Why did Russia invade Ukraine?
In Russia, the military-industrial kombinat is the real power structure that prompted the invasion of Ukraine. And who did not hesitate to bend the oligarchs themselves, who would need peace to get rich. Gianfranco Polillo's analysis
Europe, but more generally the West, had a guilty feeling of compliance with Vladimir Putin. The signs of a renewed aggression, in the sign of destabilization against other countries, had been seen for some time. The tools used were halfway between soft and hard power. Not aimed precisely at improving the cultural prestige of the Russian Federation, but (yes!) At "convincing" growing shares of Western voters to vote for those candidates who best suited the interests of the former Soviet Union. The definitive move towards hard power, with the military invasion of Ukraine, was nothing more than the logical consequence of that appeasement and the lack of counteraction by the West. Elements that have contributed to creating in the Russian President, but above all in the entourage, which supports him, a delusion of omnipotence.
Almost a century has passed since that distant September 1938. But those events, which marked the first failure of the West towards the Führer, have remained an indelible element in the collective memory. To the point that mentioning Munich immediately brings to mind the dull figure of Chamberlain, the English leader, who was wrong in not seeing, above all not understanding, what history was preparing. Then the great Kantian illusion of perpetual peace disarmed the West and armed the hand of the dictator. An encore that must not be repeated. Make every effort to avoid escalating the conflict. But, at the same time, be aware of the intrinsic limits of this strategy.
Again, as then, the greatest risk is the domino effect. The justifications given so far by the Kremlin are non-existent. Who threatened the borders of the state? The hypothesis of a NATO entry of Ukraine was, at the moment, only theoretical. It required a consensus that did not exist among all the countries adhering to the organization. And the United States itself, more than exerting some form of pressure on its allies, could do little. Moreover, this was seen in the pilgrimage of many European leaders – from Olaf Sholz to Emmanuel Macron – to Moscow. Elements of great concern, but also of strong autonomy. And in fact they immediately ceased – Draghi's renunciation – when the weapons made their voices heard. And forced the West to unite, again, against the post (?) Soviet bear.
But if there was no motivation to justify the attack, then what are Vladimir Putin's real intentions? Deciphering them is far from simple. However, in his speech on TV, on February 21, the historical references are particularly striking, which go back to the beginning of the last century. That convinced applause in favor of Stalin, accompanied by the criticism of Lenin's positions on the self-determination of peoples, leaves us stunned. We return to before the 20th Congress of the CPSU, the beginning of that process of de-Stalinization, which, today, Putin seems to be calling into question.
And then the suspicion that you want to put back the hands of the clock is more than justified. In Moscow, perhaps new borders are being thought of. The same ones that characterized the perimeter of the old Soviet Union. With a leap back over thirty years. And the reaffirmation of the doctrine of "limited sovereignty" to be applied to all those territories that, in some way, could have tempted the expansionism of the "great mother Russia". Term used not by chance. This is the deepest culture of those lands. So powerful that he brought about, with Lenin, a profound transformation, in the name of "populism", of the very body of doctrine of Marxism, which had characterized the Second International.
And today that is still the common thread that connects distant events: Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1968, Afghanistan in 1979 – 89. And the military strategy followed is identical, which, in turn, presupposes an upstream structure military remained, more or less, unchanged. True element of continuity of a long history. The great power and mobility of conventional forces – tanks, logistics, missiles, aviation and navy – able to quickly conquer simple outposts, and then protect them, with nuclear deterrence. Think of Vietnam. Who is willing, today, to die for Kiev, running the risk of falling under what is "the end of the world weapon"?
But how did it come about? Worldwide, globalization has been perceived as the start of a new era. The market, or rather the great international finance, triumphed. The conflicts that had bloodied the planet in the twentieth century disappeared. You could buy and sell everything. If Russian gas cost less than Algerian or Libyan gas, why think, as in the past, of a diversification of energy sources? Things out of fashion, such as the idea that the state could still be an active subject in the organization of the economic and social system.
The important thing was immediate advantage, "the payment in cash" would have closed Marx, certainly not the long steps of geopolitical strategies. It was thought that capital, in its various forms, needed only peace and tranquility to pursue its ends. The conflict was classified as a local war, the result of the relative backwardness of some countries or portions of territory. But the great powers – think of the progressive US withdrawal – had no interest in fomenting those riots, which hurt business.
An illusion as big as the idea that democracy could be exported. That the homologation process could lead to converge towards a common system of values. Well, that was not the case. In Putin's Russia, the military complex never laid down its arms. It has been silent, but far from inactive. It has invested in new armaments. The existing ones have been strengthened, giving rise to a military-industrial kombinat (Комбинат in Russian) which is the real power structure that dominates the scene. And who now did not hesitate to bend the oligarchs themselves, who would need peace to continue to enrich themselves, in an attempt to reaffirm that hegemony that time and the serious contradictions of real socialism had progressively demolished.
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL https://www.startmag.it/mondo/russia-invasione-ucraina/ on Thu, 24 Feb 2022 17:26:36 +0000.