Print this post.
Ajamu Baraka is sure to shake some people’s assumptions about the inherent reliablity and benevolence of what is seen by many on the world stage as “good” great powers, but still, he warns, “This is not to suggest a moral or political equalization between the emergence of capitalist Russia and China and the systematic degradation unleashed on the world by the Pan-European colonial/capitalist project that emerged in 1492 with the invasion of the ‘Americas.’ That would be a perversion of history and divert us from the primary global contradiction and target: The Western capitalist alliance and the corporate and finance oligarchy at its center.”
OpEds
Syria and the S-300s: Re-Centering the People in the Global Struggles for Power
Protecting Russian interests in Syria and the Mid-East was and is the driving force for Russian military and diplomatic activity, nothing else!
“The corporate grip on opinion in the United States is one of the wonders of the Western world [….] No First World country has ever managed to eliminate so entirely from its media all objectivity, much less dissent.”— Gore Vidal
“Those of us who are members of oppressed peoples and nations cannot depend on any bourgeois state to really care about our humanity – including Russia and China.”
One of the most amusing elements of the current anti-Russian hysteria produced by U.S. state/corporate propagandists is the notion that Russia is this bold, aggressive challenger to “U.S. and Western interests” when the reality has always been the opposite. In the tumultuous period after the Soviet Union disintegrated, the Russian Federation emerged under the leadership of the clownish BorisYeltsin.
The Russian capitalist oligarchy that developed during that period and expanded under the leadership of Vladimir Putin has always just wanted to be part of the global capitalist game. They had demonstrated on more than one occasion their willingness to cooperate with the agenda of Western powers. However, they wanted to be respected with their regional interests recognized.
“The Russian capitalist oligarchy has always just wanted to be part of the global capitalist game.”
But as result of greed, hubris and just plain incompetence, U.S. policy-makers, especially the amateurs running foreign policy during the Obama years, pushed the Russians out of their preferred zone of caution in international affairs, with Syria being exhibit A. Forcing the Russians’ hand in Syria was followed by the Ukraine when the U.S. sparked a coup in that nation as the second front against Russian “intervention” in Syria.
So it was quite comical to see how the announcement that Russia will deliver the S-300 air defense system to the Syrian government was met with feigned horror by U.S. and NATO forces . This decision was taken after the U.S. allowed or didn’t stop the Israeli Air Force from playing games that resulted in a Russia cargo plane being shot out of the air by Syrian ground defenses who mistook the Russia plane for an Israeli aircraft.
“The amateurs running foreign policy during the Obama years, pushed the Russians out of their preferred zone of caution in international affairs.”
Without an adequate air defense system capable of covering the entire nation and strategic territories within Syria, the Israeli Air Force has had almost unimpeded access to Syria air space during the Syrian war to attack military forces associated with the Syrian government, Hezbollah and the Iranian state.
Yet in their zeal to push out anti-Russian propaganda, the state/corporate propagandists in the U.S. exposed once again Russia’s conservatism and acquiescence to the global colonial U.S./EU/NATO agenda. While the headlines screamed traitor at Turkish President Erdogan for concluding a deal for the Russian S-400, the most advanced system the Russians are selling on the open market, very few seemed to have noticed that those wily, evil Russians that were propping up their partner in Syria hadn’t even delivered on the S-300 sale to the Syrian state that had been concluded five years ago!
“The Israeli Air Force has had almost unimpeded access to Syria air space during the Syrian war.”
The Russians said that they failed to deliver the system that the Syrians purchased due to a request from the Israeli government in 2013. This decision took place a year after the debacle of Geneva I, the United Nations sponsored conference to resolve the Syrian War, where the Russians appeared ready to abandon Assad as long as the Syrian state was maintained, and their interests protected. Getting rid of Assad but maintaining the Syrian state was also U.S. policy at the time.
However, instead of a negotiated settlement in which the Russians would play a role, the Obama administration rejected Geneva I believing that it could topple the government in Syria through its jihadist proxies. The U.S. knew that those elements were never going to be allowed to govern the entire nation but that was the point. The Syrian state was slated to be balkanized with its territory divided and a permanent presence by the U.S. directly on the ground. Those forces in Syria would be bolstered by the thousands of U.S. troops in Iraq that had been reintroduced as a result of the U.S. reinvasion supposedly to fight ISIS — that it helped to create.
“The Obama administration believed it could topple the government in Syria through its jihadist proxies.”
Although it’s old news that the Russian position on Assad came out just a year after the Chinese and Russians gave the green light to the U.S. and NATO to launch a vicious war on Libya, it points out how in the global game of power relations the peoples of the former colonial world continue to lose. The Russians, like the Chinese, have demonstrated repeatedly their willingness to collaborate with the U.S. and the “Western colonialist alliance,”even as successive U.S. administrations have singled them out, along with Iran and Venezuela, as geostrategic threats to U.S. global hegemony.
This observation is not meant to be another Russia and China bashing that plays into the hands of the reactionaries driving U.S. policies who see military conflict with those two nations as inevitable. Instead what is being argued here is the absolute necessity for African/Black people and oppressed peoples and nations to be clear about the international correlation and balance of forces and competing interests at play so that “we” the people are not confused regarding our objective interests.
Russian intervention in Syria was not as cynical as the U.S. and Western European powers, which knew from the beginning that “progressive” forces in Syria could not win a military conflict. Nevertheless, they encouraged those forces to engage in military opposition while the U.S. and its allies decided to back various Islamist forces – not for democratic change, but to destroy the Syrian state.
“The Russians, like the Chinese, have demonstrated repeatedly their willingness to collaborate with the U.S. and the ‘Western colonialist alliance.’”
Maintaining an independent, critical perspective on the national and global dispensation of social forces means not having any illusions about the world and the national, class and racial politics in play. We need to be clear that supporting Syria’s attempt to assert full sovereignty over its territory was only a secondary concern for the Russians. The back seat given to the Syrian government in the negotiations between Russia, Iran, and Turkey regarding Idlib confirms that. Protecting Russian interests in Syria and the Mid-East was and is the driving force for Russian military and diplomatic activity, nothing else!
The delivery of the S-300 anti-aircraft system to Syria resembles the Russia cooperation with the U.S., Israel and Turkey on the Turkish Afrin operation ,which was basically an invasion of Syria by Turkey in order to establish a “buffer zone.” These are all decisions based on the objective interests of Russia and secondarily the interests of the Syrian government.
It remains to be seen how the deployment of the S-300’s will alter the situation on the ground in Syria. It would not be surprising if the deployment was limited and only covered the territory around Latakia, the site of the Russian air base and close to its warm-water port. It may not be in Russia’s interests to allow the Syria government the means to block Israeli intrusions into Syrian air space. If the Syrian government had the ability to really ensure the security of its national territory from Israeli intrusions, it could mean that Russia would have less leverage over the Syrian government to force a withdrawal of Iranian forces from Syria. Additionally, the land corridor and security of the “Islamic pipeline” between Iran, Iraq and Syria could be secured but that may not be necessarily conducive for maintaining Russia’s share of the energy market in Europe.
“Supporting Syria’s attempt to assert full sovereignty over its territory was only a secondary concern for the Russians.”
The U.S. and Israel overplayed their cards and made a strategic blunder by precipitating the shooting down of the Russian cargo plane. Although National Security Adviser John Bolton claims that the decision to supply Syrian forces with the S-300 is a “significant escalation,” the escalation really took place in 2012 when the Obama administration decided to allow U.S. vassal states to significantly increase military support for radical Islamic forces. Michael Flynn revealed this as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency – something the Obama forces never forgot.
Syria has been a difficult object lesson for the left that has had a devastating consequence for the people of that embattled nation. Hundreds of thousands have died, and millions have been displaced primarily because left and progressive forces lacked the organizational, but more importantly, the ideological, political, and moral clarity to mount an opposition to the machinations of their national bourgeoisie in Europe and the U.S. The very idea that the bourgeois leadership of their respective states might have some benevolent justifications for military intervention in Syria revealed a dangerous nationalist sentimentality that is driving the left version of white supremacist national chauvinism.
“It would not be surprising if the missile deployment was limited to the territory around Latakia, the site of the Russian air base and close to its warm-water port.”
Before the dramatic rightist turn of the left in the U.S. and Europe over the last two decades, the left – at least much of the Marxist-Leninist left – opposed Western imperialist intervention out of a theoretical and principled commitment to the national-colonial question in the global South. As citizens in “oppressor nations,” opposing their own bourgeoisie’s interventions into oppressed nations was seen as a responsibility for the left and indeed was a measurement of what was actually an authentic left position.
That stance has virtually disappeared.
The first response by the Western left to plans or actual interventions by their nation’s ruling class is a strange conversation regarding rather or not the intervention is justified or not based on the nature of the government being toppled by the intervention.
For those of us who are members of oppressed peoples and nations, it is quite obvious that without independent organizations and global solidarity structures buttressed by the few progressive states that exist on the planet, we cannot depend on any bourgeois state to really care about our humanity or on the radical or left forces in Northern nations to put a brake on repression and intervention against non-Europe states and peoples.
“The Left once opposed Western imperialist intervention out of a theoretical and principled commitment to the national-colonial question in the global South.”
The bloodletting will continue in Syria. Candidate Trump raised some serious questions about the wisdom of U.S. policies in Syria and indicated that he might be willing to reverse U.S. involvement. But President Trump surrendered to the pressure from the foreign policy establishment and the warmongering corporate press. Instead of extricating the U.S., the administration announced a few weeks ago that the U.S. will essentially engage in an illegal and indefinite occupation in Syria.
There is reasonable doubt that Israel and the U.S . will allow the deployment of the S-300s even if the Russians followed through with the delivery. Which means the possibility of another dangerous escalation in the conflict at any moment. It also means that, despite one’s opinion about the nature of any government’s internal situation, it is important to reaffirm and defend the principles of national sovereignty and international law in opposition to arbitrary and illegal interventions to effect a change in government by any outside forces.
The people’s movements for social justice and human rights around the world must not allow the people to be drawn into the machinations and contradictory struggles and conflicts between essentially capitalist blocs, which include the Russians and the state-capitalism of China. This is not to suggest a moral or political equalization between the emergence of capitalist Russia and China and the systematic degradation unleashed on the world by the Pan-European colonial/capitalist project that emerged in 1492 with the invasion of the “Americas.” That would be a perversion of history and divert us from the primary global contradiction and target: The Western capitalist alliance and the corporate and finance oligarchy at its center.
“Instead of extricating the U.S., the administration will essentially engage in an illegal and indefinite occupation in Syria.”
In the competition between blocs and the real possibility of global conflict, we must be vigilant not to repeat the tragic mistake made before the First World War when workers enthusiastically signed up as cannon fodder in the clash of capitalist empires. Imperialist war really is a class issue!
Totalitarian capitalist domination is not a figment of our imaginations, it is real. Penetrating the ideological mystifications that divert us away from the matrix of power that distorts consciousness and renders the people as collaborators in their own subjugation is the task of the moment.
The global order is changing, the only question is what will emerge. Will the new order be a multipolar one dominated by emerging capitalist states or will a new transitional order develop that is oriented toward an association of states and people’s movements moving toward authentic de-colonization, ecological rationality, and socialist construction?
There is still time for the people to choose.
Ajamu Baraka:
Ajamu Baraka is the national organizer of the Black Alliance for Peace and was the 2016 candidate for vice president on the Green Party ticket. He is an editor and contributing columnist for the Black Agenda Report and contributing columnist for Counterpunch. His latest publications include contributions to“Jackson Rising: The Struggle for Economic Democracy and Self-Determination in Jackson, Mississippi. He can be reached at: Ajamubaraka.com
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
^0The corporate media will never present you with this kind of information.
Nothing that contradicts the empire's lying narrative is allowed.
Support our citizens media. The only media you need.
Things to ponder
While our media prostitutes, many Hollywood celebs, and politicians and opinion shapers make so much noise about the still to be demonstrated damage done by the Russkies to our nonexistent democracy, this is what the sanctimonious US government has done overseas just since the close of World War 2. And this is what we know about. Many other misdeeds are yet to be revealed or documented.
Parting shot—a word from the editors
The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found
In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” — acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump — a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all.— Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report
4 comments
TOTAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS: 14,575
RUSSIA 6,850
USA 6,550
FRANCE 300
CHINA 280
UK 215
PAKISTAN 150
INDIA 130
ISRAEL 80
NORTH KOREA 20
From the Ploughshares Fund. Morituri te salutant
I agree that Russia’s involvement in Syria is first and foremost it’s interest in it’s Mediterranean port but I disagree that Russia is prepared to throw Assad or the people of Syria under the bus for considerations from the western empire. I believe that Putin and the the Russian people are highly principled and that their commitment to Syria stands firm. That being said it is not so easy to stand up against such a powerful and vicious empire. I believe that when Russia and China went along with the intervention in Libya that they were blind sided by the regime change that followed and that was the impetus for Russia to finally stand up to the big bad bully. I think that when Putin came to power that he thought that he could deal with the USA and perhaps find some common ground and some mutual interests but after being kicked to the curb time and again and being demonized so in the western media he finally understands that the USA can not be negotiated with and can not be trusted.
I also believe that although China has utilized some capitalist techniques and strategies it is still first and foremost a socialist country. I think that at some point the Chinese leadership realized that they would never be able to survive the constant onslaught of the imperial western empire if they were not able to match or surpass the western empire economically, technologically, and militarily and so their goal became to beat the west at it’s own game so to speak but not for world domination but for world liberation.
Furthermore I believe that Iran is a socialist country whose leadership as well as their people are of the highest moral character. It amazes me to see how demonized this country is in the western media. Virtually every negative word written about Iran in the western press is a damnable lie. The fact that Iran helps it’s Arab neighbors stand up to the military aggression of Israel is a testimony to their commitment to truth and justice and ultimately peace and prosperity for all the people of the Middle East.
Perhaps some people will think that I am silly or nieve but I believe that the greatest threat to humanity is the continuation of the western empire. I believe that if humanity is to have any chance of surviving on this planet then the western empire needs to end. And I believe that the multipolar world offered by the success of Russia and China and Iran (and other countries that are brave enough to resist the hegemony of the USA and the western empire) is our best hope.
Lynn Miller I
am of the opinion that Chinese/Russian authoritarian capitalism will be
no better for my class than western faux democratic capitalism
(imperialism deluxe). If anything, the dual economy shows us that we are
not to gain victory under any such regime or economic system and that
hegemony created serves the elite interests and none care of our
conditions.Manage
Like · Reply · 8h
Joseph P. Timperio I think at their heart, Russians are reluctant capitalists.
1Manage
Like · Reply · 7h · Edited
Patrice de BergeracpasYou and 6 others manage the membership, moderators, settings, and posts for The Greanville Post. Lynn
Miller <—In China, the proof is in the pudding. The "democratic"
content of any system is seen in the direction and quality of its
policies, namely, which class benefits? What are the ourcomes we see
everywhere? While in the immediate sense China has
created a tier of billionaires, they are controlled in a manner hardly
seen or understood in the west, not to mention that the "heights" of
China's economy—that is the military industries, finance, media, etc.,
are all in public hands. Second, the party, which numbers morethan 90
million people has shifted ever moe to the left, not the right, and is
seriously attempting to bring full-fledged socialism and later communism
to yhe entire society. Some istorians and observers in fact claim that
China is already substantively communist in many spheres of life. While
all over the West the middle class shrinks and pathetic clowns run these
nations' affairs, all such "leaders" representing the 0.0001% of their
populations, not to mention the horrors again visited among the poor in
the developed and Third World (capitalist) countries, austerity and lies
being the constant menu, underwritten by constant wamongering and wars,
in China the government has managed to raise 800 million people to the
middle class from poverty. No event can match that for social
accomplishment. Lastly, the will of the people is obeyed in China. The
Chinese are among the most frequently polled people in the world, at all
levels, and the leaders examine these polls and listen. They shape
policies accordingly. In the US polls are used as toilet paper,
political p.r. ("we have a democracy") and mere robes into the minds of
the hoi polloi, never given much priority or importance. All of this was
amply documented in a definitive study in 2014 by two mainstream, ivy
league professors, Martin Gilens and benjamin Page. They showed the US
was — symbols aside— essentially a plutocracy. The findings triggered a
storm, but, miraculously (since the professors were members of
distinguished universities, like Princeton, etc.) the media could not
just bury the report. Numerous establishment apologists jumped into the
fray to question the study. Below, a passage from Gilens &
Benjamin's reply, pblished of all places on The Washington Post (2016):
“In
2014 we published a study of political inequality in America, called
“Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and
Average Citizens.” Our central finding was this: Economic elites and
interest groups can shape U.S. government policy — but Americans who are
less well off have essentially no influence over what their government
does. This was in line with a good deal of previous research by Larry
Bartels, Martin Gilens, Larry Jacobs and Benjamin Page, Elizabeth Rigby
and Gerald Wright, and others. But for some reason, our paper caught the
media’s attention in a way that few academic journal articles do.
Since
then, a number of questions and criticisms have been raised about our
work — some offering sensible critiques and alternative perspectives and
others simply mistaken. We have responded in print to some of these,
and will list some of those responses at the end of this post. Here we
will respond briefly to the most important challenges to our research.
In brief, we don’t believe that any of these critiques, individually or
collectively, undermine our central claims.
The full page is here:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/…/critics-challenge…/…Manage
washingtonpost.com
Critics argued with our analysis of U.S. political inequality. Here are 5…
Like · Reply · Remove Preview · 6h
Patrice de BergeracpasYou and 6 others manage the membership, moderators, settings, and posts for The Greanville Post. Regarding
Russia, our friend J. Timperio is right. While Russia underwent a quick
transformation from sovietism to savage capitalism—as prescribed by the
Americans and their associates—bringing the nation to its knees, and it
did create a class of billionaires
(“oligarchs”) under the rule of US imposed and supprted Boris
Yeltsin—Russia is still very much a “collectivist” society in
temperament and the socialist way of thinking runs deep in their
culture. Even today the communists are the second most important
formation after Putin’s own party. Second, and perhaps curiously or
indicative of my point, the miltary have never reneged on the communist
matrix that created the Red Army. To this day Russian arms—planes,
ships, tanks, regimental flags, etc.—fly the communist star or hammer
and sickle banner, sometimes along with the new Russian emblem, as that
symbol was never left behind. The Eurasian integratinists, who back
Putin, are also deeply respectful of the communist past, although
officially sometimes we see anticommunist grumblings in the “liberal”
(read pro-western/ 5th column-controlled) media, which does exist and is
actually quite powerful.
NOTE FROM THE EDITOR
For some strange reason the DISQUS comment engine fails to publish Alan Barbier comment. As a result, we are posting it directly below ourselves.
BY ALAN BARBIER:
I agree that Russia’s involvement in Syria is first and foremost it’s
interest in it’s Mediterranean port but I disagree that Russia is
prepared to throw Assad or the people of Syria under the bus for
considerations from the western empire. I believe that Putin and the the
Russian people are highly principled and that their commitment to
Syria stands firm. That being said it is not so easy to stand up against
such a powerful and vicious empire. I believe that when Russia and
China went along with the intervention in Libya that they were blind
sided by the regime change that followed and that was the impetus for
Russia to finally stand up to the big bad bully. I think that when Putin
came to power that he thought that he could deal with the USA and
perhaps find some common ground and some mutual interests but after
being kicked to the curb time and again and being demonized so in the
western media he finally understands that the USA can not be negotiated
with and can not be trusted.
I also believe that although China has utilized some capitalist
techniques and strategies it is still first and foremost a socialist
country. I think that at some point the Chinese leadership realized that
they would never be able to survive the constant onslaught of the
imperial western empire if they were not able to match or surpass the
western empire economically, technologically, and militarily and so
their goal became to beat the west at it’s own game so to speak but not
for world domination but for world liberation.
Furthermore I believe that Iran is a socialist country whose
leadership as well as their people are of the highest moral character.
It amazes me to see how demonized this country is in the western media.
Virtually every negative word written about Iran in the western press is
a damnable lie. The fact that Iran helps it’s Arab neighbors stand up
to the military aggression of Israel is a testimony to their commitment
to truth and justice and ultimately peace and prosperity for all the
people of the Middle East.
Perhaps some people will think that I am silly or naive but I believe
that the greatest threat to humanity is the continuation of the western
empire. I believe that if humanity is to have any chance of surviving on
this planet then the western empire needs to end. And I believe that
the multipolar world offered by the success of Russia and China and
Iran (and other countries that are brave enough to resist the hegemony
of the USA and the western empire) is our best hope.