As the war in Ukraine continues to grow and all sides stumble toward a greater conflict, what represents the US ‘left’ has taken various positions with regard to the war. Some on the Left have fallen into the black hole created by the massive US media propaganda barrage. They adopt the imperialist view that Russia is solely to blame by invading and the US and NATO are the good guys responding to the bad guy’s invasion.
Other organizations on the US Left have take the position of ‘plague on both their imperialist houses’,thereby ignoring the history and role of the US in Ukraine since 2014 to use local fascist forces in there–first to drive out any pro-Russian influences in Ukraine government and install in its place clearly fascist elements, secondly to use that government to attack eastern Ukraine 2014-2021, and thereafter to expand US-NATO into Ukraine.
Other ‘Left’ formations in the US lean toward correctly identifying US imperialism as the originating culprit in the war. While both the US and Russia are capitalists, it is not a case of two ‘imperialisms’ more or less equally responsible. The US form is clearly the more dangerous to world peace and has decided to restore its former political and economic world hegemony at any cost–including use of tactical nukes if necessary. US political elites have already begun debating and convincing themselves the US can prevail if tactical nukes are used. Russia in Ukraine is clearly the proxy conflict (much like Spain was in the 1930s) as the US has decided it must neutralize Russia before it ‘takes on’ China, the even greater challenger to its global empire. It is prepared to use nuclear weapons if necessary to achieve its objectives, this writer is convinced.
Therefore in a previous piece poster on this blog, this writer explained why those formations on the US left were incorrect to assume the position that both the US and Russia were ‘equal imperialists’ and a ‘plague on both their houses’ position was incorrect. US imperialism is the greater danger, willing to provoke a third world war in order to restore its hegemony now under greater threat at any time since 1945. Russia and China are the loci of that threat, while other lesser countries also show increasing resistance to continuing per the rules of the American empire (Venezuela, No. Korea, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Syria, Yemen, Iran, So. Africa, and even India).
The following comment is my follow on response to those US left formations that have assumed a position that the US imperialism is the greater threat with which I agree–but with some qualifications that their analysis still does not give sufficient attention to US imperialism’s current global strategy, of which the war in Ukraine is just the first phase:
“You are correct to reject the ‘equal’ imperialisms’ (US and Russia) position and realize the greater cause of the conflict to be US imperialism. Too many ‘left’ positions today unfortunately do not give sufficient cause and weight to US imperialism’s role in preparing, instigating, expanding, and now continuing the conflict in Ukraine which is a deeply influenced fascist regime. This is a US proxy war with Russia on the ground of Ukraine (not unlike Spain 1937), designed to debilitate and undermine Russia militarily and economically as a prelude move by the US before ‘taking on’ China. Since assuming power in 2021, Biden and the US clearly taunted and provoked Russia to invade which fell into the trap—no doubt deciding to fight on the ‘foreign ground’ of Ukraine now rather than on Russian ground later at which it would be at an even greater disadvantage. Already US imperialism has re-solidified its hegemony in Europe and US capitalists opened vast new profitable markets there as Russia is driven completely out of Europe’s economy. US energy and defense corporations will now reap hundreds of billions more profits, climate change investment has been completely sabotaged in the US, and capitalists in US have succeeded now eliminating any social program spending initiatives. In addition, Biden and Democrats see the ‘war issue’ as the only tangible position to run on in November elections after having abandoned all promises of social spending benefiting US workers and facing a coming debacle in November 2022 as inflation accelerates and the US central bank embarks on a policy of extraordinary interest rate hikes that are clearly intended to generate a recession no later than 2023 and possibly even earlier. The US empire is under rising global challenge today, and US imperialists have decided to attack both Russia and China before their strength and challenge become even greater at a later date and even more difficult for the US empire to confront. The greatest risk today and in the near future is that US imperialism is preparing to fight a tactical nuclear war if it deems it necessary. It has already begun preparation and its media has begun the process of convincing public opinion it is permissible to do so. The internal ‘debate’ among US neocons and capitalists is not whether to engage in a tactical nuclear confrontation with Russia, but how to develop the best strategy to do so. I agree with much of your analysis–with the exception that, like most of the rest of the US left you need to see Ukraine proxy war as the first move in the US strategy to restore its unchallenged global hegemony”
Jack Rasmus, April 16, 2022
“The internal ‘debate’ among US neocons and capitalists is not whether to engage in a tactical nuclear confrontation with Russia, but how to develop the best strategy to do so”.
In other words Jack, they are prepared to risk everything to lose nothing.
The most professional of card players know that you never do that.
The most professional understand risk and return.
Strictly, they are not gamblers. They’re mathematicians.
They know that it is incremental wins that win in the long run.
You never, ever bet the bank.
The West is now run by desperate gamblers.
What the American empire wants from Russia is to balkanize it, break it up into smaller statelets, and rob its resources. Then China will become a dependent customer of the expanded and enriched empire.
Close. What they want is to put Russia in such a disadvantaged position (surrounded by an aggressive NATO) that they can ‘defang it’–i.e. get it to abandon its nuclear weapons. Then they’ll balkanize it and US capitalists will descend on it (like they did in the 1990s) and like they, the US barons, are doing to Europe. They want to control it (and Eu) economically, politically, and militarily (NATO). China will be isolated and the ROW will fall in line. US empire then continues unchallenged for another half century–until or unless the ‘War against Nature’ (also being waged today) results in global warming that collapses the social systems and thus capitalism itself. Then we have barbarism, that is the ultimate legacy of global capitalism should be allowed to prevail.
Neocons in charge of US foreign policy are not rational poker players, counting cards, watching opponents likely next move, thinking how to properly ‘bet’ given the situation (to extend your metaphor). They are amateur crap table shooters, willing to ‘bet the 7s’ and let it ride in the believe their numbers will always come up and that the dice are loaded in their favor. That is, bad gamblers.
This is a very, very bad situation Jack.
The concept of winnable nuclear wars has been on the back burner for years. Now on the front burner.
Dr. William J. Perry, who was involved in the Cuban Missile Crisis, warned several years ago that we are in a worse situation now and no-one knows.
Arising, as it does, from the lack of trust and very short flight times
_______
Dr. Des Ball, nuclear war strategist, demonstrated that all limited nuclear wars escalate to the limit. President Jimmy Carter acknowledged his appreciation for pointing that out! Right-O!
_______
Scott Ritter, of no Iraqi WMDs fame (whoops!), thinks The Generals have had enough of the so-called Neocons and their war posturing and will see them removed very soon. Not all the news is bad.
_______
One would have to say that the people now running US foreign policy are not in the league of the likes of George Kennan, Henry Kissinger, Paul Nitze, George H. W. Bush . . . Everyone gets the idea. They were imperialist and they knew how to run a Cold War and it stayed that way, more or less.
_______
One could speculate that first movers have the advantage. If a pre-emptive strike was made against certain Western interests – that is, they disappear in a flash, would the swivel chair strategists be frightened enough to call the whole thing off and start negotiating – for real? Of course you smash up the vassals – er – the allies first. That’s what they’re there for.
_______
As for Russia and China, having issued warning after warning, an old saying from SunZi (Sun Tzu) – Art of War: “Keep your plans as dark as the midnight and when you strike, fall as a thunderbolt”.
So like millions of other Americans I was duped into supporting Biden for President because he was “less dangerous” than Trump. Does any European country understand how insane US policy is? Do any of the American planners remember what happened to Napoleon and Hitler when they decided that Russia was “easy” prey? How can you “plan” to knock out two of the largest economies in the world—-Russia and China—–and not suffer economic catastrophe? Russia and China are not Vietnam or Iraq or Central America or Venezuela or Afghanistan or Cuba but apparently Americans planners don’t have a clue as to either history or geography.
PostScript: to answer my own rhetorical questions, the US “planners” are making the same mistake Napoleon and Hitler did: they believe their own propaganda.
[…] vertritt eine extrem linke Position und hält den kapitalistischen Imperialismus der USA für gefährlicher als den russischen. Auch eine solche Position hilft zur Bildung einer eigenen Meinung, […]