Sunday 31 July 2022

Zelensky's elite battalion destroyed – Russia

 

Dozens of neo-Nazis have been eliminated over the last two days, including fighters from the Kraken formation, the military said

Zelensky's elite battalion destroyed – Russia

Russia’s armed forces destroyed an ‘elite assault battalion’ of the Ukrainian president and dozens of fighters from the notorious Kraken neo-Nazi formation, Defense Ministry spokesman Major General Igor Konashenkov said on Saturday.

Providing an update on the progress of Moscow’s military operation in Ukraine, Konashenkov said that on July 28, at the Krasnoarmeysk railway station in the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR), the Russian military conducted a direct strike “with a high-precision air-based weapon” on a train transporting “an elite assault battalion of the 1st Separate Brigade of the President of Ukraine.”

More than 140 nationalists were killed on the spot. About 250 more militants received injuries of varying severity. All military equipment that was in the echelon was disabled,” Konashenkov stated.

The next day, in the area of Bogodukhov in Kharkov Region, Iskander missiles hit the hangars of a meat processing plant where the Kraken nationalist formation had set up a temporary base, according to the military spokesman. “More than 30 Nazis and 10 units of military equipment were destroyed.” 

Kraken calls itself a special reconnaissance and sabotage unit under the Ministry of Defense, operating separately from the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Moscow has accused the battalion of committing several war crimes since the beginning of the conflict.

Also on July 29, Russian forces destroyed 30 Ukrainian servicemen, a warehouse with rockets for Grad combat vehicles, and military equipment in the settlement of Yasnobrodovka in the DPR. In the area of Artemovsk, according to Konashenkov, Ukrainian losses amounted to 50 servicemen and eight units of military equipment.

In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the following have been destroyed: 261 aircraft, 145 helicopters, 1,644 unmanned aerial vehicles, 361 anti-aircraft missile systems, 4,190 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 772 combat vehicles of multiple launch rocket systems, 3,217 field artillery guns and mortars, as well as 4,573 units of special military vehicles,” the general said.

The Russian Defense Ministry does not provide regular updates on the numbers of Ukrainian or Russian losses. On July 4, Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu announced that over the previous two weeks alone, Ukraine had lost almost 5,500 troops, including over 2,000 killed.

Regarding its own casualties, Moscow has not updated the numbers since March, when it reported 1,351 military personnel killed.

Kiev has not disclosed its total military losses since the beginning of the conflict but claims that the figure is several times lower than Russia’s. Moscow’s assessment of the numbers is the opposite.

https://www.rt.com/russia/559903-konashenkov-update-battallion-destroyed/

Severing ties with Russia is ‘absurd and dangerous’ – German official

 

Saxony’s prime minister calls for ‘pragmatism’ in relations with Russia

Severing ties with Russia is ‘absurd and dangerous’ – German official

Isolating Russia and ending economic cooperation with Moscow is dangerous for Germany, Prime Minister of Saxony Michael Kretschmer told Die Zeit newspaper this week, reiterating his call for a diplomatic solution to the conflict in Ukraine.

“I think the idea of isolating Russia permanently or never again cooperating economically is absurd and dangerous… A Russia that is oriented towards China and has no ties to Europe is much more dangerous for us,” Kretschmer told the news outlet.

The official said he was concerned with the impact of the sanctions on Russia on the German economy and energy security. He called for “pragmatism” in relations with Moscow and for the EU to facilitate peace talks and a “freeze” of the conflict in Ukraine, adding that a ceasefire would not only end the deaths, but “create an opportunity for the supply of raw materials,” most notably fossil fuels and grains.

Roughly half of German households rely on gas for electricity and heating, and around a third of the energy for German industry comes from gas. Prior to the conflict in Ukraine, up to one half of that gas was supplied by Russia. However, deliveries have dropped in recent weeks due to either technical or political reasons.

According to Kretschmer, despite ambitious energy transition plans and political agendas, Germany will need gas supplies from Russia for the next five years at least.

If we realize that we cannot for now give up on Russian gas, then it is bitter but it is the reality, and we must act accordingly,” Kretschmer said, adding that apart from ordinary residents who will not be able to heat their homes in the winter, German industry is at risk if Russian gas supplies are lost.

Our entire economic system is in danger of collapsing. If we are not careful, Germany could become de-industrialised,” he stated. Last month, Kretschmer said that Germany needs to ensure reliable fuel supplies before slapping Russia with sanctions.

https://www.rt.com/business/559924-germany-russia-severing-ties-dangerous/

US miscalculations are now legion — but what to do now?

Adaptation — to a multipolar world in which Washington doesn’t always call the shots — is the first step.

Emperor unclothed? Why we can’t expect ‘big change’ from the president

Something much bigger than POTUS — call it the MIC or the deep state — has de facto veto power on all matters related to national security.

The Rise and Fall of the Megamachine

 

 


Biomass plant, Willamette Valley, Oregon. Photo: Jeffrey St. Clair.

If you’ve ever wondered why the military-industrial complex, fossil fuel industry and finance sit at the center of so many problems afflicting the world today, while finding solutions seems so intractable, it is because they are core elements of a Megamachine with roots as old as civilization itself.

That is the case Fabian Scheidler makes in his recent work, The End of the Megamachine: A Brief History of a Failing Civilization. He begins by looking back to the first military-industrial complex, when around five to six thousand years ago in the Middle East humanity learned to make bronze by smelting copper and tin with wood-stoked fires. Before that time, human settlements evidenced relative equality in terms of dwellings, food and burial rites. Then the hardness of bronze made possible weapons and armor that allowed rulers and empires to emerge. Temples and palaces appeared. Some people ate better than others, and had more elaborate burial rites.

Rulers forced farmers to pay taxes in the form of grain, accumulating the currency of food in temples, controlling distribution. Around 2500 BC came the first evidence of land ownership in the early empire of Sumer. Writing and the first legal codes came about to record and enforce tax obligations and property ownership. With failure to pay taxes and debts came enslavement. Around this time also came the first religions with a singular, dominating god.

These were the origins of what Scheidler describes as the four tyrannies: the physical violence of the state; the structural violence of economic coercion; the ideology to justify inequalities, and linear thinking asserting control of nature on which the first three tyrannies were built. These four tyrannies form the basis of the Megamachine, a term Scheidler draws from Lewis Mumford. The Megamachine is a pyramidal structure which forces people to look up to hierarchical peaks, rather than relating to each other on an eye-to-eye basis.

The Megamachine devouring the planet

It is this Great Machine, as Scheidler alternatively calls it, that has taken modern shape in the last 500 years in the form of a capitalism that is now devouring the planet. “At the core of it is the unrelenting increase of wealth stored in the bank accounts of a relatively tiny number of individuals. Today, 42 men possess the equivalent of all that owned by the poorer half of the world’s population. It seems the only remaining goal of the global Megamachine is to incinerate the Earth for a small clique of the absurdly superrich and add endless rows of zeros to their bank accounts.”

The same system is generating increasing instabilities in the form of ravaging climate disruption, financial crises, class conflicts, failed states and wars. “The growing instability and the possible disintegration of this system present an opportunity for change that has not existed for centuries,” Scheidler writes. “Under the right circumstances, the farther a complex system strays from equilibrium, the greater the impact that small movements can have, just like the famous butterfly that triggers a tropical storm.”

Scheidler counsels against feelings of powerlessness and helplessness. “  . . . in the chaos looming on the horizon all our actions will count . . . that which occurs will be the result of an infinite of individual decisions, made by almost an infinite number of people during an infinity of moments.” Whether the outcome will be a warlord world, or one in which democratic self-organization reminiscent of the times before hierarchical civilization rose, “will depend on how we are prepared for the systemic ruptures that lie ahead. That means we must already begin our exit while the Great Machine is still operating.”

Scheidler spends the conclusion of his book listing ways in which we might do that, with examples of how it is already being done. To that I will return in the second part of this series, after briefly detailing the author’s recounting of how we arrived in this place.

Two further revolutions: Steel and coins

The empires that rose out of the Middle East and then Greece, and culminated in the Roman Empire, were grounded on two more metallurgical revolutions.

One was the smelting of iron to create steel, which emerged in Anatolia somewhere around 1200BC. Even more than bronze, steel was ideal for making tools, weapons and armor. Steel provided the most aggressive and widespread empire to date, Assyria, with supremacy. Later, Rome far surpassed Assyria to become the Iron Empire par excellence, Scheidler writes. Around 20% of workers not employed in agriculture worked in metals. But making steel required far greater temperatures than bronze, as well as a carbon source. The demands of the Roman military-industrial complex drove the energy industry of its day, stripping forests twice the area of Greece from the Mediterranean basin.

An earlier metallurgical innovation made standing armies possible, and in Scheidler’s view created the basis for the market economy. That was the minting of coins from precious metals originating in Greece around the middle of the 6th century BC. Virtually no professional armies existed before then. Armies were composed of farmers who had to return home to sow and harvest crops. Soldiers had to be paid in-kind with goods, which had to be transported to the front. Even if they looted, armies would soon exhaust the landscape. This placed practical limitations of around three days on marches.

Silver coins eliminated this limit. Soldiers could now be paid with easily transportable coin purses. But payment in coin required creation of markets. Farmers previously had largely grown for their own subsistence, and paid taxes in the form of crops. Now they had to pay in coins, the need of which forced them to market their crops for coins. Armies could provision themselves through purchases along the way. “It was an almost perfect cycle without which neither Greek imperialism, Alexander’s empire, the Roman Empire nor the modern world system would have been possible.”

Mining the silver required slavery by captives in war and those convicted of crimes, including debtors. The system came to its first peak under Rome. The publicani, an early form of military contractor, organized taxation, mining and military supplies. Unlike individually owned enterprises, much as modern corporations they were theoretically immortal. In the same way, contrasting how fortunes might be disbursed upon the death of individuals, the publicani were the first to embrace the concept of endless accumulation.

But because Augustus valued the stability of the state, he eventually placed their functions under public control, so capitalism as we know it did not originate from here. The goal was a world state. Similar events later took place in China. The contrast with today, Scheidler notes, is that the modern goal is not a world state, but a world market ruled by capital.

Apocalypse and universal mission

The brutalities of empire, small groups holding power over the masses, created a deep sense of despair and helplessness that wounded society and traumatized people. Scheidler sees the tales of demon possession in the Christian gospels as evidence of that trauma. In the words of the prophets and recorded teachings of Jesus were a call to create a more egalitarian order in the present. But those calls were reversed when the emphasis changed from present action to visions of future deliverance through apocalypse. The only solution to the traumas of imperial devastation was divine intervention to completely destroy the old order to create a new one. The most influential example of this was the Book of Revelation written around 90AD.

Out of this apocalyptic dualism rose the cult of progress that possesses us today, Scheidler writes. In the shift from present action to an idealized future came an assertion there is only one valid universal truth, and an orientation to proselytizing virtually unknown before Christianity.

“World history forms an inevitable course towards a divine event that will result in the salvation of believers and the damnation of unbelievers,” and  “. . . whoever knows this truth also has the right and duty to lead the uninformed onto the right path.”  “These are the premises that form the foundation of the mission on which stands the entire ideological structure justifying the expansion of Europe during the last two millennia,” Scheidler writes. “The label on this mission project might change – from Christianity, to the Enlightenment, to the market economy or simply ‘Western values.’ Nonetheless, at its core remains the claim that it is the West that advances progress throughout human history.”

On this claim have brutalities been justified from the conquest of pagan tribes of Europe, to the genocide of the indigenous of the Americas, to colonization of Africa and Asia, to the wars of today. When the U.S. and its allies in Europe assert a “rules-based order,” the old message of Western supremacy rings through with clarity.

The coming of the modern

A parallel to the coming ruptures of the global system can be seen in the fall of the western Roman Empire. It seems a variety of factors came together to shatter the Megamachine of its time, a changing climate, pressure from peoples coming from across Eurasia, even difficulties obtaining the silver needed to pay its armies. In any event, around the 5th century AD, it did collapse into what have been known as the Dark Ages.

But they were not so dark for the masses of people. The dispersal of wealth and the elimination of the Roman military that backed it up relieved burdens on them. Slavery virtually disappeared. No longer did the tax collector come around seeking coins. Land, which had been held through almost unlimited property rights, reverted to non-tradable fiefs for which occupants paid in crops. Lords, with limited power, had to make compromises with them. Guilds rose to regulate production.

In the later middle age, the system of relative equality began to be undermined by increased productivity fed by climate warmth. The four tyrannies were beginning to re-assert themselves. Social divisions began to increase, while church officials grew wealthy. Sects that rose to challenge their wealth and power were labeled as heresies and put down by force.

The basis to re-create the four tyrannies was provided by wealth accumulated through the luxury trade with the east monopolized by the city-states of Venice and Genoa. Venice built the largest military-industrial complex predating the industrial revolution in the Arsenale, manufacturing its armed trading ships. (Ironically, now one of the sites for the Biennale, the modern arts festival that takes place in Venice every two years.)

Capital accumulation by the Italian city states was grounded in militarism. That capital funded mercenary armies to put down revolts, and kings to create the first standing militaries since Rome. The merchant empires of Italy also funded the murderous ventures known as the Crusades which brutalized and looted Islamic lands in ways that later would be transmitted to the Americas.

The late middle ages experienced world ravaging traumas. In Europe, the medieval warm period turned into the Little Ice Age, collapsing agriculture, killing 10-25% of the population. In 1348, the Black Death began to spread, killing a third of those who remained. Reduced populations had one positive effect. With labor power reduced, the peasants who remained more powerful, and staged unprecedented revolts. Elites desperate to stave them off birthed what Scheidler describes as the “monster of modernity.”

This first appeared in The Raven.   

                 https://www.counterpunch.org/2022/07/19/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-megamachine/


Joe Biden brings a neo-imperialist vision to the Middle East

US president's trip to the region entailed open support for settler-colonialism, meetings with local dictators and a deafening silence on human rights

S President Joe Biden’s recent visit to the Middle East was widely lauded by the American foreign policy establishment. In its view, the visit was rooted in a realpolitik grasp of international relations shaped by the destabilising impacts of the war in Ukraine, American national interests and the “realities of power” in the Middle East.

This perspective differs sharply from that of people from the region, and particularly civil society activists. The US president’s trip felt like modern Middle East history, deeply shaped by European intervention, had come full circle. Biden's vision smacked of a new Western imperial dominion over the region, akin to the Anglo-French conquest of the Arab world a century ago.

Though the president did not explicitly affirm support for a new imperial conquest of the Middle East, he came close to doing so

There was open support for a settler-colonial regime, meetings with local dictators, a dubious commitment to economic development, and critically, a deafening silence on the principle of self-determination and the question of democracy. The abject humiliation felt by many Arabs and Muslims during Biden’s visit was palpable.  

Are terms such as colonialism and imperialism grossly inaccurate here? To answer this question one should recall the core moral critique of colonialism and imperialism.This European project was ethically objectionable because imperial powers, supported by local collaborators, created a political and economic arrangement that negated the human and democratic rights of subject peoples, while exploiting natural resources to benefit the economies of the West.

Does this picture bear any resemblance to Biden’s Mideast policy? Though the president did not explicitly affirm support for a new imperial conquest of the Middle East, he came close to doing so. Upon arriving at Ben Gurion Airport, Biden noted that he had visited Israel repeatedly over a span of nearly 50 years, and added: “You need not be a Jew to be a Zionist.”

While this sentence generated little interest or controversy in the US, where declaring pro-Israel bona fides is de rigueur for many politicians, it was certainly noticed by Arabs and Muslims, who understand Zionism from the perspective of its victims.

The most powerful man in the world was openly declaring his support for the mass expulsion and ongoing dispossession of Palestinians by a country that is widely viewed by the human rights community as an apartheid state

Authoritarian status quo

Biden’s policy on Jerusalem keeps the colonial analogy alive. His administration has openly accepted former President Donald Trump’s controversial relocation of the US embassy to Jerusalem, a move in clear defiance of international law, and previous policy, which viewed East Jerusalem as illegally occupied territorywhile effectively abandoning plans to reopen a consulate for Palestinians. 

Meanwhile, illegal Israeli settlements are continuing to expand, housing hundreds of thousands of settlers in the occupied West Bank - a reality that Biden failed to critique during his recent trip. While official US policy opposes the building of new settlements, Biden has strongly objected to conditioning US aid on a halt to new construction, saying in 2019 that such a notion would be “absolutely outrageous” and a “gigantic mistake”.

Revealingly, there was a moment of candour when Biden seemed to unconsciously confirm the applicability of the theme of colonialism and imperialism to the Israel-Palestine conflict. “The background of my family is Irish American, and we have a long history … not fundamentally unlike the Palestinian people with Great Britain and their attitude toward Irish-Catholics over the years, for 400 years,” he said.

Biden is flanked by Israeli President Isaac Herzog and Prime Minister Yair Lapid in Jerusalem on 14 July 2022 (AFP)
Biden is flanked by Israeli President Isaac Herzog, left, and Prime Minister Yair Lapid in Jerusalem on 14 July 2022 (AFP)

Quoting a poem from the famous Irish poet Seamus Heaney - which Heaney has applied to Nelson Mandela and the struggle against apartheid in South Africa - Biden affirmed these lyrics were “classically Irish, but it also could fit Palestinians”. Devout Israel supporters responded with outrage. 

Biden’s meetings with Arab dictators also smacked of neo-imperialism. Pledging to remain committed to the authoritarian status quo, he promised the US “will not walk away” from the Middle East. This view was reinforced prior to his arrival by a flurry of reports suggesting the US was offering Gulf regimes new security guarantees, defence agreements, and a regional air defence partnership with Israel. The purported threat is Iran - clearly a destabilising player in the Middle East - but the real longer-term threat is regional democratisation. 

This was on display a decade ago during the Arab Spring, when Israel and Arab autocrats lined up on the same side to oppose citizens’ revolts for dignity and democracy. These events rocked Middle Eastern repressive regimes and directly contributed to the Abraham Accords, the brainchild of the Trump administration and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, as former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has now publicly attested.

Bleak prognosis

Events in Tunisia and Sudan confirm the threat that democracy poses to Israel and its friends in the “axis of Arab autocracies”. Official media, as well as social media campaigns in the UAE and Saudi Arabia, welcomed President Kais Saied’s seizure of power last summer in Tunis, which overturned the country’s brief experiment with democracy.

Similarly, in Sudan today, Israel, Egypt, the UAE and Saudi Arabia are firmly on the side of General Abdel-Fattah al-Burhan and his military junta, whose hallmark has been the crushing of street protests led by a democratic coalition of civil society groups.     

Imperialism is also about economics. While oil is a huge factor in sustaining great power interests in the Middle East, the West is less dependent on oil purchases from the region than it has been in the past. But it is crucial to ensure that profits obtained by Arab states from the sale of oil are reinvested back in the American and European economies. Arms sales and the ensuing relationships built around them between western and Arab ruling elites is key to this equation.

Biden in the Middle East: A visit that has failed before it even starts
Read More »

Between 2015 and 2020, the US agreed to sell more than $64bn in weapons to Riyadh. The new defence and security agreements  Biden is negotiating with Arab autocrats will surely push these figures higher. 

Gulf wealth and investment opportunities are highly coveted by business and political interests in the West, as evidenced during Mohammed bin Salman’s 2018 trip to the US before the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The crown prince was given an unprecedented red-carpet treatment, including meetings with American luminaries across the political, economic and cultural spectrums. Indeed, economic interests help shape western imperialism in the Middle East - and friendly pro-western dictators are a key element for enhancing these interests.

“We live in scoundrel times,” observed the late author Eqbal Ahmad. Commenting on the state of the Middle East towards the end of the 20th century, he rightly noted that it was “the dark age of Muslim history, the age of surrender and collaboration, punctuated by madness”.

Twenty-two years into the new century, the picture has become darker, and the prognosis looks bleak - especially if you identify with the political aspirations of the peoples in the region struggling for democracy and human rights. This is the only conclusion that can be drawn from the US president’s visit to the Middle East and the neo-imperial vision it encompassed.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

Nader Hashemi is the director of the Center for Middle East Studies, Associate Professor of Middle East and Islamic Politics at Josef Korbel School of International Studies, University of Denver

https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/us-middle-east-joe-biden-neo-imperialist-vision