Proxy war in Ukraine and the armament push
THE politico-diplomatic drum-beaters of the West may project NATO’s recent summit in Vilnius (Lithuania) as a ‘great success’, but the single tangible outcome of the meeting was the reiteration and reaffirmation of its proxy war in Ukraine and the thriving arms sales. Thus, NATO’s ‘big boys’ Germany and the USA vehemently opposed a direct fight with Russia.
Russia today appears like a mauled, heroic, tragic Trotsky before a marauding Stalin, as pictured in the masterly trilogy — Prophet Armed, Prophet Unarmed and Prophet Outcast — by Isaac Deutscher. The West continues to look down upon Russians. Following the common fight against Nazi Germany in World War II, the scenario has been the same after 1945, bearing all the hallmarks of the 21st-century ‘Great Race’ war between the West and Slavic Russia.
The tradition dates back to the era of 10th-century German Emperor Otto I, when Russians and East Europeans were branded as ‘slaves’. Hence, the West finds it hard to allow a bilateral (‘inferior’) Slav dispute on Europe’s fringe. Instead, the ‘superior’ third party jumping into the Moscow-Kyiv conflict threatens to turn the conflagration into MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction), resulting in the West’s decimation too.
Paradoxically, today’s scenario originates from the fears of Germany, the economic engine of Europe and EU, which doesn’t want a World War III-type conflict, after being guilty of starting two World Wars which pulverised people and vivisected Deutschland for decades. Today’s prosperous Berlin wants to avoid being singed by an unpredictable and uncontrollable conflagration. And who is Berlin’s silent supporter? None, except the world’s indisputable number one financial and military power: the USA.
Unsurprisingly, therefore, the whole West incurred the wrath of Ukrainian President Zelenskyy, who said it was it was ‘unprecedented and absurd’ that the USA, NATO and EU had failed to set a timeline for Kyiv’s admission to the trans-Atlantic military alliance. A seemingly inevitable crisis, however, was averted by NATO’s 31-nation club because Ukraine is the frontline fighter of the West’s proxy war against the behemoth called Russia, whose land is preyed upon to be sliced for resources, forward deployment and a future ‘Great Game’ involving Asia, Europe and Africa.
Thus came the western media’s candid report that ‘NATO countries are using Ukraine as a testing ground for advanced weaponry and learning valuable lessons’. That’s obvious, because the West’s two most powerful business group lobbies are the Eisenhower-coined Military-Industrial-Complex (MIC) of the USA and the EU’s non-military-industrial export goods corporations of Paris, Berlin and Rome, which are desperately eyeing the market of China (despite its coercion and bullying). All because of the aftermath of the USSR break-up. Their shifted priorities and crippled capabilities resulted in combat weapons’ reduction and enhanced production and distribution of consumer and luxury goods.
For the ever-insatiable US private military contractors/corporations, however, the Russia-Ukraine conflict is a God-sent opportunity, especially after the botched-up, nocturnal retreat of the entire US fighting formations from Afghanistan’s Bagram airbase in August 2021. After a 20-year Afghan war where 40-odd nations pounded a landlocked country under the sole command of the USA (not the UN), the abrupt retreat meant an income drought for the West’s war merchants. Hence, nothing’s better for the US arms-making companies than the prospect of a prolonged European war where the USA is the pilot in command owing to being the leader and creator of the expanding NATO, akin to the imperialist British from the 18th to 20th centuries.
But, the problem today is the serious mismatch between Ukraine’s arms demand and the US-EU-NATO supply timelines. According to the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS): “Russia and Ukraine have… collectively fired 200,000 artillery shells per week. Yet, the total US production of 155 rounds currently stands at 20,000 per month, and will only reach 90,000 a month in 2024.” That one segment shows how even the mighty USA, despite her MIC, will find it hard to put conventional war materiel in place on time. Hence, the remote proxy war’s single frontline fighter is Ukraine. The US-NATO-EU can be arms merchant-suppliers, not the arms-bearing military in the battlefield.
No wonder Germany, even after injecting more than $105 billion into the defence budget, refused to supply Ukraine the Taurus missile, scrapped the joint tank maintenance hub plan in Poland, delayed supplying lethal arms and, along with the USA, is unwilling to give Ukraine the green light for NATO membership anytime soon. Ukraine’s entry will definitely reduce Germany’s importance in the EU.
Germany aside, France too cleared 413 billion euros for arms spending (2024-30), which is more than a third higher than the previous military spending. Surprisingly, however, France wants Israel to ‘help Ukraine repel Russia’. Is Israel to fight for proxy warriors of the West against Russia in Crimea? Is Russia facing a West Bank or Gaza-like front? Isn’t it a thought fraught with fatal consequences?
Finally, when President Biden sends F-16 fighters, cluster bombs which are banned under the international treaty by 123 countries (not including the USA), the Army Tactical Missile System — in use since the 1991 Gulf War with a unit cost of $800,000 plus — and has already sent HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket System), used since 2010 in Afghanistan (unit cost $3.5 million), one can realise as to why only Ukraine is to fight despite losing more than 20 per cent of its population — dead or scattered around western countries. And why the US-NATO-EU would not miss an opportunity to make money out of the Slavic mutual destruction in a civil war!
Even as the USA’s gross debt has crossed $32 trillion, the NATO summit shows that EU members are totally dependent on it. If so, how can a proxy war, with all the ingredients of a race war, resolve the dispute, bringing the merchants of war to the table for peace talks?
