After an incomprehensible and at the same time suggestive silence, the government took a position at the center of global tension: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and sanctions imposed by the United States and the European Union. He did so with a statement that naturally called for the resolution of the conflict through diplomatic means, in a tone that would in itself be controversial. This is not a personal data. In foreign policy – more than the domestic sector – The lines are highlighted, not just the dots. And text Twenty days ago in Moscow the Ministry of Foreign Affairs read aloud the statements and gestures made by Alberto Fernandez towards Vladimir Putin..
The official statement calls for a peaceful settlement and “appeals to all parties involved” to resolve the conflict within the framework of UN resolutions and international law. Note on “Parties Involved” –Twice in eight lines– May emerge as a neutral way to solicit and cooperate, even in part, to eliminate the threat of war and tragedy. Indicates how deep or systematic the statement is. Other countries, such as Mexico, were in the same line, but paid homage to “the unity of Ukraine.”
Of course, the subject of the debate has an axis and at the same time violates Ukraine. The United States, Russia, China and the European Union — especially Germany and France — are on the move, whether directly or indirectly. Decided to increase their movements By “recognizing” the Donetsk and Lukansk territories as independent republics. It marked a turning point from the “logic” aimed at exploiting the gray matter of Washington and its allies, as international analysts have speculated.
That is not what is happening. The standard, however, is the slope to the abyss of war. Is this movie unthinkable? It is clear that Alberto Fernandez flew to Moscow for a meeting with Putin on a trip to Beijing. Conflict was already inevitable and a dangerous point at the top of the international agenda.
As a tough stand, some voices of protest arose demanding the suspension of the meeting with the Russian president. Nothing suggests that retreating a few days after the meeting was planned and publicized would be a sensible alternative to foreign policy. It will always be on the front line, regardless of potential internal problems. Anyway, fair Intense attention, i.e. measuring gestures and statements.
What happened in Moscow was the opposite and even some evidence from the ruling party overcame their astonishment and some discomfort. President Putin has previously questioned relations with the United States and the International Monetary Fund. Something strange – merger and diplomacy – has to be said in Moscow for different reasons. However, this seemed very significant News delivered to Argentina as a “gateway” to Russia in the region.
Part of that news – expanded at a press conference from Barbados – needs to be edited through efforts. It was hastened by the need to close the agreement with the IMF, not by substantial limitations in terms of foreign policy. There were renewed contacts in Washington and here to neutralize the discomfort that had developed in the democratic administration. Finally, Alberto Fernandez said his criticisms pointed to the Trump era and thanked Joe Biden for his role.
This seemed to be a signal that the debt consolidation was about to begin. On the other hand, the gesture of Argentina as a gateway to Moscow’s plan in the region This was the background curtain of the conflict with the print in Ukraine, which was already to be expected. This was a powerful message in terms of geopolitics.
That is the question To what extent does the government provide Russia with a “strategic partner”?. Olivos’ spokesmen seek to support the central truth of the “multilateral” position on what was done during the trip to Russia and China. Christianity is not the same thing that is highlighted, it is called hard Christianity. Precisely, this attempt to balance the interior was also applied to foreign relationsWith the distribution of heavy diplomatic seats at the discretion of each member of the government coalition.
The plan to divide these areas is paradoxical and costly in administration, with the external front being more aggressive. Nothing is said about diversity, in the broadest sense and a state of equilibrium. The worst echoes of that message left in Moscow are the silences or speeches of these hours.
“Introvert. Thinker. Problem solver. Evil beer specialist. Prone to fits of apathy. Social media expert. Award-winning food fanatic.”