Statkevich on protests in Ukraine: If you elected a president and at the same time a Commander-in-Chief with such a lead, then let him govern

«Can democracy defeat autocracy in war? It seems that autocracy has the ability to quickly concentrate and use material and human resources without restrictions.

And democracy fights under conditions of press freedom and internal political competition. During wartime, this forces the country's leadership to take into account the limitations imposed by public opinion and criticism from political opponents. It also forces them to consider the factor of future elections. The leader of a democratic country must spend part of their forces and information resources fighting political competitors. Not only because of a natural desire to win the next elections, but also to prevent any of the competitors from gaining so much strength that they begin to be perceived as an alternative leader of the country, which could disorient the state's governance system during wartime.

Frankly, it surprises me that many high- or even mid-level military leaders in Ukraine engage in active self-promotion during the war. The internet offers wide opportunities here.

It's understandable that the country wants to know its heroes, those to emulate. On the other hand, it seems that the most active in this regard are preparing for a political career, for participation in future elections. It's not for nothing they say, where there are two Cossacks, there are three atamans. Isn't it too early? Perhaps it's better to focus on the war? The aggression has not yet stopped. Furthermore, those who actively engage in self-promotion create additional career opportunities for themselves, and also protect themselves from career failures, as they can appeal to public support if there's an attempt to dismiss or demote them. Ordinary citizens, who have chosen their latest idol based on information presented about themselves online, do not know the many true reasons for the complaints against them. And for many, especially women, external attractiveness alone is often enough to acknowledge its owner as trustworthy.

In such a state of affairs, those leaders who have not bothered to create a proper image for themselves online find themselves at a disadvantage. Also, higher leaders who are responsible for the outcome of the war but cannot implement their essential right to their own personnel policy, without which governance loses its effectiveness. Ultimately, the entire country loses.

If you elected a president and at the same time a Commander-in-Chief with such a lead, then let him govern. You have a war at home!

All of this is under the impression of the briefing by the former Minister of Defense of Ukraine. More precisely, the self-presentation of another presidential candidate of our neighbor. The question arises: why was there such harsh general criticism of a combat general, whom the critic himself calls the country's savior at the decisive moment of the war's beginning? He's not planning to participate in the presidential elections. I think the real target of the attack here is another general who has already announced his participation in the presidential elections and is perceived by the self-presenter as a competitor. Something like, all these old, antiquated generals don't understand how to win without losses, rifles, or cannons, only with joysticks.

And the people didn't understand the true reasons for the "attack" and have already started to rally with demands for the resignation of the criticized acting Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces.

And now the president himself is discussing these demands of the protestors — during wartime(!!!). Neighbors, have you lost your minds?

I will give an example of other behavior. After the 2000 presidential elections in the USA, acquaintances from the American embassy did not hide their disappointment that Vice President Gore lost to Bush Jr.

Time confirmed their fears — President Bush, for artificial reasons, dragged his country into a long and costly war in Iraq, thereby untying the hands of Iran, which had long and difficultly fought with Iraq.

This allowed Iran to develop its missile and nuclear programs and become a factor of destabilization for the entire region.

In the next presidential elections, Bush Jr. won again. But my acquaintances were already satisfied with this fact. As they explained: "Our country is fighting in Iraq. A change of president during wartime would embolden our enemies. And it would make things harder for our soldiers there."

Now back to the question I asked at the beginning of this text. Yes, democracy can defeat autocracy. The same former Minister of Defense Fyodorov perfectly demonstrated this with a drone "breakthrough," taking advantage of a free economy, as well as financial and technological resources received by the current president from democratic countries around the world.

But ochlocracy (mob rule) will never win," writes Nikolai Statkevich.

• 12
• 5
• 3
• 8
• 0
• 0
• 2
• 0