Πέμπτη, 3 Απριλίου 2014

People’s steps emphasized by the Ukrainian crisis: attention, we are in 2014 by Ana Bazac


[this text was sent as a contribution to the conference]
Introduction: Why should we go over to Russia? We must go over to it … and more

My standpoint here is to connect the geopolitical and the social/class views – just opposite to Alexander Dugin’s opinionsii – and to condition the constitution of a sustainable Eurasia by rejecting the capitalist relations and by fulfilling an alternative model of society.

Therefore, the problem is no longer that of the obvious legality of the referendum in Crimea or that of the obvious legality of the behavior of Russia towards Ukraine and Crimea. This legality was demonstrated point by pointiii. But the problem is, forwards, that of the moral and geopolitical legitimacy of the procedures used by Russia and the Crimean authorities.
Morally, no one could incriminate the referendumiv and the Russian management of the Ukrainian crisisv, and just from a moral standpoint – and not only from a legal one – the progressive and left-wing people worldwide must support Russia. How that? Would the moral not have a historical and, what is important for usvi, social character? Certainly, it has: the desirable principles of human conduct reflect the social/class position; and the social interests of the ordinary people from the whole world consist today in the opposition to the seizure of the global power by a single force, the “West” (in fact, the USA and their European Union ally). Not because of an abstract treasuring to concepts such as the “multi-polar world”. But because the possible seizure of the global power by a single force will generate and constitute a world oppression of the world masses without any hindrance: the political efforts of that single force would no longer share between social domination and ardent struggle against the competing forces, but they would focus only on the exploitation without mercy of the many: in other words, only on the direct and indirect destruction of the many in order to preserve “the economic stratification of society into ‘Elites’ and ‘Masses’”vii.


But would the competing world powers, as Russia, China etc., not be based too on the capitalist exploitation of their populations? And would the states, as official representatives of different collective powers of monopolies and oligarchsviii, not be rather formal entities covering the real economic power of the above-mentioned monopolies and oligarchs, in a more technical term, of the capital/capitalist relations? They certainly are and if so, even the geopolitical aim of multi-polar world has a single opportunity to realize: if the world powers pressing for a quiet status quo of balance between them want to attain their goal they need to relate the internal social character of their states with the fight for a relatively generalized social state worldwide. Only in this case, the internal model they show to the world would be at the same time convincing enough in order to both being attractive to people and legitimizing the possible geopolitical steps toward a more or less regional or world grandeur, and powerful enough in such a way as to allow the development of armament and military without both reducing the general welfare benefits and increasing the corruption. (So, I’m not out of the logic of the present-day realism).

If the world power would concentrate only in the hands of USA (and “its allies”), no social state will develop anywhere, as the last 25 years neo-liberal “triumph” has demonstrated. On the contrary: and thus the declining level of welfare, the declining general level of culture, and the declining social capital could be “countered” only with high manipulative practices which have only strengthened the deep alienation and lack of confidence in the rulers.

At the same time, if the world power would concentrate only in the hands of USA (and “its allies”), no democracy – even the capitalist democracy limited to procedures supporting the indirect “power of the people” – will develop anywhereix, and a global masked totalitarianism will establish. As a result, not many people will intend to die for such states: is it surprising that the USA uses more and more drones and even cyber-soldiers?

In the present world atmosphere impregnated with the deconstruction of the former national and patriotic myths, people should be convinced in order to support their own states’ warns or wars against other states. The propaganda war is thus somehow stronger than the real ones. But no propaganda is today strong enough so as to counter the moral and logic, as well as the flow of information.

Conditions of patriotic cohesion

Would be, in these conditions, superfluous to speak about the national/patriotic spirit of peoples? It is not, obviously: but this spirit is constructive only to the extent that it is not founded only on historical/cultural myths, but also on social factors of cohesion. Such factors are the possibility/greater possibility of social benefits and democracy, and they played a huge role in the Crimean referendum and the revival of Russian patriotism everywhere. (From this standpoint, the Ukrainian rise of nationalism as a simple xenophobia did not base on the promise of social rewards and democracy but, on the contrary, on the destruction of the scrap of social state and democracy).

From the standpoint of moral and logical reasons of the national spirit, the Russian policy was far better than the Ukrainian nationalism that wanted to mix the independence melody, the anti-Russianism and the entering in the reach of USA-EU: as if there would not exist any common cultural and historical Russian-Ukrainian feature, and as if the Ukrainian patriotism would base only on xenophobia, and as if the entering of Ukraine in the reach of USA-EU would solve the economic, social and democratic problems of the Ukrainian people. While the first act of the Ukrainian self-proclaimed government issued from the coup was the xenophobic law forbidding the official use of non-Ukrainian languages (Russian, Tatar, Romanian, etc.), the Crimean self-proclaimed government in legal procedures related to the autonomous status of this region has stated the official use of non-Russian languages in Crimeax. While the entering of Ukraine in the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) would have assured to this country a significant reduction of the price of gas, under the market price, and a huge hospitable market for the products of the Ukrainian industry and agriculture, the intended entering in the reach of USA-EU annuls the favorable price of gas and, somehow more important, annuls any possibility of the development of the Ukrainian industry and agriculture: the country will be only a market for the Western goods and only a provider of raw materials, shale gas energy and some agricultural products. The financial aspect too highlights the anti-national character of the Ukrainian coup policy: the new Ukrainian government has renounced to the Russian loan in the exchange of the Western one which is postponedxi and which in any case is depending on an agreement with the IMF, requiring new privatizations, selling of the Ukrainian assets to the international capital and hard austerity measures for the populationxii.

It has to be clear: it’s capitalism and in this process of capitalist “restoration”, the parasitic bureaucracy and “new rich” have sacked all they could. In Russia is capitalism too, but Russia did not put to Ukraine so difficult conditions as the West doesxiii.

Russia’s management of the Ukrainian crisis and the Crimean referendum where not a single bullet was fired was, obviously, a brilliant proof of clever political strategyxiv. But not the partisanship for this strategy is the aim of this paper. Nor that of the geopolitical future development isolated from the social concern. On the contrary, neither this geopolitical future is guaranteed without a consistent humanist strategy, nor the “secession remedy” considered by the Western politicians as a domination tactic in the absence of social policies – and possible in Ukraine – would be a long term solution: for Russia and for the Russian and Ukrainian peoples. Because: the present Ukrainian fate, co-fabricated by the Western capital and the Ukrainian union of capital and backward bureaucracy, is only a mirrorxv of the intended future for Russiaxvi.

The huge richness of Russia is thought by the Western capital to guarantee once more 20 years of “victory” of the West as a real “end of history”, and certainly more than 20 years. Russia and the entire former space of Soviet republicsxvii would be destroyed systematically, its multicultural people imbued with humanist universalism put on the verge of a radical despair, its natural resources – wrecked, its land and water – empoisoned forever. This is not a horror picture: if the American capital behaves with its own people in the manner it is putting capital first, and not peoplexviii, why would we hope to a better destiny of a surrendered Russia?

And concerning the 20 years and more: the capitalist logic of economy will not change, and not only the private competition as well as the contradiction between the huge supply and the shrinking purchase power will deepen worldwide, but also the antagonism between the fundamental capitalist economic aim to maximize the profit and, on the other hand, the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. Concretely and in a world of a persistent scientific-technological revolution which leads to the decrease of prices per units of products, capitalism will aim, as usually, to “compensate” this consequence by a rental economy based on the exploitation of natural resources: but with its entire force to monopolize the rental economy, it will not escape from the structural crisis of this modelxix. Indeed, instead of realizing and developing the creativity of all the humans, capitalism will irremediably suffocate this creativity: just in order to “demonstrate” the legitimacy of the Malthusian solution, the “inherent and inevitable” exit of millions and millions of people worldwide.

How to respond to this prefigured fate? If Russia has behaved after 1991 with its sister countries from the former USSR as if this single country still would have existed, how could it consider the ethnic cleansing imposed by the West in Yugoslavia as becoming the new rule came from Ukraine? If secession and the single country of fraternal parts are absolutely diverging, should we not see concrete separations as a means for the preservation of the idea of fraternal unity?

The left as popular spirit: the first step, to not worsen

Russia needed to counter the “containment”xx, the encirclement of its territory by the Western military forcexxi which dared to cross the last limit by organizing the coup d’état in Ukraine. Otherwise, the new West backed government would have rapidly removed the Russian fleet from Crimeaxxii. And this fleet is necessary in order to counter the West’s behavior in Syria etc.

But, as we know, the West has not done the lessons carefully. It thought that it is too powerful so as Russia to not respect the Yalta agreement of spheres of influences. But Russia is not an abstract entity, and the ordinary people – Russians, Ukrainians and Tatars as well – did understand not a geopolitical abstract pride, but first of all the condition of their more or less normal life: that to not worsen it irremediably by accepting both a fascistic type of government, i.e. an open antidemocratic leadership, and the defeat of Russia by a power which did not showed itself as being full of mercy. And just the idea of to not worsen the existential situations should lead people to understand more than isolated factual inferences: the geopolitical significance of a defeat of Russia, i.e. the worsening consequences of this defeat on the life of the many.

The strategy of Russia was brilliant, but rather the people were those who decided ultimately. And they will decide from now on.

But how will they? Will they decide in the same resolute way? And will this way be in accordance with the will of the present powerful and rich stratum– the “nouveaux riches”, as they were called in Russia after 1991 – from Russia, Ukraine and all the former Soviet republics? Is it not clear that, after 23 years – and more, of course – the ordinary people have roused and they understand what does it mean capitalism, social polarization and destruction of the human dignity of all by a rapacious appropriation of the common goods, assets and work of all? Do they not see clearly that capitalism is not a solution to the former bureaucracy led first attempt to surpass capitalism? Not all of them see clearly, obviously: because of the conjoint manipulative strategy of capitalism and bureaucracy. Still there is a huge ideological confusion within the social conscience of people. However, every social experience of a caliber as the euro-Maidan and the coup led by a Ukrainian extreme-right fed by the West pushes people to concern of, to inquiry and to be consistently logical.

This is not an idealistic optimism: people had to choose in Crimea between, simply put, fascism, and non-fascism. The term is not a simple propagandistic tool “of the Russians”: every one knew very well what would be the consequences of an open extreme-right government as a simple ram of the Western will to definitively subjugate Eurasia, the consequences endured by every one and by the whole country, the whole Eurasian continent and the world.

The left as popular spirit: the second step, to improve

Concretely, people expect now both the respect of cultural identity – not as a parochial fragmentation and drowning within particularistic illusions, but as a universal promotion of the human dignity for all – and the change of the social pattern of development. This means to restructure the social relations in such a way that every one could work and create and thus have self-esteem, that every one could express his/her reasonable standpoint concerning the social problems, that every one could reach a high quality, ecological, sustainable and reasonable consume. Technically speaking, all of these are both possible and necessary solutions of an alternative economy and society. More: all of these are possible and necessary on world scale. If, as it is known, 25% of the world population consume 80% of the world resources, the West should change its consume manner just in order to allow the rise of consume in the peripheral countries: this would request a “civilization change”, first of all of the economic institutions, since the probable use of military power in order to rule over the resources does not end wellxxiii.

As we know, the capitalist economy needs an always new “vital space” in order to ensure profits. This “vital space” consists in the permanent “creative destructions”: peaceful destructions – as the crises and the technological change – and warlike destructions, as the wars and the Centre-Periphery relations worldwide. The “Rest”xxiv, the underdeveloped and developing countries represent the reservoir of the world-dominance by the West, and if it is not doubtful that Ukraine, and Russia, are seen as the “Rest”, the only solution is to annul the social relations which generate and impose this type of oppositions. And this solution is, nowadays, absolutely realistic. To continue to track the present capitalist growth – and to compete for 1, or 2, or 3%, comparing with other countries where the growth is less, or even for 7% and more –, namely to continue the present pursuit of profit, of markets and state contracts irrespective of the ecological and human damages, is, on the contrary, self-suicidal. The only growth that makes people be proud of it is that which results in an increase of the quality of life of the many: therefore, more than the individualistic fever to buy more and more, irrespective of the social costs of this attitude.

So, people are fervidly preoccupied with all of these. They can postpone some quantitative expectations but, since they have discovered dignity, democracy – beyond electoral campaigns, fights for power and formal procedures (distorted even by their gainers) –, culture, solidarity, the hardihood to oppose rational arguments to egoistic and elitist manipulations, they may dare to impose their agenda.

The left as popular spirit: the third step, to collectively impose a consistent humanist politics

How can they do this? The first metaphor that comes to mind is “Bosnia”, that is, the plenums, the spontaneous “power of the people” issued from February 2014 protests. In fact, things are not so simple. The demands adopted by the plenums are related to the shameless behavior of the public officials who have by far maximized the privileges of the former “nomenklatura” and to the savage neo-liberal policies imposed by the West: when in many European countries the progressive tax rates where not dislocated, in the Eastern countries they were described by the neo-liberal rush to profit as opposing to the competitiveness, and so the plenums ask the abrogation of the neo-liberal tax ratesxxv. But these demands are met in many Western countries. And indeed, would a weak enough economy be competitive without offering a “friendly economic environment” for the international capital? Of course, it would not.

Therefore, in order to impose their agenda, the wage earners, unemployed, pensioners and youth should surpass a counterproductive and induced shyness: they have to oppose the capitalist social order, and not only the privileges of the bureaucratic stratum and the mismanaged privatizations. In this respect, the criticism of the, for the moment, reformist character of plenums and of their function to tune the discussions to a pre-determined agenda “limited to ‘practical’ demands directed at local authorities” is correctxxvi and, since we want to surpass the ethnic divisions and lies and to really mobilize the revolutionary potentialxxvii, rather the model of direct democracy is not yet that of Bosnian plenums (which want not to transform into soviets), but parties which oppose capitalismxxviii. Without this clear opposition – this meaning clear proposition of a socialist democratic society – neither the unification of the left nor the surpassing of ethnic divisions will occurxxix. Indeed, on what basis could the left unite? Only on the basis of a radical distinction from the capitalist parties and policies is the left both logical and supported by broad masses. There is no time to postponement, since the neo-Nazi Ukrainian right has already become political partyxxx.

Russia’s spirit of dialogue and compromise with the West showed from 14 years has nothing to do with its internal policies: this spirit could continue very well just as far as Russia becomes more powerful just through its social policies. This situation is possible from a technical standpoint which includes scientific, management, natural and human resources features. But besides the technical possibility it is the social and political one. Would the patriot officers, the office workers and the peasants, the workers and the researchers, the whole population of the former land of the Soviets want more than the persistence of the capitalist logic? Would they accept the persistence of the world imperialism provided that it will not cross their space? Or, in other words, how want they peace without the construction of social values? A peace still based on the “balance of forces” has an ugly face in the world dominated by imperialism. But indeed, Russia alone – i.e. with China and the BRICS – and as it happened before, can strive for a humanistic transformation of the world. It is up to their peoples to do this.

Now the peoples were confronted with the betrayal of some parties and leadersxxxi, but also with the clarification and radicalization of many organizations and parties. It is now clear – if some one has forgotten what happened in the 1933 Germany – that the rise of the extreme rightxxxii was possible only because the left parties were not resolute to express their radical solutions. Radicalism was confiscated by the extreme right, and people’s needs of decent and dignified life have been diverted in a blind alley.

The hopes that the compromise of Russia with the West would preserve peace are vain and emptyxxxiii, since Russia is, though an empire, not imperialisticxxxiv: because the antagonism is not only between excessive neocon standpoints and Russiaxxxv, but between aggressiveness / imperialism issued from the capitalist logicxxxvi, and a defensivexxxvii empire based on a mix of values. Empty and vain are also the hopes that Russia and the former countries of the USSR will continue the social polarization and confusion and, at the same time, might be based on the patriotic spirit of the people indefinitely. Facts have helped Russia: if it is strange that the Ukrainian coup has substituted some oligarchs with other oligarchsxxxviii, why would the private concentration of ownership and power be safer for the peaceful development of Eurasian countries?

If the oligarchs have not only supported the euro-Maidan, but are seeing the extreme right government as the warrantee of their power (‘it is accepted that there will be a new Ukraine’xxxix), the only issue is Russia to support a “pro-Russian” social and class movement, not only in the south-eastern part of Ukraine: so as to weaken the capture Ukraine gained by the West and to give a hope to most of population in the whole Russia and the former countries of USSR. This hope is in no way capitalism: just its crisis, which includes the crisis of the leftwing organizations as well, has determined the rise of the extreme right. Therefore, we can no longer struggle against the extreme right without fighting for the alternative to capitalism. Could be the oligarchs as a class patriots enough to support the people, and not their business?

The cancellation of privileges of the bureaucratic stratum is necessaryxl, as well as the public control of the whole administration – as the Bosnian plenums and the Russian government have understood and wish, and as it is already done in Sweden and Norway, for example – but this is only a half-step: without the attack on the private concentration of the economic power, even this gain would vanish.

This doesn’t mean to annul the benefits of trade, of commercial initiative and search for quality and innovation. On the contrary: but they ought to subordinate to social values, and not to the private rush to profit.

If the dissolution of the former USSR was determined by many factors – such as the internal bureaucracy emphasized by Trotsky – and the consequences of this dissolution were more malign than an eventual continuation, the reconstruction of a new Eurasian power can no longer be based on the previous causes of destruction.

It would be an incommensurable world tragedy if the Russian leadership would reduce the popular factor of cohesion to religion, conservative values and Russian nationalismxli.

Nowadays, the danger of neo-fascism, resulted from the treacherous behavior of the capitalist democracy playing “the false choice between the right and the left” and the false-leftxlii, is big. The “unity” of the left is no longer viable by taking over the social-democratic “reformism” and the capitalist postponement of the human expectations of all. The existing socialist organizations or the constitution of a new organized left must supply not only criticism, but also resolute boldness to promote the alternative to capitalism.

Milestones of the present history are no longer huge manifestations taking the streets: we remember those of 2003 against the aggression of Iraq, without any result since they were only protests, requests and accommodation with capitalism. The Ukrainian coup is, however, such a milestone: because its life and death consequences press us to think the future strategies in term of life and death responsibility.

Some colleagues from Criticatac thought that if they criticize in clever manner capitalism and if they show their democratic spirit by rejecting “Putin’s aggression in Crimea”xliii, they would attract people to think in a leftwing manner. They showed very well that the West has no arguments against Russia. But this is not enough: they should side with “Russia” and understand what it would mean the continuation of the power of the West for the humanistic and democratic values they share.

i Professor, Polytechnic University of Bucharest.
I prepared this paper to the 2nd International Conference, "Europe in crisis", Athens 28-30 March, 2014.
ii I made a little critique of Alexander Dugin’s opinions in a Note (http://www.argumentesifapte.ro/2014/01/27/nota-privind-articolul-despre-romania-ca-pamant-parjolit-de-raoul-weiss/) published together with my translation into Romanian (http://www.argumentesifapte.ro/2014/01/27/motivatii-geopolitice-ale-politicii-occidentale-de-pamant-parjolit-in-romania-de-astazi-3/) of Raoul Weiss’ Motivations géopolitiques de la politique occidentale de terre brûlée en Roumanie actuelle, Janvier 2014, http://www.lapenseelibre.org/article-motivations-geopolitiques-de-la-politique-occidentale-de-terre-brulee-en-roumanie-actuelle-n-89-122120700.html. I showed that by stating geopolitics and the game of relationships between states as the central elements explaining man and society – thus a simple Kriegspiel motivated by axiomatic assumptions, and not by lemmas – both geopolitics and Dugin have an abstract image about the states: as if these ones would represent only one will and set of interests, and as if there would not be individuals, nor social factors, but as if all of these would be subordinated to the geopolitical super-interest. For example, the class interests, or the ecological ones, or the social divide are considered by geopolitics and Dugin only at the extent they fit to the geopolitical aims: otherwise, they are disturbing and annoying.
Concretely, Dugin 1) reduces the (present) international conflicts – by neglecting any economic and social antagonisms – to the opposition between the American imperialism and the promoters of multi-polar world. But he does not explain why this multi-polar world should be more benign that the concentration of world power: just because he substitutes the real social problems of people with an abstract Dasein borrowed from Heidegger (see http://www.counter-currents.com/tag/alexander-dugin/). And 2) he legitimates the international relations (fragmentations and unifications) only with religion/religious tradition. For Dugin, capitalism is OK, only the deviation from the religious roots and the subordination to imperialism would be the evil.
This is not an original standpoint, of course, and it belongs to the right-wing traditionalist ideology springing from the 1989-1991 shock.
In   http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/07/interview-with-alexander-dugin/, Dugin speaks about a „struggle against the Western universalism, against all universalisms”. But Dugin doesn’t explain which aspects of universalism he’s opposing to, why and which would be the consequences of the substitution of universalism by particularistic standpoints. Following the right-wing ideologies, Dugin reduces the social to an abstract image of culture and thus, the return to traditions (for Russians, these consisting in orthodoxy) would solve everything.
Therefore, if not all the aspects of (Western) universalism are negative – is it not the origin of logos and logic? – to cover these valuable features of the Western universalism with the correct thesis of multi-polar world means only to produce confusions.
Hereupon, in the present paper I use the terms “multi-polar world” and “Eurasia” only in their “natural” sense, so not in the meanings of Dugin and al.
iii Robert Charvin, La question ukrainienne : une étape dans le processus de déconstruction du droit international par les puissances occidentales, Mars 2014, http://www.lapenseelibre.org/article-la-question-ukrainienne-une-etape-dans-le-processus-de-deconstruction-du-droit-international-par-l-123022300.html.
iv The figures speak by themselves: from the 83.1% present in the March 16th referendum, 96.7 % were in favor of joining the Russian Federation, and 2.51% percent against. But the ethnic Russians are, according to the official data, only 58.32% of the population of Crimea, while non-Russians are 41.7%. See Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, What the Western Media Won’t Tell You: Crimean Tatars and Ukrainians Also Voted to Join Russia, March 18, 2014, http://www.globalresearch.ca/what-the-western-media-wont-tell-you-crimean-tatars-and-ukrainians-also-voted-to-join-russia/5373989; also Ron Paul, Crimea secedes. So what?, March 17, 2014, http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/03/17/crimea-ukraine-russia-ron-paul-editorials-debates/6544163/.
v Jean-Paul Pougala, Comment gagner une guerre sans combattre selon Sun-Tzu. L’exemple de la Russie en Crimée, http://pougala.org/lecon-de-geostrategie-africaine-n-71-comment-gagner-une-guerre-sans-combattre-selon-sun-tzu-lexemple-de-la-russie-en-crimee-2/.
vi As we know, the latest mainstream philosophers neglect the social character, privileging only the historical one (as Heidegger did).
vii Nasa-funded study warns of ‘collapse of civilisation’ in coming decades: ‘Business as usual’ approach of economic elite will lead society to disaster, scientists warn, 16 March 2014, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/nasafunded-study-warns-of-collapse-of-civilisation-in-coming-decades-9195668.html.
viii Although this term – oligarch – was used in the recent years only according to the Eastern part of Europe and to Russia, it’s hard to emphasise any difference between the Western and Eastern “1%”.
ix As it is the case in USA, see Prof. Peter Dale Scott, The State, the Deep State, and the Wall Street Overworld, March 10, 2014, http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-state-the-deep-state-and-the-wall-street-overworld/5372843.
x Crimean parliament guarantees broader rights to Tatar minority, March 11, 2014, http://rt.com/news/crimea-tatar-rights-guarantee-122/; See also Israel Shamir, Crimea: Putin’s Triumph. Now the Confrontation Moves East to “New Russia”: Novo Rossia: The Eastern and Southeastern Mainland Provinces of Ukraine, March 21, 2014, http://www.globalresearch.ca/crimea-putins-triumph-now-the-confrontation-moves-east-to-new-russia/5374710.
xi Renaud Vivien, Ukraine, la nouvelle proie du FMI, 28 février 2014, http://cadtm.org/Ukraine-la-nouvelle-proie-du-FMI; EU Offers Conditional "Aid" For Ukraine's "Catastrophic, Pre-Default" Economic Statehttp://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-23/eu-offers-conditional-aid-ukraines-catastrophic-pre-default-economic-state; Gaz: l'aide de l'UE va tarder; l'Ukraine se prépare à des temps difficiles, 19 mars 2014, http://www.lapresse.ca/international/dossiers/ukraine/201403/19/01-4749384-gaz-laide-de-lue-va-tarder-lukraine-se-prepare-a-des-temps-difficiles.php.
xiv See Xavier Guilhou, Crise ukrainienne : quel pilotage des événements ?, le 15 mars 2014,  http://www.diploweb.com/Crise-ukrainienne-quel-pilotage.html.
xvi Sam La Touch, Derrière l’Ukraine, c’est la Russie et Poutine qui sont attaqués dans une guerre de confrontation menée par l’Occident, 14 mars 2014, http://www.mondialisation.ca/derriere-lukraine-cest-la-russie-et-poutine-qui-sont-attaques-dans-une-guerre-de-confrontation-menee-par-loccident/5373523.
xvii See US begins withdrawal of equipment from its airbase in Kyrgyzstan, 6 March 2014, http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_03_06/US-begins-withdrawal-of-equipment-from-its-airbase-in-Kyrgyzstan-5740/.
xviii See only the consequences of hydraulic fracturing shale gas, assumed without startle by the American elite.
But see also the obstinate capitalist quest of private profit even entailing the destruction of civilization: Nasa-funded study warns of ‘collapse of civilisation’ in coming decades: ‘Business as usual’ approach of economic elite will lead society to disaster, scientists warn, 16 March 2014, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/nasafunded-study-warns-of-collapse-of-civilisation-in-coming-decades-9195668.html.
xix See for the rentier returns related to natural resources – and not to the financialization of the world economy – Emiliano Teran Mantovani, La crisis del capitalismo rentístico y el neoliberalismo mutante (1983-2013), http://alainet.org/active/68388. (Or Raúl Zibechi, Latin America Rejects the Extractive Model in the Streets, 27 October 2013, http://www.cipamericas.org/archives/10983).
xx See also Stephen Lendman, Containing Russia, March 24, 2014, http://www.globalresearch.ca/containing-russia/5374946.
xxi In fact, the Cold War did not stop after the 1991 destruction of the USSR. The “anti-missile shield” constructed by the USA in Poland and Romania took place before the Ukrainian crisis. See Manlio Dinucci, Le « bouclier » pour la nouvelle guerre froide, 20 mars 2014, http://www.mondialisation.ca/le-bouclier-pour-la-nouvelle-guerre-froide/5374508. See also George Washington, The Backstory to the Russia-Ukraine Confrontation: The U.S. and NATO Encirclement of Russia, 03/03/2014, http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2014-03-03/backstory-russia-ukraine-confrontation-us-and-nato-encirclement-russia.
xxii See Yulia Tymoshenko wants Russian Black Sea Fleet out of Crimea, 05.03.2014,
xxiii Kari Polanyi Levitt, The Transformation of the World System: Some Insights from the Work of Karl Polanyi, 2004, http://www.karipolanyilevitt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/budapest-address-Kari-Polanyi.pdf.
xxiv See Nial Fergusson, Civilization: The West and the Rest, New York, Penguin Books, 2011.
xxvi Ognjen Markovic and Paul Mitchell, The pseudo-left and the plenums in Bosnia, 22 March 2014, http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/22/bosn-m22.html.
xxvii Slavoj Žižek, Anger in Bosnia, but this time the people can read their leaders' ethnic lies, 10 February 2014, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/10/anger-bosnia-ethnic-lies-protesters-bosnian-serb-croat.
xxix As Volodymyr Ishchenko, If the Left Movements Don’t Unite, Only the Far-Right Will Benefit From the Social Anger, 04 Mar 14, http://www.criticatac.ro/lefteast/volodymyr-ishchenko-for-transform/, considers, thus without insisting that it is impossible to overcome the ethnic divisions and to realize the unification of the left without opposing to the capitalist agenda.
xxx Russia Today, Ukraine’s Neo-Nazi Right Sector to become Political Party, Nominates Yarosh for President, March 23, 2014, http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraines-neo-nazi-right-sector-to-become-political-party-nominates-yarosh-for-president/5374873.
xxxi See Partia Regionów oskarżyła Janukowycza o zdradę Ukrainy, http://polish.ruvr.ru/news/2014_02_23/Partia-Regionow-oskarzyla-Janukowycza-o-zdrade-Ukrainy-4246/. But there were also “pseudo-left political organizations and publications that have promoted the Kiev protests as a genuinely democratic and even revolutionary movement”, The crisis in Ukraine, 3 March 2014, http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/03/pers-m03.html.
xxxii See Etat des lieux des neo nazis au pouvoir a Kiev, 02 mars 2014, http://blogs.mediapart.fr/blog/xavier-d/020314/etat-des-lieux-des-neo-nazis-au-pouvoir-kiev; Who are the Nazis in the Ukrainian government?, March 23, 2014
xxxiii Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, Washington’s Arrogance, Hubris, and Evil Have Set the Stage for War, March 03, 2014, http://www.globalresearch.ca/washingtons-arrogance-hubris-and-evil-have-set-the-stage-for-war/5371695: “Only three countries stand in the way of Washington’s hegemony over the world, Russia, China, and Iran”.
xxxiv Thierry Meissan, Le basculement de la Crimée est-il le premier d’une longue série ?, http://www.voltairenet.org/article182898.html; Pierre Khalaf, Un monde multipolaire grâce à la résistance de la Syrie, http://www.voltairenet.org/article182615.html.
xxxv Robert Parry, What Neocons Want from Ukraine Crisis, March 2, 2014, http://consortiumnews.com/2014/03/02/what-neocons-want-from-ukraine-crisis/.
xxxvi See “Global Peace vs. Global Interventionism and Imperialism”, Final Document. Belgrade Conference, 23 March 2014, March 24, 2014, http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-peace-vs-global-interventionism-and-imperialism/5375008.
xxxvii Rogozine : la Russie prête à employer l’arme nucléaire contre un agresseur, 12 décembre 2013, http://french.ruvr.ru/2013_12_12/Dmitri-Rogozine-la-Russie-est-prete-a-employer-l-arme-nucleaire-contre-des-agresseurs-3365/.
xxxviii Questions on Ukraine the West chooses not to answer, March 05, 2014, http://rt.com/news/ukraine-west-questions-not-answered-994/.
xxxix Peter Schwarz, German foreign minister Steinmeier woos Ukrainian oligarchs, 25 March 2014, http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/25/olig-a25.html.
xl Ulyanovsk region cuts benefits for officials, 07.03.2014, http://english.pravda.ru/news/russia/07-03-2014/127062-ulyanovsk_officials_benefits-0/.
xli Though it is not about an official attitude, the expression of anger against those who do not understand the tragic consequences of the defeat of Russia should not be acceptable if it is xenophobic and subordinated to authoritarianism and mismanagement. See 'Dear Vladimir Vladimirovich, I Speak Russian, Too. Please Send Troops!', 26 March 2014, http://www.rferl.org/content/russia-journalist-writes-putin-for-help/25302977.html.
xlii Alex Lantier, What accounts for the electoral victories of France’s neo-fascist National Front?, 25 March 2014, http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/25/pers-m25.html.
xliii I do not quote my colleagues, but a Ukrainian very good analysis where, however, it appears that the Western imperialism and the Russian attitude towards Ukraine would be that of a “coordinated plundering of Ukraine by both sides (West and Russia)”. See Editor of the Ukrainian leftwing site; “The enemy is within”, 25 March 2014, http://www.marxist.com/interview-with-editor-of-liva.htm.

Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:

Δημοσίευση σχολίου

Σημείωση: Μόνο ένα μέλος αυτού του ιστολογίου μπορεί να αναρτήσει σχόλιο.