Carl Philipp Gottfried von Clausewitz (1780-1831) was a Prussian general and military theorist who stressed the ‘moral’ and political aspects of war. He is a source of many succinct quotations with arguably the most well-known being “War is nothing but a continuation of politics with the admixture of other means.” Admixture is a rarely used word; when something (other than water) is mixed with something else.
If the Prussian general was observing today’s war between Russia and Ukraine he would probably find his quote as applicable now as he did then. But he might wish to downplay his view on the ‘moral’ aspects of the war and replace it with ‘economic liberalism’. General Clausewitz might also tweak the ‘political’ aspect to ‘geopolitics’.
It is impossible not to be horrified by the murderous military invasion of Ukraine by Russia. However, the issues are much wider and more complicated than the inhuman invasion of one country by another. Further, if the focus is on personalities such as Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy, then the analysis will be found wanting.
The invasion should be seen in the backdrop of economic liberalism and geopolitics. To further strengthen analysis it is best to focus on ‘first principles’ so that convolution and the minefield of hypocrisy can be avoided.
The first ‘first principle’
The first of the ‘first principles’ is, without qualification, that the invasion of Ukraine is unjustified. It has created a humanitarian disaster for Ukrainians. Complex politics sits behind this conflict but the loss of lives of the innocent is not the way to resolve them.
This innocence is highlighted by the reported Russian bombing that severely damaged a maternity and children’s hospital leading to multiple deaths in the port city of Mariupol in south-eastern Ukraine (occupied by Ukrainian troops but claimed by the separate Russian led republic of Donetsk).
Putin can only justify the invasion on the basis of hypocrisy. He calls it a ‘military operation’. Arguably his terminology might have some validity if he was seeking to protect concentrations of Russians living in eastern Ukraine. But this is an all-out invasion across the whole country even it this protection was the end goal.
Putin also argues that he wants to free Ukraine of its Nazi influence. Highly laudable one might think as there is a (neo) Nazi movement in the country as part of a wider far right. It was influential in the coup of 2014 that overthrew the then elected president , including the Azov Battalion (a Nazi paramilitary militia).
But Nazi-type influence appears much less now (although alarmingly the Azov Battalion was subsequently integrated into the Ukrainian armed forces). Further, while not a Nazi, Putin himself is an authoritarian far-right politician. Hardly an ambassador for democracy.
Although written before the invasion, one of the best contemporary background articles I’ve read on the conflict between the two neighbouring countries is by British and Pakistani socialists Tariq Ali published (16 February) in Side Car (the blog of New Left Review) News from Natoland
Despite his highly critical analysis of NATO in this conflict , Ali is unequivocally opposed to the Russian invasion but his analysis is appropriately broader than this.
Hypocrisy runs rife
The public display of unqualified support by the European Union (EU) for Ukrainian refugees reeks of hypocrisy (of course, the United Kingdom just had to be the opposite) when compared with its appalling response to refugees from other parts of the world such as Africa, Asia and the Middle East.
Shocking present day brutality engineered by the EU is highlighted in this gut-wrenching article by American journalist Ian Urbina in Le Monde Diplomatique(January 2022): EU’s shadow immigration system .
This is not an argument for treating Ukrainians as harshly as other refugees. But it is an argument about hypocrisy and the need for treating these other refugees the same as Ukrainians.
Chechnya, part of Russia, provides a tragic example of hypocrisy. In 1999 the Russian government led by Putin initiated a military campaign in Chechnya against those seeking independence. The campaign was brutal with massive loss of life.
By early 2000 Russia almost completely destroyed the capital city of Grozny. The hypocrisy is that Putin’s actions were willingly condoned at the time by both the United States and the United Kingdom.
Then we have the hypocrisy of the United States’ foreign policy. No country has been responsible for more overseas wars since World War 2 or regime change (both attempted and successful) than the US. Russia is an amateur by comparison.
While war rages in Ukraine the US has significant ongoing responsibility for the repression of Palestinians by Israel’s government and the current humanitarian disaster in Yemen.
NATO involvement
However, if all we know about the invasion of Ukraine is the invasion, then that is all that we will know. At the heart of the widening conflict that led to (but does not justify) Russia’s invasion is the widening conflict between the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and Russia.
NATO was established after World War 2 as a United States led military alliance of western European countries, Canada and the United Kingdom against the Soviet Union (of which both Russia and Ukraine were part) and other eastern European countries (such as Poland and Hungary) that made up the Warsaw Pact. This was all part of what was then known as the ‘Cold War’.
The demise of the Soviet Union should have made NATO redundant. Instead NATO continues to expand towards the Russian border. In the mainstream media the predominant message is that Russia is challenging NATO and the ‘international rules-based order’ (in reality, a ‘US rules-base order’).
The trigger point, so the messaging goes, was Russia’s 2014 annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula which was evidence of Putin’s goal of rebuilding Russia’s long-lost empire.
Should Ukraine join NATO it would enable the US-led military alliance to establish missiles right up to the Russian border. It is easy to imagine the reaction if Russia was able to set up its missiles in Canada or Mexico.
The mainstream media messaging is highly misleading. It excludes the crucial role the US by itself and through NATO has played in escalating tensions. This begins with its extensive role in the 2014 coup in Ukraine that preceded Russia’s annexation of Crimea.
February 2014 coup
The 2014 coup and Crimean annexation need to be understood in the context of the US strategy of opening up Ukraine to foreign investors and multinational corporations. The US led International Monetary Fund (IMF) leverages aid loans to push governments to adopt policies friendly to foreign investors.
The IMF has been at the centre of efforts to reshape economies around the world for decades, often with disastrous results. The current civil war in Yemen and coup in Bolivia (subsequently defeated) both followed a rejection of IMF terms.
Linked to Ukraine joining the European Union, the IMF was planning to implement a series of economic reforms to liberalise the economy (ie, extend neo-liberalism), including wage levels, subsidies, and both the health and education sectors, in order to make it more attractive to foreign investors.
This led, in 2013, to Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych ending trade integration talks with the EU. Instead he restarted economic negotiations with Russia. This set in motion the basis for the coup the following February.
The United States became engaged hands-on in a destabilisation campaign against the Yanukovych government. It culminated with the overthrow of the elected president in February in what is known as the ‘Maidan Revolution’ (also known as the ‘Maidan Coup’) named for the Kiev square where most of the protests were held.
Yanukovych was at best not an endearing person. He was widely believed to be corrupt but was not alone in that respect, either before or after his presidency. He was elected with a clear majority in an election that was as democratic as other elections held previously and subsequently.
His electoral support was strongest in the regions of the country and less so in the capital (hence the name of his political party, the ‘Party of the Regions’). Elected Yanukovych was and overthrown he also was.
Crimea
Russia’s response was to annex Crimea but there is more to this than the mainstream media messaging of resurrecting the old Russian Empire. From Russia’s point of view, a long-time adversary had successfully overthrown a neighbouring government.
Crimea has an interesting history. In 1921 Crimea became an autonomous republic within the new Soviet Union. It was dissolved in 1945 and became part of Russia. Next, after the death of Joseph Stalin in 1953, there was a shift in approach in the relationship between Russia and the other Soviet republics.
As part of this shift, Nikita Khrushchev (himself part-Ukrainian) successful led a reconciliation initiative with Ukraine leading to the transfer of Crimea from Russia to Ukraine the following year.
Come February 2014 Crimea was home to one of two Russian naval bases with access to the Black and Mediterranean seas. It is unsurprising that a Crimea controlled by a US-backed Ukrainian government was considered to be a major threat to Russian naval access.
In March Russia held a plebiscite of Crimeans on whether they should join Russia or remain in Ukraine. A massive 95% voted to join Russia. While this was not an independently monitored plebiscite the result was not that surprising.
The large majority of Crimeans were Russian and Crimea had only been part of Ukraine for less than 70 years. While most Ukrainians speak both Russian and Ukrainian, in Crimea only 2% mainly spoke Ukrainian.
Self-determination as a second ‘first principle’
None of this – the integration of Ukraine into the neo-liberal European Union, the February 2014 coup in Ukraine, or the threatened expansion of NATO military capacity to the Ukraine-Russian border – justifies the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The inhumane impact of the invasion on Ukrainians is sufficient reason for this conclusion.
In his lengthy address announcing the invasion Putin was critical of another Vladimir. This was Lenin, the first leader of the Soviet Union, who supported Ukraine as a separate soviet republic instead of being part of the Russian republic.
Lenin had an acute understanding of the importance of self-determination as a socialist principle that offers a way forward and an alternative to military force. Ukraine’s right to self-determination must be respected. But, equally so, should the same right apply to highly Russian populated areas of eastern Ukraine near the Russian border.
Even in more peaceful times achieving full (rather than selective) self-determination would be difficult. The Russian recognised separate Luhansk and Donetsk republics are located in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine.
There have been significant political differences, including in presidential elections, between eastern and western Ukraine since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. Ukraine has been a polarised country.
Local plebiscites would be necessary to achieve self-determination in parts of the east. They would need to be independently monitored and not necessarily covering the whole populations of Luhansk and Donetsk. The republics laying claim to them only control part of the territory (perhaps a third) and there are also many non-Russian Ukrainians living there.
Defining the boundaries for plebiscites would be difficult but achievable if there is a meeting of minds. It is implausible to believe that the citizens of Donetsk’s second largest city Mariupol would vote in favour of being part of a Russian aligned republic. Perhaps encouragingly Zelenskyy appears to have expressed recent interest in addressing Russia’s security concerns in the region.
What also needs to happen is that NATO does not further extend its boundaries towards Russia. That is, Ukraine does not become a member. This is geopolitics. NATO does not need to expand for defensive reasons. Expansion would only be seen as an unnecessary aggression.
But, for any of this to eventuate, the first step needs to be an end to the invasion (preceded by a ceasefire). The bottom line is that regardless of the hypocrisy and provocations from the United States and NATO, the Russian invasion is inhuman and should end forthwith.
It is also counterproductive in that despite taking some cities Russia can never win either militarily or politically and it can only strengthen the image of its adversaries. Full self-determination based on a democratic process as close to the grassroots as practical is the only of providing for a sustainable and fair resolution.
If he was here today Clausewitz might well say “Self-determination is nothing but a continuation of politics to avoid war with the admixture of other means.”
Ian Powell was Executive Director of the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists, the professional union representing senior doctors and dentists in New Zealand, for over 30 years, until December 2019. He is now a health systems, labour market, and political commentator living in the small river estuary community of Otaihanga (the place by the tide). First published at Political Bytes
Good Morning Vietnam !!!
Latest Updates From the Ukraine Overnight
Statistics are not looking good for Russia overnight however still NO CEASE FIRE. Russia are accusing the Ukraine of holding chemical and biological weapons, we all hoping for a peaceful resolution as soon as possible.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/300536848/full-coverage-russia-and-ukraine-hold-highlevel-talks-after-hospital-bombing
they have admitted US funded research facilities…
wouldn’t it be a turn up if the chinese virus was the ukrainian virus? RELAX just fuckin about, zero evidence the thought just amused my sick wee mind.
Gagarin maybe the virus was developed in Kyiv by the US and the Ukranian’s and released in Wuhan Wet Markets to make it look as if it’s a Chinese Virus. Trump was mentioning that at one stage. Putin needs to release the evidence he has to the World Health Investigators to analyse, if it matches the Covid 19 virus – Bingo we have solved that Covid 19 was actually developed by the US in a Laboratory in Kyiv.
N do go back and read my post properly, I was avin a larff…but thanks for confirming your radical humourectomy for me.
Please tell me how Ukraine can win this war?
Ukraine could start targeting facilities inside Russia or Western Russia like taking Vladivostock ?
Open the War up on two fronts, then the Chinese might start taking more interest as they don’t want Ukranian Nazis in that part of the World. Vladivostock would be easy to capture and would give the Russian military two x battles to concentrate on. Interesting that Ukraine produces 15% of the World’s food supply so obviously strategically very important for Russia. The UN needs to extract it’s finger out of it’s anus and do something ie tell the Russian’s to fuck off home to Moscow otherwise the UN will put an International Peace Keeping Force into the Ukraine. It is not that fucking difficult IMHO ???
and do you know what forces russia has stationed in the east? the japanese found out at kalkin gol and that led to soviet victory in the battle of moscow…I don’t know russian dispositions today but neither do you.
and N if you’re so keen on war, why don’t you volunteer?
yeah right
Ukraine taking Vladivostok is not a realistic possibility N.
By transitioning over time (if / when they lose the cities to Russian occupation) to irregular warfare strategy and tactics think use of IED’s / snipers etc as per Vietnam / Afghanistan / Iraq etc.
Countering this kind of warfare is extermely difficult and perhaps impossible if you are operating in an environment with a hostile local population who refuse to admit defeat.
Russia may win the battle but winning the war less than certain.
I would say that the Ukrainian refugees are not looking to settle in the EU or UK. Once Putin is gone they will more than likely return. Unlike the middle eastern refugees who will neither go home or integrate.
Add religion into the mix and you have short term christian refugees versus long term muslim refugees.
Add demographics into the mix with the majority of short term Ukrainian refugees being women and children versus long term young man that do not want to integrate and live outside the norms of the society they seek to settle in.
No hypocrisy at all, simply looking after ones own. Oh, is that racist?
Agreed. Well said.
ukrainians are ‘white’, syrians ain’t, it might not be the case for other countries but as far as the UK gammons go IT IS a case of ‘ah dun loike darkies’
Gagarin maybe the virus was developed in Kyiv by the US and the Ukranian’s and released in Wuhan Wet Markets to make it look as if it’s a Chinese Virus. Trump was mentioning that at one stage. Putin needs to release the evidence he has to the World Health Investigators to analyse, if it matches the Covid 19 virus – Bingo we have solved that Covid 19 was actually developed by the US in a Laboratory in Kyiv.
Not racist just realist – Ukrainian refugees would be unlikely to be attacking women and children on London’s streets with knives or mowing them down on the pavement in France in a truck in a misguided attempt to get to the virgins in paradise (or try to impose Sharia law for that matter) . .
Yes not all Muslim refugees commit terrorist acts or even close but enough do all the same to make weathering such attacks become very old very fast.
no the UK will just do an ‘operation paperclip’ to import some nazis like it hasn’t got enough already.
…don’t forget after ww2 the brits did exactly that to support the ‘forest brothers’ war against civilians…just one of the operations philby burgess and mclaine betrayed.
“Should Ukraine join NATO it would enable the US-led military alliance to establish missiles right up to the Russian border.”
And, if Russia were to take over and incorporate Ukraine into Russia (where Putin believes it belongs) they would then have NATO right on their doorstep anyway. Not only that but the other border and near border countries would be even more committed to their NATO alliances and to the strengthening of their defences generally. Finland, with a massive Russian border, is now actively pursuing joining NATO.
In short, as a strategy to buttress itself from NATO, the invasion of Ukraine is so spectacularly stupid that I wonder why it is so readily trotted out as a justification for Putin’s war.
Exactly. It’s bloody curious that this isn’t being stated clearly in the media.
Yup great point – Russia already has 2 Nato countries directly on their border (Estonia + Latvia) and if they were to ‘absorb’ Ukraine then they would be adding 4 more (Poland + Slovakia + Hungary + Romania) . . also like you say their actions are also only serving to unite existing Nato countries / is leading to an increase in their own (Nato countries) defence spending / otherwise non-aligned countries such as Finland and Sweden etc warming to the idea of also joining Nato.
Keep up , Russia most definitely does not want to incorporate Ukraine, or even the 2 republics
Usually, I’ve found, it’s better to watch what people do rather than accept what they say. Regardless, it doesn’t diminish the increased motivation for a powerful, well equipped and committed defence alliance among the Eastern European nations. Perhaps an alliance of those nations outside of NATO will develop.
I wonder if Putin would be happy about Ukraine joining that. What do you think Francesca.
“The public display of unqualified support by the European Union (EU) for Ukrainian refugees reeks of hypocrisy (of course, the United Kingdom just had to be the opposite) when compared with its appalling response to refugees from other parts of the world such as Africa, Asia and the Middle East.”
If the above is indeed correct how is it that there there almost 850,000 Syrians now in Germany? 850,000!
‘In Europe, Germany is one of the countries hosting the most international migrants and between 2015 and 2019 alone more than 1,622,954 people registered as asylum seekers with Syrians being the largest single nationality.’
https://archpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13690-021-00745-7#:~:text=In%20Europe%2C%20Germany%20is%20one,17%2C18%2C19%5D.
Well said and a clear and succinct description for all to understand. Appreciated.
However, I’d also like to add, NATO should be dismantled and the US military across the globe should all return to the US and remain within their borders.
Nato should be dismantled – Not sure you would be feeling that way if you were Polish . .
Oh Denny, that is hilarious.
Worth reading:https://original.antiwar.com/David_Stockman/2022/03/02/the-eazy-peazy-ukrainian-alternative-partition/
Also – https://original.antiwar.com/david_stockman/2022/02/23/george-kennan-warned-nato-expansion-would-lead-to-this/
“[Yanukovych] His electoral support was strongest in the regions of the country and less so in the capital (hence the name of his political party, the ‘Party of the Regions’). Elected Yanukovych was and overthrown he also was.”
Yes and Zelensky was also elected, with most support from Eastern and Central Ukraine.
Hypocrisy runs rife in the EU and NATO foreign policy for sure, but as another comment points out Europe, especially Germany has taken vast numbers of refugees in. Also since 2017 Ukrainians can travel visa-free to the EU, small point but they have a legal right to enter the EU temporarily.
“[Yanukovych] His electoral support was strongest in the regions of the country and less so in the capital (hence the name of his political party, the ‘Party of the Regions’). Elected Yanukovych was and overthrown he also was.”
Yes, and Zelensky was also elected, with most support from Eastern and Central Ukraine, while I agree with much of the article, it’s funny how this was omitted in the historical recap.
One addition to the refugee debate I’ve not seen mentioned anywhere, since 2017 Ukrainians can travel visa-free, so they have a legal right to enter the EU and stay temporarily.
“Zelensky was also elected, with most support from Eastern and Central Ukraine,” ,,,,, yes he was born there and the comedy where he played the president was shot in russian and dubbed in Ukrainian.
But , he was elected on a pro-peace with Russia platform,,,, his attempts to stop fascists shelling of Donbass was met with refusal and contempt ,,,, he was also warned any serious attempts to enforce the Minsk peace agreements would see him lynched and strung up outside Parliament.
It appears he received no support for peace from the usa ,,,, who arm and train the Nazis. https://youtu.be/lh4ClXnv9w8?t=1161
Bio-hazard Numan and the usa have brought about this phase of their war.
Ukraine could start targeting facilities inside Russia or Western Russia like taking Vladivostock ?
Correction Eastern Russia, too much Vodka last night.
Evidently the Grey Ghost was shot down the other day. RIP the Grey Ghost a true Ukrainian Patriot.
Francesca has already pointed out that the whole Grey Ghost thing has been debunked by the BBC. You do love to naively drink in the propaganda, don’t you Ngungukai?
Drinking too much Ukranian Kool Aid, it was actually a m8’s son who told me that, so someone else feeding me bullshit ?
This is a global conflict affecting fuel prices and systems. I wonder how anyone can treat it as a source of entertainment but there it is. Nato chief now aiming to head the world bank not a particularly good look considering world bank paying millions into Ukraine and ignoring Afghanistan being royally ripped off three ways before breakfast. The governments so keen to impose sanctions look a bit dumb when there is no nickel or whatever to make stainless etc