Russian Tensions
- This topic has 5,149 replies, 37 voices, and was last updated 1 week, 6 days ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Conscientious objectors on both sides of the front must be going through hell too: possibly beatings.
Yes, what is striking is that at least in public and in rhetorics the Western politicians (and the tame media) show no indication that their actions will have contributed to the crisis. Personally, I think “NATO aggression” wouldn’t be the wrong word.
But they’d never push it to the nuclear?
Ukraine produces the jet engines for Russia and warships spare parts
The US supplied 60% of Japan’s war needs against China in the 1930s, according to Edgar Snow. Nazi Germany supplied China with advisers, helmets etc.
Only Aljazeera will remain, because Sky and the BBC are unwatchable in this matter!
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/02/23/pers-f23.html?pk_campaign=newsletter&pk_kwd=wsws
What Russia has done now, was also done by the Western power after the collapse of the Soviet Union,
So when do we think all this is going to be drawn back and some kind of compromise reached?
One possibility is that nothing else happens, as after the take-over of Crimea. Russia stays in control of the two statelets (which are actually larger than the two Baltic statelets Estonia and Latvia) and the low level sanctions continue.
The situation will change only if one or the other side ups the ante, NATO by threatening more sanctions unless Russian troops withdraw from the two breakaway statelets and Russia by trying to expand into the area claimed by the two statelets but currently under Ukrainian control.
Neither side’s ultimate option is on the agenda — neither a generalised Russian invasion not Ukraine joining NATO.
But for a freeze such as you suggest, Ukraine will have to stop its shelling of the statelets, which now are manned by Russian soldiers.
Very insightful interview (in two parts) with Andrei Buzarov on The Analysis (https://theanalysis.news/massive-escalation-in-donbas-or-a-new-propaganda-campaign-andrey-buzarov-pt-1-2/?cmid=b1126eeb-06b8-4404-aa5b-d27e4115fecb). One of the things he explains is that there are two rival diplomatic efforts, one involving the US and the other France and Germany (without the US). There is a division of interests between the US + its closest allies (like the UK) and France + Germany (e.g., Germany wants to save the Nordstream project for a gas pipeline under the Baltic from Russia to Germany, while the US wants to scupper the project). This intra-NATO split corresponds to a political division inside Ukraine between extreme and moderate Ukrainian nationalists, with President Zelenko inclined toward the moderates but afraid of another armed uprising by the extremists if he makes deal they disapprove of.
I am not suggesting that that will happen only that it’s one possibility. But. yes, it would involve Ukrainian forces not shelling the statelets.
In any event according to NATO Russian soldiers have been there since 2014 (that their explanation for why they are not regarding this being “legalised” as the famous invasion) and so will have been being shelled.
It’s NATO that should back down, but it never will. So what then?
Germany has already said Nordstream 2 is kaputt. If they represent a split with NATO, i’ve yet to see any.
Turkey is against the sanctions, there are several inter disputes within the NATO alliance, contradictions between bandits
https://www.reuters.com/world/nato-member-turkey-opposed-sanctions-bind-over-ukraine-2022-02-22/
It can not be called an invasion, the Russian troops have been in that area for several years, it is just a war hysteria propaganda made by the USA and they know that too
“Germany wants to save the Nordstream project for a gas pipeline under the Baltic from Russia to Germany, while the US wants to scupper the project.”
This may give the impression that Nord Stream is an on-paper proposal only. In fact the pipelines are already built. Nord Stream 1 was completed and onstream in 2012, and Nord Stream 2 was completed in Sept 2021, but NS2 certification was suspended by Scholz yesterday (22 Feb). Both pipelines are ‘fiercely opposed by the United States and Ukraine, as well as by other Central and Eastern European countries’, the US because of unacceptable Russian influence in Europe, and Ukraine et al because of the loss of overland gas transit fees (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream).
What does NATO care about member states’ objections? NATO = USA, and what it does is what Washington tells it, regardless of grumblings from members.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.