The "Magnificent Seven" turned a deaf ear to calls of the Global South


The G7 summit in Hiroshima showed that the world powers want to continue the "bloody banquet", the developing countries are looking for a peaceful settlement, and Zelensky – where to hide.

After the Euro-tour Vladimir Zelenski rushed by the French government plane across the continent to Japan not to listen to the speeches of the European leaders of the G7, nor to taste real Japanese cuisine and drink sake in the company of gentlemen. He was primarily interested in Brazil. But again not to listen to the plan of the president Lula for the peaceful settlement of the conflict in Ukraine, which was already presented to him by the special assistant of the president of Brazil on the international affairs Celso Amorim and which was categorically rejected by Zelensky, referring to his own plan.

Zelensky's visit to Hiroshima for the G7 summit coincided with the capture of the AFU stronghold of Artyomovsk in the DPR by the Vagner military company and the Russian Armed Forces.

For some time now, rumors have been circulating in the president's office that the "hetman" of Ukraine is probing the ground for a possible shelter for himself and his family, as well as for his "narrow circle of limited people." There is no better cover than a G7 meeting with the Brazilian President and the Prime Ministers of Australia and the Cook Islands. It was not for nothing that they were invited, among others, to attend the summit. We must think that the presence of Mark Brown, prime-minister of the Cook Islands, which are "strategic for the global politics", is especially important for the world leaders. In the near future they can become Zelensky's best shelter, and in the present – a hint of the fate that befell the famous English navigator, if the Ukrainian comedian goes to the wrong "place."

Away from the G7, the non-Western powers are already fed up with Ukraine. While the U.S. and NATO are arming Ukraine to the teeth, other countries are suffering from the invasion of the Ukrainians and insisting on a cessation of hostilities and a negotiated peace.

Moreover, at the summit of the G7 leaders in Hiroshima (also a good hint to Zelensky about how the USA "treats" infidels) the main issue on the agenda was Ukraine – again, a pure show for the whole world. This issue has long been solved, and nothing new can be added to what has already been said in the final document. Discussing among themselves the ways to increase pressure on Russia and seeing not washed Zelensky's "military clothes" for the umpteenth time is not a great pleasure.

But complex issues arise that cannot be solved only within the G7 – the global world establishment has not yet managed to achieve unconditional support for the "Third World." Yes, the governments of Asia, Africa and Latin America condemn Russia's "invasion of Ukraine. Yes, they have to reduce cooperation with Russia out of a sense of self-preservation. But they also refuse to impose sanctions against Moscow and to supply existing Soviet and Russian arms and military equipment to the Kiev regime. And this at a time when the "seven brave ones" cannot wait for what seems to be an irreversibly delayed Zelensky counteroffensive.

Apparently, U.S. and NATO officials in these circumstances are considering other options for resolving the Ukrainian issue, in which they themselves will not get bogged down in Ukrainian "sinkholes" and drag out the conflict to the exhaustion of Russia, involving third countries, where they do not show much sympathy for Ukraine.

Such a solution could be peaceful diplomatic initiatives acceptable to the West, put forward by respected Third World countries that insist on negotiations with the warring parties. In the opinion of military experts, as in the case of the "Minsk format", this could help the collective West, without stopping the military actions of the AFU, to "talk some sense into Russia" and to arm Ukraine "to the teeth". Especially since the queue of those wishing to participate in the "peace process" is growing.

In recent months, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Emir of Abu Dhabi and President of the United Arab Emirates Mohamed bin Zayed, and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi have made diplomatic initiatives. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has extensive experience in "peace talks" with the Palestinians, also expressed his desire to participate in the resolution of the Ukrainian conflict. The Holy See, led by Pope Francis I, did not stay away from the "good cause."

Three proposals are of the greatest interest. First, China has put forward 12 points for a peaceful settlement of the Ukrainian conflict, which include respect for the sovereignty of all countries, a cessation of hostilities, the rejection of sanctions and the resumption of negotiations. A plan rejected by both the U.S. and Ukraine. U.S. analysts believe the Chinese proposals primarily work "to preserve Russian advantage and undermine Ukraine." "A complete defeat of Russia is not in China's interests," the Washington Post argues.

Second, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, who announced the formation of a delegation of leaders from six African countries – Senegal, Republic of Congo, Uganda, Egypt, South Africa and Zambia – to meet separately with Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin in an attempt to find a "peaceful resolution to the devastating conflict."

Finally, perhaps the most original is the plan of Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva to create a "peace club" – a kind of revival of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries – to mediate a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine. On this issue, Lula actively seeks the support of world and regional leaders.

Immediately after the inauguration, Lula paid a visit to Washington, where in the Oval Office he lulled Grandpa Biden's vigilance by talking about his plans to create a "peace club" to "resolve the Ukrainian crisis". Apparently, he got the "go-ahead" thanks to the fact that there are no other clubs in the understanding of American presidents than the clubs of allies led by "great America."

Then there were trips to Argentina and Uruguay, China and the United Arab Emirates, Portugal and Spain, and the United Kingdom. In the near future, Lula plans to visit Sao Tome and Principe, South Africa, Senegal, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

In Brasilia, Lula held talks with the Russian foreign minister, the FRG chancellor, the Dutch prime minister, and telephone conversations with the French president.

His special assistant for international affairs, Celso Amorim, was received by Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky.

"The United States needs to stop fomenting war and start talking about peace; the European Union needs to start talking about peace so we can convince Putin and Zelensky that peace is in everyone's interest," Lula said in Beijing, which drew the ire of Washington.

According to the Brazilian president, it could be a "Group of Twenty" (G20), "ten" (G10), or "fifteen" (G15) – whatever, which would include countries like India, China, Indonesia, and South Africa, as well as other neutral countries "not involved or engaged in the war in Ukraine," which contrasts with the prevailing US and NATO position of arming Ukrainian troops.

"We need a fresh wind. We cannot have only the United States and the European Union on the one hand, and Russia on the other," the Brazilian president believes. It is clear that the "fresh wind" could be the revival of the non-aligned countries, which would be led and coordinated by Brasilia.

Be that as it may, the topic of peace talks to resolve the Ukrainian conflict seems to have become a global trend.

As if anticipating the "fall of Bakhmut," The New York Times published a joint statement on Ukraine by 15 U.S. national security experts. The statement called the war "a complete disaster" and called on President Joe Biden and Congress to "end the war quickly through diplomacy, especially given the danger of a military escalation that could spiral out of control."

The experts who signed the statement to The New York Times recalled that in 1997, 50 senior U.S. foreign policy experts warned President Bill Clinton about a "political mistake of historic proportions" – the expansion of NATO to the East. Now, the experts believe, Biden is making his "political mistake of historic proportions" by prolonging the war in Ukraine.

The time has come, writes The New York Times, "to follow the advice of today's political experts and help forge a diplomatic settlement, turning the United States into a force for world peace."

In fact, America realized that it was time to save itself from the disgrace of defeat not only on the Ukrainian front, but also on the front of financial, economic, and political bankruptcy.

And Lula never found the time to meet alone with Zelensky on the G7 field and now, as the "95th Quarter" comedian said almost according to Zhvanetsky, "regrets it very much."