Major General Le Van Cuong: The Russia-Ukraine Special Military Operation: 6 Months, 6 Issues

1. The origins of the Russia-Ukraine war:

There are two fundamental, underlying causes of the Russia-Ukraine war: 1) Internal conflicts within Ukraine; 2) A US strategy aimed at weakening Russia.

Ukraine is a country where "the timing is right, the place is right, but the people are not harmonious."

With 603,000 km²Ukraine has the largest land area in Europe (excluding Russia). Within its vast territory, there are no extreme cold or hot zones, and the land is fertile (Ukraine possesses 10% of the world's best land).

From an anthropological, linguistic, religious, and economic perspective, Ukraine is composed of two distinct and contrasting regions: the nine eastern provinces bordering Russia, predominantly Russian in population, practicing the Russian Orthodox religion, and with an industrial economy linked to Russia (dating back to the Soviet era). The people of these nine eastern provinces share similar sentiments and beliefs towards Russia, and they desire to promote and expand relations with Russia in all aspects.

Kyiv, the capital of Ukraine. Photo: Kelley Hudson

Eight western provinces (bordering Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Romania, and Bulgaria) are predominantly Roman Catholic, with a majority Ukrainian population and anti-Russian sentiments, even extreme anti-Russian views. Seven central provinces, however, do not have extreme anti-Russian sentiments but aspire to integration into Europe.

The population is divided into two blocs: pro-Russian in the East and anti-Russian in the West. Therefore, since 1911, Ukraine has never existed as a unified state. The internal political situation in Ukraine is an objective and long-standing one. This situation creates an objective requirement: the Kiev government needs to maintain a balance between the East (Russia) and the West (Western Europe).

The facts have proven this: Periods when the Kiev government balanced East and West resulted in stability and development; periods when the Kiev government leaned heavily toward one side (Russia or Europe) led to instability and stagnation. Currently, the Kiev government has completely embraced the US against Russia and is bringing disaster upon itself.⁽²⁾.

Leading strategists around the world have warned Kyiv. Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger rightly pointed out: “If Ukraine wants to survive and thrive, it must not become an outpost for either side against the other; it must act as a bridge between the two sides.”⁽³⁾.

Regarding the US strategy to weaken Russia:

Ideally, for objectivity, we should quote the opinions of leading scholars and strategists from the United States and its allies.

"The strategic goal of the United States is to seek global hegemony, not allowing the emergence of any major power in the two continents of Europe and Asia that would constitute a threat to America's leadership position." ⁽⁴⁾.

"To maintain post-World War II global hegemony and eliminate the prospect of a multipolar world, it is necessary to control the Eurasian bloc, whose constituent elements include Europe, Russia, and China."

The ultimate goal is to exert maximum pressure on Russia in the Eurasian region and eliminate or weaken Russia as a power pole.⁽⁵⁾.

NATO's eastward expansion has posed urgent challenges to Russia. (Photo: Archival material)

To weaken Russia, the first and most important step is for the US to expand NATO eastward, admitting Eastern European and Baltic states into NATO; narrowing Russia's strategic space; and deploying modern weapons and war equipment in Eastern European and Baltic states, directly threatening Russia's national security.

GF Kennan, the father of the Soviet "Strategy of Containment" against the Soviet Union.⁽⁶⁾He wisely remarked: "Expanding NATO would be the most fatal mistake in post-Cold War American policy."⁽⁷⁾.

Leading American strategists Kissinger, William Burns, Malcolm Fraser, Edward Luttwak, Sam Nunn, Jack Matlock, Paul Nitze, Owen Harries, William Perry, and B. Brzezinski all share the same viewpoint as GF Kennan.

Among the former Soviet republics, Ukraine holds a particularly important position for Russia's national security. If Ukraine were to join NATO, American hypersonic missiles stationed in Ukraine could destroy the Kremlin in just four minutes, a feat Russia would be unable to defend against. Therefore, Ukraine's non-joining NATO is a "red line" that Russia demands the US and Ukraine not cross.

B. Brzezinski vehemently opposed Ukraine's accession to NATO: “The US and its allies should abandon the plan of Westernization and instead aim to make this country (Ukraine) a neutral buffer between NATO and Russia, similar to Austria's position during the Cold War”; and “Finlandization of Ukraine: Substantive neutrality, politically able to have friendly relations with any country, economically able to join the EU, militarily not allowed to join NATO.”⁽⁸⁾.

NATO regularly conducts military exercises in Russia's "backyard." Photo: Archival material.

"Top U.S. national security experts emphasize that the current Ukraine crisis was created by the United States."⁽⁹⁾Journalist Thomas Friedman, who writes the foreign affairs column for "The New York Times," also argues that the US created the Ukraine crisis itself.⁽¹⁰⁾.

In short, the root cause of the current Ukrainian crisis is the confluence of internal factors (Ukrainian internal affairs) and external factors (the US strategy of weakening Russia since the end of the Cold War (1991) to maintain Washington's dominant role in the world).

2. Two phases of the Russia-Ukraine war

The division of the Russia-Ukraine war into two phases (so far) is only relative and reflects the intentions of the US and the West.

- Phase 1 from February 24, 2022 to April 23, 2022:

For the first two days (February 24th and 25th), the US and the West were still considering and observing the situation, not yet ready to rush in to provide weapons and financial assistance to Ukraine. The Ukrainian president publicly stated: Ukraine – a democracy abandoned by the West! Subsequently, the US and NATO – primarily European countries – began providing weapons and financial aid to the Kiev government, mainly to help Ukraine fight against Russia.

Russian armored vehicle convoy in Crimea in January 2022. Photo: AP

- Phase 2, from April 24, 2022 to present:

On April 24, 2022, US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and US Secretary of State Antony Blinken arrived in Ukraine. In Kyiv, the Ukrainian President and the Kyiv government pledged to US officials that if the US and NATO provided sufficient weapons and funding, Ukraine would certainly defeat Russia, forcing Russia to return Crimea and withdraw (Russia would suffer a humiliating defeat!).

Please note: February 24 - April 23, 2022 was a period of heavy losses for Russia on the battlefield. For over a month, Russian troops made slow progress, failing to enter Kyiv and Kharkiv. Western public opinion suggested that Russia was bogged down and would fail! This was arguably the darkest period for the Russian military in Ukraine. In this context, the Kyiv government was determined to defeat Russia if it had sufficient weapons and financial resources from the US and NATO. Perhaps the US shifted its intention from helping Ukraine fight Russia to providing weapons and funding to Kyiv to defeat Russia.

On April 25, 2022, in Poland, US Secretary of Defense L. Austin publicly declared: “The Ukrainians have a mindset of wanting to win; we have a mindset of wanting to help them win. Furthermore, we want to see Russia weakened to the point where it cannot do what it did in its invasion of Ukraine.”

On April 26, 2022, in Germany, Secretary of Defense L. Austin held a meeting attended by 40 defense ministers from 40 US allied nations and issued a statement: Forming a broad international front to support Ukraine with weapons and financial assistance to defeat Russia.

On April 28, 2022, the US Congress passed (417 votes in favor/10 against) the "Ukraine Democracy Protection Lease Act of 2022". Accordingly, during the period 2022-2023, the US allocated $33 billion to Ukraine (for arms purchases, Ukrainian military training, etc.) to defeat Russia.

From the end of April 2022, the US and its European NATO allies (UK, France, Germany, Poland, etc.) have been aggressively providing funding and the most advanced weapons available to the Kiev government to defeat Russia.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky addressed the US Congress on March 16 to appeal for support. Photo: GETTY IMAGES

The US supplied the Kiev government with Javelin anti-tank missiles, Stinger air defense systems, sniper rifles, and especially the HIMARS high-mobility missile launch system (which can launch multiple guided missiles simultaneously with high accuracy and a range of 70-80 km).

Britain supplied the Kiev government with anti-ship missile systems and armored vehicles. France provided Kiev with the latest Milan anti-tank missiles and Caesar artillery. Germany transferred armored vehicles and new generation anti-tank missiles to Ukraine. Türkiye supplied Kiev with the most advanced TB2 drones currently available.

The Kiev government possesses most of the most modern weapons from the US and its NATO allies. The Ukrainian battlefield is currently witnessing a clash of two weapon systems: Russian weapons systems and advanced weapons systems from 30 NATO countries, with the US playing a core and leading role.

In essence, this is a war between Russia and 30 NATO countries led by the United States. In other words, the US is providing weapons and funding to the Kiev government so that it can fight Russia to the last Ukrainian. It's also not wrong to say this is a proxy war: Washington is using Ukrainians to fight Russia, weakening Russia.

Ukrainian soldiers unload a shipment of US Javelin missiles. Photo: CNN.

3. Shortcomings and losses for Russia:

We will not discuss whether Russia is bogged down or has failed in this war. Because the war is not over, the full extent of Russia's losses cannot yet be assessed. Initial opinions are being expressed regarding...Russian lossesand focus on examining how inadequate Russia was when it entered into "Special Military Operation" on February 24, 2022.

Preliminary estimates point to five major losses for Russia: 1) Losses of human lives and property (weapons, financial resources, etc.); 2) Immediate and long-term economic damage to nearly a thousand Western corporations withdrawing from Russia, a shrinking of 80-90% in the import and export market for goods, materials, and high-tech equipment, and financial isolation; 3) Increased isolation for Russia; 4) A deepening of the divide between Russia and Europe; 5) A dire situation for Russia and Ukraine.

The initial points highlight some shortcomings of Russia's "Special Military Operations":

- Firstly, there is a contradiction in the very philosophy of the war: The war should not be destructive, should not target civilians (considering the Ukrainian people as friends of Russia), should not destroy the economy, but should focus on destroying military infrastructure (information centers, command centers, weapons depots, transportation systems serving the Ukrainian army, weapons production facilities, etc.) and the Ukrainian military forces.

The Kiev authorities brought modern weapons and command and staff forces into the city and residential areas (including schools and hospitals), causing significant difficulties for the Russian army. This was urban warfare; the Kiev authorities organized dozens of squads hidden in alleyways, using snipers and anti-tank missiles to destroy Russian tanks. This was non-destructive urban warfare; a very small sniper force was capable of halting the advance of an army with dozens of tanks and armored vehicles.

Perhaps Russia did not foresee this paradox before launching "Special Military Operation".

Ukrainian soldiers at a defensive position on a bridge in Kyiv. Photo: NPR

Secondly, in March 2014, the Russian army entered Crimea with virtually no resistance from the Ukrainian army. In 2014, the Ukrainian army was quite demoralized, with very low combat effectiveness. Over the next eight years (2014-2022), the Kiev government reorganized the army: Approximately over 80% were new recruits after March 2014 (the loss of Crimea); over 70% of commanders at all levels were newly appointed; NATO trained the Ukrainian army using NATO's combat methods (different from the Russian army's combat methods). Thus, the quality of the Ukrainian army, as demonstrated by its combat capabilities in 2022, is vastly different from that of 2014.

In every respect, the combat strength of the Ukrainian army in 2022 was far superior to that of 2014. Russia underestimated the Ukrainian army when it launched its "Special Military Operation".

- Thirdly, Russia failed to anticipate the determination and level of consensus between the US and its European allies in two aspects: 1) Comprehensive and thorough encirclement and sanctions against Russia; 2) Political support, arms and financial assistance to the Kiev government to defeat Russia. Russia also did not foresee the devastating consequences of nearly 5,000 economic sanctions imposed by the US and its allies on Russia. Furthermore, Russia may have overestimated the strength of the "energy weapons"Its policy towards European countries. In reality, Europe faced countless difficulties, but the European economy did not collapse, nor did Europe disintegrate without oil and gas from Russia."

From the three issues above, a preliminary observation can be made: Before launching the "Special Military Operation" on February 24, 2022, Russia did not properly assess its adversaries: It did not properly assess Ukraine, nor did it assess the determination of the US and its allies in sanctioning Russia and in providing modern weapons and financial support to the Kiev government to defeat Russia.

Sun Tzu taught: "Know yourself and know your enemy, and you will win every battle. Know yourself but not your enemy, and you will win one battle and lose another. Know neither yourself nor your enemy, and you will lose every battle."⁽¹¹⁾Perhaps Russia falls into the second category.

A Russian Su-57 fighter jet. Photo: TASS

4. Who benefits from this war?

As of August 24, 2022, the United States is the country that has benefited the most from the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

- Politically, the US benefits are demonstrated by: 1) Russia's weakening; 2) Europe's weakening in politics, security, economy, and society, thus rendering the so-called "strategic autonomy of Europe" mere rhetoric, giving the US even more leverage to force Europe to follow Washington's every move; 3) Thoroughly supporting the Kiev government in defeating Russia has added points to the Biden administration and the Democratic Party in the midterm elections in November 2022; 4) Through the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the US has gained a better understanding and assessment of Russia's role and position in the world and the Russia-China relationship.

- Economically, the US reaped significant benefits from the Russia-Ukraine conflict: 1) The Wall Street military-financial conglomerate profited handsomely from the production and sale of weapons to the US Department of Defense and dozens of European countries; 2) US oil, gas, and liquefied natural gas companies gained an export market 3-4 times larger than before February 24, 2022 (primarily selling to Europe); 3) The dollar appreciated against the euro, and large corporations, primarily from European countries, sought investment opportunities in the US.

It's important to note: Ukraine is far removed from the United States. Whether Ukraine is strong or weak has no bearing on the United States. A war between Russia and Ukraine would not threaten U.S. national security. The U.S. has no interest in Ukraine and is not concerned with protecting Ukraine's territorial integrity.The US aims to weaken Russia, and the more Russia disintegrates, the better.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy (center) inspects Javelin anti-tank missiles supplied by the US military. Photo:Reuters

The US provided weapons and funding to the Ukrainians to defeat Russia. This was a proxy war waged by the US.

Many talented and honest scholars in the West share similar views with the author.

Renowned American economist and professor Jeffrey Sachs, who advised the UN Secretary-General for many years, said: “The US is very ‘fond’ of escalating conflict. The US government wants to seize the opportunity and force Russia to ‘kneel.’”⁽¹²⁾.

5. The Crimea issue and the use of atomic bombs:

- Regarding the issue of Crimea:

It is also worth recalling some details about the history of Crimea. From 1793, Crimea belonged to Russia and remained under Russian control until Khrushchev – General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and Chairman of the Soviet Union – decided to transfer Crimea from Russia to Ukraine at the end of 1954. The Soviet Constitution stipulated that transferring a territory from one republic to another required two steps: 1) A referendum in that territory; 2) If more than two-thirds of the residents agreed, a report was submitted to the Supreme Soviet (Parliament) for a decision.

The bridge connects the Crimean Peninsula and mainland Russia. Photo: TASS

In 1954, Khrushchev transferred Crimea from Russia to Ukraine without fulfilling the two aforementioned conditions. Therefore, the transfer of Crimea from Russia to Ukraine in 1954 was unconstitutional.⁽¹³⁾.

The internal crisis in Ukraine began on November 21, 2013, and lasted until February 20, 2014, during which bloody clashes occurred in Kyiv and several major cities on February 18, 19, and 20, 2014.

With the backing of France, Germany, and Russia, to save Ukraine from a bloody tragedy, on February 21, 2014, the government of President V. Yanukovych and opposition political forces signed an agreement to end the conflict, with the parties cooperating to bring Ukraine out of crisis and develop the country.

On February 21, 2014 (afternoon), the European Union and the Obama administration issued a statement supporting the agreement between the Yanukovych government and opposition forces, stating that it was the only solution to save Ukraine from the crisis.

On February 22, 2014, the United States directed an extraordinary session of the Ukrainian Parliament to criticize President Yanukovych, resulting in a vote in which 72.88% of parliamentarians agreed to impeach him. The 2014 Ukrainian Constitution stipulates that a president can only be impeached if more than 75% of parliamentarians agree. The extraordinary parliamentary session organized by the US on February 22, 2014, only received 72.88% of the votes. Therefore, the impeachment of President Yanukovych on February 22, 2014, organized by the US, was unconstitutional.

Given the situation (the US had broken its promise), Russia decided to annex Crimea:

On March 1, 2014, Russian troops entered and took control of Crimea.

On March 18, 2014, Russia held a referendum on Crimea's return to Russia, with 96.8% of the population voting in favor.

On March 21, 2014, the State Duma issued a decree recognizing Crimea as an entity belonging to Russia.

Between 2016 and 2017, Russia constructed the Crimean Bridge. The 19km-long Crimean Bridge (the longest in Europe) connects Crimea to mainland Russia (Russian territory), encompassing both road and rail routes. The construction cost was $4 billion. The Crimean Bridge is the only route for Russia to transport supplies and food to the 2.3 million people in Crimea; it is also the primary route for transporting weapons, logistics, and troops to Crimea to support the war in Ukraine.

On dozens of occasions, the Ukrainian president and high-ranking officials of the Kyiv government have publicly declared their intention to destroy the Crimean Bridge and liberate Crimea.

From Moscow's perspective, Crimea belongs to Russia and the issue of Crimea will never be brought up for negotiation with Kyiv. Russian National Security Council Deputy Chairman Medvedev stated:If the Kiev authorities destroy the Crimean Bridge, “they will immediately face judgment, very quickly and violently. There is no escaping this.”

Russia is deploying its most elite forces with modern weapons such as the S-400 to protect the Crimean Bridge. It should be understood that the opinion of the Deputy Chairman of the Russian National Security Council, Medvedev, is not a warning but an order.

Regardless of how the Russia-Ukraine war unfolds, and who emerges victorious, the Crimean Peninsula will forever belong to Russia. In 2015, Russian President Vladimir Putin told a Western counterpart:"Whoever uses force to take back Crimea, we will use atomic bombs!".

If the Kiev government were to launch a direct military attack on the Crimean Peninsula and destroy the Crimean Bridge, the nature of the war would change 180 degrees.^oIt is truly a war of destruction and will lead to a swift end with defeat and disaster for the Kiev government.

- The use of atomic bombs:

On August 1, 2022, Russian President V. Putin said:"There are no winners in a nuclear war."

Russian President Vladimir Putin. Photo: Reuters

On August 16, 2022, at the annual Security Conference in Moscow, the Russian Defense Minister outlined four scenarios in which Russia might use nuclear weapons: 1) An attack by nuclear missiles; 2) Any other nuclear weapons being used against Russia; 3) An attack on critical infrastructure that would cripple Russia's nuclear deterrence capabilities; 4) Hostile actions against Russia and its allies that endanger the country's survival, even if only conventional weapons are used, excluding nuclear weapons.

The fourth scenario above relates to the current Russia-Ukraine war. It can be speculated as follows: If the Kiev government takes one of the following two actions: 1) Fires missiles at Russia, directly at Moscow; 2) Concentrates advanced weapons from the US and NATO members for a massive attack to regain the Crimean Peninsula.

If either of these two scenarios occurs, Russia is likely to use tactical nuclear weapons to end the war.

Another nuclear threat is showing signs of emerging.Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plantThis is Europe's largest nuclear power plant, currently controlled by Russia. As the war intensified, no one naively believed that no missile or artillery shell would fall on the "heart" of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. If the Zaporizhzhia plant were to explode like Chernobyl in 1986, it would cause a catastrophe for all of Europe and also hasten the end of the war.

Russian soldiers patrol the area around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine on May 1. Photo: AFP

Could a nuclear war between the US and Russia occur?

This largely depends on the United States. The nuclear ball is in Washington's court. If the U.S. decides to push Russia into a corner, "Russia's reaction will be immediate and will cause you unprecedented consequences."⁽¹⁴⁾President V. Putin is not threatening but warning the US. Russia possesses approximately 6,000 nuclear bombs and delivery systems (hypersonic missiles, intercontinental ballistic missiles, etc.) capable of destroying the US tenfold. No matter how much they hate Putin, even the most hawkish politicians in Washington know when to stop in the face of death.

6. How will this war end?

To put it bluntly: Nobody knows.

Western scholars and politicians have put forward dozens of scenarios for ending the Russia-Ukraine war. Try to listen to them all, but only believe a few!

The US is not sending troops to Ukraine to fight against Russia. Instead, the US is providing modern weapons to the Kiev government to defeat Russia on the Ukrainian battlefield.

- To date, Ukraine has effectively gone bankrupt.

The economy was devastated, and most of the weapons production facilities were destroyed by the Russian army. Ukraine lacked money and weapons. Ukraine used money and weapons from the US and European NATO members to fight Russia. Ultimately, the European countries (Britain, Germany, Poland, the three Baltic states, etc.) were nothing more than puppets in the hands of the US.

Without financial aid and weapons from the US and NATO members, the Kiev government would collapse within a month.

- The ball is in the American's court.

The outcome of this war largely depends on how Washington decides to fight Russia and where it will push Russia.

Outwardly, the US-led anti-Russia front still appears to be a solid, unified bloc. However, internally, cracks have begun to appear, and two factions, "hawks" and "peace-seekers," have emerged.

Generally speaking, European countries have begun to feel weary of following the US against Russia. The Brussels elite have begun to realize that siding with the US against Russia brings no benefits and only heavy losses in every respect. Only the UK, Poland, and the three Baltic states still actively follow the US and want to prolong the war to defeat Russia. This is the hawkish faction. Conversely, France, Germany, Italy, and many other European countries want to promote dialogue between Russia and Ukraine to end the conflict as soon as possible. This can be seen as the pacifist faction.

In the US, there have also been many opinions suggesting that the conflict should end as soon as possible.

An editorial in the New York Times in late May 2022 argued that Russia's failure was unrealistic and dangerous. This was a major blow to the "hawkish" faction in the United States.⁽¹⁵⁾.

Scenes of devastation in Ukrainian cities following Russian airstrikes. Photo: Archival material.

At a panel discussion in Davos during the World Economic Forum, former US Secretary of State H. Kissinger (99 years old) suggested that Ukraine and Russia should negotiate to end the bloody conflict as soon as possible. Kissinger even called for Ukraine to make "territorial concessions" to Russia, by accepting the status quo – that is, Moscow's annexation of Crimea and other eastern territories – in order to consider ending the war and restoring peace.⁽¹⁶⁾.

On June 4, 2022, French President Emmanuel Macron said: “We must not humiliate Russia so that when the fighting stops, we can build a way out through diplomatic means. I believe that France has a role to play as a mediator.”⁽¹⁷⁾.

- With the Kiev government.

Dozens of times, the Ukrainian president and top officials of the Kiev government have sworn: They will defeat Russia, reclaim Crimea and Donbass. These are the pronouncements of those who are "deaf to the sound of gunfire." Of course, they have to say this so that Washington and Brussels will pump weapons and dollars into Kiev. Perhaps those who claim to reclaim Crimea don't even believe it's possible, but they still have to say it to appear as "national heroes"!

In the West, many sincere pieces of advice have been offered to President Zelensky.

“President Zelensky quickly realized that he had been deceived by his Western friends and used as a pawn in a determined geopolitical struggle against Russia. Western media praised and hyped Zelensky as a hero in the face of Russian forces.”⁽¹⁸⁾.

"Zelenski would have been wiser to ignore Western incitement to escalate the war, instead calling for a ceasefire and earnestly seeking negotiations to end the hostilities, thereby alleviating the suffering of the people and preventing the country from being devastated."⁽¹⁹⁾.

"President Zelensky should avoid using his citizens as 'human shields' in the name of patriotism."⁽²⁰⁾.

- With Russia.

Public opinion in the West believes that Russia will exhaust its resources (weapons, economy, soldiers) and will inevitably fail. They misjudge three key aspects of Russia: 1) Russia possesses vast resources that can be mobilized for the war; 2) The Russian character and the immense inner strength of the Russian people, when they recognize an enemy threatening and infringing upon Russia's vital interests, will lead to a fierce reaction (beyond the enemy's expectations); 3) Russia has superior military power and has not (to date) used its "trump card" in the Ukraine war.

The enormous losses suffered by Russia in all aspects are clear.

Russia will not fail.

A wise person knows when to stop.

The ball is in America's court.⁽²¹⁾.

It would be wise and somewhat humane for Washington and Kyiv to follow the advice of world-renowned strategist H. Kissinger.

Hanoi, August 24, 2022

-------------

1. 90% because in the US and its allies, there are many politicians and scholars who are level-headed, insightful, and honest in their assessment of this war, believing that the root cause is the US strategy of weakening Russia.

2. During the period 1991-1995, Ukraine essentially pursued a strategy of balancing East and West. If it had continued this policy from 1994 to the present, Ukraine would have become a powerful economic power in Europe.

3. The website thelill.com, March 22, 2022.

4. Tien Chung: “Strategic Forecast for the 21st Century”, Institute of International Relations, Hanoi, 2002, p. 391.

5. Special Reference Document (VNA), April 2022 issue, citing the website “ccg.org.com” (late March 2022).

6. At the request of the U.S. Congress and the U.S. State Department, on June 22, 1946, GF Kennan (U.S. Consul General in Moscow) sent a 6,000-word telegram outlining strategic solutions to prevent the "expansion of the Soviet Union."

7. An article by GF Kennan published in the New York Times in 1997.

8. Foreign Policy magazine, USA, July 2014 issue.

9-10. According to "Asian Weekly", issue 19/2022.

11. Sai Vu Cau: “Selected Strategists - Volume 5 Military Strategists”, Public Security Publishing House, Hanoi, 1999, p. 89.

12. The German newspaper Die Wilt, April 1, 2022.

13. Khrushchev was Ukrainian.

14. VNA: The World News Agency (TTKTG) on February 26, 2022, quoted President Putin's statement (message) (February 24, 2022) when launching the "Special Military Operation".

15-16. “The Economist” (UK) May 26, 2022.

17. VNA: The World News Agency, June 6, 2022, citing BBC/Sputnik/RFI, June 4, 2022.

18-19-20. News.cgtn.com website, February 28, 2022.

21. The US twice pledged not to expand NATO eastward, but they betrayed that commitment: On February 9, 1990, US Secretary of State J. Baker pledged to President Gorbachev that NATO would not expand even an inch! On March 6, 1991, at a meeting of six nations—the US, the Soviet Union, the UK, France, West Germany, and East Germany—in Boon (the capital of West Germany), the US pledged, "We will not expand NATO beyond the Elbe River."