Going to war over spheres of influence. The 21st century is going to be just as rough as the 20th century.
“Russia says, for instance, that it is threatened by Nato expanding eastwards and potentially including Ukraine as a member. The response of the Nato powers is to say that its door should remain open to all and, more privately, that Ukraine is unlikely to join the organisation in the foreseeable future, so why is Moscow objecting so strongly?
But there is a perfectly rational Russian response to this, which is to point to the furious American response to Soviet missiles being based in Cuba that almost led to a nuclear war in 1962. The Russians can also reasonably ask why, if Ukraine’s Nato membership is such a distant prospect, Nato powers are so insistent on keeping open the option, even though, by doing so, they increase the chances of a shooting war.”
The Russian national interest must be preserved I suppose, and that is reason enough to initiate an armed conflict. We watch the US do it all the time as well, just that somehow we’re the good guys.
With resources scarce, this model of armed intervention will occur more often. We’ll have to get used to it or be prepared to radically reorganize our societies around the idea that we as co-inhabitants on this earth all have the right to live in peace.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
4 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 28, 2022 at 6:39 am
tildeb
This typical anti-Americanism excusing and/or rationalizing Putin’s invasion of Ukraine as somehow equivalent to what the US does is still just anti-Americanism for the purpose of promoting not the truth, not a better understanding of this situation and how it came to be, but straight up anti-Americanism for then purpose of spewing more anti-Americanism. All of this
article falls neatly under ‘false equivalency’. I’m surprised, Arb, that you would go along – and repeatedly over time – with this kind of motivated reasoning to vilify the US at every opportunity.
‘But NATO” is not a justifiable grievance because, unlike the Russian military under Putin, it poses zero aggressive military threat to anyone. Using this line of reasoning from CounterPunch is no different than blaming the rape victim for how she was dressed or what she wanted to do because she was just so darned provocative, donchaknow, so cover up those ankles and face and hair and walk around in a body bag – don’t consider meeting the requirements for joining NATO because – it’s only reasonable that we dare not provoke the bully. And besides, the US is just as bad by the way so shut up and leave Ukraine to the Russians. Oh, and let’s throw in the mandatory ‘give peace a chance’ during a full out war as if this puts the author on some high moral ground from which more anti-American vitriol can be spewed.
Good grief; what a terrible article. It’s just an anti-American narrative re-clothed as if it were journalism.
LikeLike
February 28, 2022 at 9:23 am
The Arbourist
Vilify? Meh.
Larger powers do this sort of thing whether they happen to be the US or Russia or any other established power. Manifest Destiny, The Monroe Doctrine et cetera are not aberrations in imperial policy.
It would seem that Russia has a different view of Nato encroaching on its borders – enough to justify a full scale land invasion of a sovereign country in their estimation . Is it right? I do not think so personally and the sanctions against Russia are justified.
Calling attention to the crimes we commit and the imperial actions we undertake isn’t being Anti-American – being able to see similarities in policy between imperial nations allows for a greater understanding of how nations work.
LikeLike
February 28, 2022 at 9:56 am
tildeb
It’s not ‘similarities’: it’s false equivalencies. And it serves to promote misinformation. The given example is Ukraine and Cuba. Maybe it goes without notice, but the US did not equivalently send in 190,000 occupying troops to Cuba. Or did you miss that fact?
The Munroe doctrine is intended to keep out unfriendly ‘foreign’ powers from occupying countries of the Western hemisphere. Notice this does not include ‘friendly’ powers, meaning liberal democracies like Britain and France who really do ‘occupy’ lands in the Western hemisphere. Or did you miss that fact?
Again, not ‘similarities’ at all: false equivalencies.
It seems to me that the threat nescient democracies with very weak militaries pose to the Russian regime isn’t about bordering potential NATO members at all; that’s the disinformation anti-American supporters tout on behalf of that regime. (Talking over Ukraine would INCREASE the number of NATO bordering countries, not DECREASE this supposed intolerable ‘threat’.) It’s about the threat liberal democracies pose to maintaining authoritarian regimes. And that’s what anti-Americans are attacking – the spread of liberal democracies – with these never-ending false equivalencies. What is really being attacked at home by anti-Americans are the shared founding principles of our liberal democracies – liberal principles. These really are under sustained attack by people who presume some other kind of authoritarian governance – regardless if from the Left or Right – would magically be better. Well, you’re wrong.
LikeLike
February 28, 2022 at 7:05 pm
bleatmop
Russia has absolutely been expanding their boarders and they must be stopped. They’ve all but annexed Georgia, they’ve already taken the Crimea portion of Ukraine, and now they are trying to take as much of it as they can. War is terrible and horrible but appeasement is not going to solve problems for anyone here. The Russians aren’t going to stop at Ukraine either as Putin has openly mused about expanding territory to much of the former Soviet Union. So the only question is does the West let them?
And that’s an important question. Because Russia isn’t the only imperialistic power looking at gobbling up territories. Be sure that China is watching this closely. They are already trying to set up military bases around the world, including Equatorial Guinea. An important spot as it could set up a deep water port in an area that would put them within easy striking distance of the eastern seaboard of North America and essentially ensure that Africa, and their vast natural resources, firmly moves within their sphere of influence.
LikeLike