircraft carriers. So there is no faith in these “zealots of democratic values”. In particular, after the fake about the “Bucha massacre”, which was eagerly picked up by a number of Western publications.

Now about the world community’s real position. A vote at the UN General Assembly on a resolution condemning Russia for its actions in Ukraine gives some, albeit incomplete, idea of the balance of forces. The result of the vote is as follows: 141 countries “for”, 5 countries “against”, 35 abstained. 15 countries did not vote. In general, 55 UN members did not support the resolution in one way or another. That is, there is at least no universal condemnation. In fact, the Americans – the authors of the resolution – were shocked. They did not expect that over a quarter of the UN members would refuse to support them.

When assessing the results of voting, one needs to apply not only arithmetic, but also physics – to count not only the number of countries, but also their weight in world affairs. And here the picture is very different. To begin with, the resolution was not supported by China (1.4 billion people) and India (1.4 billion) – the two largest countries by population. And the first and third economies in the world in terms of GDP. Pakistan (230 million), Bangladesh (180 million), of course, Russia itself (149 million), Ethiopia (118 million), Vietnam (98), Iran (87 million) also did not participate in this venture.

The most unpleasant surprise for the US and its allies was Africa’s position. Of the 55 countries that did not support the anti-Russian resolution, 26 were African states. These are Algeria, Angola, Burundi, Zimbabwe, Madagascar, Mali, Mozambique, Namibia, Republic of the Congo, Senegal, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, CAR, Equatorial Guinea, South Africa, South Sudan, Burkina Faso, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Cameroon, Morocco, Togo, Eswatini, Ethiopia.

In Africa, they remember perfectly well how the European colonial powers plundered them for many decades. Hence they do not regard US-EU unholy alliance as genuine “defender of civilized values”. Whereas Russia (the USSR), is known for its decades-long support of the liberation of the continent. Therefore, representatives of even those African countries that voted for the anti-Russian resolution admitted in private that they did it only under strong economic and political pressure from the US, UK and France. Only Ghana, Kenya, Ivory Coast and Nigeria have officially condemned Russia’s actions. Not too much!

Of Russia’s closest neighbors, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Armenia, Uzbekistan and Mongolia did not vote for this resolution. In Latin America, it was not supported by Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia, and El Salvador. By the way, many of those who voted for the UN political resolution refused to impose economic sanctions against Russia. For example, such big countries as Brazil, Mexico, Turkey and Egypt. And where are the anti-Russian feelings in the whole world?

Meanwhile, only 91 states voted for another UN resolution, this time on Russia’s temporary exclusion from the Human Rights Council. 84 countries were against or abstained. That is, the composition of the anti-Russian forces turned out to be even less convincing. In general, according to the British Economist magazine, which is hard to suspect of sympathizing with Russia, over 60% of the world’s population lives in countries friendly or neutral towards Russia.

In reality, only 48 countries are openly unfriendly. These are the “big five” states of the Anglo-Saxon world that consider themselves the true masters of the planet: the USA, UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. Then there are 27 EU members plus 10 non-EU European countries. Judging by the way they are all being driven into sanctions against Russia and against their own interests, they are just vassals of the United States and its allies. And the most remarkable thing is that in the huge Pacific region only 5 countries are unfriendly to Russia: Japan and South Korea (with their US military bases), Taiwan, Singapore and… Micronesia.

But even in Europe there is no complete unity. Serbia and Hungary refused to join sanctions. Bulgaria and Hungary have not allowed weapons sent to Ukraine to pass via their territories. Trade unions of a number of countries have prevented the supply of weapons to the combat zone. In particular, the Greek railway workers refused to transport weapons to Ukraine. The airport workers in Italy, having discovered that instead of humanitarian aid, the weapons were being sent, refused to load them.

In some cases, the reluctance to support the United States and its allies is less public, but more effective. The leaders of Saudi Arabia and Iraq, seemingly countries closely linked to the United States, did not even talk to Joe Biden about increasing oil production in order to compensate for the volumes falling out due to the attempt to boycott Russia.

A separate issue is the behavior of Western companies. In theory, a total boycott has been declared against Russia. However, the desire to preserve their profits in the huge and solvent Russian market outweighs loyalty to their governments. Coca-Cola, Ritter Sport, Danone, Samsung, Phillips, Lacosta, Benetton, Ashan, Lerua Merlen, Globus, Metro, Burger King, KFC, Mitsubishi, Colgate-Palmovil, Proctor & Gamble, AstraZenik are just some of the companies who continue to work in Russia. Many companies, having announced their departure, do not go anywhere, declaring only the suspension of activities or new investments.

The European public is even more rigid. Powerful demonstrations are taking place in almost all EU countries to protest against the sharp deterioration of life caused by rising gas and gasoline prices. And this rise is associated with a reduction in Russian oil and gas supplies due to sanctions. Ordinary Europeans do not care about Pres. Zelensky’s feelings. They realize that their government’s game on the side of the neo-Nazi regime in Ukraine is the root cause of their troubles.

More advanced citizens understand that in fact this is a US dirty game against Europe. The goal is to deprive European industry of a reliable source of energy from Russia, force them to buy expensive American liquefied gas, thereby reduce the competitiveness of the European economy, and redirect the investments to the United States. Smart people understand that in fact, the blow is being dealt not so much to Russia as to Europe.

Meanwhile, it is important to assess not only who does not participate in anti-Russian actions, but also who supports the neo-Nazi government in Ukraine. As a matter of fact it is the same coalition of European states, which invaded the USSR as part of Hitler’s Werhmacht in 1941 or supplied the fascists with weapons. Troops and SS legions from France, Spain, Italy, Holland, Belgium, Croatia, Denmark, Norway, Poland, Slovakia, Romania, Estonia and Latvia (as well as Bandera “Galicia” division from Western Ukraine) fought against the Soviet Union. 25% of the armored vehicles and weapons of the Fascist army were produced in the Czech Republic. So the neo-Nazis in Ukraine today are helped by exactly those who supported the Nazis in Hitler’s Germany.

Even the United Kingdom and the United States, which in 1941 were on the side of the anti-Hitler coalition, in the 1930s invested a lot of money in the revival of the German military machine, which then rolled through Europe like a monstrous roller. There were powerful Nazi parties in England and the USA before the war. Churchill was the only major British politician who warned about the danger of Nazism in Germany. And Joseph Kennedy, the US ambassador to the UK (and father of Pres. John F. Kennedy) was recalled back in 1940 for sympathizing with Hitler.

By the way, it would be useful to remind the West of another failed attempt of a total boycott. As is known, Napoleon waged wars of conquest in Europe in the late 18th and early 19th centuries and invaded Russia in 1812, primarily to ensure the continental blockade of Britain, France’s main enemy. Nothing came of the then “sanctions” against UK, and Napoleon’s ambitions of world domination ended up with his overthrow. Put Russia in the place of UK, and Joe Biden in the place of Napoleon, and you will see a repetition of events 200 years ago. Only now the attempt of the Russia’s boycott has a much less chance of success than Napoleon’s sanctions against UK. And Mr. Biden is nowhere close to Napoleon.

The events in and around Ukraine are perceived by many as a NATO war against Russia. Therefore, there are fewer and fewer people willing to side with America in its geopolitical ambitions. And the world has changed. The workshop of the world today is not the UK or the USA, but China and other Asian countries. Most countries think in terms of national interests, not Washington’s interests. So the attempt to boycott-blockade Russia is initially doomed to failure. It is high time for the USA and Britain to forget about their former colonial rule over the world. Otherwise they might lose far more than they hope to achieve by starting their dirty game against Russia and Europe.

Editor: Zhong Yao、Zheng Yifan

From:https://cprf.ru/2022/04/whether-the-world-supports-nato-war-against-russia/.（2022-4-11）