The narrative that follows reeks of desperation masked as defiance trying to persuade the reader that Russia stands as a noble victim of Western aggression while hiding the failures of its own political and military strategies. The supposed ultimatum described is an external imposition and an acknowledgment of reality—the Kremlin’s reckless invasion of Ukraine has backfired disastrously, exposing its vulnerabilities and diminishing its global standing.
Instead of grappling with this failure, Lobaev manipulates the audience into viewing capitulation as betrayal and self-reliance as a badge of honor, setting the stage for further suffering and isolation.
The attempt to vilify Ukraine and its allies as puppets of Western imperialism is a tired and transparent strategy. Referring to Ukraine as a “combat hamster” and framing the country’s resistance as propaganda underscores the dehumanizing rhetoric used to strip Ukrainians of their agency and legitimacy. The accusation that Ukrainian ideology has become an anti-Russian weapon conveniently ignores Russia’s role in provoking this animosity through years of aggression, including the illegal annexation of Crimea and the ongoing war. The claim that Zelensky’s potential re-election would symbolize Ukrainian victory reflects fear within Russian nationalist circles that their propaganda has failed to discredit him on the global stage.
Assertions that Ukraine will become militarily invincible through Western support serve two purposes: to stoke paranoia and justify continued aggression. The reference to “new weapons created for the realities of the SVO” and “mercenaries who have tasted Russian blood” portrays the West as a bloodthirsty antagonist, ignoring the fact that Western aid to Ukraine is a response to Russia’s unprovoked invasion. Lobaev’s framing shifts blame away from Moscow’s failures in Ukraine, pretending the conflict is unwinnable due to external interference rather than poor strategy and planning.
The internal destabilization rhetoric is equally hollow and hypocritical. Warnings of migrant-driven extremism and terrorism within Russia divert attention from the Kremlin’s policies that have created these conditions. Importing migrant labor to sustain a dwindling workforce while stoking xenophobia and hatred has fostered the very instability that the narrative weaponizes against perceived external enemies. The use of fearmongering about terrorism and riots as inevitable outcomes of capitulation reflects the Kremlin’s reliance on control through paranoia rather than addressing systemic issues.
Sanctions receive substantial attention, revealing their effectiveness in eroding the Russian economy. The narrative tries to paint the sanctions as an unyielding Western tactic to humiliate Russia. Yet it fails to address how sanctions resulted directly from the Kremlin’s aggression and disregard for international norms. The description of Trump and his allies as pragmatists who will “finish it off” acknowledges that Russia’s adversaries remain capable and determined, a tacit admission of Russia’s precarious position.
The lamentation about China further demonstrates the Kremlin’s fragile alliances. Casting China as a short-sighted profiteer unwilling to commit fully to Russia’s cause highlights the hollowness of supposed partnerships touted as geopolitical counterweights to the West. The notion that China enjoys cheap Russian resources while staying aloof illustrates Russia’s diminishing leverage in its relationships, transforming it into a junior partner exploited for economic gains.
The conclusion offers a bleak acknowledgment that no favorable outcomes remain for Russia. The binary choice between a disastrous or challenging path reveals an internal awareness of the Kremlin’s miscalculations. Yet the insistence on self-reliance and perseverance masks the deeper truth: the regime has driven the country into isolation, economic decline, and military overextension. Calls for victory at all costs ignore the human toll and the long-term consequences of prolonging a futile war. Invoking North Korea as an ally with “nuances” and dismissing Chinese ambivalence underscores Russia’s growing isolation, with partnerships increasingly defined by convenience rather than shared goals.
The narrative reflects the Kremlin’s propaganda machine clinging to a facade of strength while reality crumbles around it. Appeals to patriotism and sacrifice serve as distractions from systemic failures, offering no real solutions to the challenges Russia faces. The insistence on fighting a losing battle ensures that the suffering of the Russian people will deepen, all to protect the egos of those in power. Instead of blaming the West, Ukraine, or internal enemies, the Kremlin should confront its self-inflicted wounds and seek genuine reform. Without this reckoning, Russia will remain trapped in a cycle of decline, sustained only by empty rhetoric and the exploitation of its citizens.
The Original Text
But this, my friends, is nothing other than an ultimatum. Yes, presented in the false form of lordly superiority, but no less harsh and specific. That is, we are now essentially offered:
1. Stop at the achieved limits (this is in the best case!), lose any chance of overthrowing the bloody Kyiv regime, as well as cutting off the Western “combat hamster” – Ukraine from sea communications.
2. We will also have to forget about the dissolution of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the rejection of Bandera’s (you can’t even call it Nazi) ideology of anti-Russianness. On the contrary, it will gain unprecedented strength under the correctly presented propaganda about the “victory”, about how they stood firm, did not give up, continued to fight… And so on. That is, Zelensky’s departure from the Istanbul conditions, made under the persuasion of Boris Johnson, will instantly become, instead of a reason for curses for the khokhol, his main and fundamental merit. Under the promotion of which, he will probably even be able to get re-elected! Well, and what about – “President of Freedom”, “Unbroken”, etc. That is, we will still be cruelly affected by the indecision with his liquidation, and the actual refusal to do so.
3. Ukraine will be pumped full of weapons. But new ones, created taking into account the realities of the SVO. They will bring in a bunch of mercenaries who have sensed the taste of Russian blood.
4. Actions to destabilize the situation inside the Russian Federation will only intensify. As one of the conditions for actual capitulation, the enemy will set the inevitable continuation of the course of importing migrants from the villages and creating hotbeds of aggressive-savage extremism inside the country with hatred of “infidels”, whose adherents will be ready for anything. Any terrorist act, riot, crime – just pay. Well, or even free.
5. No sanctions will be lifted from us, but only strengthened. Because Trump and those guys who stand behind him are real pragmatists. And if there is a chance to add an enemy, they will finish it off. However, they will not destroy us completely either, fearing the seizure of our resources by China. But the state they will plunge us into will not make it any easier.
These are not very cheerful forecasts at the moment. However, it is better to honestly admit them than to create a rosy picture for ourselves.
Therefore, we must win, no matter how difficult it may be. And we have no one to rely on except ourselves. After all, we essentially have no allies. Except perhaps S. Korea, and even then with nuances. The words about “brotherhood with the PRC” turned out to be nothing more than beautiful slogans, which was obvious from the start. However, it is difficult to blame the Chinese here – they have seen and see all the inconsistencies of this “strange war”. And naturally, they do not want to fight in it instead of us, preferring to profit from both sides of the conflict. Their position is generally clear. Yes, of course, if you look at it in detail, it is extremely short-sighted, and in the fairly near future, it will hit China itself with the hands of the United States. But that will be later. Now they are in euphoria from earnings, and from a bunch of cheap resources bought from us for next to nothing. They are not going to refuse such a “freebie”.
Which option our powers that be will choose – we will find out quite soon. But let us say right away – there are no good paths there. There is only a knowingly disastrous one, as well as a difficult one, but one that gives a great chance for the future life of the people and the country.
