Putin gave several reasons for his decision some of which held a small amount of water. He claimed Ukraine was harbouring “Nazis” on its territory and he, Putin, is clearing the area of “Nazi” organisations. This claim has been given credence by the Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s, use of the self-proclaimed Nazi troops of the Azov Regiment. The Azov claim to model themselves on the “Das Reich” Division of the Nazi Waffen SS of World War Two infamy. This the Azov Regiment proudly boast making Putin’s claims of Nazi activity appear more than credible. Was invasion the answer? No, not in my view but the Russian fears at the time were understandable. Another of Putin’s worries was that Ukraine was/is seeking NATO membership bringing the US led alliance right up to Russia’s western border.
Putin is not a nice man and, in my opinion, neither is Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the President of Ukraine who, although the darling of the west, is not in my view all he appears to be! What is a man who claims to be of Jewish stock doing using Pro-Nazi troops in his army? Surely these soldiers, should Ukraine win the war, would be gunning for Zelenskyy one day?
Putin is not a nice man and, in my opinion, neither is Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the President of Ukraine who, although the darling of the west, is not in my view all he appears to be! What is a man who claims to be of Jewish stock doing using Pro-Nazi troops in his army? Surely these soldiers, should Ukraine win the war, would be gunning for Zelenskyy one day?
Putin was partly responsible for the present situation many years previous when he was working in the KGB, the former Soviet intelligence agency, and was also an agent of Boris Yeltsin. It was Yeltsin who, as President of the Russian Socialist Republic, allegedly organised the collapse of the Soviet Union back in 1989/90. Yeltsin was not happy “playing second fiddle” to Soviet General Secretary, Mikhail Gorbachev. So, when the General Secretary of the USSR was away on holiday Yeltsin, aided by Putin and others, including the then General Secretary of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Stanislav Hurenko, met to discuss the best way of bringing down, or winding up, the Soviet Union. Did the collapse of the former super power make such a confrontation between Russia and other former Soviet Republics, particularly Ukraine and Georgia, inevitable? I believe it did and the West knew it!
What Putin did not take into account on launching this invasion was that the Russian Army was not, and are not, the fighting machine which was once the Soviet Red Army. The Ukrainian Army (themselves once part of the Soviet Red Army) on the ground, despite being well outnumbered, have given the Russians a good run for their money and there is no way Putin can claim his goals in Ukraine have been achieved. Zelenskyy has been heavily supplied with arms by European countries and even more so the USA which have given the Ukrainian leader weapons to the tune of 69 billion dollars and rising! Zelenskyy in fact never seems to have enough weapons and keeps asking for more and more to a point, I believe, somebody should say no we cannot afford to keep this up. Britain are supplying Ukraine with weapons and have pledged a further two billion pounds worth of arms to defeat Russia.
What Putin did not take into account on launching this invasion was that the Russian Army was not, and are not, the fighting machine which was once the Soviet Red Army. The Ukrainian Army (themselves once part of the Soviet Red Army) on the ground, despite being well outnumbered, have given the Russians a good run for their money and there is no way Putin can claim his goals in Ukraine have been achieved. Zelenskyy has been heavily supplied with arms by European countries and even more so the USA which have given the Ukrainian leader weapons to the tune of 69 billion dollars and rising! Zelenskyy in fact never seems to have enough weapons and keeps asking for more and more to a point, I believe, somebody should say no we cannot afford to keep this up. Britain are supplying Ukraine with weapons and have pledged a further two billion pounds worth of arms to defeat Russia.
This is the policy of the new so-called Labour Government under Keir Starmer, and his predecessors, who will have spent six billion pounds sterling arming Ukraine yet have told their own pensioners they cannot afford to give these elderly people in Britian their winter fuel allowance. All Starmer’s political opponents are attacking his government for not paying this allowance to pensioners but not one of these detractors mention the money spent helping Ukraine! Why have they not mentioned this expenditure as a cause of the pensioners' misery? Because every one of them would have done exactly the same thing! Anything to beat Putin seems to be the order of the day.
Until recently Zelenskyy has not been able to use certain weapons supplied by the USA and European countries including Britian outside Ukraine. They have not been given permission to use long range western supplied missiles inside Russia. It appears that has now changed with the US, now in the last months of the (Irishman, that’s a laugh) Joe Biden's Presidency - because in January Donald Trump takes over as President despite him being a convicted felon! Trump appears not to share his NATO allies' love of Ukraine and may well stop the supply of weapons to Zelenskyy. So, in his last months of his Presidency Biden is increasing the supply of arms to Ukraine and allowing them to use US supplied long range missiles inside Russia. True to form it appears Britain has followed the US by allowing Zelenskyy to use British supplied ‘Storm Shadow’ long range missiles inside Russia. When asked whether this is the case British Secretary of State for Defence John Healey said; “we are not going to talk about the situation for security reasons”. What security reasons? Britain is not at war with Russia are they? Or, are they fighting a proxy war to every last drop of Ukrainian soldier’s blood? The same applies to the USA. Britain says they will continue to back Ukraine but what about a situation when Trump takes over and US support is no longer a guarantee, in fact the supply from Washington drying up would perhaps be more accurate!
The British media are now using such phrases as “the Western allies” which was a term coined during the Second World War against fascism. They used the term “western allies” to differentiate Britain, USA, Canada and many other countries from the Red Army of the Soviet Union, without who the war could well have been lost. On BBC2s Daily Politics on 19th November the Daily Mirror's Suzie Boniface referred to the “Western allies” several times, almost like Britain is at war, or at least preparing for war!
Until recently Zelenskyy has not been able to use certain weapons supplied by the USA and European countries including Britian outside Ukraine. They have not been given permission to use long range western supplied missiles inside Russia. It appears that has now changed with the US, now in the last months of the (Irishman, that’s a laugh) Joe Biden's Presidency - because in January Donald Trump takes over as President despite him being a convicted felon! Trump appears not to share his NATO allies' love of Ukraine and may well stop the supply of weapons to Zelenskyy. So, in his last months of his Presidency Biden is increasing the supply of arms to Ukraine and allowing them to use US supplied long range missiles inside Russia. True to form it appears Britain has followed the US by allowing Zelenskyy to use British supplied ‘Storm Shadow’ long range missiles inside Russia. When asked whether this is the case British Secretary of State for Defence John Healey said; “we are not going to talk about the situation for security reasons”. What security reasons? Britain is not at war with Russia are they? Or, are they fighting a proxy war to every last drop of Ukrainian soldier’s blood? The same applies to the USA. Britain says they will continue to back Ukraine but what about a situation when Trump takes over and US support is no longer a guarantee, in fact the supply from Washington drying up would perhaps be more accurate!
The British media are now using such phrases as “the Western allies” which was a term coined during the Second World War against fascism. They used the term “western allies” to differentiate Britain, USA, Canada and many other countries from the Red Army of the Soviet Union, without who the war could well have been lost. On BBC2s Daily Politics on 19th November the Daily Mirror's Suzie Boniface referred to the “Western allies” several times, almost like Britain is at war, or at least preparing for war!
So, are the British preparing for some sort of confrontation with Russia? Well, as a point of observation, Putin has lowered the bar for the use of nuclear weapons in this war with Ukraine which to all sensible people spells danger, particularly if he really is as mad made out by the media! There is no such thing as ‘limited nuclear war.’ Once these things come into play it could well mean good Night Vienna for all of us! If Putin, and he is mad enough to, so we are constantly told, decides to use a nuclear bomb on Ukraine will the West retaliate? Even though Ukraine is not a NATO member and, therefore, is not covered by that organisations constitution which states under article 5 of collective defence:
If a NATO Ally is the victim of an armed attack, each and every member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the Ally attacked.
Will the NATO countries decide to make an exception if Ukraine is attacked by Russia using nuclear weapons? Article 5 only applies to NATO member countries which Ukraine is not, but the language coming from Britain and, at least short term, the USA suggests should Putin use his nuclear weapons then he could expect retaliation in kind. Will the West supply Zelenskyy with nuclear weapons? That would be very foolish move and certainly, in the case of Britain, was not in the Labour Party’s election manifesto!
I have remained neutral in this conflict, unlike the Israeli/Palestinian war where neutrality is not an option, and I shall remain neutral. I do not like Putin, he is a para-fascist dictator who aided Yeltsin in collapsing the USSR, thus making the world a more dangerous place, and to me Zelenskyy is a fraud. Russia should not have invaded Ukraine – if for no other reason the Russian Army were in no state for war – and there were other ways around Putin’s concerns. The West did not help. All they had to say was – words to the effect of – any application from Ukraine to join NATO will be turned down. Even British Conservative MP, Michael Gove, is on record as saying no to a Ukraine application to join the alliance. Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal of any single country in the world including the USA, not that matters a great deal once a certain number of nuclear warheads has been reached. Somebody should get these two headbangers, Putin and Zelenskyy, together and iron out an agreement, satisfactory, if not perfect, for both waring countries. Regretfully, and I really, really hate suggesting this but Trump might be capable of arranging such a meeting. This does not mean Trump, having tried and failed to get a meeting of minds in Eastern Europe, would not be prepared to use nuclear weapons himself. The question would be, under such circumstances, whose side would the US be on? Even a Trump brokered deal is preferable to nuclear annihilation which very few on this planet will survive. Continuing supplying one side with weapons, which of course lines the pockets of the arms dealers paid by pensioners heating allowance money, is not the way to promote peace in the region. Of course, Trump may be able to cobble something together in Eastern Europe, but the other side of this coin is he supports the Israelis even more so than Biden, and that is saying a lot, in the Middle-East.
This is bad news for the Palestinians and the people of Lebanon. Would Trump make even more weapons available to Israel? Israel's motives in the region are more than revenge for the attacks of 7th October 2023, they have more than avenged the deaths involved that day. Neither are they too bothered about the Israeli hostages taken that day still held by Hamas. No, Israels goals I believe are far wider and deeper than this. I believe they are out to expand their influence and governance in the entire area, an even greater Israel putting a two-state solution regrettably well and truly to bed. Neither Netanyahu, Hamas or Hezbollah are interested in a two-state solution and neither is Trump I understand. With Trump at the helm the misery of the Palestinians and citizens of the independent nation state of Lebanon can expect little or no let up from the Israelis! Israels arms supply will be endless once Trump takes the reins of Presidential power.
These are potentially dangerous times, and this excludes the ever-growing threat of man-made accelerated climate change. With nutters like Putin, Zelenskyy, Netanyahu, Ali Khamenei, Hamas, Hezbollah and shortly Donald Trump responsible for the planet and human kinds future, or no future, the possible eventualities are endless and the stuff of nightmares! It does not paint an encouraging picture for the future no matter how we dress it up or which paint we use!!
I have remained neutral in this conflict, unlike the Israeli/Palestinian war where neutrality is not an option, and I shall remain neutral. I do not like Putin, he is a para-fascist dictator who aided Yeltsin in collapsing the USSR, thus making the world a more dangerous place, and to me Zelenskyy is a fraud. Russia should not have invaded Ukraine – if for no other reason the Russian Army were in no state for war – and there were other ways around Putin’s concerns. The West did not help. All they had to say was – words to the effect of – any application from Ukraine to join NATO will be turned down. Even British Conservative MP, Michael Gove, is on record as saying no to a Ukraine application to join the alliance. Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal of any single country in the world including the USA, not that matters a great deal once a certain number of nuclear warheads has been reached. Somebody should get these two headbangers, Putin and Zelenskyy, together and iron out an agreement, satisfactory, if not perfect, for both waring countries. Regretfully, and I really, really hate suggesting this but Trump might be capable of arranging such a meeting. This does not mean Trump, having tried and failed to get a meeting of minds in Eastern Europe, would not be prepared to use nuclear weapons himself. The question would be, under such circumstances, whose side would the US be on? Even a Trump brokered deal is preferable to nuclear annihilation which very few on this planet will survive. Continuing supplying one side with weapons, which of course lines the pockets of the arms dealers paid by pensioners heating allowance money, is not the way to promote peace in the region. Of course, Trump may be able to cobble something together in Eastern Europe, but the other side of this coin is he supports the Israelis even more so than Biden, and that is saying a lot, in the Middle-East.
This is bad news for the Palestinians and the people of Lebanon. Would Trump make even more weapons available to Israel? Israel's motives in the region are more than revenge for the attacks of 7th October 2023, they have more than avenged the deaths involved that day. Neither are they too bothered about the Israeli hostages taken that day still held by Hamas. No, Israels goals I believe are far wider and deeper than this. I believe they are out to expand their influence and governance in the entire area, an even greater Israel putting a two-state solution regrettably well and truly to bed. Neither Netanyahu, Hamas or Hezbollah are interested in a two-state solution and neither is Trump I understand. With Trump at the helm the misery of the Palestinians and citizens of the independent nation state of Lebanon can expect little or no let up from the Israelis! Israels arms supply will be endless once Trump takes the reins of Presidential power.
These are potentially dangerous times, and this excludes the ever-growing threat of man-made accelerated climate change. With nutters like Putin, Zelenskyy, Netanyahu, Ali Khamenei, Hamas, Hezbollah and shortly Donald Trump responsible for the planet and human kinds future, or no future, the possible eventualities are endless and the stuff of nightmares! It does not paint an encouraging picture for the future no matter how we dress it up or which paint we use!!
 |
| Caoimhin O’Muraile is Independent Socialist Republican and Marxist. |
.jpg)
I still haven't figured how someone can be neutral while stating they support the Ukrainian right to resist invasion and oppose the Russian invasion.
ReplyDeleteThe Nazi reason is another myth for going to war. Azov have plenty of Nazis but Putin has no problem with Nazis given the documented accounts of his own Russian Nazis.
It is hard to believe NATO was never gonna happen for Ukraine. The West was at its usual lark of playing Ukraine. Now Putin has a bigger NATO member on his border than he did at the start of the war.
Russia was provoked by the West which sought to humiliate it. The best account of this that I have found is in Everybody Loses by Samuel Charap and Timothy J. Colton. This probably better explains its invasion than NATO or Nazi based theories.
It is not a "Nazi based theory" it is tge words of Azov tgemselves. They "model ourselves on Das Reich" seens pretty clear to me. Support either Putin or Zelensky at your peril, they both lack credibility. If this war develops it wont matter one fuck once the first nuclear weapon enters the theatre. I can't help feeling, and it is only a feeling, Zelensky has some kind of hidden agenda backed by the West. My contempt for Putin is well documented, I blame him and his former boss Yeltsin for the mess the entire region is in.
ReplyDeleteCaoimhin O'Muraile
You did not get the point being made.
DeleteOf course Azov is Nazi or at least has a large Nazi core. Michael Colborne details its make up quite well in his book From the Fires of War.
There is a Nazi based theory which seeks to explain Russian motives for invading. Putin is quite happy to work with Nazis in Russia so why would he be so concerned about them in Ukraine?
Ukraine is much wider than Zelensky. Focus on one man is a great man of history theory which is so removed from any Marxian perspective which you as a Marxist understand. A Marxian focus would be on Ukrainian society and its right not to be invaded which you accept, and Russia having no right to invade, which you also accept. There is no space for neutrality once you subscribe to that logic. It is different for the person who supports one position or the other but you support both, leaving you with no neutral ground to stand on.
The left in Ukraine are very critical of Zelensky and his neo liberal regime but they are not claiming to be neutral. They support the right of Ukraine to resist. Once we support that right claims to be neutral amount to little.
It is a dangerous situation. A non-nuclear state is invaded by a nuclear power which broke its own guarantee never to invade Ukraine if Kiev handed its nuclear armoury over to Moscow.
America is a nuclear power that also invades or backs invasions of non-nuclear powers. We can hardly claim to be neutral in those conflicts either.
We know the West is not backing Ukraine for any reason other than self interest. But that hardly answers the question of what Ukrainian society is supposed to do when subject to a war of aggression.
And let's not forget Putin ordered the use of a WMD in the form of a radiological agent on UK soil to kill a spy so any whinging from Russia is crocodile tears.
ReplyDeleteДжон Патрик - This page is where you can comment if you choose
ReplyDelete