In the erstwhile article, we showed contradictions in the Russian peculiar military operation in Ukraine, and the consequences that this had for the course of the combat activities themselves. With all these contradictions, immense human sacrifices and economical costs, Russia and Ukraine have not formally declared war.
A very interesting comment on the Russian peculiar military operation in Ukraine was released in the Russian program Nowosti on 24 November 2022. Among another things, the talker read: “The withdrawal of troops from the Chersonia area may be justified from the point of view of a war strategy, but not from the point of view of interior politics. I confess, but I don't know much about war strategy, but here you don't request to be an expert to be aware of the obvious, purely military issues should not be an addition and a function of political affairs. This is the way to a double disaster,... at first to build up war-strategic errors and then to pay for political errors. Putin does not consider himself a hostage to the intrapolitical situation and interior political sentiments in Russia. Instead, the host of the Kremlin sees himself as the leader who shapes, and interior political situation, and interior political sentiments. It won't be easy and pleasant now. But those interior problems that will arise will primarily bear a full resolving character for the Kremlin. And how is Putin going to solve those problems that the Russian army will collide with and already collide in the peculiar Operations area? The answer to this problem, I believe, is in Putin's answer in Samarkanda. On September 16, the Kiev authorities announced that they would search triumph on the battlefield. The banner in hand – they are now trying to do so by conducting a counteroffensive. We'll see what happens. This was said in the mediate of the first period of autumn. Putin has long been ready for a possibly long clash. Putin thinks and acts logically. Now he laughs not who controls the right bank in the Chersonia area at this point. It will be a good laughter for those who will control Russia's fresh regions at the final phase of the peculiar operation. And when's the final stage? He will be erstwhile he is. This is the creed that the Kremlin is now confessing.”
The fresh or classical nature of war?
It sounded like any kind of panegiric. It may seem to be proof of a full dictatorship. Vladimir Putin, but traditionally looking at the problem of the union of war and peace can come to another conclusion. The Russian state leadership realized that success would not even warrant him a complete military triumph over Ukraine unless it met with the designation of the United States and Europe, unless its achievements were approved by global political and economical agreements.
Therefore, all Russian counter-sanctions are always late, little severe or absent at all, even if NATO states exceed the "red lines" outlined by the Russian authorities. There may be 2 reasons for Russia's abstinence. Firstly, Russia is aware of the business and full dependence of the European Union on the US and is curious at least in reviving its separatistism towards the United States policy. He most likely sees the self-destruction of the European Union, which he now sees as a puppet of the United States. Secondly, if the argument that wars are now independent and that they specify politics is true, then it means that the dominance of wars in the longer term, or even that the beginning wars are transformative, like the 30-year war, Napoleonic wars, planet War I and planet War II, or the 30-year war of the 20th century. The war of Armenia and Azerbaijan, the armed conflict of Russia with Ukraine, the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan, the war in Syria, the war in Yugoslavia – it is, according to popular views in Russia, the transformation wars after the collapse of the USSR, and in the fight for a multipolar world, for a fresh global division of labour, for access to the scarce resources essential for fresh technologies in 20-30 years, of which a large part is in Russia. Therefore, if, despite all the difficulties, we could win the triumph over Ukraine, it would not be only a local success – Russia would most likely have demanded the withdrawal of NATO's borders until 1991, which would only have been the beginning of fresh contradictions and postponed subsequent conflict.
The past of wars waged by many democracies, from ancient Athens beginning, shows that they do not recognise states with another regimes if they seem weak enough. Especially in the post-truth era can we be mistaken in assessing the real power of the second state, like Russia in relation to Ukraine, which in authoritative propaganda has always been ignored, although the power of NATO stood behind it.
But conflict contradictions in Ukraine are more complicated. It is at the same time the war of the United States with Russia only with Ukrainians and mobilized into the army of its Russian-speaking citizens. This is at the same time the United States' war with the European Union, which has so far borne the top consequences of the sanctions formally directed against Russia, making its commodities little competitive to the American and Chinese. The European Union is doomed to bear the comparatively highest cost for 2 main reasons: firstly, it is simply a rival of the US and China at an economical level, which is why the United States must do everything to increase production costs within the EU, and China has nothing against it; secondly, Russia is moving in economical relations to the East, and a subordinate Europe is not needed for Russia.
A peculiar military operation in Ukraine, to which Russia has provoked the United States, is besides a war to keep US dominance over France, and especially over Germany, which plays a decisive function in maintaining the unity of the European Union. It is at the same time a war for the continued submission of China by the United States.
The United States has succeeded in mobilising a comparatively wide anti-Russian coalition, as for all inexpensive natural materials purchased in weak Russia are a dream and an increasingly visible mark of current western capital. The authorities of the present Ukraine have seen respective successes thanks to the military and political assistance of NATO states and are so not inclined to make any concessions. Since each organization has antagonistic goals, war must continue, and the condition of peace has so far become a large defeat of 1 organization to take distant its will to proceed fighting on another levels and make fresh impulses for further transformation in the world. At the time of the launch of the peculiar military operation, territorial conquests were not the main objective, but the political transformation of Ukraine and the preservation of political and economical position quo in Russia. However, this operation has grown into a war to transform global relations, to establish a planet order after the first phase of globalisation. Although they seem to realize this in Russia, they do not follow adequate military and political action.
U.S. Neocolonialism
The protracted conflict in Ukraine is best suited to the United States, which has already become 1 of the biggest beneficiaries of this war today, including the closure of the European Union's opportunities for mutually beneficial trade transactions with Russia and the current US supply of its costly gas, the reinforcement of Ukraine and the refurbishment of east NATO members. These expenditures will negatively affect social budgets in erstwhile socialist countries, which will entail widespread economical depression and will not let their manufacture to revive. The militarized economy will become the origin of increasing social discontent, to suppress the strength that most suitable parties like PiS, supported for years by American capital.
In addition, the United States has been fighting to keep the dominant function of the dollar in the planet as a clearing currency and a reserve currency, making it possible for decades to implement social and arms policies based on budget deficits, abroad trade deficits and brain drains from around the world. They pay another countries dollars that do not have real commodity coverage, but only in securities that are not accidentally called fictitious capital.
Due to the Ukrainian problem, it becomes apparent how the United States implements a model of colonial dependence on its allies, which is akin to the situation in which a metropolis and its dependent colonies exist. The United Kingdom's trade policy, which received gold as a currency in India for goods sold in India, could service as a model, and China, due to the deficiency of silver for valuable goods, paid opium produced in India, and even fought war for it. After the United States forced the EU to acquisition its costly natural gas (retained with environmentally harmful fracturing technology), Naïvely, Europe has set a maximum price for oil delivered by sea at the expense of Russia. If Russia so reduces its extraction, the European Union will endure further consequences. It may seem that it was unknown perpetrators who blew up 3 of the 4 strands of the Russian gas pipeline Nord Stream, supplying inexpensive gas from Russia to the EU, but leaving 1 strand of gas pipeline seems very thoughtful.
The United States drew conclusions from the wars of opium fought by the English and no longer waged war against Europe to impose its costly natural gas, but achieved this by indirect means. Apart from another issues, it can be assumed that Germany and another European countries have seriously undermined their ability to compete in steel, glass, aluminium and many another production materials. This resulted in favourable conditions that would enable US financial capital to be utilized by investing in these sectors in Asian countries or at home. And moving this production to Russia will surely be blocked by the United States government.
An example of this neocolonial U.S. policy is besides to prevent the spread of Russian high-tech vaccine against COVID-19 within the European Union. After the Chinese company Huawei, the world's largest smartphone manufacturer, announced in 2019 that it would not buy any components from US producers, as a consequence of U.S. operations Huawei cannot certify its newest phones, which in practice means banning their sales on the US and European markets. any corporations with a decisive share of U.S. capital supply China-based intermediates, which represent strategical natural materials for further production in the EU – branches of these corporations in individual countries bear a symbolic name – “division”, which shows that they represent the forposts of the US in the economical war...
This policy besides means that, as in the past, colonies have an work to sale natural materials at low prices to the metropolis; that the metropolis has the right to dictate advanced prices for its goods, high-tech production; that colonies have the work to import goods imposed from the metropolis, and that there is no free competition on the economical level, but there is an absolute economical war that, as once, this war is taking place throughout the world. The United States is attempting to reactivate this economical model in a situation where it cannot address its economic, social, educational and infrastructure problems. However, they have support for their abroad policy in the economically and politically supported elites of individual countries.
On this occasion, it is worth mentioning a fresh contradiction between war and peace. This is the contradiction between the freezing of conflict and war and peace at the same time. The frozen conflict is intended to keep a state of uncertain peace and can at any convenient minute grow into a hot conflict as well as into a room. The terms "frozen conflict" by the Western media are very eager to usage the word "frozen conflict" in relation to Russia's policy and service to show discontent with the peace achieved, which is presented only as a truce. It must be admitted that the word proved attractive adequate that it was besides readily utilized by liberal journalists in Russia, who were on the services of the Kremlin.
The objectives of war so appear partially hidden, dispersed and opposing, and with additional ambiguity of objectives, as he said Georg W. F. HegelIt's hard to talk about heroes. Heroes for any are antiheroes for others. any of the characters on the another side would be most likely to bring them to justice if they could.
Causes of Conflict in Russia's War in Ukraine
The Russian “special military operation” seems to have been the origin of the conflict to date with the oligarchy that governs it, which is financially linked to elites in the widely understood West. Many members of the Russian oligarchy rode the same cars as the oligarchs in the West, held money in the same taxation havens and banks, owned properties in the same places and rested in the same resorts. Many members of the Russian elite household permanently live or lived in the West, children of the elite studied and studied at renowned Western universities. This included, among another things, president of Russia, Minister of National Defence, Minister of abroad Affairs, Advocate Putin Dmitri Doskov, members of the Duma and the Federation Council and generals.
Many companies in Russia are mixed property with abroad capital, even from those countries that Russia formally ranked as “enemies”. Therefore, most likely erstwhile Russian assets held in western banks were frozen, The Central Bank of Russia continued to repay Russia's debts, cities utilizing frozen assets for this purpose. Many public limited companies paid dividends to abroad investors from hostile states. Russia sent energy and production resources to countries that announced sanctions against it and did not sale it any of their goods.
As Russia could not formally make purchases for the given mottos, there was a constant strengthening of the ruble course (for dollars it was impossible to buy this and what you wanted), despite the fact that production in Russia was falling as a consequence of sanctions. The central bank deliberately lowers the ruble rate so that export companies that are mostly owned by local and abroad oligarchy can make more profits, as at a low rate ruble little earned dollars gotta spend on wages. As a result, Russia has accumulated immense reserves of "toxic currency", which it has begun to invest, but not for the home economy and the army, only on the more favourable foreign, mainly Asian financial markets.
The West provided arms to Ukraine, and since Russia supplied natural materials and gas to the West and could not buy anything for the money it received, it can be said that (at least in any part) it credited (and continues to do so) the supply of arms to Ukraine, especially as any economists observe that the United States could at any time frost further money collected by Russia in abroad accounts. At the beginning of the military operation, the export of abroad currency was banned and now any restrictions have been lifted.
So if you ask for whose money the arms are being delivered for and Ukraine will be rebuilt, then surely besides for Russian money. The value of the arms delivered in the last 9 months represented 1/3 of the frozen assets and the accumulated surplus of Russia. In view of the expanding volume of discussion about the confiscation of Russian abroad assets, the argument that deliveries to Ukraine will thus be financed is becoming increasingly probable, especially since in fresh past the United States has practically confiscated Iran's money and tired over 30 years of Afghanistan's war.
The Neoliberals with Putin in the lead, for almost 30 years have broken down the interior cohesion of the russian economy and the arms manufacture of Russia. It was thought that since there was money from the sale of oil, gas and another natural materials, everything could be imported from abroad. erstwhile the global situation began to escalate, even an import substitution strategy was adopted. And, as reported, the program was successfully implemented, the proverbial rocket could consist of 99% of Russian components, but this 1% was a chip produced in Taiwan, or China, without which the rocket could not accomplish its assumed parameters. At present, with the introduction of sanctions, the Russian arms manufacture is experiencing large difficulties in accessing the latest technologies and credits. Putin did not draw any critical conclusions, and did not make personnel changes among the neoliberals, as they could disrupt the balance of power between the individual oligarchy groups in the bosom of the ruling elite.
In Russian social networks, there are many critical words about leaving known neoliberals in positions erstwhile it is essential to stand above the interests of individual oligarchy groups, a centrally run war economy. There are various conspiracy theories. It is even said that Putin's crew is simply a comprador's oligarchy, which raised only a temporary "rebellion on board" against its moguls, that its aim remains to discredit the Russian army and further weaken Russia, that any known Putin's squad representatives have already left Russia in fear of bearing consequences and having to settle for their possessions. A lot can be explained with these theories, but are they true?
Who is the “managing class” in Russia?
It turns out that 100 billionaires had a wealth of $393 billion, their combined wealth was like 113 million Russians (i.e. 77% of the population). Of the 100 Russian billionaires, 40 had abroad citizenship, 57 billionaires surviving constantly abroad; 68 billionaires have taken all their families abroad. The most popular were the passports Cyprus (13) and Israel (13), the United Kingdom (6), as well as the United arabian Emirates (2) and Canada (2). 9 billionaires have late resigned from Russian citizenship.
The leadership of each army reflects the existing socio-economic and political system. The management of the Russian army is simply a reflection of the oligarchy existing in Russia, the army is oligarchical and oligarchically directed (the army of Ukraine is besides oligarchical, but it is practically under external direction, without which it would mean small recently). In the Russian oligarchate there are large influences of pro-Western neoliberals, and thus objectively enemies of Russia. Russian oligarchs with large capitals in the West request peace at all costs, even at the cost of Russia's defeat in the war against Ukraine. They support a transnational order led by the elite and do not want Russia to talk to the planet Trade Organisation (WTO). They fear that if Russia leaves the WTO, it will be punished and incapable to influence decisions (it is interesting how can it now affect WTO decisions?).
Part of this group of oligarchs is most likely conducting secret negotiations and is ready to retreat from occupied territories. It should be admitted that all now and then this faction of oligarchy was successful erstwhile Russia withdrew partially from the acquired circuits. Another group of oligarchy would most likely be satisfied with peace with the designation of the existing position quo, but they do not want to agree with the authorities under Western control. The very interesting situation developed after blowing 3 of the 4 strands of the Nord Stream pipeline. Officially, the Russian authorities considered this to be an example of “Western terrorism”, but at the same time expressed their willingness to proceed to supply energy resources to Western Europe, which is hostile states. Only the threat of lowering prices for Russian oil forced Russian oligarchs to announce the cessation of supplies to the West, although China and India are supplied at an even lower price.
Dr Edward Karolczuk
photo: Romana Abramowicz and president of Israel (wikipedia commons)
Think Poland, No. 7-8 (12-19.02.2023)
