Ukraine

[Serial_Apologist]

So nothing to be done. The complexity of international relationships creates seemingly insoluble problems for any kind of consistency in democratic policy. Coincidentally, the prime minister of Abkhazia - the separatist movement which, with Russian backing, broke away from Georgia - has just resigned in the face of anti-Russian protests. And Georgia, historically seeking NATO and EU membership, faced its own protests over the current government's proposed Russian-style legislation. The small pro-Russian separatist movements are all backed by Moscow (Donbas, Transnistria). Then there was the separatist movement in Chechnya that was foolish enogh to try to wrest control from Russia. South Ossetia? Nothing to be done? Anywhere? All down to Western aggression?

Quite. And, short of massive internal opposition, those seemingly coming up in Putin's eventual wake seem no better from the world's perspective vis-a-vis any Russian expansionist intentions. As with the case of whatever climate change inflicts, nuclear war without a Fifth Cavalry conquering the distant ridge to come to the rescue goes beyond practical or humanitarian considerations. Those states on Russia's periphery clamouring for EU membership are facing the increasing fragmentation of a unit initially set up to trade effectively with the US (and later Japan) but now disintegrating under nationalist pressures. We might be faced with Europe (including the UK) becoming the last available go-to for a sustainable survivable future for everyone: a scary prospect in terms of migration. But it leaves no alternative but the richest, namely the original members making up the EU, constituting ourselves into a defense bloc and pooling the resources necessary in support. One hopeful emerging from all this might be that along with the uprooted destitute we would then also attract the brightest minds in science and politics - men and women of the likes of those we saw on last night's Panorama, on the theme of whether or not science can save the world from climate change consequences.

[french frank]

Russia is too large to be confronted. It is best for the Russians to work things out themselves. Putin will eventually be forced to step down from within.

So nothing to be done. The complexity of international relationships creates seemingly insoluble problems for any kind of consistency in democratic policy. Coincidentally, the prime minister of Abkhazia - the separatist movement which, with Russian backing, broke away from Georgia - has just resigned in the face of anti-Russian protests. And Georgia, historically seeking NATO and EU membership, faced its own protests over the current government's proposed Russian-style legislation. The small pro-Russian separatist movements are all backed by Moscow (Donbas, Transnistria). Then there was the separatist movement in Chechnya that was foolish enogh to try to wrest control from Russia. South Ossetia? Nothing to be done? Anywhere? All down to Western aggression?

[HighlandDougie]

This may - or may not - be easily accessible but Sir Lawrence's latest pensées:

https://samf.substack.com/p/can-trump-get-a-deal-on-ukraine?utm_campaign=email-post&r=w1xt&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

[Ian Thumwood]

I think UK rightly should be aligning itself with Europe and certainly not Trump

Russia is too large to be confronted. It is best for the Russians to work things out themselves. Putin will eventually be forced to step down from within.

[french frank]

We argued for exiting NATO on grounds that if anything the west was the aggressor, penning in the so-called socialist world on all sides, and that money spent on weapons could be better deployed for social needs, with Britain declaring itself neutral.

And accepting Russia's claim that NATO and the West are 'to blame' wilfully ignores the fact that back in the real world most of the non-Russian 'socialist world' has had to fight to get away from Russia's influence and join the Western allies, NATO and the 'capitalist/socialist' (take your pick) EU. United Russia is the imperialist power. There's more than a hint of Trumpian isolationist thinking to argue that the US/UK is better off going it alone and dumping Ukraine and Europe..

[Ian Thumwood]

The provision of missiles is pointless. They do not have a particularly long range and Trump will reverse this decision within 2 months. I cannot see what it will achieve in the long term


I agree with the condemnation of Putin but, like China, Russia is large enough and has the human resources to do what it wishes. At best, we can seek to maintain a status quo. The West is made up of countries which are not martial ones. I do not see how we can make countries that large comply to our will.

My main point was the the West is not acting democratically. The role of uk troops in Ukraine had not be voted through Parliament and was in neither party's manifesto. There is no coverage whatsoever of the likes of Stop The War who have offered other solutions.

[Serial_Apologist]

I think it is quite interesting how this conflict is now being reported and seen as a marker of why Western demography is working. For example, the use of Anerican long range missiles is being seen as a game changer and being justified as tit for tat with the employment of North Korean soldiers. This is not the case . If the 12000 figure is to be believed, this is about 6 times the daily casualty figure of the Russian forces . North Korean troops are untrained and don't speak Russian. I also have heard that they are serving as service corps. The US response is not proportionate

I also think criticism of the aiding of Ukraine from the Left and organisations like Stop The War is ignored and never reported. There is no counter argument.

The other thing that really troubles me is that there are British services on the ground in uk and this has never been put through Parliament. Everytime th3 British start getting involved in foreign conflicts, things become messy and we get it wrong. Supplying long range missiles will not solve the problem.

I was adamant that Russia were 100 % reaponsible for the invasion and that this was a consequence of NATO provocation if a Russian leader who was u hinged. This is now being bourne out. The situation is no longer clear cut and I feel that perhaps it is time to both cease military support fir Ukraine and also get out ofNATO now that Trump had been re-elected.

I cannot understand why no efforts have been made to reach out to Iran. Why has no one offered them support against Israel on the proviso that they cease supplying drones to Russia ?

Labour's foreign policy is no more balanced than the Conservatives. Corbyn not getting elected in 2016 is probably the worse thing to happen from a foreign policy perspective to this country since Suez.

I find myself at odds with the left's opposition to supporting Ukraine on grounds that uninvited invasion of one country by another violates a prime socialist principle of national sovereignty - or at least I thought it did. The argument that NATO has been advancing its spheres of operation eastwards is neither here nor there - NATO was set up as a bulwark against a Soviet Union that Neo-Cons in the Pentagon later admitted to Pilger was no threat to the West, just building its nuclear technology and armaments quota to maintain the games theory mutual destruction balance between the two sides. I believe this was leaked from internal Pentagon/White House documents. We argued for exiting NATO on grounds that if anything the west was the aggressor, penning in the so-called socialist world on all sides, and that money spent on weapons could be better deployed for social needs, with Britain declaring itself neutral. One does not like finding oneself effectively supporting a military alliance now solely for the protection of capitalist interests, but on the other hand we have rogue states whether they be Israel , Iran, Pakistan or India nuclear-defended, and all bets are off as to who might kick off in the unforseeable future. The left finds itself in the invidious position of being on the same side as Putin, Trump and nationalist far right climate change denying régimes hellbent on trading and economic retrenchment. I've strongly expressed my disagreements on one of the main left wing websites in the UK. I agree strongly with what you say about Corbyn, however. FPTP disguised the fact that Labour's share of the 2016 vote was actually greater than it had been in the preceding GE.

[french frank]

For example, the use of Anerican long range missiles is being seen as a game changer and being justified as tit for tat with the employment of North Korean soldiers. This is not the case . If the 12000 figure is to be believed, this is about 6 times the daily casualty figure of the Russian forces . North Korean troops are untrained and don't speak Russian. I also have heard that they are serving as service corps.

It's reported otherwise today:

Ukrainian and South Korean intelligence services have said that many of the troops deployed to Russia are some of Pyongyang’s best, drawn from the 11th Corps, also known as the Storm Corps - a unit trained in infiltration, infrastructure sabotage and assassinations.

These soldiers are “trained to withstand a high degree of physical pain and psychological torture”, says Michael Madden, a North Korea expert from the Stimson Center in Washington.

“What they lack in combat they make up for with what they can tolerate physically and mentally,” he adds.

[Mark Cancian, from the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)] agrees that “if these are special operations forces, they will be much better prepared than the average North Korean unit".

"Further, the Russians appear to be giving them additional training, likely on the special circumstances of the war in Ukraine,” he adds.'

It's the eternal dilemma for free democracies. Socialism is founded on ideals of equality and social justice, peaceful coexistence, the strong helping the weak. How do they cope with authoritarian dictatorships which flout all the norms of human rights and threaten weaker nations with aggression, war and conquest?

[Ian Thumwood]

I think it is quite interesting how this conflict is now being reported and seen as a marker of why Western demography is working. For example, the use of Anerican long range missiles is being seen as a game changer and being justified as tit for tat with the employment of North Korean soldiers. This is not the case . If the 12000 figure is to be believed, this is about 6 times the daily casualty figure of the Russian forces . North Korean troops are untrained and don't speak Russian. I also have heard that they are serving as service corps. The US response is not proportionate

I also think criticism of the aiding of Ukraine from the Left and organisations like Stop The War is ignored and never reported. There is no counter argument.

The other thing that really troubles me is that there are British services on the ground in uk and this has never been put through Parliament. Everytime th3 British start getting involved in foreign conflicts, things become messy and we get it wrong. Supplying long range missiles will not solve the problem.

I was adamant that Russia were 100 % reaponsible for the invasion and that this was a consequence of NATO provocation if a Russian leader who was u hinged. This is now being bourne out. The situation is no longer clear cut and I feel that perhaps it is time to both cease military support fir Ukraine and also get out ofNATO now that Trump had been re-elected.

I cannot understand why no efforts have been made to reach out to Iran. Why has no one offered them support against Israel on the proviso that they cease supplying drones to Russia ?

Labour's foreign policy is no more balanced than the Conservatives. Corbyn not getting elected in 2016 is probably the worse thing to happen from a foreign policy perspective to this country since Suez.

[Serial_Apologist]

Russia rather than Ukraine, but this BBC headline raised a smile. What planet are they on?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdxvnwkl5kgo

That would be a much easier way for Putin and his mob to take over the entire world than by waging war!

[french frank]

Russia rather than Ukraine, but this BBC headline raised a smile. What planet are they on?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdxvnwkl5kgo

[Historian]

The BBC has at last caught up with the news about Russia targeting civilians with drone attacks in Kherson. These attacks have been going on for several months.

While I realise that the BBC has to seem even-handed I think they could probably risk being a little less neutral:

The Russian military did not respond to the BBC’s questions about the allegations. Since its full-scale invasion in February 2022, Russia has consistently denied deliberately targeting civilians.

Well, yes, but that is obviously not true, as seen throughout the whole conflict in Ukraine and elsewhere (Chechnya, Syria, etc. etc.)

[Historian]

Professor Sir Lawrence Freedman's latest (free to read) thoughts on Ukraine: what next?

[HighlandDougie]

I seem to be able to share the post but to Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn or an email address. It also says, "Copy link", but it is no different from before. I'm not sure about having to subscribe (as in pony up some dosh) to the Friedmans' site but it might be worth creating a Substack account and then seeing what happens. I'm happy to share it to your e-mail if you PM me your e-mail address.

[Retune]

I subscribe but I also thought that there was essentially open access to the posts.

Clicking your link for the first time (or subsequently if I use a private browser window) I get something like:

[HighlandDougie], a paid subscriber of Comment is Freed, shared this with you. Follow [HighlandDougie] and continue reading.

But then I'd need to create a substack account to go any further, which I haven't yet. If I did, I'm guessing I'd get this first article free on you, but would have to subscribe to Comment is Freed to read any more of their paywalled articles?