Russian Tensions
- This topic has 5,312 replies, 39 voices, and was last updated 3 weeks, 1 day ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Truss, the British foreign secretary, raised fears that China might join the war by attacking Taiwan if Russia “invaded” Ukraine.
“China could use a Russian invasion of Ukraine as an opportunity to launch aggression of its own in the Indo-Pacific, British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss has warned. ‘I don’t think we can rule that out,” Ms Truss said. … “Russia is working more closely with China than it ever has. Aggressors are working in concert and I think it’s incumbent on countries like ours to work together.’”
Former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating, wrote:
“Remarks by the British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss that China could engage in military aggression in the Pacific, encouraged by Russia’s contingent moves against Ukraine, are nothing short of demented. Not simply irrational, demented.”
As tensions rise, the media does its job of being the voice of their respective governments. They present the view their government wants them to present.
They depict what is going on simplistically as goodies v baddies, and , of course, we can guess who the former will always be.
Our task is to explain that war and preparations of war are the normal patterns of capitalism and our fellow workers are being manipulated and manoeuvred into taking sides in a potential conflict.
We all need to understand the context of the confrontation. I think this article presents the deeper historical background.
https://original.antiwar.com/ted_snider/2022/01/05/six-things-the-media-wont-tell-you-about-ukraine/
And Jonathan Cook always has a nuanced analysis of world events that is worth reading
ISTR claims that the Russian game plan is partition, taking the largely Russian east, and leaving the largely agrarian west, which then falls into the European orbit (at least that’s what Germany would like), hence why the Germans are more accommodating (although maybe the views of the now ex-German admiral are more widely shared:
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/german-navy-chief-resigns-over-putin-comments-2022-01-22/)I have not seen any mention of the previous talks and Donbas agreement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_Protocol
Minsk II appears to have all but forgotten by the media
Ukrainian nationalism has an ugly history. Before WW1 what is now Ukraine was divided between the Austrian-Hungarian and the Russian Empires and after it between Poland and Soviet Russia. Lvov, the centre of the pro-West faction in Ukraine was a major Polish city. During this period the Ukrainian-speakers were discriminated against by the Polish government.
Under the Nazi-Soviet Pact the Polish part was annexed by Russia including Lvov. When Germany invaded Russia in 1941 many living in this part welcomed the Germans as liberators and many fought on the German side. Some served as concentration camp guards.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaboration_in_German-occupied_Ukraine
The trouble for the poor sods living in Central Europe is that history has dealt them a bad hand — no choice but to be dominated either by Germany or by Russia. It seems that the population of Ukraine is still divided over which, so providing the both sides with pawns to play to further their interests.
Ukraine is also a big manufacturer of Jet engines and shipbuilding materials used by the Russian military-industrial complex
A further complication was Kruschev’s redrawing of the boundary of the Russian SSR and the Ukrainian SSR. The Crimea and much of the Donbass area had been in the Russian SSR, Krushchev apparently redrew the boundaries to hobble Ukrainian nationalism within the USSR. Still don’t think the current Russian government have any wish to create an on going insurgency crisis by trying to take full control of the whole Ukranian state. They may wish to solidify their games so far and add a further hinterland in the east of the current Ukraine to join up Russia with the Crimea (and more importantly the mineral wealth of that area).
I don’t think we should underplay the seriousness of the situation.
For Putin, it is his Cuban Missile Crisis if Ukraine is permitted to join NATO.
New York Times report Biden is considering deploying several thousand U.S. troops, as well as warships and aircraft.
UK and US have sent Ukraine military supplies.
The State Department has ordered family members of U.S. Embassy staff in Kyiv to leave the country, as well as allowing non-essential staffers to leave too. It also advised no travel to Russia itself. US citizens “who are visiting or residing in Russia have been interrogated without cause, and threatened by Russian officials and may become victims of harassment, mistreatment, and extortion.”
As battle groups of both sides take up positions, France advises against travel to Ukraine
The Cuban missiles crisis also showed that the Soviet Union was not so powerful and so Influential, and at present Russia is not as powerful and influential as the Soviet Union, as Stefan said, Ukraine is lost for Russia. They might send more troops but the main purpose is to encircle Russia and more blockades, Eastern Europe was like a buffer for the Soviet Union and now NATO is at the front door of Russia
If some of us aren’t fearing the outbreak of another European war, the stock market appears concerned.
“Traders continue to be in selling mode as fears mount surrounding the Russia-Ukraine situation,” said David Madden, a market analyst at Equiti Capital.
fears of military conflict in Ukraine spooked investors, wiping £53bn off the value of the UK’s blue-chip share index.
European markets tumbled by 3.8%
Investors rushed to safe-haven assets such as the US dollar, and also the Swiss franc, which hit a six-year high against the euro.
Without endorsement – I’m not qualified to judge – this sounds a level headed and thorough discussion of the situation (there may be some biases, listeners beware).
the suggestion is that London and Washington are ramping things up: but that Russia is seeking to Finlandise Ukraine
Paul Mason has been fairly vocal about the Russian build up:
“Meanwhile, an analysis from the Centre for Defence Strategies, a Ukrainian think thank, has concluded there is no immediate threat of Russian military action.
The think tank cites the following reasons:
a) The vehicles being monitored on the Ukraine-Russia border are not deployed, and nor are any of the required logistical units. They remain parked ready to roll.
b) The Russian troops are not moving as brigades, but as separate battalions; likewise their support units are moving separately. There is not, says the think tank, the “necessary connections” to begin operating at brigade level and above.
c) Further, Russia has neither deployed nor tested its wartime administration system — of eg transport police, logistical troops, security detachments.
The Centre concludes there is no possibility of action starting within “two to three weeks” and in addition, that a large scale invasion/occupation looks highly unlikely.”Similarly, Ukraine’s Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov said that “as of today, there are no grounds to believe” that Russia is preparing to invade imminently, noting that its troops have not formed what he called a battle group that could force its way through the border.
$500 million military aid to Ukraine?
Democrats Are Rushing Through a Massive Ukraine Defense Bill
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.