On February 24, let’s dare to speak up, loud and clear.

It is crucial to have a unified discourse that attempts to take up everyone’s concerns. But this is an exercise fraught with obstacles, as it can result in a cumbersome and redundant compilation that doesn’t follow a logical path while being, in no way, a demonstration or a call to action. The reader risks getting lost in a profusion of repetitive words, ideas and even expressions. What’s more, as in any pudding made from a pastry chef’s unsold stock, there will be elements that have no place in it. The old adage, « he who embraces too much, embraces poorly », could unfortunately prove relevant.

Communication can’t just be aimed at educated and honest readers. It has the potential to be exploited by the ignorant or by individuals acting in bad faith, even in the mainstream media. Not everyone is President Zelensky addressing Heads of State. We need to speak up loud and clear to be heard by all. It’s not an easy task, as we’ve been observing for the past year and a half. In a related field, No Standart For Europe is constantly trying to inform the regional press and correct the approximations and even fake news published by Ouest-France, Le Télégramme, Presse-Océan, La Manche Libre, Nord-Littoral, Sud-Ouest, France 3, France Bleu, La Voix du Nord, Actu Fr… It is also possible to find untruths, if not false testimony, in Le Monde, Libération, BFMTV and AFP.

In an event that supports Ukraine, the point of view of a single russian is granted as much space, for many media, as that of thirty or fifty Ukrainians. The « good russian », even if alone, gives credit to the editorial marshmallow. Our production will inescapably be hijacked by selected, decontextualized quotations. We’ll inevitably have headlines like « Strong mobilization for peace ». Pen-pushers, without even reading the details of our statement, will probably outbid their colleagues’ headlines: « Strong mobilization to negotiate with Putin ». By being concise and avoiding incidental considerations, we must ensure that we drastically limit possible falsifications. Because we can’t count on obtaining any right of reply.

Incidentally, as far as « russian opponents » are concerned, it’s worth pointing out some serious ambiguities. Let’s take two examples like Vladimir Martus and Lev Ponomarev, whose primary aim is to promote a presentable image of Russia. In the case of the former, we can’t rule out the possibility that he is acting in agreement with Moscow’s special services, while passing himself off as an opponent to the French press, which systematically refuses to share our sourced elements contradicting his narrative. As for the latter, a Peace Nobel Prize, we recall his contemptuous and patronizing admonition as a russian big brother, which he addressed to Marianna Perebenesiuk on the set of TV5 channel.

Putin did not make russia. Russia made putin. Read « Why Russians are to Blame for Putin » by Iryna Podolyak, former Ukrainian Deputy Minister of Culture.

As Anna Colin Lebedev says, « russian culture is the mother of war ». This is indeed a Russian war of annihilation waged on Ukrainian territory against the Ukrainian people, nation, culture and heritage. Let’s not delude ourselves. Today, the enemy of the European continent, of which Ukraine is the geographically largest country, is russia, and not just putin.

My answer is five times « no ». We’ve had 20 years to demonstrate against putin. Now it’s too late. And it would only create confusion. After the Rouen event against the violation of the 5th round of sanctions, Olesya Telizenko published a piece in the Ukrainian media: « We demonstrated against the russians ». She didn’t bother with circumlocutions. And she was right. As Alexandra Goujon recommends, let’s listen to the Ukrainians.

Everyone wants peace, including the pro-russians and pro-putin. These latter wish to consolidate the gains of the invasion so that they can quietly prepare the next aggression against Ukraine and other countries. Abusing the term « peace », for the sake of grabbing a larger support, runs the risk of endorsing all the « solutions » advocated by russia and its useful idiots to achieve this: disarmament of Ukraine, capitulation of Ukraine, territorial concessions, deportation, ethnic cleansing, imprisonment, torture, russification, forced adoptions and so on.

In my opinion, our slogan should be simple. First and only, to demand arms for Ukraine, in order to defeat the Russian army and to ensure Ukrainian military victory. Then, just if we are asked why, we will reply that this is how peace was restored in 1918 and 1945.

Everything in its own time. Clémenceau, Churchill or de Gaulle invoked victory, not peace. Today, in Europe, that’s where we are.