ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Being the self-appointed chief cheer-leader in Europe for continuing the war in Ukraine seems to have gone to Borys’s head. He imagines himself to be a Great War leader. His latest idea is to send armoured landrovers to Ukraine to break the siege of Mariupol:
Apparently he sees it like the Relief of Mafeking in the Boer War that he would have learned as a schoolboy.
The trouble is that there is no way that the Ukrainian cavalry in landrovers could end the Russian encirclement of Mariupol. If they could they would already have done it.
But it’s another headline for Borys.
That’s ingratitude for you. Like Labour, the AWL supports Ukraine in the Ukraine-Russia War but Labour still wants to kick them out.
It is true, though, that the AWL is an “entryist” group in the Trotskyist tradition even if they are Trotskyoids rather than pure Trots.
Items from today’s Times indicating who is interested in keeping the war going:
“A government source expressed concern that France and Germany could call for sanctions to be eased if Putin agreed to take no more territory.”
“Johnson said he wanted to send Ukraine ‘more lethal’ military aid.”
And from the editorial:
“The surest path to an acceptable settlement is for the Ukraine to prevail over Russia militarily.”
Clearly Johnson has earned his place in the history books as a warmonger. How long British oligarchs (other than those who are merchants of death) will go along with sacrificing their profits to continue the war remains to be seen. As yet none has spoken out but the pain has not yet really been felt.
Russia’s list of “unfriendly countries” is instructive:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfriendly_Countries_List
It shows that they are all states that depend on US military protection and so can be expected to fall in line with US geopolitical strategy. The rest of the world (most) are neutral.
Looks like evidence of a serious war crime has emerged. Be interesting to see if the International Criminal Court, aided by UK money and advice, will investigate it. This is not self-evident as the perpetuators appear to be a rightwing nationalist militia incorporated into the Ukrainian army.
Arms companies — the merchants of death — have certainly benefitted from the war. There’s an article in today’s Times headed “Defence companies having a good war as shares skyrocket” which begin:
“Defence companies stocks have risen dramatically as the war in Ukraine triggers a ‘massive reinvestment’ in arms, according to industry sources.
Western governments are flooding Ukraine with guns, ammunitions and sophisticated man-portable missile systems, sending share prices for weapons companies up by as much as 72 per cent since the day Russia invaded.”That’s what you’d expect once a war starts. But I don’t think we can say that these companies start wars. They just profit from them. Nor would governments want to favour arms companies in particular as it is governments that have to pay for the arms — out of taxes paid by other sections of the capitalist class.
When I first read Martov’s theory as to why Bolshevik tactics were popular among some sections of the working class outside Russia I found it disappointing and could understand why the 1939 translation left it out.
To see support outside Russia for Bolshevik tactics as coming mainly from ex-soldiers is unconvincing and doesn’t fit the facts, not even in the defeated German and Austrian empires and certainly not in Britain, France and Italy. I know it was written in 1919 when it was not clear how things were going to develop. In any event it didn’t take long —a couple of years — before the Bolshevik government changed its tactics and abandoned immediate insurrection for electing left wing governments.
Dan of course was writing much later and able to trace the origin of Bolshevik ideas and tactics to a section of the Russian anti-tsarist revolutionary movement. But, if I remember, he still saw Bolshevik Russia as in some way basically socialist (because it was based on state ownership) rather than as a form of capitalism.
Because NATO, ie the US, wouldn’t let him of course. Equally significant is his new concession (recognition of reality) that Russian troops could stay in the Donbas region.
Some NATO states, eg Britain, still don’t want him to make any concessions as that would not mean that Russia would be seen to have failed. They prefer to provide Ukraine with more arms in the hope that Russia can be defeated militarily, but the only result will be more cities bombed, more people killed and more refugees.
Here’s what we said about the Russian-Georgian war of 2008 which has some relevance to the current war:
One of the points made in the 2nd letter:
“We should counter the image of a successful campaign that Ukraine is constructing: this war is unwinnable, and every minute of denying it kills more and more people. Patriotic proclamations do not help the newly drafted soldiers, nor do they help the people that can’t evacuate from the slowly encircled and shelled cities, which, authorities assure, “are never going to fall.” A historical example of the Deutsche Vaterlandspartei suffices to prove that, as long as there exists a chance of winning the war, reactionary forces will mobilise for its continuation.”
After being called by Biden a war criminal and a butcher who cannot remain in power, Putin is showing remarkable restraint in not replying that Biden is senile and a doddering dotard — some of Biden’s minders who are having to regularly correct him might well agree with.
A sensible, pragmatic compromise to avoid unnecessary bloodshed (instead of the dangerous, crackpot government advice of throwing Molotov cocktails at oncoming tanks):
“A mayor in a Ukrainian town occupied by Russian forces has been released from captivity and the soldiers have agreed to leave after a mass protest by residents.
Slavutych, a northern town close to the Chernobyl nuclear site, was taken by Russian forces but stun grenades and overhead fire failed to disperse unarmed protesters on its main square on Saturday.
The crowd demanded the release of mayor Yuri Fomichev, who had been taken prisoner by the Russian troops.
Attempts by Russian troops to intimidate the growing protest failed and on Saturday afternoon Fomichev was let go by his captors.
An agreement was made that the Russians would leave the town if those with arms handed them over to the mayor with a dispensation for those with hunting rifles.
Fomichev told those protesting that the Russians had agreed to withdraw “if there are no [Ukrainian] military in the city”.
The deal struck, the mayor said, was that the Russians would make a search for Ukrainian soldiers and arms and then depart. One Russian checkpoint outside the city would remain.”Everything Russia has done, Israel has too, including bombing civilians and assassinating opponents. The US and its protected allies could easily bring Israel to heel even if it has the nuclear bomb but choose not to for strategic reasons. Prize hypocrites.
Australia’s defence minister said on Friday any move to establish a Chinese military base in neighbouring Solomon Islands would be a concern after a wide-ranging draft security pact was leaked online.
Russia’s defence minister said on Friday any move to establish a NATO military base in neighbouring Ukraine would be a concern after . . .
