Felix, I understand what you're reacting to, and to be clear, I support the Ukrainians in their war against Russian aggression. I think it's a necessary war for NATO to engage in, as I've said before. I also agree the term "liberal fascism" is meaningless, btw.
But this is also a great power war, fought with NATO weapons in Ukrainian hands. Up to now that's been called a proxy war, but if there's a better term, I'll take it. The point is definitely not to wallow in outdated concepts, but to grasp what's happening now. I think this war is perceived by US and other Western strategists as the means for the installation of a new global security system in the face of increasing challenges to the post-WWII order. That order, originally defined by the US and cemented by NATO, is now fundamentally threatened by climate change and by the rise of East Asia. The intense bellicose signalling between China and the US reveals the larger stakes. Putin attempted to take advantage of this situation by establishing a partnership with China, but he failed. Victory in Ukraine would reestablish uncontested Western military superiority at the global level, and allow the NATO countries to organize the next phase of capitalist development, just as the Gulf War did at the outset of neoliberalism in the 90s. But the world is now far more unstable than in the 90s. The Ukrainians are pushing for total victory, which is hard to imagine without Putin's fall. I doubt it is possible to achieve regime change in Russia without NATO troops on the ground. My point is that this is a dangerous time with immense future consequences. It would be important to analyze the new security system as it emerges. Support for the Ukrainians does not mean turning a blind eye to what the most powerful countries are doing. The international system that emerges from this war will be the one that deals with the existential challenge of climate change. Thoughtfully, Brian On Mon, Feb 13, 2023, 11:41 Felix Stalder <fe...@openflows.com> wrote: > > On 12.02.23 20:50, Brian Holmes wrote: > > -- There's a war on in Europe, which is a proxy war that pits NATO > > against Russia, via the fighting force of Ukraine. Definitely check > > out the list of equipment which the US alone has sent: > > https://newleftreview.org/sidecar/posts/sleepwalking-elites > > <https://newleftreview.org/sidecar/posts/sleepwalking-elites> (list > > begins in paragraph 3) > > > I know this is not your point here, but to see this only as a proxy > war really reductive and reeks of a "great powers" analysis in which > some countries/people are just have to accept the fact that they are > subordinate. > > The author of the NLR article comes right out with this world view: > > > Ten years ago, nobody could have imagined that Europe would risk > > such a catastrophe for the sake of the Donbass – a region that few of > > us would have been able to locate on a map. > > I'm sure most Ukrainians knew already 10 years ago where the Donbas was, > but why bother with their view. Also, the war in the Donbas started > 2008, so not to know where the Donbas was in 2012 is really an act > of metropolitan ignorance. It happens, nothing to be proud of. > > So, this war is primarily one of Ukrainian survival. I'm sure that many > in the US security apparatus see it also as a proxy-war, but I think > also Biden's theme of democracy-vs-authoritarianism plays a role. I > don't think it's a given that a republican administration under Trump > would have done the same (even if some in the military would still have > liked to fight a proxy war). > > > On 13.02.23 08:45, Stefan Heidenreich wrote: > > > - the defeat of NATO could lead to a "decolonization" of Western > > Europe (not that this by itself leads to positive results. Repressive > > "liberal" fascism remains as likely an outcome as some sort of > > independence.) > > Oh my, what this is supposed to mean, only chatGPT can explain. > > > > > > > > > -- > | |||||||||||||||| http://felix.openflows.com | > | for secure communication, please use signal | > # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission > # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets > # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l > # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org > # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: >
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
