Amancay Riquelme | Chilean Communist Party (Proletarian Action)
The era of political, economic and military interventions by imperialism against largely defenseless countries is coming to an end, and a new one has dawned in which the US and its dominated NATO are challenging countries with large nuclear arsenals and powerful armed forces. The fact that the US is reducing its presence in its traditional theaters of war, such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, indicates that Washington wants to strengthen its economic and military presence in the Indo-Pacific region, i.e. around China.
The NATO regularly conducts military exercises in which “defensive attacks” against Russia are rehearsed. The most recent were: Steadfast Defender 2024 (from April 8 to May 31 in Northern Europe) which became by far the largest exercise since the end of the Cold War and one of the largest since the organization’s existence, Immediate Response 2024 (from April 21 to May 31 in Sweden), Brave Warrior (May 1-22, 2024 in Hungary), Swift Response 2024 (May 14-June 14 in Estonia, Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland), Spring Storm 2024 (May 6-17 in Estonia), Grand Quadriga (April 30-July 30 in Germany and Lithuania).
It seems that the NATO member countries are urgently looking for a war against Russia. In January this year, NATO Admiral Rob Bauer called on the people of Europe to prepare for a war against Russia within the next 20 years!
Roderick Kiesewetter of the CDU/Germany pointed out that the war must be taken to Russia.[1]
We well remember that in 2014 the US and the EU staged a coup in Ukraine against the then democratically elected President Yanukovych after he refused to accept the terms of the EU agricultural agreement, which would have largely opened the Ukrainian agricultural market to highly subsidized EU agricultural producers[2]. Former President Viktor Yanukovych said: “I, as a president and as a patriot of my country, cannot accept such conditions”[3].
The behavior of NATO states where their economic interests cannot be fully asserted, where the free exploitation of other countries’ raw materials by their monopoly companies is not fully guaranteed, where limits are imposed on the export of capital or on the return of capital (e.g. in China), is well known: to overthrow an undesirable head of state. To defend one’s own agricultural producers would be mad and tyrannical, but to call for war against Russia after Germany was responsible for the deaths of between 27 and 32 million Soviet citizens in the Second World War would be the purest expression of reason.
The madness, of course, is not that the peoples of the world want to defend themselves against the exploitative policies of the imperialist countries. The madness is to believe that all the peoples of the world must accept them without resistance and that if they do not, they will be forced to do so with sanctions, coups and even wars. This is what happened in Ukraine with Yanukovych.
Since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine in 2014, Russia has been looking for ways to achieve peace, such as the famous Minsk agreements. In December 2021, Russia presented NATO countries with a proposal for a security agreement. Among other things, Russia proposed that Ukraine should not join NATO and, to avoid incidents, that neither NATO nor Russia should conduct military exercises in a strip defined by all parties to the treaty on the border between Russia and NATO member states (including states that have only a military alliance with NATO).[4] It was a last-ditch attempt to make Russia’s security interests clear to NATO states through diplomatic channels before the start of the Special Military Operation in Ukraine.[5]
But Russia has continued to try to reach agreements with the “West”, even after the start of the special military operation. Negotiations took place again in March 2022, this time in Istanbul.[6] Both sides signed a document that stipulated very unfavorable conditions for Russia. For example, the Donbass was to remain Ukrainian, as previously stipulated in the Minsk agreements. According to the Washington Post, Crimea was to be handed over to Russia only ‘on a lease basis’. Russia would withdraw its troops. In return, Ukraine was to reduce the size of its army and not join NATO. And Russia signed the agreement and withdrew its troops. But, according to David Arachamia (a Zelensky official), Boris Johnson (the then British Prime Minister) went to Kiev and gave Ukraine a choice: if Ukraine complied with the agreement, there would be no more Western aid. But if it continued to fight, it would get all the money it could possibly get. Today we know exactly what Zelensky decided.[7]
In the face of NATO’s relentless escalation of warmongering, the overwhelmingly re-elected Russian President Vladimir Putin warned on 29 February this year that Russian weapons could also reach European territory.[8]
A few days earlier, on 26 February, Putin said that the deployment of NATO ground troops in Ukraine “would be the last step before World War III”[9]. On the night of 17 March he warned that a direct military conflict between Russia and NATO forces in Ukraine would mean the world was one step away from a third thermonuclear world war.
But no, thermonuclear war seems to be worth it for the NATO states if it means saving their battered and moribund economies from collapse. Two days later, on 19 March, the head of Russia’s foreign intelligence service, Sergei Naryshkin, reported that France was already preparing to send a contingent of some 2,000 troops to Ukraine.[10]
Also on 19 March, US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin attended a meeting of the Contact Group on Ukraine at Ramstein Air Base in Germany, where he reiterated US policy that NATO would soon be at war with Russia if Ukraine were defeated. How ironic, since it would have been sooner had Russia not blocked NATO’s advance into that very country… The extension of NATO’s architecture to Ukraine would have directly destroyed the nuclear parity between Russia and the United States, to Russia’s detriment.
The day before, the German and Polish defense ministers, Boris Pistorius and Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz, met on the outskirts of Warsaw and announced that the two countries would jointly deploy a rapid reaction force on the EU’s eastern border (initially with 2,500 troops per country).
On 1 March, an audio recording was leaked which revealed that senior Bundeswehr officers were planning an attack on the Kerch Bridge (Crimea) with some 20 Taurus cruise missiles.[11] On 6 May, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz decided to travel to Latvia and Lithuania[12] to talk to Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda about the 4,800 Bundeswehr troops that Germany plans to station on NATO’s eastern flank because of “Russia’s increasingly aggressive behavior and the increasingly tense situation”.[13] [14]
On 24 May, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg urged NATO member states to allow Ukraine to use Western weapons against Russian territory[15].
On 28 May, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz echoed Stoltenberg’s calls, saying he would agree to Ukraine using German-supplied weapons against Russia “within the framework of international law”, including on Russian territory.
Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that “this further escalation could have serious consequences”[16].
In Germany, the CDU[17] is likely to form the next government and, hard as it may be to believe, the signals it is sending suggest that it is likely to outdo the current government in warmongering. For example, it has advocated the gradual reintroduction of conscription in Germany in order to ‘send a clear signal to Russia’, arguing that Germany is currently incapable of defending itself against foreign aggression. This is Kafkaesque because Germany is a US-occupied country, and has been since 1945, when it was not the US, Britain or France but the Soviet Union that liberated the country from fascism. It sounds schizophrenic, but it is true: Germany “must” militarize, not to drive the current occupiers out of the country, but to wage war against those who liberated it from fascism…
Last Wednesday (05.06.224), the German Defense Minister said: “We must be prepared for war [against Russia, it is understood] until 2029”[18].
The reaction of France, the US, the UK, Germany and NATO as a whole to Russia’s repeated calls for reason seems unbelievable.[19]
NATO is sacrificing Ukrainian lives for its own interests. It is trying to do the same with the Baltic peoples and with Georgia. A large part of the population of the latter country is strongly opposed to being bled dry again by foreign interests. But the NATO countries will continue to plunge more and more peoples of the world into blood and death. It should not be forgotten for a moment that the governments of the NATO countries are rightly desperate because their economic systems are collapsing. All this seemingly irrational warmongering is ultimately an act of survival.
This is the great significance of Russia’s struggle against NATO on Ukrainian territory. Russia is directly confronting imperialism there. Whether it is doing this by its own will or because history has dragged it into it is of no historical importance. Russia is confronting imperialism, this is the only fact that counts.
In recent months, the Russian military has made great leaps from an army that made serious and elementary military mistakes to one that is disciplined, capable of excellent military strategy and, without losing its moral basis of focusing military action on military objectives and protecting civilians as much as possible, increasingly prepared to confront a more powerful enemy.[20]
Russia’s struggle in Ukraine against NATO and fascism marks the beginning of the defeat of imperialism in the world.
Notes
[1] Kiesewetter’s words were:
“The evil in all this is Putin and his criminal war of aggression. That is why Russia must be shown that it cannot go on like this. Russia must recognize the right of its neighbors to exist. The war must be taken to Russia. Russian military installations and headquarters must be destroyed. We must do everything possible so that Ukraine can destroy not only Russian oil refineries, but also ministries, command posts and combat centers. It is time for the Russian people to realize that they have a dictator who is sacrificing Russia’s future.”
[2] This would have made Ukrainian agricultural producers uncompetitive.
[3] Yanukovych’s words were:
“I, as president and as a patriot of my country, cannot accept such conditions. That is why, in search of a way out of the current economic situation in Ukraine, we have agreed with Russia to reduce the price of gas from $430 to $268.5, to provide a $15 billion state loan and up to $5 billion in development loans at acceptable interest rates. We have agreed to draw up a roadmap to restore the $15-17 billion in trade between our countries that has been lost over the last 1.5 to 2 years. We have signed an agreement under which we will look at joint programs for a number of industries to increase production of finished products and create new jobs.”
While Yanukovych flirted with the EU and NATO, he was considered a “flawless democrat”. When he put Ukraine’s national interests before those of the EU and NATO, he was overnight declared a “dictator” (in the bourgeois sense of the word), opposed in the streets by a “freedom-loving” people.
[4] Russia also proposed that short- and medium-range land-based missiles should not be deployed in areas from which targets on the territory of other States Parties could be attacked. In general, nuclear weapons should not be deployed outside one’s own country. Finally, Russia proposed a return to the NATO-Russia Founding Act, which prohibited the permanent stationing of NATO troops in Eastern Europe.
[5] NATO’s written response of January 2022 has not yet been made public, but according to statements by US Secretary of State Blinken and NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg, no concessions were made to Russia. This is in line with NATO’s behavior since its founding (1949).
[6] It is not true what the bourgeois media reported that Russia torpedoed the negotiations.
[7] It is not a question of defending “democracy” and “freedom”, even in the bourgeois sense of the word. A quote:
“We cannot allow Russia to win this war. Otherwise American and European interests would be seriously harmed. This is not about supporting Ukraine just out of generosity and because we love the Ukrainian people. It is about our own interests and those of the United States as a global actor.”
These were Joseph Borrell’s words.
[8] Putin’s words were:
“They must understand that we also have weapons […] that can attack and eliminate targets on there territory. […] All this is real and can provoke a conflict and lead to the use of nuclear weapons. Don’t tehey understand? These are people who have suffered hard times. But now they have forgotten what war means.”
[9] Responding to a journalist’s question about French President Emmanuel Macron’s comments on 26 February that the deployment of NATO ground troops in Ukraine could not be ruled out, Putin said that everyone knew this would be the last step before World War III:
“Everyone knows that this will be the last step before World War III. […] I have said it many times and I will say it again. We are in favor of peace talks, but not just because the enemy is running out of ammunition.”
[10] Sergei Naryshkin said:
“Initially it will consist of about 2,000 troops. […] This will make them a legitimate priority target for the Russian armed forces. This means that they will suffer the fate of all the French who have ever invaded the Russian world with a sword”.
[11] The authenticity of the recording was immediately confirmed by the German government. The bourgeois media and the German government were shocked not by the content of the conversation between senior Bundeswehr officers, but by the fact that it had been leaked. As military strategist Scott Ritter pointed out, this was an act of aggression by Germany against Russia, and Russia could rightly have interpreted it as an open declaration of war by Germany against its country.
[12] At the Lithuanian military training area of Pabrade, he visited the Bundeswehr’s 10th Armoured Division, which is taking part in NATO military exercises there.
[13] This will “only” cost around €9 billion.
[14] At about the same time as Oslo announced its recognition of Palestine, the Norwegian authorities passed a law banning Russian tourists from entering the country. The Associated Press reported on 23 May:
“Norway said Thursday it will further tighten its entry restrictions on people from Russia, warning that those with tourist visas issued by Norway before controls were tightened in 2022 or issued by another European country will not be able to enter the Scandinavian country starting next week.”
The day before Spain’s official recognition of the state of Palestine came into force, Zelenski was personally received by the King of Spain. Subsequently, security agreements worth millions were signed between the Sánchez government and Zelenski.
[15] Stoltenberg’s words were:
“The time has come to consider whether it would not be right to lift some of the restrictions that have been imposed. If [Ukraine] cannot attack military targets on Russian territory, then [the restrictions] tie the hands of the Ukrainians and make it very difficult for them to defend themselves. It is clear that Ukraine has the right to defend itself […] Legitimate self-defense includes the right to attack legitimate military targets inside Russia.”
[16] Putin’s words were:
“Today, the NATO Secretary General talks about the possibility of attacking Russian territory with long-range precision weapons. He should know that long-range precision weapons cannot be used without reconnaissance satellites. The final selection of the target and the so-called flight task can only be carried out by highly qualified specialists on the basis of technical expertise. This flight task is not prepared by Ukrainian soldiers, but by representatives of NATO member states. They should be aware of what they are getting into.
First they provoked us in Donbass, led us by the nose for eight years, deceived us into believing that they would solve the problem peacefully and forced us to resolve the situation by armed means. Then they deceived us during the negotiations.
They thought they would defeat Russia on the battlefield and inflict a strategic defeat on Russia. We warned them: do not invade our territory, do not bombard Belgorod and other neighboring areas, otherwise we will be forced to create a security zone.
This constant escalation could have serious consequences.”
[17] The CDU will probably have to form a coalition government with other parties that are not yet foreseeable (perhaps the AfD and the SPD).
[18] Der Spiegel reports:
“Due to the threat posed by Russia, Defense Minister Boris Pistorius wants to strengthen the Bundeswehr’s operational readiness. ‘We must be ready for war by 2029,’ said the SPD politician on Wednesday during the government’s questioning in the Bundestag. ‘We must not believe that Putin will stop at Ukraine’s borders if he gets that far,’ said Pistorius. Russia is not only a threat to Ukraine, but also to Georgia, Moldova and ultimately to NATO. ‘We must act as a deterrent to prevent things from coming to an extreme.’”
[19] Instead of peace talks, they are escalating the war. First they sent arms to Ukraine, then medium-range missiles, then Leopard and Abrams tanks, recently they started discussing sending long-range Taurus cruise missiles, which can penetrate deep into Russian territory, and sending NATO troops to fight Russian soldiers, and today they have authorized Ukraine to use weapons supplied by NATO countries on Russian territory.
[20] The appointment of the new defense minister, Andrei Belousov, who was trained in the Soviet years and is an advocate of a strong state industrial base, is to be welcomed.
Putin has nominated Andrey Belousov as the head of the Russian Defence Ministry. Andrey Belousov was born on 17 March 1959. He graduated from Moscow State University in 1981 with a degree in cybernetics and economics. He was Deputy Minister of Economic Development and Trade of the Russian Federation and Head of the Department of Economics and Finance of the Russian Government. From 2012 to 2013, he headed the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation. From 2013 to 2020, he was Assistant to the President of the Russian Federation for Economic Affairs. On 21 January 2020, he was appointed First Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Government. Deutschland Funk reads:
“This Moscow-born economist is considered an advocate of industrial and state economic policy. In terms of economic theory, he is therefore more a follower of the teachings of John Maynard Keynes (state control of the macro-economy) than of Milton Friedman (the market regulates everything). ‘Beloussov was one of those who saw the state as the main driver of everything, and at the same time analyzed the same data as we do, unlike most other pro-state economists, who just juggled with abstractions,’ says Konstantin Sonin, an economist and professor at the University of Chicago.”