Caoimhin O’Muraile ☭ The 26 County State are, rightly so, taking in Ukrainian refugees fleeing their own troubled land. 

The situation in Ukraine, though not as bad as the West would have us believe (you only need look at the intact tower blocks when people are interviewed there) it is still not a safe place to be.

The number of dislodged people the Government are allowing in far exceeds what the state is capable of looking after competently. Already they are asking sporting organisations to open up stadia for these now nomadic peoples as hotels are apparently full of both refugees and the, albeit, dwindling number of tourists. 

The reason the number of tourists is in decline has nothing to do with refugees, but Ireland is now just too expensive to visit! We have not the housing and health service to accommodate, safely, an indefinite number of displaced people and that is becoming obvious to all but those who choose not to see. Are the concerns of the 26 County administration out of genuine sympathy for these now homeless Ukrainians or more about showing Washington just how anti-Russian this state is? I’ll leave the answer to that question open. Whatever the reason the state is pulling out all the stops to help one way or another. 

A question on many people’s lips is: why could these sporting organisations not have been asked to accommodate our indigenous homeless peoples whose numbers are growing by the day, in concert with the increasing number of refugees? Why are the peoples of Palestine and Yemen, the latter in a far worse state than is Ukraine, not given the same consideration? If the state could accommodate millions of refugees then by all means let in millions of them but the fact is the state cannot.

The European Union is also making big anti-Russian noises without ever questioning the ever-dubious Ukrainian President Zelensky. Each time this man is interviewed - remember he’s supposed to be in a war-torn country - he looks in better shape than most Western leaders, including our own Taoiseach. For a man who is supposedly of Jewish extraction he now praises the openly Nazi Azov Regiment of the Ukrainian Army as “brave defenders”. That is akin to the Jews of Warsaw congratulating the Das Reich Regiment of the Waffen SS in defeating all in front of them! If the EU are as concerned as they make out about Ukrainian refugees why have they not issued a directive to all member states that each state must take a number, relative to that states size and facilities, of refugees? To my knowledge, and correct me if I’m wrong, no such directive has been issued. Are they afraid countries, apart from ourselves, might tell them where to shove their directive?

Each time I see on TV President Putin of Russia being interviewed or a documentary about him I see a bad bastard. A man who, as an understudy of Boris Yeltsin, brought down Mikhail Gorbachev, former and last leader of the Soviet Union and who was trying to introduce reforms. He was trying, without weakening the position of the USSR, to have better détente with the West and NATO. He was beginning to succeed when Yeltsin, the vodka soaked drunk, aided by the likes of Putin brought him down. The West must have loved him, and look at the regime Gorbachev has been replaced with! On the other hand, every time I see Zelensky interviewed on the same TV I see a fraud, a con man whose only interest is to persuade NATO, with Ukraine as a member, to invade and take over Russia. Not once have I heard him voice concern for the refugees, ask about their whereabouts and living conditions of the countries which have taken them. No, not a murmur, or if he has I have not heard him. Without a doubt the 26 County state has offered more than a hand of friendship to these people, and I repeat, rightly so.

Recently our President, Michael D. Higgins wife, Sabina, has spoken on the situation in the Ukraine. She, like all right-thinking people, condemned the actions of Putin and his invasion of his neighbour, Ukraine. I would call it a semi-invasion as most of the country is intact. The West, in usual hyper language tried to compare Putin with Hitler and the Nazi invasion of Poland. There is no comparison, Poland was obliterated, the Ukraine is not. Nevertheless, his actions are wrong as Sabina made perfectly plain. 

The Irish President's wife made what to me sounded a very sensible level headed and thought-out statement suggesting a “peaceful outcome and negotiated settlement” while at the same time continuing to condemn the actions of the Kremlin. To me that was a sensible and diplomatic way of putting it from the head of state's wife. Despite her level headedness and diplomatic tact, unlike some barmy TDs who almost want to go to war with Russia, providing of course the USA go first she is in the firing line and wrongly. Yet she has come in for criticism from both our own TDS and, the fucking cheek of it, some Ukrainian MPs. These same MPs of the Ukrainian Parliament, often simply called the Rada, who, along with their fraudulent President, have not once asked or mentioned the disposed peoples of that country. Yet they still find time to criticise our head of state's wife for commenting, quite rationally and sensibly, about how a solution to the tragic situation could be found. Perhaps if Sabina Higgins had come out and called on NATO to go to war with that horrible Putin then these cheeky, insulting cunts, may have been happy, applauding even!

The 26 County State has been a very good friend to Ukraine and certainly its dispossessed peoples. Much more so than their own cockeyed government appear to care, so it is very inappropriate for some of their MPs to start slagging off our elected Presidents wife just because she would not say what they want! This is an insult and they should apologise, as should some of our own shameless TDs who prefer to back a doggy government in Kyiv than their own President's wife. If this was in the so-called UK and MPs started criticising the unelected monarchy there would be cries of treason from the opposition. Not so here when our Head of State's family are criticised wrongly for simply trying to offer a peaceful end to the situation in that tragic land, the Ukraine some of our TDs agree with the tormentors in a foreign parliament.

As an internationalist I am not a great believer in heads of states but, alas, we do not live in a socialist world where such positions would be a thing of the past. In the meantime I can see right from wrong and the criticism of Sabina Higgins was wrong, uninvited and not welcome.

Caoimhin O’Muraile is Independent 
Socialist Republican and Marxist

Well, That’s Gratitude ✑ The Presidents Wife’s Comments

Caoimhin O’Muraile ☭ The 26 County State are, rightly so, taking in Ukrainian refugees fleeing their own troubled land. 

The situation in Ukraine, though not as bad as the West would have us believe (you only need look at the intact tower blocks when people are interviewed there) it is still not a safe place to be.

The number of dislodged people the Government are allowing in far exceeds what the state is capable of looking after competently. Already they are asking sporting organisations to open up stadia for these now nomadic peoples as hotels are apparently full of both refugees and the, albeit, dwindling number of tourists. 

The reason the number of tourists is in decline has nothing to do with refugees, but Ireland is now just too expensive to visit! We have not the housing and health service to accommodate, safely, an indefinite number of displaced people and that is becoming obvious to all but those who choose not to see. Are the concerns of the 26 County administration out of genuine sympathy for these now homeless Ukrainians or more about showing Washington just how anti-Russian this state is? I’ll leave the answer to that question open. Whatever the reason the state is pulling out all the stops to help one way or another. 

A question on many people’s lips is: why could these sporting organisations not have been asked to accommodate our indigenous homeless peoples whose numbers are growing by the day, in concert with the increasing number of refugees? Why are the peoples of Palestine and Yemen, the latter in a far worse state than is Ukraine, not given the same consideration? If the state could accommodate millions of refugees then by all means let in millions of them but the fact is the state cannot.

The European Union is also making big anti-Russian noises without ever questioning the ever-dubious Ukrainian President Zelensky. Each time this man is interviewed - remember he’s supposed to be in a war-torn country - he looks in better shape than most Western leaders, including our own Taoiseach. For a man who is supposedly of Jewish extraction he now praises the openly Nazi Azov Regiment of the Ukrainian Army as “brave defenders”. That is akin to the Jews of Warsaw congratulating the Das Reich Regiment of the Waffen SS in defeating all in front of them! If the EU are as concerned as they make out about Ukrainian refugees why have they not issued a directive to all member states that each state must take a number, relative to that states size and facilities, of refugees? To my knowledge, and correct me if I’m wrong, no such directive has been issued. Are they afraid countries, apart from ourselves, might tell them where to shove their directive?

Each time I see on TV President Putin of Russia being interviewed or a documentary about him I see a bad bastard. A man who, as an understudy of Boris Yeltsin, brought down Mikhail Gorbachev, former and last leader of the Soviet Union and who was trying to introduce reforms. He was trying, without weakening the position of the USSR, to have better détente with the West and NATO. He was beginning to succeed when Yeltsin, the vodka soaked drunk, aided by the likes of Putin brought him down. The West must have loved him, and look at the regime Gorbachev has been replaced with! On the other hand, every time I see Zelensky interviewed on the same TV I see a fraud, a con man whose only interest is to persuade NATO, with Ukraine as a member, to invade and take over Russia. Not once have I heard him voice concern for the refugees, ask about their whereabouts and living conditions of the countries which have taken them. No, not a murmur, or if he has I have not heard him. Without a doubt the 26 County state has offered more than a hand of friendship to these people, and I repeat, rightly so.

Recently our President, Michael D. Higgins wife, Sabina, has spoken on the situation in the Ukraine. She, like all right-thinking people, condemned the actions of Putin and his invasion of his neighbour, Ukraine. I would call it a semi-invasion as most of the country is intact. The West, in usual hyper language tried to compare Putin with Hitler and the Nazi invasion of Poland. There is no comparison, Poland was obliterated, the Ukraine is not. Nevertheless, his actions are wrong as Sabina made perfectly plain. 

The Irish President's wife made what to me sounded a very sensible level headed and thought-out statement suggesting a “peaceful outcome and negotiated settlement” while at the same time continuing to condemn the actions of the Kremlin. To me that was a sensible and diplomatic way of putting it from the head of state's wife. Despite her level headedness and diplomatic tact, unlike some barmy TDs who almost want to go to war with Russia, providing of course the USA go first she is in the firing line and wrongly. Yet she has come in for criticism from both our own TDS and, the fucking cheek of it, some Ukrainian MPs. These same MPs of the Ukrainian Parliament, often simply called the Rada, who, along with their fraudulent President, have not once asked or mentioned the disposed peoples of that country. Yet they still find time to criticise our head of state's wife for commenting, quite rationally and sensibly, about how a solution to the tragic situation could be found. Perhaps if Sabina Higgins had come out and called on NATO to go to war with that horrible Putin then these cheeky, insulting cunts, may have been happy, applauding even!

The 26 County State has been a very good friend to Ukraine and certainly its dispossessed peoples. Much more so than their own cockeyed government appear to care, so it is very inappropriate for some of their MPs to start slagging off our elected Presidents wife just because she would not say what they want! This is an insult and they should apologise, as should some of our own shameless TDs who prefer to back a doggy government in Kyiv than their own President's wife. If this was in the so-called UK and MPs started criticising the unelected monarchy there would be cries of treason from the opposition. Not so here when our Head of State's family are criticised wrongly for simply trying to offer a peaceful end to the situation in that tragic land, the Ukraine some of our TDs agree with the tormentors in a foreign parliament.

As an internationalist I am not a great believer in heads of states but, alas, we do not live in a socialist world where such positions would be a thing of the past. In the meantime I can see right from wrong and the criticism of Sabina Higgins was wrong, uninvited and not welcome.

Caoimhin O’Muraile is Independent 
Socialist Republican and Marxist

53 comments:

  1. WTF is wrong with being a vodka soaked drunk? I aspire to becoming a whiskey / rum / bourbon / tequila / brandy - take your pick soaked drunk!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ditto mo chara, but we are not the head of the, by then, second super power. The worst we can do these days is hurl abuse at the TV if Man Utd, in my case, Liverpool in yours don't score⚽️⚽️😬. Two left-wing variants of Alf Garnett and "yer ammers".

    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete
  3. @ Caoimhin O'Muraile

    "Are the concerns of the 26 County administration out of genuine sympathy for these now homeless Ukrainians or more about showing Washington just how anti-Russian this state is?"

    I suspect that whilst taking in large numbers of Ukrainian refugees from a war the US/UK approve of (and didn't start) is politically expedient, there is something else at play.

    The first waves of refugees out of a country are the wealthiest, best connected, usually professional, and resourceful people. I imagine, in time, a significant amount of wealth and wealth creation will follow the refugees who have arrived in the South and elsewhere.

    This is an admittedly cynical way of looking at it. But I think it's also accurate.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Caoimhin. The reason why apartments in Kiev look intact when Zelensky is interviewed is that the initial Russian assault on Kiev was heroically repelled by the Ukrainian defence forces. You make very good points on refugees but constant attempts to establish a moral equivalence between Ukraine and Russia. Like a lot of left wingers trying to make the same case you are fixated on the Azov Brigade and the Right Sector while disregarding the far right, pro-Confederacy droogs of the so-called Peoples' Republics in Donetsk and the atrocities of the Putin's Wagner Group mercenaries who look to have been responsible for the recent massacre of tAzov Brigade prisoners of war.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If you're suspicions are correct, Brandon, and certainly may well be it makes yet another mockery of the 26 county state claiming equality. If you are right then this so-called policy is elitist to say the least, elitist and hypocritical. The Brits always have been hypocritical liars, I know having witnessed the Thatcher Governments lies at first hand.
    I am not sure the USA and UK did not have a slight of hand in starting, or at least provoking this war. It would be in line with new right-wing concensus politics in tge UK.

    Caoimhin O'Muraile.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Since the original impetus to war in Ukraine in 2014 was the thwarted desire for most Ukrainian for closer relations with the EU; it seems counter-factual for a UK govt which is essentially a Brexit Party administration to start this war. Putin is the current lodestar for far right nationalist populism throughout Europe; yet another reason for progressives to support Ukraine's battle for freedom from Purtin's yoke.

      Delete
  6. CO'M
    Total mischaracterization Re: "our Head of State's family are criticised wrongly for simply trying to offer a peaceful end to the situation"
    If an intruder invades your house you do not negotiate a peaceful settlement which gives them ownership of one part of your house. You kick them the fuck out! So some bleeding heart spectator's wishy washy comments are not helpful nor do they do justice to the Ukrainians trying maintain sovereignty over all of their sovereign territory. The Russians are unprovoked aggressors in this war and they have committed unspeakable number of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

    Claims about the Azov Regiment do not justify any of what the Russians are doing. References to the AR as Nazis do not justify Russia's war in the Ukraine... Russia's war is a territory grab and and true or false claims of Fascism are merely the pretext to justify the war and all atrocities committed.

    I am gobsmacked at your attempt to apply Russian propaganda about the destruction of civilian infrastructure -as not that bad --7 million Refugees and 1 million internally displaced did not leave the comfort of their own homes if they were not destroyed or otherwise no longer safe to live in.

    Ireland is long overdue a comprehensive housing program to meet environmental and national needs -the Ukrainians only add extra urgency to the need for more homes for those who need them.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The winter will decide the fate of Ukraine. When the mud freezes and the Russian tanks can move much more freely we shall see how well they have prepared for this. Ominous times for Europe.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Over the winter months, as the populace is forced to bear the heavy costs of yet another of the US's proxy ideological wars, expect to hear more citizens expressing views similar to Sabina's.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The Russians and Putin are the villians in the Ukrainian war -regardless of any posturing and brinkmanship between Russia and NATO -even if you take into account any provocations NATO may have caused -the Russians blinked first and there is no justification for their war crimes. The author seems to have a partisan preference for Putin the dictator over Zelensky the democrat that some of his commentary is purely Russian propoganda in denying the war and its atrocities.

    On the home front -a large portion of housing in Ireland was already substandard, much of it deserving to be bulldozed long ago because it is so dilapidated. One of the first things that struck me when I moved to Cork; until the celtic tiger much of the existing infrastructure dated back to Brit occupation. The influx of refugees will do more to move a housing crisis toward an human disaster.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think this is always gives away a section of the Left - it is dictatorship they hanker after. It is enamoured to Czarism more than they are to Marxism. Marxism just becomes the tool by which it hopes to establish Czarism.
      When we drill down talk of being neutral doesn't amount to much if the person waving the neutral flag opposes the Russian invasion and supports the right of the Ukrainians to resist.
      NATO is a most unappealing of entities but so is gangster capitalist Russia. I can see somebody wanting to be neutral between those two but not when either of them invade or bomb another country.
      I think the author has a point in his defence of Sabina Higgins - there are too many in the West, as the former US diplomat Chas Freeman said, willing to fight to the last Ukrainian. He felt the US goal was to prolong the war rather than find a way of ending it.

      Delete
    2. AM

      Czarism is apt. Sabina Higgins may not have intended the implications of her statement but the Russians have made absolutely clear that they only negotiated settlement they will agree to will involve them taking control of large portions of Ukraine. Hence, calls for a negotiated settlement are not welcome.

      If Ukraine is to survive with its sovereign territory intact at the end of this war of aggression, then they have to defeat the Russians.

      Delete
    3. AM
      Further, we of all people should know the implications of a negotiated settlement with an aggressive neighbour that involves partition of the invaded nation.

      Delete
    4. I think calls for a negotiated settlement should always be welcome. It does not mean they have to be accepted and certainly not on the Russian terms. But the concept should be explored.
      Even in our own situation, the negotiated settlement is better than the non negotiable war.
      Wars that cannot be won are best not fought. The objective should correspond to the achievable.
      I would strongly agree with Sabina Higgins on the matter. I think the only problem was that it featured on the President's official site.

      Delete
  10. Don't be so naive Barry.
    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete
  11. To me, as I said, zelenky is a fucking fraud. Putin an evil cunt, would give neither house room. What about a few words of support for Sabina Higgins whose comments were, to me, sensible. Stop eating the shit of either Zelensky or Putin.

    Caoimgin O'Muraile.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whatever about Zelensky, the cause he represents - the freedom of a country not to be invaded by a foreign power is a right that progressives should be siding with. The side represented by Putin - the freedom of a foreign power to invade its neighbour is a wrong that progressives should oppose.
      Reducing wars to personality clashes between people perceived as cunts is as far removed from a Marxist or realist perspective as can be found.

      Delete
  12. So the allies had no right to invade Nazi Germany? Any more than they, the Nazis, had a right to invade Poland. Of course they did and should have done so back in 1936. This conflict, and maybe the word cunts was a bit strong but I stand by it, ( dont always do the PC stuff, must be my upbringing) goes back in the meeting in 1990 between Boris Yeltsin and understudies like Putin, Shushkevichuk, Belarus Soviet Republic, soon to be independent, and Leonid Kravchuk of the Ukraine. The objective of these three brigands, music to the Americans and their supportrs ears, was to bring down the USSR and Mikhail Gorbechev. That is the roots of this mess. In the meantime not a word of support for the Irish Presidents missus, why not invite Zelensky in to do the job as President of Ireland? Many appear to think the sun shines out of his arse.

    Meanwhile in Belfast a group of Marxists and trade unionists have been holding support rallies for the Russian speaking majorities of East Ukraine who, if reports are to be believed, have been suffering persecution by Azov for some time prior to Russias intervention. It appears this minority do not matter to the pro-Zelensky supporters who, I'm begining to wonder, may have a very questionable motive.

    For the record, the actions of the Kremlin have been condemed countless times by Marxists and other progressives, including Sabina Higgins.

    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "
      ", Caoimhin.
      You wax nostalgic for the old USSR which far from being a socialist paradise was an absolute toilet

      Delete
    2. Most Russian speakers did not welcome Putin's invasions nor rule by the goons of the Luhansk and Donetsk "Peoples Republics". The constituent nations of the former USSR like the Baltic States, Georgia and Ukraine had every right to cede from the Soviet Empire? Or was the Irish struggle the only acceptable national independence struggle for you, Caoimhin?

      Delete
    3. Caoimhin - I doubt that is the best point of reference given that nobody thus far has made that point about the invasion of Germany.

      A country that wages aggressive war can be invaded as part of a war to stop its war making. Although WW2 does throw up a conundrum as to why the USSR was supplying Germany right up to the day of Operation Barbarossa and whey it had earlier reached an agreement with Nazi Germany on the two of them waging a war of aggression on Poland, perpetrating similar type of war crimes against the Poles while they were at it.

      You have already opposed Russia's invasion of Ukraine, describing it as wrong and something that should not have been done. Presumably, as a self defined Marxist, you will support the right of Ukraine to resist the Russian war of aggression rather than reduce matters to personality clashes. Putin and Zelensky being two cunts no more explains this war than WW2 having its roots in Stalin and Hitler being two cunts. Marxists invariably look elsewhere for explanations.

      Rather than the USSR being brought to an end it would have been much better to see it being democratised from within. At the heel of the hunt all dictatorships should be brought down including Marxist ones. A Marxist dictatorship has no more claim over people than a theocratic dictatorship.

      Azov and the far right were committing war crimes and atrocities in Eastern Ukraine from 2014. They are hideous cunts and there is Sweet FA wrong with using that language to describe them. The Belfast Marxists should have been highlighting it then rather than leave themselves open to the suspicion or accusation that they are only doing it now to mask the Russian war of aggression. But as Young Earth Creationism has more traction in Belfast than Marxism, I would not read too much into it. Czarist Leninism has no attraction for me!!

      Azov would not be the force it now is were it not for the Russian manipulation of the region in response to the overthrow of Yanukovic and the subsequent negative impact on the Kremlin's ability to impose its influence on what were called the in-betweens.

      And now we have the Russian speakers being bombed by the Russians.

      I think Sabina Higgins is right - what right has the West to fight to the last Ukrainian? But there seems no popular sentiment in Ukraine for surrendering. Why would there be?

      Delete
  13. Anthony, the Nazi Soviet pact was a direct response, not well publicised, but look in the right places and it will be found, of the Soviet offer of an anti-Nazi pact. Stalin offered a million Soviet troops plus artillery and tanks to be positioned with Polish, British and French troops along the Polish German border. This was rejected out of hand by the Poles, who were suspicious understandably, but with the alternative been Nazi Germany should have chanced it, thus in hindsight signing their own death warrant, and Britain along with France, if they were honest (a first) were hoping Hitler would invade the Soviet Union and they would assist. British troops, along with the Yanks, had already been given a bloody nose by Trotskys Red Army during the Russian Civil War. Unfortuately Hitler did not play their game and invaded Poland, not the USSR, not yet. Stalin signed the non aggression pact with Hitler because his initial offer to Poland and the Brish and French allies had been rejected. The Red Army was, initially in a bad state, thanks to Stalin and his suicidal purges. Stalin knew this, though could never admit it, and he also knew his forces had made hard work of the job in Finland, almost losing. Fortunately he had not executed Zukhov and Kenychek (forgive spelling) the real victors over fascism.

    At last, somebody supports Sabina Higgins. And you are right, there seems no popular sentiment in Ukraine for surrendering, just like, at one point, Finland had no intentions of surrendering. I think the Ukrainian forces, despite a fraudulent President, who still has not enquired about his country's refuggees, are in better shape than were the Finns in 1939, if I were them surrendering would not enter my head, if western reports are correct???

    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete
  14. Caoimhin - I am sure if it is correct it will be easy found. There is a lot of literature on the war and a lot of links to information about the war.

    The realpolitik of the time occasioned by Soviet military weakness caused in part by Stalin murdering Mikhail Tukhachevsky abd others in the 1937 purge.

    The "pact I am actually referring to" is the agreement between the two to invade Poland from either side in 1938 and only weeks apart.

    The Allies had a right to invade Nazi Germany. Russia has no right to invade Ukraine. It really gets no simpler. You have stated your agreement on both points.

    It might ultimately be a good idea for Ukraine to surrender rather than fight to the last Ukrainian to suit the West, But that does not remove the right of the Ukrainians to resist a wrongful invasion. Nor does it follow because we have a right to do something that it is the right thing to exercise that right. There is something to be learned from the fate of William Jay:

    “Here lies the body of William Jay,
    Who died maintaining his right of way.
    He was right, dead right, as he sped along,
    But he's just as dead as if he were wrong.”

    For that reason I think Sabina should at least have the right to express a view and it is worthwhile listening to. Not because I think for a second there is any merit in the Kremlin strategy or ethos.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The William Jay ditty succinctly prioritises the utilitarian position over and above legitimate ethical, moralistic and ideological concerns.
      Eventually, an ending to this conflict, like an end to any conflict, will require either a crushing victory for one side over the other, or alternatively a pragmatic negotiated settlement.

      I'm clear on my preference.

      Delete
    2. I think it is more cautious than consequentialist. Must tell you when I next see you how I came across it - a story in itself!!

      Delete
    3. I'll look forward to hearing that story.
      In the meantime I can only but imagine circumstances where perhaps such a ditty was used as a cautionary tale in an attempt to coerce or intimidate dissenting voices and get him or her back on-message.

      Back on topic, I believe negative consequentialism has a worthy place in formulating positions; its more than useful to include considerations of what are the likely least damaging consequences for the greatest number of people, as much as it is to factor or prioritise ideological and moralist concerns.

      Idealist best possible outcomes need to be weighted by consideration of real and lived world worst case scenarios.

      Delete
    4. I doubt in real life we can ever be absolutist about it - I think we all take short cuts in most walks of life. But as a rule I do not favour consequentialism, preferring the liberal precept of process legitimises outcome.

      Delete
    5. The geopolitical processes that allowed Bush over-rule Sarkozy's and Merkel's reservations over NATO expansion produced the current outcome.

      Delete
    6. An element of truth in that but far from the whole story. The Clinton admin, not the Bush, began rowing back from commitments not to expand NATO. Things had gone quiet on the NATO front with the Ukrainian proposal not being processed. The more plausible explanation seem to lie in the war being a continuation of the 2014 war but with a full on invasion rather than relying on "little green men." And that flared up as a result of Ukraine ousting the regime of its corrupt president, Yanukovych. With or without NATO, I am of the view that the Kremlin would have cracked down in order to maintain hegemony in what it sees as its sphere of influence.
      I completely distrust the West in all of this. Its official narrative is best regarded as Trump type talk.

      Delete
  15. Anthony, I have never suggested Ukraine should not defend herself, not once. I argue the neutrality, and still do, over the fears of Russia over NATO. I still hold their fears are justified as no guarantees have been given that it will not happen. As for EU membership, that is meaningless compared with the NATO terrorist threat. Invasion was not the answer and in the past I have suggested many alternatives for addressing this worry, which nobody appears to want to know about.

    As for the pact offered by Stalin to the west, it was in 1939 before the Nazi Soviet pact, which occurred in 1939 not, as you suggest, 1938.

    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is the point Caoimhin and which is why it puzzles me that you claim to be neutral. From what you have said, you support the right of the Ukrainians to defend themselves against the Russian war and oppose the war. That is not being neutral. On the wider international dimension of the conflict between the capitalist West and capitalist Russia, you claim neutrality - but most of us are. I prefer NATO but the difference is marginal and I don't support it. It is like preferring 7 lashes of the whip to 8 - I am not going to support any lashes!!

      Delete
  16. I know the date of the Hitler Stalin pact, August 23rd 1939. August 23rd would have been my dads birthday, that is how I remember the date.

    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know the date from books - even have the battle of Stalingrad as a tattoo on my arm!! But what we have in our heads does not always make it to the page. Try proof reading your own writing - no matter how often I read what I write it still appears as I intended to write it and not the way it is written! Of course your date is right. But expect the same error from me next time!

      Delete
  17. Stalin knew as soon as he signed that Pact that Hitler was going to invade Russia. All he was doing was buying time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He said he knew but I wonder how much he believed what he said. Right up to the invasion on the morning of 22 June, 1941, he was dismissing intelligence reports including one from a German CP member serving in the Wehrmacht who crossed the lines to tell the Soviets the invasion was imminent. I think Stalin had him shot. That said I can understand the realpolitik of the Pact but collaborating with the Nazis to destroy Poland . . . that is something from a different league

      Delete
  18. I thought it was an error, easy done Anthony, just watching how Smidley Ritz (sorry about spelling) Polish leader was aware of imminent Nazi invasion, after his pact with Stalin Hitler was ultra confident. The point I am trying to make is, had the Polish leader along with the British and French took up Stalins offer earlier in 1939 the forces arrayed, Polish, Soviet, British and French along with tanks and artillery would have been too much even for a nutter like Hitler. The Poles refused, the Brits and French wanted a piece of the USSR on Hitlers coat tails and that is the hard facts of the matter. It the Brits and particularly the French could, and should have stopped Nazi Germany in 1936, the Rhineland reoccupation by German troops in clear breach of the Versailes Treaty. They didn't because they too had eyes on the USSR.

    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But none of this addresses the main point that the USSR collaborated with Nazi Germany to wage aggressive war on Poland. Sometimes we reap what we sew. The Nazis went on to do to the USSR what both they and the Soviets did to Poland.

      Delete
  19. Henry Joy. You are in danger of finding yourself referenced in Pseud's Corner!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If one is to be referenced for pointing out that the King has no clothes on, then so be it. Its undeniable that the necessary conditions for conflict were created by the US and continuance of the war is driven on by the supply of Western armaments.
      All of this currently comes at a terrible price for the people of Ukraine and will shortly impinge harshly on many others.

      For how long more will people continue to insist on the wonderful suit of clothes that the king wears?

      Delete
    2. Henry Joy is not going to Pseud's corner or anywhere else. Play the ball Barry rather than the man, even if it is a shirt tug and not a serious foul.
      I think a strong case can be made that neither the US nor NATO were the prime cause here. There is a wide range of sources hostile to both the US and NATO that are denying it. Largely because it denies agency to both the Russians and the Ukrainians and looks for external causes rather than internal ones. So, there is a lot of affirming and denying around the matter that is not mere PR. Richard Falk tackled this problem some years ago in a fine piece where he said insufficient emphasis is given in conflict analysis to the internal dynamics that often cause or feed into violence and war.

      Was In Dun Laoghaire today HJ - my son pointed out just how wealthy it was. Reminded me of our mosey thru Dalkey - we had no sun then whereas today it was beautiful.


      Delete
  20. I genuinely had difficulty understanding what Henry Joy was saying. i was not attacking his ideas. Apologies, Henry Joy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. that usually only happens when he does pyschobabble!!

      He didn't complain and will carry on regardless. Attacking his ideas is fine - that's the ball. I felt yours veered in the direction of the man and there is an onus on us to try and nudge comments away from that. No harm done.

      Delete
    2. John Maynard Keynes described the Versailles Treaty as a "Carthaginian peace", one intended to permanently cripple the losing side. The geopolitical mismanagement by the West since the collapse of the USSR has not been dissimilar in its intent. A ten-year-old could have better predicted the consequences of excessive NATO encroachment.

      A realpolitik was called for and is still called for.
      But no, the West arms the Ukrainians and continues to stoke the fire.

      Delete
    3. In my view Western societies should be demanding of their governments that they arm Ukraine with weaponry needed to defend itself against aggressive war. I think it should also be demanded for the Palestinians against Israeli aggression. At the same time I think a negotiated settlement must be considered.
      A blind man could also have predicted the consequence of a long standing Russian tendency to impose its will on its neighbours, particularly a neighbour that had 4 of its cities out of 13 in the USSR awarded Hero City status for its fight against the Nazis.
      There is no one cause of the war but Russian aggression is most likely the primary determinant.

      Delete
    4. " it should also be demanded for the Palestinians against Israeli aggression"

      And therein lays the flawed fantasies of the entrenched moralists and ideologues. The 'musterbation' of the shoulds, musts and ought to's ... totally at odds with the realpolitik actualities of the lived world. Sometimes, in moving from chaos to order, systems of politics or principles based on practical rather than moral or ideological considerations are called for.

      Delete
    5. Realpolitik is invariably framed by those with power. One of their greatest achievements is when they can persuade the powerless to share their framing. The starting point for those with less power should not be how to bend over to suit those with more power. It should more approximate a position of how to subvert that power having first developed an informed understanding of it rather than surrendering to it. Surrender, while unavoidable in some circumstances, should. like war, be last option not the first.

      Delete
    6. Its absolutely true that realpolitik swings with the power axis. Indeed, its also true and advisable that the less powerful ought to develop an informed understanding of overall situations before challenging a stronger power. That said though, there's also much merit in the old Scottish proverb 'T'is better to bend than to break'.
      The Ukrainian regime, unfortunately having been led down a primrose path by the West, aren't ready to bend yet. With US led support its possible they'll never break, but if that were to be true its going to come at a massive cost, a massive cost not just to them but also to Europe and tragically to other nations dependent on grains from the region.
      When the winter arrives and the negative impacts of the war are felt more deeply those consequences will shape and change public opinion. There'll be more taking Sabina's position.

      Delete
    7. In almost every conflict situation there is a power asymmetry. If the less powerful always decide to give in nothing ever changes. It is better to bend than break but as Russia has already said that it wants to break Ukraine, that it wants to deny its right to exist as a nation - for Ukraine to meet its demands would lead to it breaking rather than bending.
      Ukraine deserves the support of the international community, much as the struggle against Apartheid did or the victims of the genocide in Rwanda. It should not be pressurised to suit Western interests to surrender. Nor should it be pressurised to continue a fight that it does not want.
      The consequences of the war will without doubt shape public opinion but that will be as a result of self interest and not solidarity.
      Sabina's position is one of negotiation, not unconditional surrender. But it seems her view is not a popular one in Ukraine where the dominant sentiment seems to be much as it was towards Nazi Germany - resist.

      Delete
    8. Now that the conflict is established Europe finds itself in an intractable position and as Steve alludes we'll all just to accept that a long war of attrition is the future; a future with mass movements of refugees and enforced migrants, energy disruption, economic hardship, inevitable destabilisation and further fragmentation of society and perhaps eventually the collapse of the EU too.

      Delete
    9. A bleak prognosis HJ but one that has every likelihood of coming to fruition.

      Delete
  21. Me thinks folk that believe the fact that Kiev hasn't been 'shock and awed' is due to 'heroic' defending by Ukraine is listening to NATO/mi7(media) announcements for too long. If NATO thought Russia was at full capacity they'd have been more blatant at opposing Russia instead of making do with pathetic taking the ball home spoilt child antics. Remember Syria? The yanks and NATO terrorists couldn't even stop Russia there. The longer it goes on the more weak and exposed NATO becomes.....long may it continue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So Mick O you want more war crimes like Bucha, Mariupol and Aleppo to sate your appetite. But in your universe these were probably staged events.

      Delete
    2. Putin probably thought that the tactics that worked in Crimea, Chechnya and the other places Russia invaded would work in the Ukraine. They didn't for a variety of reasons, so they go back to doing what they do best. Blanket bombing civilian areas to break resolve. The West and NATO are happy to field test new weapon systems, plunge Kiev into eternal debt, and grind Russia down in a war of attrition over years a la Afghanistan/Iraq for the U.S. The winter that is coming will be telling and disastrous for the Civilians though.

      Delete