Featured Image
Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger (L) meets China's President Xi Jinping (R) at the Great Halll of the People on December 2, 2016, In Beijing, ChinaPhoto by Nicolas Asouri - Pool / Getty Images

(LifeSiteNews) — In a surprising departure from the drumbeat of permanent war, former National Security Advisor and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has suggested the war against Russia may come to a negotiated end – with the help of China.

In a CBS interview reported by Newsweek on May 8, Kissinger said, “Now that China has entered the negotiation, it will come to a head, I think, by the end of the year,” and “We will be talking about negotiating processes and even actual negotiations.” Kissinger went further, offering to meet President Vladimir Putin himself in the capacity of an advisor.

It is an indication of the state of Western diplomacy that a 100-year-old man is the only senior diplomat in the West to suggest that talking to people might be useful.

A pattern of peace

Kissinger is not a neoconservative but what is called a “realist.” This is a position in diplomacy which recognizes that other nations exist to defend their own interests, just as yours.

He first called for a settlement of the U.S.-Russia war in May 2022, with a proposal which included the cessation of territory to Russia from the former Ukraine.

Regarded as outrageous in Western circles, this is simply the position to which Zelensky himself was likely to agree during talks in Turkey to end the war as early as March 2022.

However, with the full-throated intervention of the U.S.-led West, it became anathema to mention any realistic means of ending the war, the objective of which has nothing to do with Ukraine beyond its purpose as the site of destroying the Russian state.

Taiwan is Ukraine

No mention has been made of the fact the Chinese began a process which resulted, so far, in Kissinger’s remarkable endorsement of their power to make peace. The Chinese published their peace plan in February 2022, and their President, Xi Jinping, discussed peace with Zelensky during a telephone call in April.

Talk of peace in partnership with the Chinese takes place in the alarming context of a permanent war establishment seeking to move on to conflict – and not cooperation – with China. It is therefore understandable that Kissinger would see any mention of the Chinese peace plan as unrealistic in the current feverish climate.

Nevertheless, attention may well shift to the Chinese plan. Titled “China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis,” it was published on the February 24, 2023, and roundly ignored. Later, as it became impossible to completely exclude this reality from coverage, it was framed as scheme to secure victory in a war over Taiwan which has not yet taken place.

The attempt to link Ukraine with Taiwan is a disgraceful one, which has rapidly faded from view – along with any possibility of the Russians losing the war. It is a case of bait and switch. The populations of the West are inured to one war whose degraded brand can be renewed by the promotion of the next.

As Foreign Policy magazine claimed, “China’s Ukraine Peace Plan is Actually About Taiwan.” This framing permitted the war faction to elide the mess in Ukraine with the one they seek to provoke around an island 100 miles from the Chinese coast.

This was the latest attempt to legitimize the life support given to the war against Russia, paid for in vast amounts of blood and treasure and with no realistic hope of success. As reality begins to dawn on the dreams of the neoconservatives, China’s involvement may present a means of saving face, whilst preparing – insanely – to provoke them.

What does the Chinese plan say?

Precisely no one in the Western media has examined the Chinese plan. Even Kissinger stopped short of naming any of its twelve points. Why? If it is so bad, so naked in its abuse of peace to promote military ambition, then surely it would be wise to quote it?

Instead, the plan is simply derided without mention. The reason? It documents the total failure of the project of the West in Ukraine.

The Chinese plan begins with respecting the sovereignty of nations. Woah! This is not a regime-change friendly remark, Chairman Mao. The Chinese hatred of freedom and the American way continues with its promotion of peace talks, ending the humanitarian crisis, and abandoning the Cold War mentality.

We have been treated to almost a year of propaganda which has boldly asserted there will be no talks with Putin, who will be deposed in some fantasy world and brought before a show trial in The Hague.

EU Commissioner Ursula von der Leyen, German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, and former Finnish Prime Minister Sanne Marin have all supported this line, using the needless destruction of life as the opportunity for a grandstanding bravura performance to the cameras.

President Joe Biden called for the removal of Putin in March 2022, accomplishing the extraordinary feat of embarrassing Antony Blinken when he said of the Russian President, “this man cannot stay in power.”

Regardless of whether you agree with Biden and the wise women of Europe, it is plain that Putin is going nowhere, and that Russia has steadfastly refused to collapse. Project Russia is a busted flush.

The Chinese plan makes no mention whatsoever of Taiwan, referring to the need to maintain supply chains, guarantee the fair treatment of prisoners of war, but perhaps most controversially calling for an end to unilateral sanctions.

The Chinese peace plan proposes to remove the obstacles to peace put in place by the West, in order to de-escalate the situation. It is plain to see why this is unacceptable.

Added to the fact that the only diplomat to adduce reality is older than television, we now inhabit a bizarre world where the Chinese Communist Party talks more sense than the United States government. It is a moment of profound disgrace for the West, and an indictment of the fantasy ideology which has ruined it.

Anti-factist action

The reason why no one talks about the Chinese peace plan is that it is realistic. That is the reason it is such a profound embarrassment to fantasy policies of the West. It also explains its appeal to Kissinger – whose realistic suggestion that talk may be better than slaughter is a welcome departure from the roar of the war machine.

It is to be hoped that reality is now back in the room with the so-called adults in charge. Politics at home and abroad is in desperate need of reconciliation with reality.