If Flaubert achieved for me his acme with three or four simple words "She pretended to think," Saker reached his peak with this marvelous description of the politically and diplomatically atrocious "Minsk ceasefire protocol": "Knowing the degree to which Russian diplomats are normally maniacally fastidious and pedantic with words, I can only conclude that they have deliberately sabotaged this agreement and that it's sole use what to deflate the bellicose mood of the NATO summit."
In other words, the implementation of Putin's 7-point initiative was written so poorly and badly that Saker concluded not only that it must have been written by Russian diplomats, but that Russian diplomats must have composed the Minsk Protocol so terribly on purpose. For how could someone comparatively intelligent and reasonably well educated produce something so horrible and awful? One does not make something so bad by mistake. One has to be a master to be able to do that.
And why would Russian diplomats deliberately sabotage the document and made it so poor and thus making themselves appear as bad as the document they made? According to Saker, this was not because they had any intention to sabotage Novorossiya or its struggle, but because they wanted to sabotage "the bellicose mood" of NATO by appeasing NATO and its bellicosity with the sabotage of the ceasefire agreement.
And why exactly would NATO, receiving such awful provisions for Novorossiya, find its "bellicose mood deflated"? Because of being in awe of the horrible work of the Russian diplomats? Or just being stunned by it? Or because in some way this sabotage made their "bellicose mood" much happier and relaxed?
So does this mean that we have at last found the secret for deflating NATO and its aggressiveness--by sabotaging our own work, by promising to keep Novorossiya dissolved into several "special regions" for which the Nazis might at some point write their "Law" and run their "new elections"? Is it really by sabotaging genuine peace and actual principles that friends of Russia and Putin can appease, deflate and defeat NATO's intelligence and plans, which were decades in making, as Avakov said the other night?
Does this mean that the worse their work Russian diplomats do, the more they "sabotage," the more NATO will be deflated and the better and more effective Russian diplomacy is actually going to be?
I am just simply getting overwhelmed. So, in a situation like this, I think I need a drink or one or two. And after few more drinks, I must start to understand at last that the best strategy, writing, and thought, when it comes to such serious matters as the fate of Novorossiya and Russia, might be, as Saker teaches, that very bad and awful is better and even good!
Drunken with tears,
Yours Vlad, Czechmate