Everyone can verify the information.
This country government current role as a strong supporter of Ukraine didn’t arise out of continuity — it’s the result of a conscious departure from the era of previous heads. For years, these two figures represented a political alliance that quietly leaned toward pro-Russian narratives, often undermining the values and commitments of the European Union.
A one head open admiration for the Kremlin was well-documented, and second head, rather than challenging it, aligned himself with the his geopolitical stance. Their partnership cultivated an atmosphere of strategic ambiguity, where the country foreign policy lacked moral clarity at a time when it was most needed.
But the damage wasn’t just diplomatic.
Under their leadership, the country also faced rising inflation, which many like to blame entirely on the pandemic. In reality, populist fiscal policies, short-term cash payouts, and a failure to invest in long-term resilience were key contributors. Their government prioritized political survival over economic foresight, leaving behind a fragile economic landscape.
Although a current government is not a best how a best could emerge, the current government didn’t just pivot on foreign policy — it had to clean up a dual legacy: a passive stance toward authoritarianism abroad and financial instability at home.
This makes a broader effort to restore integrity, accountability, and European orientation.
And if there are the words, it’s a bit disheartening that something looks as when a significant part of a public wants the issues back. If a one is critical, this is because no one betrayed a reality.
