Ukraine fell into an ideological and political crisis in the early 2000s, Viktor Yushchenko and Viktor Yanukovych broke down successively the right-wing and left-wing projects for possible solutions to problems.
Majdan 2014 in the opinion of its organizers was the last effort to preserve the unity of the state by exploiting strong social emotions, but in fact only confirmed its breakdown and inevitable disintegration. The organizers of Majdan started processes that were meant to make Ukraine as it utilized to be never again. As a result, starting a course for the West, the organizers of Majdan began preparations for war with a stronger opponent. Thanks to the assurances of the powers in the West, they made a decision that could mean the self-destruction of the erstwhile state, if Vladimir Zelenski and his squad will sabotage the US and Russia agreement process and Ukraine will not receive adequate military, economical and diplomatic assistance. Ukraine, taking a course years ago for military confrontation with Russia, was no longer a full independent and sovereign state, but a conglomerate of various political factions, abolishing the foundations of a single state. The political leadership of Ukraine understood the hazard perfectly, and the population “fed” with nationalism and a imagination of fast raising the standard of surviving did not know what was happening behind the scenes of authoritative propaganda.
In Russia's assessment, the consequence of the 2014 referendum showed that there were reasons for the dissolution of Ukraine. Under these conditions, Russia proved to be under force of time, on the 1 hand – from the point of view of its political interests at this point of view, neither Donetsk nor Lugansk was peculiarly needed – was it primarily about neutralising Ukraine internationally through its federalisation. Only Crimea unlawfully transferred to Ukraine in 1954 became peculiarly crucial from a military and political point of view. Russia became full active and with all openness to its recovery for a simple reason: since the liquidation of Ukraine took place, Russia would have received these territories sooner or later.
Whatever the current Ukrainian authorities said, the majority of Ukrainian society at the time was pro-Russian, and after the adoption of the law against the language which ruled over 80% of the population, to which no 1 forced Kiev, separation from Russia became the authoritative ideological and political goal of the Ukrainian state. However, this nonsubjective was, in a way, an inevitable dissolution of Ukraine – unity was tried to keep with the aid of “anti-terrorism” pacification actions.
In 2014, there were rather common expectations that it would be announced that the south and east of Ukraine are separating and announcing an independent state with the capital in Kharkiv. It would be adequate for Russia to signal that it supports these plans, and Ukraine would most likely be broken up, as its army was in a state of decay. This historical position shows that it could be a better option than present with hundreds of thousands of victims. Squad Vladimir Putin for the incorporation option for all territories that voted for belonging to Russia in referendums – it was not prepared. For he besides carried the threat of a clash with the West not necessarily in the military field. It was about the interests of the Russian oligarchy widely linked economically and dependent on the West.
In 2014, among the Russian elite prevailed the view that Russia was not ready for war, but the year 2022 showed that it was inactive not ready and made at the beginning of peculiar Military Operations many strategical mistakes, bearing dense losses on the front. But in 2014, Ukrainian forces were not prepared for this conflict either, possibly even more than Russian. And it was, according to many Russian bloggers, a large mistake for the Russian elite of power. At that point, it would have been done with less victims.
As a consequence of peculiar Military Operations, Russia has been put before its choice: either it joins these pro-Russian territories, taking work for the continuation of the war, or it will not do so and will voluntarily return the territories that voted to join it. This alternate was most likely not assumed by Russia at the beginning of the SOW, but the decision to join these territories was made at least 8 years besides late.
Putin's squad is inactive under large force from the U.S., but above all its own oligarchy linked to Western capital and controlling the raw-energy industry. Russian oligarchy is treated more as semi-peripheral compasses than equal partners. It is so not a full independent and sovereign entity of global relations. This is besides the reason for all inconsistencies and contradictions in Putin's policy and in the field of armed combat.
Because after the start of the SOW, Russia's ruling squad has not changed, its interests and the way of seeing the planet have not changed – it has been under specified pressure, which allowed it to realize that from the position of semi-periphery it will not be able to satisfy its appetites not only to increase profits, but even to keep them. The West demanded full submission and introduced respective packages of sanctions. The Russian Oligarchs and their political elite hoped for a fresh compromise after taking the office of president by Donald Trump. This compromise, with any limitations, is inactive forging on the battlefield. possibly it will bring an end to the armed conflict. But it should be remembered that it was for Trump's first presidency that the arms were supplied to the Ukrainian army, her training and the imposition of sanctions on Russia. Trump – who, on all occasion, repeats that this war should not have happened, that if he had been president, this war would not have happened – he did not take advantage of stopping this war from day to day, but he continues it, and his squad is negotiating.
Due to the casualties and costs incurred, it is hard to anticipate Russia to be satisfied with only the Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporosian, Khersonian and Crimean districts. If the conflict takes longer, it may require that Odessa and Kharkiv join. And it will not quit on officially announced targets, namely denazification and demilitarisation of Ukraine. Ukraine according to Russia will have neither the territory nor the function it played after the dissolution of the USSR. Russia is curious in controlling all of Ukraine, and erstwhile it turns out to be impossible, in the largest possible business of its territories. Ukraine had the chance to accomplish much more from Russia on a peaceful way than it can now receive after the end of the war. Instead, she took a course for conflict with Russia and for joining NATO, and that meant the death of hundreds of thousands of soldiers, the ruin of the country, multimillion-dollar emigration, the failure of many arable lands, the failure of her own resources, establishments, the country's debt – and as a result, the failure of sovereignty.
If present we are talking about mistakes, who, who cheated and what he blames, it is that Russia consistently expected and expected neutral position of Ukraine. But erstwhile taking steps to join NATO, Ukraine deliberately provoked war or was a proverbial “useful idiot”. This was demonstrated by building a strategy of military fortifications throughout the country, bringing abroad military advisors, re-establishing their own army and training it to face the Russian army. The Ukrainian elite said that she had the right to do so, but that was not a substance of law, but a mistake about disastrous consequences. Many “something” can be done by the country's leader, but he should think not only of his individual ambitions and interests, but besides of the real situation and the consequences of his decisions for his citizens. In a given situation, a decision was made that inevitably led to war, of which the West was realized from the very beginning. And if facing a stronger state – Russia was not an apparent mistake for Ukraine, then only if we consider the expected aid from the West. Russia faced a stronger opponent than it initially thought. As a result, the conflict in Ukraine for Russia has besides proved to be a mistake, the consequences of which are now dying in the light of the overall advantage on the front. Russia and Ukraine have made mistakes, from which now there is no easy way out, their people are dying trying to solve tasks that are not actually posed by them. In view of the Russians' predominance, Ukrainians die to a greater extent, but their death is of small importance, as peace in Ukraine can prevail only as a consequence of an global agreement between Russia and the US.
War is simply a continuation of politics mainly by military means. Whether it achieves or fails to accomplish its military objectives, political decisions must be decided in the end and conditions of peace. Ukraine hoped that thanks to the US and the EU, political decisions would be determined by a triumph at the battlefield, and the Russians most likely knew that even a triumph at the battlefield would not supply them with internationally recognised, favourable political decisions. Therefore, the conflict continued, stalled, and as a consequence of desperate attacks, especially from Ukraine, suffered large losses on both sides.
Russia at the head of the fight against inclusive capitalism and the nature of war
As already mentioned in erstwhile articles, Russia at any point understood the apparent thing that it is fighting not Ukraine but the West, and in addition to the transnational West, with neo-globalists for whom it is aimed with its natural resources. And this created a completely different situation due to the fact that the current version of inclusive capitalism, with green energy, deindustrialisation, the elimination of animal breeding, transgenderity, was not acceptable to anyone – it did not like much of Ukrainians and Russians, Germans and French etc. Russia promoted the view that it had not fought against the nations of England and France, but against their dehumanized ruling elites. In another words, Russia did not fight Europe, but fought for Europe against inclusive capitalism, against those who want to destruct the past of Europe and its erstwhile natural order and conventional values. The situation changed after Trump's triumph – in the U.S., neo-globalists failed but retained power and influence in Europe. That is why Europe has now become the main spokesperson for the war of Ukraine with Russia and has announced an arms plan aimed at preparing for the inevitable war with Russia.
Independence of the Central Bank of Russia
Russia is widely believed to be liable for economical problems Elvira NabiullinaActing president of the Central Bank of Russia. The environment of the economy has a negative impact on the defence industry's capabilities and actions on the front. Nabiullina is believed to be liable for the failure of over $370 billion frozen in abroad banks. It should save the country's economy from the consequences of sanctions for starting a war in Ukraine, but in fact through its anti-inflationary policy and maintaining advanced interest rates it raises production costs, thus contributing to burying native economics. It is to undermine the President's good ideas and interests of the full nation and to comply with the demands of the global Monetary Fund.
But the question arises: for what and who request akin accusations? It is not hard to imagine that the point is to criticize the Central Bank's policies on the 1 hand and, on the another hand, to avoid criticising all the another authorities and social forces that service the Russian oligarchy on this occasion. It besides gives the impression that officials cannot influence bank policy in any way. The next question is: if the bank's policy has contradicted government policy in anything, why have neither the president nor the authorities criticised this policy? On the contrary, they have always commended her. Central Bank policies and economical views leave no uncertainty that the members of the government, the management of the bank and the president of Russia are people with akin views. all time we discuss the activities of Elvira Nabiullina, people appear who say that she receives orders straight from abroad, doing what she was told in the global Monetary Fund. People who say that don't head the fact that the MWF even refused to consult Russia. To whom, then, would Nabiullin be subject under present conditions?
Fairy tales about Nabiullina following instructions from the global Monetary Fund are being thrown into the public sphere precisely to say: we have a large government, only Nabiullina is the only agent of the "V column", and if the president now wants to solve this problem against global pressure, it will all be fine and wonderful. any people with limited intellectual abilities like this full conspiracy explanation – they search simple answers to complex problems according to their intellect. At the same time, they think that individual will rapidly and easy solve these problems without having to act on their part. All you gotta do is send police and peculiar services to the Central Bank and the court will complete its work. Meanwhile, Russia does not even take credit from the MWF, so the MWF cannot dictate any conditions to it. Such fabulous theories justify all the errors of the Russian leadership. The problem, however, is that the government of the Russian Federation and the Central Bank of Russia lead, according to Nikolai Platoskin, simply a mistaken economical policy, dictated mainly by the interests of Russian oligarchy. There's no American guilt, though they're most likely happy about it. It should be recalled that Russian neoliberals have said since the beginning of the capitalist transformation that Russian oil will sale in the West, that there will be no request to keep costly own production and... everything needed will be bought with the money received. It was not essential to plan, as in socialism, and to build fresh production facilities. It was possible to liquidate and rob russian bets. This worked out for a while erstwhile oil prices were advanced and there was a favourable global situation, and Putin was fashionable in the West as a large reformer. However, the lion's share of income flowed into the private pockets of oligarchy, but social problems were increasing.
Nabiullina frequently made decisions to reduce the ruble rate to another currencies, explaining that the cheaper the ruble, the more you can gain from exporting the same natural materials. For example, by selling natural materials for $2, erstwhile the course would be 1 dollar to 30 rubles, you could make 60 rubles in the interior market, selling dollars to the state. But erstwhile the ruble-to-dollar rate would be 1 to 2 hundred, it would let you to gain almost 400 rubles, which could pay all the cost of production and supply a taxation inflow to the state budget. What's the class's meaning of a low ruble to a dollar? It acts in the interest of Russian oligarchy, which exports natural materials abroad through respective intermediaries, who besides frequently make immense profits. Russian oligarchy, thanks to simplified production patterns. inhibited the improvement of Russian economics, favoured the deindustrialisation of Russia and the deprivation of its economical and financial sovereignty.
The problem is not Nabiullina, but the interests of the Russian oligarchy and the political elite on its services, which does not want to definitely part with neoliberal delusions and their consequences. 1 should not be satisfied with specified a turn of events, but all decisions taken in economical and political matters depend on the Russian authorities. And that's why we know who cares about spreading this nonsense, that in general everything is fine and power won't hurt erstwhile a fewer abroad agents are around.
Does Russia wage an imperialist war?
The concept of Russia consists of different political entities and they have different interests, and so different objectives in this war. What political entities in Russia can we talk about? First of all, it is: 1) financial oligarchy, bank management, oil and mining manufacture oligarchs and another export industries (especially weapons), food manufacture oligarchs (major grain exporters); 2) central public administration with Putin at the head of and obedient to higher military command; parliamentarians, political organization leaders; 3) soldiers fighting on the front and part of the lower-level commanders; 4) the inhabitants of the fighting areas and their nearest families in Russia. Various political groups of the elite have unclear goals and hidden motivations. As a result, the authorities are not even able to carry out propaganda according to a unified strategy of ideological values, the arrogant past from the times of the USSR is mixed with the necessity of believing in the obscure future.
As regards the financial, banking and industrial ligarchy curious in exports, these groups are undoubtedly doing everything to hide their real interests and objectives. First of all, the defence of Russia's sovereignty is not their main objective. They seem to have specified a strong position in planet markets (they decide to buy and sale many goods) that they do not request the sovereignty of the country for anything. The planet for them is polycentric enough, in the dominance of the US they see alternatively the origin of the stableness of their interests. They want to sale more to the West. They are not curious in the socio-economic situation and future of their own people. These groups are not curious in investing in the comprehensive improvement of the Russian economy. On behalf of this Putin capital group, after first telephone talks with Trump, he stated that American capital would have free access to investments in Ukraine annexed by Russia. The export gross of these groups of Russian oligarchy invest in financial markets, engage in speculation in abroad exchange markets, do not make production into their own market, a crucial example of which is gas extraction, and in imported goods they besides earn. For these oligarchy groups, the triumph of Russia is not needed, they are ready to enter into a fresh agreement with favorable conditions, even abandoning Putin's crew and its objectives. These oligarchy groups would like to return to the state that existed before the mass imposition of sanctions on Russia. They are curious in exporting capital on equal terms with others.
The authoritative Russian rhetoric is that Russia behind Putin rose from its knees that it regained sovereignty. These are to any degree godly wishes. In relation to Russia, Western states carry out neo-colonial exploitation, impose prices on Russian natural materials, hinder the improvement of the economy. In fact, the main nonsubjective of the current war is to regain Russia's sovereignty and the right to free investment and to allocate to state purposes money earned on export. The problem is the deficiency of sovereignty of the Russian economy and culture. Russia has grown a number of dependence on another countries and global organisations, on production supplies from abroad. The Russian nation is exploited by its own and abroad oligarchy. Russia entered the global division of labour as a supplier of inexpensive industrial and energy natural materials. Her elite felt that it was time to change the terms of this agreement, hence she issued an ultimatum in December 2021, but the West did not even want to talk about it due to the fact that he considered Putin's crew to be traders with whom there was no discussion of planet politics. Putin's crew received an invitation to talk 1 period after Trump took over. She's not certain about the triumph and what she's gonna gotta pay for.
The society as a whole, fighting soldiers, the state administration must specify themselves in relation to the goals pursued by the oligarchs. The society as a full is characterised by an interior contradiction: on the 1 hand, it feels an work to follow orders as soldiers, citizens in a sense of patriotic duty, and on the another hand, it sees the request for economical and political change, forcing oligarchy to fulfill the objectives and interests of most society. This is simply a serious difficulty and a strong contradiction. Most of society remains passive due to the fact that there is no political force that could mobilise and direct the masses in the fight against the Komradorian and global oligarchy. Therefore, most naively believe that change should be waited until the end of the war.
These contradictions are reflected in the politics and manner of conducting the war by Putin's crew and state administration. Since the majority of the population does not realize specified mechanisms, it gives it the simplest and at the same time false hints that the "V column" activity is the origin of all difficulties. Individual representatives of the presidential administration are associated with various capital groups, with export, with financial operations in global markets. It is corrupted by private business, hence a gross deficiency of consequences and a uniform front for action. The Oligarchs, who are mostly connected to the interior marketplace and do not have abroad estates – they usage patriotic rhetoric more often, they negatively mention to neoliberal politics, they accuse neoliberals of treason, they clearly measure the situation. But at the same time they are negative about the russian past, they have no economical improvement program, they are content with stagnation. Under conventional values, they realize their peculiar interests, defend themselves against abroad competition. They are based on archaic proposals, on the Orthodox Church, on the memory of the large Ruth. This patrioticly motivated part of society, politicians and economical activists, is incapable to jeopardise the power and reign of the oligarchy. They lead Russia to autarkia, they do not realize much in the ongoing global processes, they stay in Orthodox rhetoric and in fact it is simply a continuation of liberal course, only a somewhat modified one. The ruling class taking up the fight believed in the triumph over Ukraine, but did not believe and do not believe in the triumph over the West. He inactive hopes to scope an agreement, but the ongoing talks are kept secret.
Putin's squad knows that it is not considered political, especially by Europe. That is why Western Europe does not believe in its atomic threat and is not going to compromise with it. The crisis drags on, among others, as a consequence of Trump's inconsistent policy, which continues to supply military equipment for Ukraine. In the face of Ukraine's disasters, the West is prone to a truce, but Russia does not satisfy and seeks additional assets in the field of combat, for the conclusion of lasting peace solutions for itself.. The West in the Russian elite sees only traders who have concentrated gigantic natural wealth in their hands, but have not developed their country sufficiently. The Russian elite took over the decaying USSR, and now in terms of the standard of surviving Russia is ranked 97th in the world, with a immense amount of resources. The tiny natural arabian countries were able to do more for the improvement of their nations than the Russian oligarchy. The increasing problems in Russia and internationally show that neither capitalism nor inclusive capitalism can handle them. As it continues, sooner or later the communist revolution will knock on the door. possibly part of the oligarchy will draw more far-reaching conclusions from the russian Union.
Edward Karolczuk
photo. ria.novosti
Think Poland, No. 15-16 (13-20.04.201025)
