The media coverage of Ukraine’s incursion into the Russian region of Kursk would be completely ludicrous if it were not providing cover for a very dangerous escalation of the war. The chances of the Ukraine conflict spiralling into actual fighting between NATO and Russia have been dramatically heightened in the last two weeks.
It echoes the propaganda of the Ukrainian government which at every turn is urging more weapons and support from the west and which pretends that if only these are available it will win the war against Russia. Yet this fantasy can only come to fruition if NATO becomes openly and directly involved, with all the consequences that entails. Meanwhile the Zelensky government is seeing less support for the war from Ukrainians themselves. Conscription is being enforced more rigorously and there is widespread opposition to it, as people see the casualties of the past two and a half years. More people want a negotiated settlement with Russia according to polls. Prisoners are being forced to fight because of heavy outnumbering by Russian troops, something that quite rightly Russia was earlier denounced for doing.
All this – plus corruption, banning of opposition and much more – is ignored by those same media now boostering the Ukrainian invasion into Russia. Why? Because they and successive governments have committed to arming Ukraine to the hilt. Supposedly in the name of democracy and defence of national rights.
How does this square with Ukrainian troops entering Russian territory, killing Russian military and presumably civilians, blowing up bridges all the while using NATO supplied equipment and weaponry? It doesn’t. It is a deliberately calibrated move by Ukraine to do a number of things: it wants to draw Russian troops away from the frontline in the eastern province of Donetsk, where Russia is advancing every day towards the key strategic town of Pokrovsk. It also wants to put more pressure on its western paymasters to provide even more weaponry and so get further embroiled in the proxy war with Russia. And as a recent Guardian article made clear it is also about Ukraine positioning itself for the negotiated peace talks which everyone knows will come in the next year.
It is inconceivable that any of this would be happening without the very close collaboration of the US at the highest level – and it is both a dangerous strategy and one unlikely to succeed. But, as we have seen repeatedly over the question of Israel and Palestine, backing dangerous strategies which are unlikely to succeed is something on which Joe Biden has quite a record.
Incidentally it is worth remembering that Kursk was the scene of a huge and famous tank battle during the Second World War in which the Germans were defeated by the Soviet Union. It cannot be lost on any Russian or Ukrainian the significance of these recent moves, nor the fact that Russia will fight to get the territory back.
Any honest assessment of the war would admit that Ukraine is losing it – that its much heralded offensive last year was a total failure, and that this latest incursion is an attempt to create some good news where there is little. It would also admit that Russia is steadily gaining ground in Donetsk and will continue to do so. Perhaps too there might be a little more honesty about the ‘first invasion of Russia since the Second World War’ which makes a far-fetched comparison to Hitler’s Blitzkreig in 1941, or the claim that Ukraine holds territory the equivalent of 10% of Greater London as if it were not advancing over largely empty countryside.
Most important however is to demonstrate the dangers of arming Ukraine in order to carry out offensive tactics on Russian soil. The British government has supported the use of Challenger 2 tanks within Russia as justified defensively under article 51 of the UN charter. Russia has accused Ukrainian forces of using US made HIMARS missiles to blow up the bridges and the US has also agreed this on defensive grounds. Both governments know that they are sailing close to the wind here and that these are not defensive operations in any strict sense.
What will happen if Russian civilians are killed by western weapons is anyone’s guess. For months now Ukraine has been targeting Russian oil installations with western provided missiles and hitting Crimea with long range missiles. None of this in itself will make a difference to the war in Ukraine but it does make a difference to the threatened hot war between NATO and Russia (and China behind it.
It also demonstrates a marked contrast with their attitudes over Palestine, where any such action by Palestinians would be denounced as terrorism, and where we are constantly told that it is Israel defending itself.
Neither Putin nor Zelensky want peace talks at this time because they think they can gain further territorial advantage by continuing the war. This is at the expense of ordinary Ukrainian and Russian military and civilians. Socialists should argue something different: that no one gains from this war of imperialist rivalry and that our governments must stop encouraging further conflict and stop sending arms.
Source: Counterfire