Crticially Linking the NATO-Russian War (18)
Discussion
Good morning. This series is intended to help identify the emerging and sustaining themes in efforts to understand the war. In time, I expect to reach a comprehensive statement. For now, I will just draw attention to a few such themes, or possible themes, on a daily basis.
Clearly, we have the war itself, and the danger that it may escalate to a nuclear war or, at least, to World War Three. There is disagreement as to the magnitude of these dangers, with very little by way of expert analysis of the respective strengths and limitations of the current stocks of nuclear weapons and defense systems and of the ways in which a nuclear war might be fought.
There is disagreement as to whether it is a war between Russia and Ukraine, or whether it is simply, as Russia says, a limited military operation to de-Nazify and demilitarize Ukraine. There is disagreement as to whether it is a proxy war between the USA/NATO/EU and Russia/China or whether it is already such a war - not just proxy, in other words. Is it merely a Cold War featuring more extreme attempts to “cancel Russia” than have been seen since the days of Senator Joseph McCarthy or should we accept that a hot war has begun?
There are various assessments as to the extent to which the US and the UK (and other European countries, and Israel) are already directly involved through the provision of training, weapons and intelligence, both in Ukraine itself and in neighboring countries, not to mention controversies as to the existence of US bioweapons labs.
There are varying assessments as to whether this is best understood in long-term geopolitical terms as a civilizational war for global dominance by the USA against its main sources of competition (allowed for, even on a pre-emptive basis, by the Wolfowitz and Bush doctrines of 1992 and 2002). Or whether it is a war fought for the benefit of the US “defense” industry, whose lobbyists wield immense influence in Washington. Or is it principally an energy war, with the US keen to destroy Russia’s Nord Stream 2 pipeline and, more generally, its gas and oil sales to Europe, in favor of exported LNG from the USA - with the additional benefit to the USA of impoverishing Europe, rendering it both more fractured and also more dependent on the USA.
There are various views as to the reasons why it started. Russian aggression - perhaps to be described as a Russian colonialist war? Or is it Russia’s response, surely accurate, to long-standing provocation that goes back to Gorbachev’s agreement in 1990 to allow unification of Germany (a massive concession given that a stronger Germany had twice attempted to invade Russia at the cost of tens of millions of lives) in return for assurances that NATO would not “move one inch further eastwards.” But how should this western betrayal, which surely it is, compare to the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, signed by Russia, US and Ukraine as a guarantee of security to Ukraine in return for its relinquishing of Soviet nuclear weapons established in Ukrainian territory.
Or is the war more simply explicable in terms of legitimate Russian defense of the republics of Donetsk and Luhansk in the face of intensified aggression by Ukraine from the end of 2021?
Whatever Russia’s motives, there are issues relating to the accuracy of its perceptions of likely reactions to its military action - for example, as to the likely responses of otherwise pro-Russian Ukrainians in Eastern Ukraine.
There are various views as to whether the war is being won or lost by the parties to it. There are various views as to the relative competence of the respective belligerents. Western media appear anxious to portray Russia both as a fearsome threat and also as a clown. Much the same might be said of depictions in pro-Russian media of Zelenskyy, in relation to Russia. There are different perspectives on the legitimacy of the Ukrainian political regime in the light the 2014 coup d’etat (not seen as such, of course, by Washington, which helped create and fund it), and on the competence of Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy who was voted in on a peace ticket but quickly turned warmonger. In some accounts, he comes across, not as the freedom fighter beloved of romantic western journalists, but as a simplistic neoliberal hack prepared to risk the very existence of his own people - for no strong reason - and who might better be seen as a naïve, even narcissistic, pawn caught in a vice between billionaire backers, Washington’s determination to “weaken Russia,” and Ukraine’s neo-Nazi right which is, in turn, determined to finally kill off the specter of the 2014-2015 Minsk agreements which would have required Kiev to allow more autonomy to Donetsk and Luhansk.
What are the consequences? Deaths and suffering, certainly. But there can be virtually no trust in the figures that emerge from different, self-interested parties. Many refugees certainly, but how many? Estimates fluctuate wildly from around four to eleven million. Nobody seems to be tracking the numbers of those who return to Ukraine. Negative economic impacts seem at the moment to be less severe than anticipated or planned for Russia (whose motivation to remove itself from the dollar in favor of a ruble economy may ultimately work to its great advantage and to great US disadvantage. Economic implications are immensely negative for Ukraine, and more negative than initially anticipated for Europe. Food insecurity appears to have accelerated sharply, especially in the countries of the South. Even the economic stability of the USA appears increasingly in doubt.
There are many questions about alleged Russian war crimes - there is strong evidence of false flag propaganda, deception and shoddy reporting - which require independent investigations. But independent investigation is something almost impossible to imagine within the current structure of pro-Washington (i.e. imperial) international regulation. And there is largely a western disregard for evidence of Ukrainian war crimes, not just in the current phase of the crisis, but ever since 2014. Similar controversies surround allegations of suppression of dissent and journalism, and censorship. These afflict both Russia and Ukraine, naturally, but also western media-space which is ever more subject to one-sided humanitarian narratives, patriotic boosterism, restrictive social media algorithms; and dubious factchecking authoritarianism.
The Economic Dimension
Europeans weigh costs of cutting Russian energy over Ukraine
Media, Censorship and Propaganda
Weaponizing the Current Thing: Biden’s Ministry of Truth & Its Origins
Ministry of Truth
Homeland Security's "Disinformation Board" is Even More Pernicious Than it Seems
Greenwald on the Ministry of Truth
Smart War Disinformation and the U.S. Military State
The Press Fumbles Again On Ukraine
The War For Globalism In Ukraine
NATO Expansion
NATO: Sweden Navigates Dangerous Waters
Nukes
Why does Washington want to risk nuclear war with Russia?
Five Reasons To Be Increasingly Worried About the War in Ukraine
China sparks panic: Deadly hypersonic missile launched to 'deter foreign ships'
China sparks panic: Deadly hypersonic missile launched to `deter foreign ships` - World News (wionews.com)
Reasons for War
The Narcissism of Small Differences in the Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Baldwin on Russia-Ukraine Perceptions
Refugees
Biden asked Congress to loosen visa restrictions on highly educated Russians
War
Easy out from steel mill seen as unlikely for Ukraine troops
Ukraine troops, not such an easy exit