Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Forthcoming ACG Public Meeting on War in Ukraine

LynnDoyleCooper said:
That is far too simplistic bordering on nonsense in my understanding, and the understanding of many anarchists and communists in the area (and others). And 'proxy' are you sure you mean that as well? Ukraine is not fighting on behalf of NATO, it's fighting for itself with limited NATO and other support. It's all very well talking about NWBTCW, but you're slipping into very dodgy and analytically weak language, you're still doing this campism thing of solely seeing things as monolithic 'blocks', there's no understanding or acceptance of people outside that having agency and potential. It's all just grist to an imperialist war.

I'll try and come to the meeting anyway!
Click to expand...
You're right that Ukraine is not fighting on behalf of NATO, it's fighting for the most basic survival of its population against a terroristic invader. But that doesn't make it any less a NATO-proxy, even if its population (and government) doesn't see itself as such, and is in fact getting very half-hearted support from NATO/"the West" for its proxydom. Sadly, Ukraine is basically stuck in the middle, acting as the fall guy for Western expansionism and Russian irridentism.

The NATO/"Western"/neoliberal capitalist block is a thing, just as are the authoritarian nationalist blocks of the Russian Federation and China. It's not campism to remark on their existence. It would only be campism if I was backing either western neoliberal capital or Russian authoritarian nationalist capital, the latter of which is making a brutal revanchist powerplay. I'm not doing either of those things, though. Nor am I saying that people or countries outside of those imperialist blocks don't have agency either. But to ignore that the butchery in Ukraine is taking place against a wider global backdrop of global inter-imperialist interests would be a mistake. Sure, it doesn't give some poor Ukrainian having their family massacred much comfort, but that's the current set up.

Too be honest though, I really don't have much in the way of answers. My heart goes out to people in Ukraine, and like many, I find watching news about the activities of the Russian military against the population there to be pretty much unbearable.

Anyway, you'll be very welcome at the meeting and it would be good to have your perspective.
 
What is the attendance like at these normally? I might listen in but only if I won't stick out as the obvious new person.
 
Proxy war is when a force is under the total or near enough commanding control of another state, entirely dependent on it eg. Like eg the Shia militias in Syria that are called 'Iranian proxies' or for that matter some of the pro Turkish jihadist groups. Ukraine isn't in that category- the commanding control is non existent and western support is lukewarm at best.
 
frogwoman said:
Proxy war is when a force is under the total or near enough commanding control of another state, entirely dependent on it eg. Like eg the Shia militias in Syria that are called 'Iranian proxies' or for that matter some of the pro Turkish jihadist groups. Ukraine isn't in that category- the commanding control is non existent and western support is lukewarm at best.
Click to expand...
Don't I agree with that at all FW.

The US used the mujahideen as proxies in Afghanistan but they did not have total control of them. Israel used Hamas as a (unwitting) proxy to undermine Fatah but it would be daft to say the Israeli government had total or near enough control of Hamas. Plenty of the conflicts in former colonies were/are proxy wars but in most cases local groups had significant independence. Plenty of times states (or other groups) have used others as proxies, only to see their proxy then make decisions beyond their control.
 
Israel has been called a US proxy , the reason is gets called that (I disagree btw) is because of the vast sums that get spent on US military aid to Israel to the extent creating a financial dependency on the US, the fact that Israels military goals often align with the US military goals and that the US has often ended up using Israels military to do stuff it didn't want to do itself.

Ukraine isn't in that category. It's leaders would probably like to be but the fact they keep on asking to join the EU and NATO and getting refused should give you a clue.
 
Serge Forward said:
Nor am I saying that people or countries outside of those imperialist blocks don't have agency either.
Click to expand...

Many of them are fighting the nationalist expansionist and murderous invasion as their way of taking agency, but you're against that right? And in saying the fighting is wrong as it means taking sides in the war, I don't understand how that then gets squared with the reality of what's happening on the ground to people? And you're saying you don't have much in the way of answers, except to say 'don't fight as it's taking sides?' Which is then your answer? Are you telling people (as some NWBTCW people are doing) that they shouldn't have weapons, and they shouldn't fight, they should just leave or stay and put up with it? I'm not being obtuse, I think NWBTCW is a good starting point (in Russia for example, and in many other situations and historical periods) but falls apart completely in Ukraine now imo.
 
redsquirrel said:
Don't I agree with that at all FW.

The US used the mujahideen as proxies in Afghanistan but they did not have total control of them. Israel used Hamas as a (unwitting) proxy to undermine Fatah but it would be daft to say the Israeli government had total or near enough control of Hamas. Plenty of times states (or other groups) have used others as proxies, only to see their proxy then make decisions beyond their control.
Click to expand...

I think there's a difference between groups being used as proxies in a limited conflict and saying this war is a 'proxy war' between X and Y. It's again this denying of Ukraine and it's reasons, and reducing it to a US/NATO/EU? versus Russia proxy war, it's nonsense. You could say the US etc. have specific interests in how it goes and they're supplying weaponry for those reasons, but that doesn't make it a proxy war.
 
redsquirrel said:
Don't I agree with that at all FW.

The US used the mujahideen as proxies in Afghanistan but they did not have total control of them. Israel used Hamas as a (unwitting) proxy to undermine Fatah but it would be daft to say the Israeli government had total or near enough control of Hamas. Plenty of times states (or other groups) have used others as proxies, only to see their proxy then make decisions beyond their control.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say those groups were proxies though tbh. , just that they were happy to take 'The enemy's' help at the time for a specific short term goal like getting one over on Fatah or the Soviets. Of course proxies can make decisions that the main state is pissed off about but the relationship between Iran and Shia militias is very different to that of the US and the mujahideen in the 80s, or Israel and Hamas for a very limited time
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDC
Well even take the case of Israel, which has had 50 odd years of the latest high tech weaponry and military aid from the US and in fact got totally dependent on it. Ukraine isn't even in the category, they keep asking to be in a military alliance with NATO and getting turned down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDC
I think it's a mistake to lump the US/NATO/The EU/The West/Neoliberals together in a one bloc that is somehow symmetrical to Russia (or China).

The forces around Trump - for example - show little inclination for imperial adventures abroad and seem to be more akin to the old isolationist type (some, as we know see Russia quite positively. I've no idea what NATO's interests here are tbh and the EU is not exactly presenting a unified agenda regarding Ukraine either.

Of course all of these forces will have more desired outcomes and less desired outcomes from the Russian invasion, but that does not make them a 'bloc' nor the invasion a proxy war.
 
Very surprised that Columbia is a member of NATO

Edit - Imagine my surprise when I was wrong
 
Last edited:
...and to consider the Russian invasion a proxy war suggests that a) someone is using the Ukrainian fighters as a proxy and that b) these "hidden forces" have some share of agency or responsibility for the ongoing conflict. Which easily slips into the perception that it is not just Russia "to blame". I think that's a hard position to reconcile right now.
 
The Chinese view of Taiwan is similar, they see it as essentially a US proxy as it's only their support (well, and the Korean War back in the day) that stopped it being reunited like all the other provinces with nationalist hold-outs after official victory in the civil war in 1949. Of course that ignores what Taiwan has become in its own historical process over the intervening years, but it's not a baseless view of the situation.
 
frogwoman said:
I wouldn't say those groups were proxies though tbh. , just that they were happy to take 'The enemy's' help at the time for a specific short term goal like getting one over on Fatah or the Soviets. Of course proxies can make decisions that the main state is pissed off about but the relationship between Iran and Shia militias is very different to that of the US and the mujahideen in the 80s, or Israel and Hamas for a very limited time
Click to expand...
Well I guess I'd use proxy in a different way to you. I'd say those are all very clear examples of the use of proxies.

LynnDoyleCooper said:
I think there's a difference between groups being used as proxies in a limited conflict and saying this war is a 'proxy war' between X and Y. It's again this denying of Ukraine and it's reasons, and reducing it to a US/NATO/EU? versus Russia proxy war, it's nonsense. You could say the US etc. have specific interests in how it goes and they're supplying weaponry for those reasons, but that doesn't make it a proxy war.
Click to expand...
I don't think noting that a conflict is a proxy war (should) remove the local factors. Vietnam was clearly a proxy war but it would be stupid to reduce the Vietnam state to not having its own desires, taking its own actions.

TBH this is a bit of a technical discussion as I was more challenging FWs definition of proxy (which is too narrow IMO) than talking about the Ukraine conflict which I don't know if I would call a proxy war. I might say that certain forces would like to use Ukraine as a proxy.
 
I mean I've seen some bonkers stuff on the 'left' that says it's a proxy war to the point of saying Ukraine wants to 'surrender' and is being funneled weapons solely to forcibly prolong the war as that is in the US's interests. And the others that say it's Ukraine that wants to prolong the war and not have a swift end to get more sympathy from 'the west' for their 'future plans'. It's all just fucking nonsense, some people have lost the plot.
 
LynnDoyleCooper said:
I mean I've seen some bonkers stuff on the 'left' that says it's a proxy war to the point of saying Ukraine wants to 'surrender' and is being funneled weapons solely to forcibly prolong the war as that is in the US's interests. And the others that say it's Ukraine that wants to prolong the war and not have a swift end to get more sympathy from 'the west' for their 'future plans'. It's all just fucking nonsense, some people have lost the plot.
Click to expand...
Yeah I don't think there's any doubt that that's crap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDC
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
ACG On-line Public Meeting on February 15th
2 3
Replies
77
Views
3K
charlie mowbray
C
C
New Bosses-same old game: business as usual for the Labour Government ACG online public meeting, August 21st at 7pm
Replies
1
Views
460
charlie mowbray
C
C
The Beautiful Idea: Why We Need Anarchist Communism Now: ACG Online Public Meeting
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
charlie mowbray
C
C
Anarchism Down Under-London ACG Public Meeting , Monday Sept. 25th
Replies
0
Views
293
charlie mowbray
C
C
All Out! The current strike wave- ACG Public Meeting
Replies
19
Views
1K
Rob Ray
Rob Ray
Back
Top Bottom