The Third World War has already begun and Ukraine is at its center.
Not a sudden eruption, but a war built over decades of Western disarmament and strategic illusions.
Azov commander Denys Prokopenko explains in Ukrainska Pravda why Ukraine is the blueprint for victory.
1/
Not a sudden eruption, but a war built over decades of Western disarmament and strategic illusions.
Azov commander Denys Prokopenko explains in Ukrainska Pravda why Ukraine is the blueprint for victory.
1/
After 1991, the West replaced armies with integration.
Security became a bonus, not a pillar.
Democracy, not deterrence, was the plan.
Result: most of Europe has peacetime militaries, hollow logistics, and no doctrine for large-scale war.
2/
Security became a bonus, not a pillar.
Democracy, not deterrence, was the plan.
Result: most of Europe has peacetime militaries, hollow logistics, and no doctrine for large-scale war.
2/
Ukraine was part of that illusion.
It gave up nukes, dismantled Soviet infrastructure, shrank its armed forces — all to fit NATO’s script.
The reward? No real security guarantees.
That script failed in 2008 (Georgia), 2014 (Crimea), and again in 2022.
3/
It gave up nukes, dismantled Soviet infrastructure, shrank its armed forces — all to fit NATO’s script.
The reward? No real security guarantees.
That script failed in 2008 (Georgia), 2014 (Crimea), and again in 2022.
3/
Now, the authoritarian bloc (Russia, Iran, DPRK, China) is betting on force.
And the West, after decades of demobilization, is unprepared.
Russia escalates. China eyes Taiwan.
And Washington signals retreat.
4/
And the West, after decades of demobilization, is unprepared.
Russia escalates. China eyes Taiwan.
And Washington signals retreat.
4/
Ukraine can no longer rely on collective defense.
It must become a donor of security — not just a recipient.
That means exporting combat-tested systems, tactics, and command models forged in existential war.
5/
It must become a donor of security — not just a recipient.
That means exporting combat-tested systems, tactics, and command models forged in existential war.
5/
“Azov” is that model.
A networked unit inside a regular army — flexible, autonomous, and fast.
No rigid hierarchies. No NATO-style corps.
It adapts under fire, builds discipline from action, not orders.
6/
A networked unit inside a regular army — flexible, autonomous, and fast.
No rigid hierarchies. No NATO-style corps.
It adapts under fire, builds discipline from action, not orders.
6/
Azov didn’t survive chaos — it built a new architecture of war.
This is about practice of war. Taiwan is studying it.
Eastern Europe is reforming around it.
It’s a prototype of the armies the future demands.
7/
This is about practice of war. Taiwan is studying it.
Eastern Europe is reforming around it.
It’s a prototype of the armies the future demands.
7/
Victory won’t go to the side with the most missiles.
It will go to the side that can adapt, mobilize, and decentralize faster than the enemy can strike.
Those with institutions that survive entropy and fight back.
8X
It will go to the side that can adapt, mobilize, and decentralize faster than the enemy can strike.
Those with institutions that survive entropy and fight back.
8X
Source: pravda.com.ua/columns/2025/0…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
