Ukraine

[Retune]

I remain disgusted and sickened at my would-be leftist friends' opposition to supporting Ukraine using all manner of feeble excuses from alleging Welensky to have fascist connections to saying America's and European support is all just in aid of their respective armaments industries.

Occasionally I sample the peculiar mirror universe of Tankie Twitter, where people like George Galloway, who had concluded (with some considerable justification) that the invasion of Iraq was a war of aggression fought on a pretext, are now telling us that the war in Ukraine is a purely defensive operation forced on Putin by NATO. In this echo chamber, Ukrainian 'biolabs', unlike Iraq's elusive WMDs, are a terrible threat. The mental gymnastics required to sustain this level of doublethink are really pretty impressive - as George might put it, I have to salute their indefatigability. The only common factor seems to be to support, in any given conflict, whoever is the brutal dictator opposed to the West.

[french frank]

... governments intent on going back to a world comprised of states inter-competing and tactically switching sides on a sixpence over dwindling resources worldwide - this amounts to a recognition of the insolubility of global capitalism's endemic problems, the "final solution" where global co-operation ultimately failed once the "Communist threat" no longer existed as an incentive to provide for a fairer less inegalitarian world. I think this goes some way to answering french frank's closing question.

A plausible analysis. Though viewing it on a more personal, individual level, was it that once Putin had arrived in power and was unwilling to leave, his increasingly authoritarian regime where all dissent must be suppressed (the assassinations began in 2003) made any kind of rapprochement between the Russian state and the west impossible?

[Serial_Apologist]

I wouldn't want to throw Ukraine under a bus either. I've read various things alleging America has provoked Russia into doing this - and yes Putin has said this also, but on the other hand, so the argument goes, one could hardly expect the US not to act with similar bellicosity (CF: Cuban Missile Crisis). Also, the line isn't just that it's all just in aid of armaments industries, but usually also that the proxy war could effect regime change in Russia... So, the line goes that the US/NATO shares at least some responsibility for this war and ought to do something to stop it rather than what has been happening... so the argument goes...

The Cuban missiles case was different in kind - Kruschev posturing on a defensive basis that if it was OK for America to surround the "socialist world" with nukes, what could they have against one part of that "socialist world" responding in kind? The Kremlin-dominated Soviet Bloc had long declared its non-intention to either attack or invade beyond its own terrain, as was later admitted by Perle (I think it was) admitting the Pentagon/White House knew this all along, while spouting on about "the Communist threat" to its own populace, as accepted by the West in general. Very few instances of the USSR coming to the aid of its intended allies come to mind - Cuba acted against Kremlin wishes in acting in Bolivia and later supporting the MPLA in Angola. The only case I can think of is their final existential act in coming to the aid of the beleaguered Afghanistan government at the end of the 1980s at the latter's request.

The Pentagon admission came straight from the Horse's mouth in a frank interview with Pilger, which I may still have on video. Support for Putin comes from far right parties and governments intent on going back to a world comprised of states inter-competing and tactically switching sides on a sixpence over dwindling resources worldwide - this amounts to a recognition of the insolubility of global capitalism's endemic problems, the "final solution" where global co-operation ultimately failed once the "Communist threat" no longer existed as an incentive to provide for a fairer less inegalitarian world. I think this goes some way to answering french frank's closing question. Today civilisation finds itself genuinely threatened by a mutual stand-off between Putin and a potentially returned Trump or Trumpalike, with what remains of liberal/centre governed electorates in Europe sandwiched between, and the possibility of either a post-election Tory or Starmer/Labour government abandoning support for Ukraine should a stalemate appear on the cards. No wonder the few remaining bourgeois politicians of more rational disposition with longer historical memories don't want to get into a bust-up with China!

[french frank]

So, the line goes that the US/NATO shares at least some responsibility for this war and ought to do something to stop it rather than what has been happening... so the argument goes...

Yes, that is how the argument goes. The BBC article today is fascinating in outlining how Russian diplomacy has changed under Putin. I don't buy the 'NATO is responsible argument', when we are reminded that Putin was saying in 2000: "Russia is ready to co-operate with Nato... right up to joining the alliance....I cannot imagine my country isolated from Europe...". If that were true then, how could he imagine that the expansion of NATO was a threat to Russia? It suits the Putin narrative to say that, now that Russian foreign policy has changed dramatically, underscored by the change in diplomacy. And it suits some political theoreticians to agree that, while Russian aggression is in no way justifiable, the US/NATO is chiefly to blame for it. What caused diplomatic rapprochement to be abandoned?

[Joseph K]

Reports had come through in time for today's BBC lunchtime Radio 4 news to announce Ukrainian claims of some sort of Russian first line defense breakthrough in terms of mine clearance operations having been completed. I remain disgusted and sickened at my would-be leftist friends' opposition to supporting Ukraine using all manner of feeble excuses from alleging Welensky to have fascist connections to saying America's and European support is all just in aid of their respective armaments industries. I am reminded of the old parable about the man who refuses to have an arrow removed from his heart until he has been satisfied as to all there is to know about his assailant's gender, background and motivation.

I wouldn't want to throw Ukraine under a bus either. I've read various things alleging America has provoked Russia into doing this - and yes Putin has said this also, but on the other hand, so the argument goes, one could hardly expect the US not to act with similar bellicosity (CF: Cuban Missile Crisis). Also, the line isn't just that it's all just in aid of armaments industries, but usually also that the proxy war could effect regime change in Russia... So, the line goes that the US/NATO shares at least some responsibility for this war and ought to do something to stop it rather than what has been happening... so the argument goes...

[Bryn]

Reports had come through in time for today's BBC lunchtime Radio 4 news to announce Ukrainian claims of some sort of Russian first line defense breakthrough in terms of mine clearance operations having been completed. I remain disgusted and sickened at my would-be leftist friends' opposition to supporting Ukraine using all manner of feeble excuses from alleging Welensky to have fascist connections to saying America's and European support is all just in aid of their respective armaments industries. I am reminded of the old parable about the man who refuses to have an arrow removed from his heart until he has been satisfied as to all there is to know about his assailant's gender, background and motivation.

I concur, entirely. Their stance seems to support the old saw that left and right meet at their extremes.

In other news today, the Israeli far right PM refers to Israel as "Jewish and democratic". That's just as much a contradiction in terms as "Islamic and democratic" (as in the "Islamic Republic of Pakistan").

[french frank]

Reports had come through in time for today's BBC lunchtime Radio 4 news to announce Ukrainian claims of some sort of Russian first line defense breakthrough in terms of mine clearance operations having been completed. I remain disgusted and sickened at my would-be leftist friends' opposition to supporting Ukraine using all manner of feeble excuses from alleging Welensky to have fascist connections to saying America's and European support is all just in aid of their respective armaments industries. I am reminded of the old parable about the man who refuses to have an arrow removed from his heart until he has been satisfied as to all there is to know about his assailant's gender, background and motivation.

I don't understand Eldridge Colby's political stance, but I did like Freedman's rebuttal of the notion that the suffering of the Ukrainian people was so great that the war must be brought to an end somehow (necessarily in a way that would satisfy Russia).

1. "Russia’s war on Ukraine is immoral and unjustified. Prolonging or expanding the war will only bring more devastation and suffering for the Ukrainian people, leaving them worse off and Americans no safer or more prosperous.’" [Colby]

2. "As Ukrainians regularly point out a Russian occupation is hardly going to ease their suffering." [Freedman] But unsupported rebels could be picked off rather more easily.

[Serial_Apologist]

Reports had come through in time for today's BBC lunchtime Radio 4 news to announce Ukrainian claims of some sort of Russian first line defense breakthrough in terms of mine clearance operations having been completed. I remain disgusted and sickened at my would-be leftist friends' opposition to supporting Ukraine using all manner of feeble excuses from alleging Welensky to have fascist connections to saying America's and European support is all just in aid of their respective armaments industries. I am reminded of the old parable about the man who refuses to have an arrow removed from his heart until he has been satisfied as to all there is to know about his assailant's gender, background and motivation.

[HighlandDougie]

Latest - interesting - thoughts from Sir Lawrence:

https://samf.substack.com/p/american-grand-strategy-realism-and?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

[groovydavidii]

Like Africa, you mean...

Marauding Wagner mercenaries, corruptive elites, an ineffective/indolent AU, it doesn’t augur well for Africa, very dispiriting.

[Serial_Apologist]

And how many Wagner troops will be prepared to take Putin's oath of allegiance to Mother Russia? They seem to have been better paid than Russia's regular troops, may have shared Prigozhin's disdain for the army chiefs they would have to obey and, as mercenaries, might look elsewhere for an alternative to the Russian state. The convicts may feel it's in their best interests to stick with Russia.

Like Africa, you mean...

[french frank]

I wonder who's checking the black box? I suppose if the Russian authorities discover the crash was caused by a bomb, they'll still have the option of blaming Ukraine.

And how many Wagner troops will be prepared to take Putin's oath of allegiance to Mother Russia? They seem to have been better paid than Russia's regular troops, may have shared Prigozhin's disdain for the army chiefs they would have to obey and, as mercenaries, might look elsewhere for an alternative to the Russian state. The convicts may feel it's in their best interests to stick with Russia.

[french frank]

I did wonder whether they were still trying to Verify all the information.

I wonder who's checking the black box? I suppose if the Russian authorities discover the crash was caused by a bomb, they'll still have the option of blaming Ukraine.

[alywin]

I did wonder whether they were still trying to Verify all the information.

[Bryn]

'Twas mentioned on the BBC1 10 O'clock news - first item I think.

Oh yes, the BBC is, in general, offering good coverage of the event and the Red Button main headlines was fairly soon updated to include a mention, though fairly low in the list. My guess is that it got temporarily lost during an update.