Saturday, 5 March 2022 — Wipokuli
Following the words of the first Secretary General of NATO, Hastings_Ismay, regarding NATO´s purpose “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down”, one could say that the aim of the Ukraine conflict purposefully brought about by the USA is: to keep the Russians and Chinese out, the USA in, and the Europeans down and in line!
The fighting in Ukraine apparently continues unabated without the public having reliable information about the actual situation and the state of military development. This means further severe human suffering, as in any armed conflict. In the Western public, the focus of the media is on this suffering, especially of the civilian population in Ukraine, which the Ukrainian government would like to encourage in large numbers to dangerously “join in“ (after training_with_wooden_rifles).
Maybe many have forgotten the words of Madeleine Albright when being asked whether the bringing down of Iraq was worth the death of 500,000 children there, caused by the sanctions imposed on Iraq, “yes, it_was_worth_it“. No real outcry followed in the West!
Today, concerning Ukraine and Russia, the reporting here, with its focus on civilian suffering, is quite different from what it was in the past on the essentially U.S.-led wars, such as in Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.. There, the coverage revolved primarily around the empire’s “goal kicks,“ as in a soccer match. In the process, the developments and the prehistory of the current belligerent outbreak of a long-simmering conflict are largely ignored (“water under the bridge“).
It looks as if effects and causes are systematically interchanged. The practically complete rupture of the West and the structures controlled by it, especially of the world economy, with Russia is presented as a consequence of Russia’s actions. The other way around may “make a shoe out of it.“ A look at the historical dimension of the events seems appropriate beyond all actionism. When Chancellor Scholz spoke on Sunday of a “turning point in time,“ that is on the one hand apt, but if it is understood to mean that “everything was fine“ until “an evil Russian“ simply wanted war, that is not only stupid but very dangerous.
In the post-war development of the “East-West-relationship“ there are striking culmination points, where there was a “clarification“ of relations and conflicts and certain manifestations of these clarifications. This is comparable to an earthquake as a result of tensions in the earth’s crust and the consequences in the landscape, only as “man’s work“.
It must be remembered that even before the end of the Second World War there were plans in the West to “nuke the Soviet Union off the map“ or at least to_bomb_her_into_Stone_Age (e.g. “Operation Unthinkable“). The dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan was more a message to Stalin than a “military necessity“.
The last joint action of the Western victorious powers and the Soviet Union took place practically from November 20, 1945 to October 1, 1946 in the form of the Nuremberg Trials. The rift that had just begun to emerge before the end of the war manifested itself in Europe especially with the unannounced currency reform in 1948 in the western occupation zones of Germany and the subsequent Berlin blockade, and culminated in the founding of the Federal Republic of Germany on May 23 and the German Democratic Republic (GDR) on October 7, 1949. The “Iron Curtain“ had become a finally visible reality.NATO was founded in 1949, and the accession of the Federal Republic in 1955 was followed by the founding of the Warsaw Pact. The East-West antagonism had thus found clear military contours and structures. More dramatic East-West conflicts now took place primarily outside Europe.
For a long time, the two sides continued to try to play off West Berlin, which was still a source of conflict, against the other side. For the West, especially the United States, West Berlin was a “stake in the flesh of the Eastern Bloc,“ and for the latter an object of pressure. With the construction of the Berlin Wall in 1961, there was a certain clarification, which virtually closed the “Iron Curtain“, so to speak also in the sense of a “stabilizing“ culmination point.
In the further disputes it played a major role (and continues to do so) that the West has for centuries had a considerable power and wealth base in the colonial_plundering of the southern hemisphere. At the same time, the Federal Republic (which was soon allowed to participate extensively) played an important role as a “democratic prosperity showcase“ of the capitalist West with enormous spillover power far into the East. Finally, the U.S.-led West (promoted also by the fact that it succeeded for quite a while in playing the Soviet Union and China off against each other) succeeded in “arming dead“ the Eastern bloc, so to speak. But the leadership of the declining Soviet Union saved Europe from a catastrophic collapse, made German reunification possible, and believed Western promises of “peace dividends“ and assurances not_to_expand_NATO one meter. The Warsaw Pact was dissolved, unlike NATO, and the devious deception worked.
With massive interference and using in particular the political figure of the heavily alcoholic Boris Yeltsin, the West soon succeeded in plunging Russia into economic chaos and turning it into an oligarch system. NATO was rapidly expanded against all promises, and the Balkans were disintegrated, culminating in the attack_on_Serbia in violation of international law. Imperial actions and wars on the part of the West increased from Latin America to Africa (particularly Central-Africa) and the Near East. The “war on terror“ (probably promoted by many “False_Flag_Operations“) played an important role. “Nine Eleven“ was another “useful turning point“ for the US power elite. The U.S. was also in the process of getting a tight grip on the world financial economy by means of the IT development controlled by it.
But, China developed from the interim “workbench of the USA“, yes, almost of the world, to an independent economic giant, and Russia came back to strength and on its feet under Putin’s leadership. “Think tanks“ in the USA had been forging sinister plans for total control of the world for the US power elite since the year 2000 (“Project_for_the_New_American_Century“), which also became clearly visible in military_planing. In contrast, the plan for the peace project of the “Belt and Road Initiative“ in the sense of “Eurasian cooperation“ matured in China in close association with Russia (and took clear shape). This also became increasingly attractive for the strong economy of Europe (which, with the admittedly problematic euro, was increasingly seen as dangerous competition in the U.S.), especially Germany. This development became the real nightmare _of_the_US_Power_Elite and, in their eyes, had to be prevented at all costs.
After the EU “beckoned“ Ukraine with an association agreement, the Yanukovych government suspended the signing of the agreement in 2013. The USA succeeded, among other things, with 5 billion dollars pumped into Ukraine (as was revealed by Victoria Nuland, “fuck_the_EU“) in inciting uprisings and driving Yanukovych into flight. In the process, not only right-wing radicals, but explicitly_Ukrainian_Nazis came on board, among others the Azov Brigades. The Russian-born parts of the population, especially in the southeast of Ukraine, came under existential pressure, which led to a strong independence movement.Unquestionably unacceptable for Russia was the threat to its base for the Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol in the Crimea. Thus, in 2014, Russia succeeded in holding a referendum through the majority Russian-born population of Crimea, which made annexation to Russia possible. In the West, this was described as a breach of international law and subject to many sanctions.
After the fighting in eastern Ukraine increased, however, there was a glimmer of hope when France, Germany and Russia reached the Minsk_2_Agreement in 2015. This provided for extensive autonomy for the disputed territories. Unfortunately, the Ukrainian government was not willing to actually implement it. Germany and France did not exert any pressure for its implementation. Thus, Russia recognized the independence of the territories and they, under pressure of further attacks from the Ukrainian side, requested Russia’s assistance. The influence of Germany and France on a possible détente had disappeared through self-imposed inaction. The “big brother“ had probably given a hint that could not be overlooked.
The current explosion
Now the guns are talking in Ukraine. Russia will certainly have insights into the iron determination of the U.S. power elite to prevent closer cooperation between Russia and Europe, especially Germany, at any cost. I think it’s fair to say this U.S. power elite has done everything it can to drive the crisis to explode. The specific prevention of Nordstream 2 is also, of course, an important sub-goal on the part of the U.S. to prevent cooperation specifically between Germany and Russia.
To the goal of preventing this plan of intensified cooperation, the U.S. attempt to push itself even closer to Russia by controlling Ukraine will now probably be sacrificed (the obvious assurance on the part of U.S.-NATO not to fight in Ukraine, which has been kept so far, signals this). A Russia-enforced neutrality and partial military “domestication“ of Ukraine could also be used as a social-psychological “scare“ in “NATO Europe“ to shift NATO costs more heavily onto it. Thus, “Hungary“ and the failed uprisings in Czechoslovakia were also used politically by the U.S. in the Cold War at the time to further fortify and popularize NATO. Russia is perhaps “granted under the table“ as a “consolation plaster“ for the end of economic cooperation with Europe, having at least temporarily secured its southwestern flank with Ukraine (which also recently succeeded with the southern flank by stabilizing Kazakhstan). But that remains speculation, assuming the US keep up some “rationality“ in this conflict.
A particular benefit for the U.S. Power Elite is, as I said, that China’s plan of Eurasian cooperation all the way to Western Europe has largely failed. Well, China is ultimately regarded by the U.S. as the main adversary. In this regard, China can probably now rely on an even firmer relationship with Russia. Europe, however, will experience that energy dependence on the U.S. and its Near Eastern “super-democratic oil allies“ may well become far more uncomfortable in the long run than the alleged “dangerous energy dependence“ on Russia. Economic and thus social upheavals are virtually certain. Weakening Europe and keeping it in even closer dependence will be one of the goals.
I would like to repeat myself: We are facing hard times in Europe, especially in Germany, for which not Putin in the first place, but the US power and European, especially German political blindness will be responsible. The “value-propagating Oliv Greens“ and the practical political impotence of large parts of the left had a particularly serious share in the establishment of this blindness.
All in all, the part of the European political spectrum that considers itself “left-wing“ or pretends to be so (clearly also in Germany again with the SPD) behaves as the Social Democracy did in Wilhelmine Germany with the approval of the war credits for the beginning of the First World War. The following catastrophe is known! In this connection the backtracking of the Federal Government from the refusal to deliver arms to Ukraine or to agree to the delivery of arms, which are originally of German origin, is once again very frightening!
It is to be hoped that the Russian leadership’s rationality and clarity will prevail despite all provocation by the West, and that the operations will be strictly limited so that the suffering of the people on the ground will not continue to expand beyond measure. There may also be currents in the U.S. leadership that deviate from the “general line“ that I have assumed and that would like to give Russia a European “Afghanistan“ with Ukraine. May Putin’s often claimed awareness of the suffering of war, fed by history, provide the guideline not to fall into such a trap. The announcement of Ukrainian-Russian negotiations on the border with Belarus gives some hope, and success is to be hoped for.
Incidentally, China may be on Russia’s side on the one hand, but on the other hand it may also be acting diplomatically as a moderator, exerting a moderating influence on Russia, as indicated by its last abstention in the UN Security Council. This may also have to do with the fact that the question of secession is a particularly delicate issue for China.
The new “iron curtain“ before the completion!
The actions of the US-led West have caused an explosion and the new fall of an “Iron Curtain“ in Europe. Let us hope that this situation will now be handled with as much care on all sides as was generally the case in the times of the first Cold War, in order to prevent the very big catastrophe. The now made announcement of Turkey to close the Bosporus for warships now holds further, worrying conflict potential! We should be alarmed. How necessary it would be, especially in Germany, to have politicians like Willy Brandt again, who, even in the middle of the Cold War, allowed historical humility to flow into his dealings and relied more on reconciliation than on confrontation!
Important open Questions
All this said, there are still big open questions! Yes, the second “Iron Curtain“ has obviously fallen. The first Iron Curtain was lowered by the Soviet Union with defensive intent. This second Iron Curtain was lowered by the West with offensive intent. Socially, here in Germany as well as in the whole West, a second “McCarthy Era“ seems to be approaching us.
The media are to a high degree “in line“. Thoughtfulness and differentiation are “out“. I do not want to follow the same pattern with my justified counter-position.
Marx wrote in “The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte“: “Hegel remarked somewhere that all great world-historical facts and persons occur, as it were, twice. He forgot to add: one time as tragedy, the other time as farce.“ At the same time, certainly, the farce is often a tragedy for many people at the same time.
The first “Iron Curtain“ existed for about 45 years. The second will probably last as long as the US Power Elite retains its power and as long as Russia remains strong. Russia’s position on the aggressive behavior of the US-led West in Ukraine cannot be denied its justification in many respects. But being right does not mean success. The “Great Patriotic War“ was won by a great unity and willingness to suffer. For almost everyone in the Soviet Union it was clear that it was a war to the death against the enemy Nazi Germany, which the USA allowed to continue fighting until they thought that the Soviet Union was “sufficiently“ weakened.
Even if Putin’s government may think, not without reason, that the war against the strongly fascist forces in Ukraine is a “small patriotic war“, it will not seem so to all people in Russia. In Russia, too, young people in particular are quite influenced by the image of the “good life in the West“ and are certainly more oriented to their individual well-being than to “great historical conflicts.“ However, they will certainly look at the numbers of Russian soldiers returning in coffins. As much as the extended sanctions will hit hard the citizens in the “headless“ European vassal states of the U.S., they will probably hit the people in Russia even harder. Divisions may also open up in Russia’s political system (which may not just be “dreams“ of the U.S. power elite). Thus, the risk of severe social upheaval and dwindling support cannot be ruled out for the Russian government.
It will depend very much on whether the Russian government succeeds in limiting the operations and ending the war soon (for which, however, it needs negotiating partners). An important question is how willing China is to moderate Russia on the one hand and to support Russia economically in the consequences of the sanctions on the other.
I have mentioned here the suffering of this war on all sides sufficiently to be able to defend myself justifiably against the accusation of cynicism, but I would like to state it clearly: in view of the ruthless world domination plans of the US Power Elite, a collapse of Russia would indeed be a geopolitical catastrophe! The “dreams of the USA of the second dead armament“ against Russia and China could lead in the long run to the fact that the USA will arm itself dead, but Russia will have to avoid fighting itself dead in Ukraine.
All in all also it is of course a great tragedy that in this conflict the means are “burned“ which would be urgently needed to tackle the enormous problems (environmental and climate problems, social problems as well as among other things the consequences of the Corona pandemic) which people all over the world are confronted with. There one can only shake the head over the 100_billion_Euro, which the Federal Government of Germany wants to make available in its irresponsibility to the armament!
The Ukraine war is, as I said, a tremor as a result of the growing tensions of the last three decades between the U.S. power elite together with its European vassals and Russia on the other side. It remains to be seen whether it is only a “foreshock“ and whether – possibly – even more dangerous aftershocks will follow. We in the West should pay more attention to what “our“ power elites contribute to the suffering of people worldwide (and stand up against their dangerous “games“) than demonize and condemn Putin
2 thoughts on “Ukraine Crisis and Outlook: Culmination points in the East-West struggle”
Thanks a lot for reblogging!