25th February 2023
The first anniversary of the Russian intervention in Ukraine has seen a propaganda frenzy in the British media extolling the supposed virtues of the Ukrainian government. Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelensky, was afforded a prime time TV interview with the BBC’s imperialist apologist, John Simpson, to mark the anniversary of the war and was given a characteristically easy ride.
While the British media coverage continued its focus upon the demonisation of Russia, and Prime Minister Rishi Sunak called for more arms to be poured into the conflict, China was proposing a 12 point peace plan as a basis for ending the war.
Earlier in the week the US Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, had suggested, without evidence, that China was considering supplying weapons and ammunition to Russia. The assertion was repeated throughout the week in US and British media with the suggestion that such action by China would be adding fuel to the conflict. The millions of dollars worth of weapons poured into Ukraine by NATO clearly not adding any fuel in the media’s eyes!
The Chinese plan was met with characteristic scepticism by the leader of the imperialist world, with US President Joe Biden commenting,
“Putin’s applauding it, so how could it be any good? I’ve seen nothing in the plan that would indicate that there is something that would be beneficial to anyone other than Russia.”
As Left wing German MP, Sevim Dağdelen, stated at an international conference in Havana in January,“those who seek war send weapons; those who seek peace send diplomats”. It is clear on which side of that assertion, Joe Biden stands.
The history behind the war in Ukraine is given little media coverage in the West but is important to an understanding of the reasons for the present conflict. The war is the direct consequence of NATO’s eastward expansion after the end of the Cold War. The expansion of NATO, to effectively encircle Russia, positioning increasing numbers of troops and weapons close to Russia’s borders, was clearly seen as a threat by Russia to its own security. In this respect, the accession of Ukraine or Georgia to NATO were unmistakably seen as red lines. The demands for both EU and NATO membership from the current government of Ukraine are only serving to exacerbate this situation.
The failure of the Ukrainian government to adhere to the Minsk accords, agreed in 2014, effectively extended an ongoing conflict in the predominantly Russian speaking Donbas region of Ukraine, which saw 14,000 casualties in seven years.
A key factor driving the war in Ukraine is the desire of the United States to preserve its global dominance in the face of the rising economic power of China in particular. The US has endeavoured, since the end of the Cold War, to prevent the creation of a common security system in Europe that includes Russia. The resultant war is partly due to the inability of Europe and the EU to act independently of the United States and to develop a policy in line with the interests of the people of Europe as a whole, including Russia, aimed at peace, stability and prosperity.
Across Europe, the war is having profound economic consequences. The militarisation which follows from the mobilisation against Russia is creating widespread economic misery, energy price rises and increased daily living costs for working people across the continent. While the low paid, unemployed and refugees fleeing persecution are in despair, at trying to meet the rocketing cost of energy and food, the shareholders of energy companies continue to rub their hands in glee, reaping billions in windfall profits.
A compelling argument has been made that the US, with Norwegian complicity, blew up the Nord Stream pipeline, cutting off supplies of Russian natural gas to Europe and increasing European dependence upon US imported liquefied natural gas imports. https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream
The war is also having an increasing impact on the poorer countries of the Global South. Rising food and energy prices, the spread of hunger and poverty and the stifling of economic development in these already vulnerable parts of the world are the devastating consequences. Given the global impact of the war and the way in which the so-called “rules-based international order” propagated by the West has lost credibility, it is understandable that many states in Africa, Latin America and Asia have refused to take sides in the war in Ukraine.
Many nations in the Global South are clear that NATO and its allies are behaving hypocritically by asserting that the Russian attack on Ukraine marks an unparalleled violation of international law. NATO is seen as sidestepping its own history of illegal wars, involving crimes against human rights, the bombardments of civil infrastructure, extrajudicial executions and the selective application of international law.
None of this has strengthened the credibility of the West in relation to Ukraine in the Global South, as demonstrated in the recent United Nations vote, when many abstained from supporting a Western backed motion condemning the Russian intervention.
Given the impact of the war on the Ukrainian people, and those in many other parts of the world, along with the real danger of nuclear war, ending the conflict must be a priority. The forces for peace and social justice across the world are this weekend organising widespread protests, focussing their appeals for a ceasefire and a diplomatic solution that will bring an end to the war.
The Western strategy of seeking to defeat Russia militarily by providing Ukraine with increasing supplies of heavy armaments is dangerous and irresponsible. Russia is a nuclear power and is not prepared to give up its existential interests. The arms supplies are prolonging the war and creating a risk of escalation to a third world war.
Like all wars, the war in Ukraine must be ended through negotiation. It will not be possible to arrive at a peaceful solution by unilaterally blaming Russia for its actions, while not addressing the issues of ongoing NATO enlargement and the need for Ukrainian neutrality.
The first anniversary of the conflict in Ukraine should be a time, not for an escalation of the conflict but for peace to prevail, for the sake of all of the peoples of Europe and the world.
Beyond the present conflict the issue for the Left across Europe must be to raise the question of the dissolution of the aggressive military alliance, NATO, and the establishment of a new security architecture across the continent, which is not aimed at intervening to support or initiate aggressive actions. While the Russian intervention in Ukraine is difficult to justify the overwhelming response of the Western powers and their military wing NATO cannot go unchecked.
Without taking on this challenge the prospects for a negotiated settlement of the present conflict, or of preventing any future outbreaks, are greatly diminished.
Avanti Populo 