By Thomas Palley
While rightly condemning Russia for its invasion, the mainstream media continues to selectively report the history behind these events. In my view, its omissions are intentional and contribute to the tragedy. They inflame public understanding, render a diplomatic resolution more difficult, and lock us into a worse trajectory.
Let me make further clear my argument: (1) President Putin is head of the Russian state which is under slow-motion implacable attack by US-led NATO. (2) After failing to secure a satisfactory diplomatic resolution, he has taken action to head off that attack.
If you accept those two propositions, the Ukraine story is massively more complicated than simply claiming Putin is an aggressor and we (the US) are good. There will be no lasting peace until that complexity is fully engaged.
Read rest here.
"the Russian state which is under slow-motion implacable attack by US-led NATO."
ReplyDeleteYes it is.
But it has the largest nuclear arsenal on the planet and the maniacal leader of Russia has now disturbed the once extant strategic stalemate.
"After failing to secure a satisfactory diplomatic resolution, he has taken action to head off that attack."
What gives Putin the right to set the strategic agenda?
Henry Rech
@Henry Rech:
ReplyDeleteYour points bear little relation to the reality on the ground and I will explain more below.
In the hopes of a fair discussion, I'm going to lay out all my cards on the table in my response. I'm ideologically a socialist - however, unlike many others of my kind I actually hold genuine Keynesians/post-Keynesians/Social Democrats/etc. in high esteem since my basic feeling is that anyone pushing or supporting policies to help the workers and those disadvantaged by our current economic system, should not be so trivially dismissed as "bourgeois stooges" "reactionaries holding back revolution" etc.
That said, there is one extremely prescient critique the Marxists make about "your kind" and that is your complete lack of understanding concerning foreign affairs/geopolitics. This is a weakness which was actually NOT shared by Keynes himself (who participated in many organizations sympathetic towards the Soviets, and even went so far as to actually travel to Russia himself to meet and talk with leading Bolsheviks), or his acolytes (Abba Lerner participated in the calculation alongside Marxists, Joan Robinson voiced support for Maoist China and North Korea, etc.)
I can bet anything that I could drag you all into a room and lock you in it for 24 hours with but a simple task: to write-up critiques of current economic policy-making, and you would all perform admirably and draw up a damning indictment against the current world order, but on the other hand, were I to do the same and instead ask you all to come up with statements on Russia & Ukraine, or Assad & Syria, or Lukashenko & Belarus, suddenly your brains would all switch off and I'd be stuck with a bunch of robots repeating talking points from CNN/Fox News/MSNBC/etc.
Sorry but you guys are too smart to be able to fall back on the excuse of being clinically braindead (unless there are still some of you who genuinely thought that Joe "Let's cut Social Security" Biden would somehow metastasize from the malevolent tumor that he has been his entire life, into the "2nd Coming of FDR" (ha!) in which case please, as the kids say, "take the L" already).
(Part 1)
So I'll start with "micro" and then move onto "macro" analysis:
ReplyDeleteThe micro concerns Russia & Ukraine:
1) Putin tried for 8 years to secure a peace deal before moving. He tried to be restrained despite a neighboring country just having its government dismantled through outside interference. If you rightfully condemn the Americans for assisting the overthrow of Evo Morales' government in Bolivia, you shouldn't be supporting this "Ukrainian" government, in the first place anyways, which illegally dissolved the prior government through sheer force of arms.
2) NATO promised not to expand as reassurance during the dissolution of the USSR. The fact that they violated that promise and expanded all the way up to Russia's borders shows just how dishonest the "Western" side has been throughout this whole process. We do not blame a cornered cat for lashing out given no other options, and we should not seriously contemplate self-righteous condemnations of the Russians who have been backed into a corner. Ukraine is closer to Russia than Cuba was to America.
Putin has already mentioned before that the shortened travel time for missiles (if advanced weapons platforms were installed in Ukraine under the pretext of NATO support), would make it virtually impossible for Russia to react in time to an aggressive first strike. MAD only holds true if the other side can reliably and consistently retaliate. The Russians truly believe that their retaliatory capabilities will be so degraded if the Ukrainians enter NATO, that they now see no other option but to forcibly assert their security interests through an invasion.
(Part 2)
3) Far-right elements possess veto power over the Ukrainian "democratic" process. Those citing the pitiful poll numbers of fascist parties should pay attention, since Zelensky had actually been elected on a peace platform to make amends with and to end the dispute with Russia.
ReplyDeleteIn order to do so he attempted to travel to strongholds of various far-right/fascist militias to get them to stand down and lay down their weapons in order to give a peace deal a chance. Azov soldiers flat out refused to take his orders and laughed in his face and he broke down ON CAMERA saying that "he wasn't a loser" and that since he "is the President" they should obey him.
Realizing that he doesn't even control significant portions of the military (which should in theory obey civilian chain of command), Zelensky folded like a chair and decided to renege on the platform he was elected for, choosing to continue the war and even elevating the very people who spat at him to higher positions! Promoting Azov Battalion commanders is insane but I suppose as an opportunist he saw no other way to "lead". Right before Russia invaded the Ukrainian military had already been in the middle of launching a renewed offensive towards the separatist regions and Zelensky had already upped the rhetorical ante by promising to look into securing nuclear weapons.
4) The Ukrainian government took IMF loans and implemented a structural adjustment program thereby quickly turning themselves into the poorest country in Europe. The reason that the previous "pro-Russian" administration had refused to join the EU was not because, as is commonly claimed, "they were Putin sycophants" etc. but rather that they had looked at what the EU was offering in comparison to Russia, and realized that the EU and IMF wanted to absolutely cripple the living standard of the average Ukrainian much like they had done to Greece, which was unacceptable, so they decided to stick with the devil they knew (Russia) who at least weren't demanding economic policies that would result in massive increases in poverty.
For their audacity in prioritizing the well being of Ukrainian workers, they were overthrown by retarded fascist groups marching alongside naive liberal dupes who associated Europe with "progress", who formed a new government and then quickly fell into the arms of the IMF economists who happily recommended (as they always do), that they destroy their country's economic base. The resulting misery further strengthened the fascist right (after all I bet that kids would not be joining up Azov's pseudo-Hitler Youth summer camps if they actually had genuine opportunities in life).
(Part 3)
The macro concerns the broader world:
ReplyDeleteA) What is the current greatest impediment to social democratic reforms; that is to say, policies that would make the lives of workers more bearable and dignified? The answer is simple: the current state of the world's international financial institutions and bodies, left over from the Bretton Woods era. The WTO, IMF, and World Bank. Any genuinely reform-minded government that came into power in the West would have to immediately deal with the pressures of balance of payments problems resulting from massive trade deficits, speculator attacks on their currency (to be devalued because of promises of public work projects), capital flight, forced adherence to ridiculous and illogical rules (ex. the WTO upholding intellectual property rights for cutting edge live-saving medicines, making them so expensive they are out of the reach of the majority), attacks from media funded by wealthy capitalists, etc.
This pressure is so far reaching and so intensive that even political movements and parties which have in the past helped to assemble "welfare states" are now betraying their legacies and blowing up everything they had formerly helped to build. Norway's Social Democrats tried to privatize their national energy provider to Goldman Sachs. Sweden's Social Democrats have not attempted to reverse the privatization of their education system. Finland's Social Democrats collaborated with the right wing parties in a coalition and implemented austerity under orders from the EU, for many years.
(Part 4)
Thus:
ReplyDeleteB) What possible measures can and should be taken to either renovate or demolish these institutions so that they can either be subverted to assist national governments in creating more employment (instead of unemployment), reigning in capital and trade flows, or functioning more like Keynes's original plan for the International Clearing Union, restoring soveriegnty to national economies and sanity to the world economy?
C) Unfortunately, the answer is: nothing. The US holds veto power over the IMF and World Bank and possesses vast soft influence (cultural, media, etc.) over all Europe. As long as they remain hegemonic it is impossible for any genuinely reformist programme to be implemented, and even those that try (example: Pink Tide in Latin America) will quickly find out that the US will attempt to overthrow their governments to stop them.
D) Given that "renovation" or subversion of these anti-human organizations run by neoliberal shills is not an option, what about demolition? Who can be trusted to demolish the current order to build something that, while not perfect, would still be better than now?
E) The answer is: China. As Yanis Varoufakis (former finance minister of Syriza) noted, during his negotiations with the Chinese they were extremely reasonable and willing to concede all pro-worker terms. Former Chinese central bankers have already openly expressed support for Keynes in comparison to Hayek, Mises, Friedman, or those other bastards. Post-Keynesians like James Galbraith have served and participated in China's State Planning Commission before.
China's state broadcaster recently released a list of books recommended by President Xi Jingping. You know what was on there, besides the usual Marxist works and lists of classical literature? Thomas Piketty's Capital in the 21st Century, and J.M. Keynes' General Theory.
You know what WASN'T? Hayek's "Road to Serfdom". Friedman's "Free to Choose". Mises's "Critique of Interventionism". Irony of ironies, it turns out that only socialists treat Keynes with any real consideration. Is anyone seriously delusional enough to believe that Xi's reading list does more harm than the University of Chicago's Economics Department?
https://youtu.be/9tJatdtv4jQ
F) Therefore, it seems that the only real "progressive" option is to hope that China supplants America to build a more rational, fair, and Keynesian international financial and monetary system. We've given the Americans almost a century to do the right thing and they have repeatedly refused to and continue to deliberately mire countries in poverty.
Time for someone else to get a shot. Following as a corollary, any blow struck against Russia is also a blow struck against China given their increased interdependence on each other. Therefore, in order to support the hope of Keynesian policies once again being permitted in the West under a more rational economic order, UKRAINE MUST LOSE, for they are the front line of the current order. Too cynical and ruthless for you lot? Perhaps.
But I have yet to hear any better solutions from any of you, and I cannot abide the rivers of blood and human tragedies that are generated on a daily basis by the IMF and which have been destroying families and lives decades before Putin even sent the first tank into Ukraine. America must fall and China must rise if ANY of you want to see your beloved policies live and be implemented in the real world, outside of the domain of micro blogs and the small battered ivory fortresses of academic journals and student associations.
- John Konrad
(Part 5/Final)