A valid critique that I always welcome and appreciate – Russian oligarch’s policy on Ukraine
The points Comrade made may sound odd for those who are accustomed to looking at war issues only from the military point of view. That, I think was my shortcoming and mistake not to dialectically connect the economic aspect of the question. “Declaration of war” is in this specific case will inevitably result in “ending the war” as it is. However, due to looking at the issue from the military point of view, I overlooked the question of “whether ending the war is in the interests” of either or both belligerent countries.
War remains to be the decisive method of concentrating capital on a world scale. And imperialist war is waged – not abstract but - with definitive policy and aims.
Below I highlighted the core of the discussion, and his points to consider.
“A declaration of war by Russia means the end of war in Ukraine in the east within a fairly quick time period. Let’s remember that Russia never had the intention of invading entire Ukraine, which is neither militarily, economically nor politically in the interests of Russian oligarchs. It was and still is limited to Donbass area with certain conditions. This limitation is extended to other regions with economic and strategic importance. Oligarchy does not have a “monolithic “structure without any conflict of interests, or without different point of views. We have clearly seen this on the issue of “declaration of war” where some were in favor, others bluntly rejected. One group sees the dragging of the war as long as possible with minor upgrades to tactics, others capture the south and Donbass completely, redraw the border and reinforce it.
Comrades from Donbass was right when they said that “Russia is playing a dangerous game”. However, that “danger” is not something Russia cannot handle, it is not a danger for them. The danger is related to the people of these regions and not limited to Ukraine but entire European people. It is correct that Russia with the “declaration war” can end this war with lesser sacrifice of human life than the cost of lives by dragging this war.
Let’s not forget that Russian bureaucrats at the service of oligarchs are as calculating as the American counterparts when it comes to strategize the short and long-term interests of the class they serve. On the contrary, they are more calculating and sinister because they all have studied Leninism and know how to use that for their own interests. The difference between them is one uses the military force and its class partners and lackeys to achieve its goals, other calculates and banks on the discontent of the people. One kills them indiscriminately to force the submission, other tries to take advantage of the misery of people and extend the duration till the people force the lackey governments to submit.
With this in mind, capturing the eastern part of Ukraine will stop the war as it is, but
1-) it will not stop the expansion of NATO,
2) It will stop the pressure on European people,
3) it will slow down the sky rocketing inflations including in US.
4) It will put a break on the speedily growing economy of Russia
The US is already weakening the European economy and bringing it down to its knees and making them more dependent on the US military and energy industrial complex. Ending the war will not stop that process. It will not serve the interests of Russian oligarchs in the long run. They know that only the suffering of people can make people rise and bring about changes.
In this sense, one of their long-term goals is to break the NATO alliance not only in bordering countries but as much further as they can.
Comrades from Donbass was right from the start when they pointed the fact that Russia is playing for the “world public opinion” at the expense of communists and anti-fascists. That is in Ukraine particular. It is clear now that a group in Russian oligarchy is ready and willing to play the game at the expense of European people.
No one clearly knows how many infantries Russia has in Ukraine, but all credible analysists agree that it is under a hundred thousand. They did not even have more than ten thousand infantries in the entire Kharkov area, most of which were situated in the north of Donetsk. That shows that they actually were not in Kharkov to sustain it. In the face of an outnumbered offensive, they retreated quickly with minimal loss. It is mostly the Donbass militias who are fighting at the front, as it is in Kherson.
In other words, no military analyzer can argue that Russia with an infantry of less than a hundred thousand had a plan to invade Ukraine. They were ready to make an agreement fitting their interests before the war- at the expense of Donbass people, they were ready with lesser demands than now – maybe they did not but sat at the table for “public opinion” knowing that US-NATO will not let Ukraine to comply with-, they are ready “publicly” now with the knowledge that it is not possible to agree.
So, from a military point of view, “declaration of war” is the only viable option to end this war. However, that is if they want to end it. The Debate may go on within the bureaucrats of oligarchy, one or the other will win depending on the developments especially in Donbass and Kherson. For now, it seems that the proponents of the “declaration of war” lost the argument and those who prefer dragging the war as long as possible at the expense of people won the argument.
The only possible impact in changing it, as you have pointed out, would be the new provocations and military actions against Russian interests in its bordering countries. Other than that, Russia seems not wanting to win-end the war in short term but want to win economically and politically by dragging the war as long as possible.
It is always the economy that shapes the policy. As you well know war is the consequence of a definitive policy with definitive goals, so is its duration- especially for an economically and militarily superior country. "
.jpg)
No comments