Re: SV: M-TH: Re: Washington and Moscow

1999-11-24 Thread Rob Schaap

Hi again, Bob,

What did ya do turn on the tele or look in your cristalball to predict this?

You want a crystal ball?  A few weeks down the track Grosny will be a hole
in the ground, Moscow will have reluctantly agreed to Wasington's 'moral'
pleas to withdraw their regulars, Bislan Gantamirov will be in charge of a
puppet government in Chechnya, and Vladimir Putin will be Russia's new
president - saying lots of proudly nationalistic, independent and butch
things to keep Russia's rediscovered sense of potency alive, whilst doing
exactly what Washington requires of him.  Everyone who effectively matters
just now would be more than happy with that, doncha think?

And, yeah, telly, a coupla papers, and years of disappointment in how
things turn out constitute my crystal ball.  Sad, eh?

Cheers,
Rob.




 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---



SV: SV: M-TH: Re: Washington and Moscow

1999-11-24 Thread Bob Malecki


Rob writes!


 Hi again, Bob,
 
 What did ya do turn on the tele or look in your cristalball to predict this?
 
 You want a crystal ball?  A few weeks down the track Grosny will be a hole
 in the ground, Moscow will have reluctantly agreed to Wasington's 'moral'
 pleas to withdraw their regulars, Bislan Gantamirov will be in charge of a
 puppet government in Chechnya, and Vladimir Putin will be Russia's new
 president - saying lots of proudly nationalistic, independent and butch
 things to keep Russia's rediscovered sense of potency alive, whilst doing
 exactly what Washington requires of him.  Everyone who effectively matters
 just now would be more than happy with that, doncha think?
 
 And, yeah, telly, a coupla papers, and years of disappointment in how
 things turn out constitute my crystal ball.  Sad, eh?
 
 Cheers,
 Rob.

Well Rob, your cristalball just doesn't make sense. Its a bit lopsided and disregards 
any kind of class analisis of what forces are in motion and the move behind all this 
stuff. My cristalball says that this war certainly must be seen in relationship of the 
various figueheads like "Putin" which you mention. But you fail to recognize that in 
order to pull this off he needs the support of broad masses and parties in Russia.  
Seems to me that the propaganda machine in Moscow are hardly talking about Putin 
becoming a lackey of American imperialism. But a wave of anti western, anti American 
propaganda are connected to all of this stuff.
Bob




 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---



SV: M-TH: Re: Washington and Moscow

1999-11-23 Thread Bob Malecki


Rob writes..


 G'day Thaxists,
 
 I don't think it matters whether trying to hang on to the prizes of past
 expansionism constitutes an act of imperialism today or not, really.  I
 reckon we might be missing the point of all this!

Um which prizes? And I think the point is the permanent revolution albut directed at a 
situation which we have never been confronted with before.
 
 I don't reckon Russia can win this war, and I don't reckon it could ever
 have thought it could.  Sure, it's always handy to tell other seccessionists
 in other areas that there'll be a ghastly price to pay for trying it on (or
 support others, as some Chechens did the Dagestanis); and sure, war's a
 great way to get the elite's outrageous corruption off the front pages; and
 sure, war is good for cohering a grumbling populace, across class lines,
 behind the banner in volatile times.  But what a war of this sort is not, is
 a good idea in its own terms.  After all, oil sourcing will be as fraught
 after this as it was before, and the chances of further terrorist acts
 shan't be diminished one iota either.

I think the whole war not seen in international perspective coming out of the 
destruction of the SU and where we are heading is pointless. Interestingly enough the 
right wing on the internet points out that it is hardly the middle east or Ireland 
today which is the crucible but has shifted to the Balkans and the Southern belly of 
the ex SU..This war like the Balkans is the beginning of jockeying before the next big 
one. So completely pointless to argue who wins or loses. Although the Islamic revival 
connected to the middle east certainly is a factor in this.
 
 I'm sure some brave mujihadeen types are digging in at Grosny for the last
 big show, but I'm equally sure the balance of the Chechen guerilla force is
 a long way away.  That's the nature of the guerilla, innit?  Not to get
 caught in decisive pitched battles against overwhelming forces?  When the
 masonry stops smoking and the bodies stop rotting, there'll still be a
 significant guerilla presence and, if anything, it'll have a more
 sympathetic milieu within which to swim around and reproduce.  And Russia is
 certainly in no position to garrison Chechnya with thirty or forty divisions
 for the foreseeable future.  Nope, western mediation was always gonna be
 quietly invited in to do the dealing that would allow a 'peace-with-honour'
 scenario for Moscow.  I reckon they'll flatten what's left of Grosny to make
 their point, and then allow themselves to be talked out of the ruins of
 Chechnya.  I give it three weeks, meself.  The weather gets very nasty after
 that, for one thing.

Well Iran won't be taken in three weeks nor the entire Islamic world and revival of 
the modern crusades in a sense.
 
 So I reckon this war is very much about the now - and an issue so pressing
 as to make the likely longer term price one worth paying.  And thus do I get
 back to my opening paragraph.  Is it A, B or C?  Or a combination.  Or
 something else altogether?  Mebbe setting up a succession in Moscow? 
 Installing a pro-Muscovite/West puppet government so that Chechens will be
 too busy with a civil war to organise against their oppressors?  Moscow
 joining the West in some global putsch against Islam - Chechnya but a
 world-political football?

Actually this raises and interesting point. Certainly the old half dead alcoholic 
Yeltsin's demise can lead to a whole lot of things. But my take is that capitalist 
Russia with its own imperialist intentions will find some sort of successor.By the way 
a right wing nationalist or fascist solution which even Dave argues is and option 
certainly must be seen as some sort of class solution. Or do you thing a fasist 
takeover can be implemented through imperialist intervention. This would make all the 
writtings on fascism stand on its head I believe.
 
 All very risky plays, for mine - but then mebbe the situation is so fraught
 that big risks are tenable.  [Even a possible post-bellum popular revulsion
 against Moscow which might (just might) help foster some class solidarity
 with left-inclined malcontents in Eastern Europe - I can't see any ensuing
 between Russian workers and Chechens for a generation or so - anti-Chechen
 racism is rife in Russia, I'm told).

Well any serious worek between western workers and Russian workers sooner or later 
will have to take place in the trenches. But pointing out that all the reforms now 
under attack in the west are directly connected to the destructiuon of the SU 
certainly might be helpful..
 
 Anyway, when was the last time demonstrably resolute guerillas with reliable
 sources of munitions and moral support in the region and significant support
 among the people, were decisively beaten on their own patch?

Actually this point I find very very interesting. The ICL has the position that the 
path of guerrilla war leading to deformed workers states has now with the destruction 
of the SU 

SV: M-TH: Re: Washington and Moscow

1999-11-23 Thread Bob Malecki

Rob writes... 

 
 Well, they might call it a win in the sense that NATO's silly slaughter in
 Yugoslavia got carded as a win, I s'pose.  There, as here, the actual
 military campaign itself soon (and predictably) reached the point of
 publicly apparent untenability, and an intrusion from outside was brought to
 bear.  There, too, negotiations were persistently ruled out until there was
 one.

My take is that the Germans won most. 
  
 
 In the terms, as I understand them, that this slaughter was justified (eg.
 to stabilise Dagestan, to rid Russia of allegedly Chechen terrorism,
 possibly to protect important oil sources, and mebbe to nip Muslem
 seccessionism in the bud), this adventure is a joke, for mine.  I predicted
 intensified instability, impoverishment and blood'n'guts in Yugoslavia in
 April, and I'm predicting it for Russia, Chechnya and Dagestan now.  

What did ya do turn on the tele or look in your cristalball to predict this?

I also
 predict that, as we have a healthy Serbian military still in place in
 Belgrade, we shall have a healthy Chechen guerilla force in Chechnya a year
 from now (of course, both Serbia and Chechnya have been ruined in the
 process, but that's not what we're talking about).  I also suspect (mebbe
 'know' is a better word) that there is no tenable exit strategy available to
 Moscow other than some sorta external intervention.  If they're seen to
 flatten Grosny, wave a few bearded heads on pikes about, and then leave
 again - all at their own behest - they're gonna look foolish to the point of
 political untenability, I reckon.  A shattered treasury, a few hundred dead
 Russian boys, and not one initially promulgated objective assured.

The point about the Serbs well taken. However on Chetchenyen I think the whole point 
is hardly wether there is a guerilla there now or next year but what happens in 
Russia. And maybe in western eyes this all looks "foolish" but hardly amongst the 
Russian masses which the present regime has successfuly galvanized over this stuff 
which might be the whole point of the war...

Bob




 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---