Din țările mai sudice, concluzia spectacolului poate fi că stăpânii lumii sunt deja Xi și Putin, Trump încearcă să se pună bine cu ei, iar europenii nu prea mai contează

 How is emerging countries perceived by Trump's latest appeal to Ukraine to capitulate?

 Perplexity: „Emerging countries, particularly in Europe and beyond, perceive Trump's latest appeal to Ukraine to capitulate with significant skepticism, criticism, and concern. While the plan reflects a pragmatic approach to ending the war by conceding parts of the Donbas region and potentially recognizing Russian sovereignty over parts of Ukraine held by Russia, many see it as a demand for Ukraine's capitulation rather than a victory.

 In Europe, countries like Hungary and Romania show some muted positive reception to Trump's economic and peace efforts, but the broader consensus among European leaders, including those from Britain, Germany, and France, is highly critical. They reject key elements of the Trump plan, framing it as a concession to Russia and a capitulation by Ukraine. This skepticism extends to the wider geopolitical implications, where European politicians fear being sidelined if Trump successfully pushes Kyiv toward agreement, which could leave Europe out of shaping the post-war arrangement. Europeans generally treat Trump’s appeal with wariness and a sense of realism about the risks of early peace deals that might undermine Ukraine's full sovereignty and European security.

 Among some international observers and emerging countries, the situation is viewed through the lens of pragmatism about military realities on the ground, with recognition that Ukraine struggles to hold all contested territories. The Trump plan's proponents argue it could represent a qualified Ukrainian victory by preserving a substantial part of Ukraine independent and providing a path toward EU membership despite losses. However, this view remains highly contested and controversial.

In summary, emerging countries and Europe's dominant voices largely perceive Trump's appeal to Ukraine to capitulate as a controversial, risky pivot that could weaken Ukraine's position, empower Russia, and marginalize European influence on the conflict's resolution. Nonetheless, some recognize the pragmatic motivations behind it and the desperate search for an achievable peace amid ongoing conflict realities.” 

*** *** 

Precum sub ceaușism, vom regreta timpul pierdut la spectacolul corupției, incompetenței, nesimțirii și inculturii. Măcar acum știm că a fi incult după globalizarea webară e o opțiune a pământeanului.

Florica Dobre, Alesandru Duțu - Distrugerea elitei militare sub regimul ocupatiei sovietice in Romania, Volumul I - 1947-1964,  Institutul Național pentru Studiul Totalitarismului, 2001

Giurescu, Dinu C. - Distrugerea trecutului României, București, Editura Museion, 1994, 96 p.

Cristian Vasile - ,,Un turn de fildeș în comunism? Institutele umaniste ale Academiei RPR în România lui Gheorghiu-Dej”

Cosmin Popa, ,,Intelectualii lui Ceaușescu și Academia de Științe Sociale și Politice (1970-1989)”.

Daniel Gamburg, Simon Shuster - The Showman: Inside the Invasion That Shook the World and Made a Leader of Volodymyr Zelensky

Consolare în toate, listele clasice de cărți bune:

https://propinatiu.wordpress.com/lista-lui-propinatiu

Carte străina clasică gratuită:

https://archive.org/details/fav-camelian_propinatiu?sort=creatorSorter

De când asist la acest măcel sălbatic pornit în Est, apoi și în Levant, de netolerat în secolul XXI al super-tehnologiilor, citesc din Armand Hrestic - Războiul Sfânt (vol. I-IV), un fel de Lev Tolstoi - Război și Pace, cu naratologie încâlcită din proiect să te plictisești de la Joyce și Musil până la Pynchon și să abandonezi.

https://archive.org/search?query=Hrestic

http://propinatiu.ro/carti

 *** *** *** ***

 How is emerging countries perceived by Trump's latest appeal to Ukraine to capitulate?

 Grok: „Emerging countries appear to have mixed perceptions regarding Trump's latest appeal for Ukraine to accept a peace plan perceived by many as a form of capitulation. The plan, reportedly involving significant territorial concessions to Russia, including parts of Donbas and Crimea, has drawn criticism and denunciation from Ukrainian and Western officials who see it as demanding Ukraine's surrender. However, some analysts and actors advocating pragmatic diplomacy view it as a possible move toward an early peace that preserves most of Ukraine's independence and offers a path to EU membership.

Europe, a key group of emerging and developed countries, has largely rejected and criticized the plan, seeing it as unfavorable to Ukraine and a European interest. European leaders like those from Germany, France, and Britain have dismissed it as a "capitulation" and pushed for alternatives. Meanwhile, there is concern that if Ukraine is pressured into accepting Trump's plan, and Russia engages, Europe could be sidelined in the resulting settlement.

Beyond Europe, perceptions among emerging countries may be more varied. Some authoritarian or illiberal regimes might see Trump's approach as an opening to strengthen ties with a Washington perceived as less focused on combating autocracy. Globally, attitudes toward democracy also shape views, with liberal democracies generally opposing Russia and China while more authoritarian societies exhibit differing sympathies.

In summary, many emerging countries and international actors seem cautious or critical of the plan, particularly its implications for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity, but some recognize its potential to end prolonged conflict pragmatically. European reactions underscore concerns over losing influence and the impact on Ukraine's future, reflecting the complexity of global perceptions around Trump's appeal for Ukraine to relent in its territorial...”

 *** *** *** *** *** ***

 Gemini: „The direct and explicit reactions from **emerging countries** as a unified group to the latest reports of President Trump's appeal to Ukraine to accept a peace plan (which is being criticized as a "capitulation") are not immediately and broadly detailed in the available public commentary, which has largely focused on the reactions from **Ukraine**, **Russia**, and **European allies**.

However, we can infer potential perceptions based on general trends, the nature of the proposal, and known positions of developing nations:

### 1. **Perception of Sovereignty and Precedent**

* **Concern over Unilateral Concessions:** Emerging countries generally hold strong views on **national sovereignty** and the inviolability of borders. A peace plan perceived as a "capitulation" or one that rewards military aggression with territorial gains—especially if pushed by a major global power—could be seen as setting a **dangerous precedent**.

    * This precedent could make smaller, less powerful nations more vulnerable to similar pressures or invasions, violating the UN Charter principle against changing borders by force.

### 2. **Focus on Economic Stability**

 * **Relief from Prolonged Conflict:** The ongoing war has caused **significant global economic disruption**, particularly in food and energy prices, which heavily impacts emerging and developing economies. A proposal that genuinely promises an *immediate end to the fighting* might appeal to some emerging nations primarily focused on stabilizing their own domestic economies and combating inflation.

* **The *How* Matters:** However, if the peace deal is seen as inherently unstable and likely to lead to renewed conflict down the road (due to unfair terms or inadequate security guarantees), that initial relief would be tempered by fear of another, potentially worse, economic shock.

 ### 3. **The View of US Global Role**

 * **Transactional Diplomacy:** Trump's approach is often viewed globally as **transactional**, prioritizing quick deals and reduced long-term commitments, which can be seen as unpredictable.

    * Some emerging nations might view this as confirmation that the US is shifting away from being a reliable security guarantor for its partners, which could encourage them to pursue more *non-aligned* foreign policies.

* **A Shift in Power Dynamics:** A plan perceived as favorable to Russia could signal a shift in the global balance of power or a weakening of Western resolve. Nations seeking to hedge their bets or balance their relationships with major powers (US, Russia, China) might adjust their diplomatic stance accordingly.

 ### 4. **G20 Context**

 * It's likely that these issues were discussed on the sidelines of major forums like the **G20 summit in Johannesburg**, where leaders from key emerging economies (like Brazil, India, South Africa, etc.) were present. While their unified public statement mainly focused on economic issues, the conversations among the leaders would have included the implications of a US-led, but Ukraine-disadvantaged, peace proposal.

 In short, while an end to the war is desired by many emerging countries for economic relief, the *terms* of an imposed peace involving capitulation are likely to cause **significant unease** due to the dangerous precedent it sets for international law and sovereignty.

 *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***