[Peace] Fwd: [marxmail] Interview with Boris Kagarlitsky: "Putin's war driven by domestic politics"

[C. G. Estabrook]

> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: "Chris Slee" <chris_w_slee at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [marxmail] Interview with Boris Kagarlitsky: "Putin's war driven by domestic politics"
> Date: July 4, 2022 at 6:32:16 PM CDT
> To: marxmail <marxmail at groups.io>
> Reply-To: marxmail at groups.io
> 
> I don't wish to defend Kagarlitsky's past political positions.  But I think it is simplistic to say that the Donetsk and Luhansk "peoples republics" were "creations of Russian military aggression".
> 
> Ukrainian socialist Taras Bilous has a more nuanced understanding.  He says that the situation in Donbas in 2014 was "complicated". 
> 
> https://commons.com.ua/en/self-determination-and-the-war-in-ukraine/ <https://commons.com.ua/en/self-determination-and-the-war-in-ukraine/> 
> 
> In an interview with an Italian left magazine he said:
> 
> "Forse il miglior quadro per spiegare la guerra nel Donbass è quello del conflitto tra due nazionalismi, in cui persone di opinioni diverse, tra cui la sinistra e l’estrema destra, hanno preso parte da entrambi i lati."
> 
> "Perhaps the best framework for explaining the war in the Donbas is that of the conflict between two nationalisms, in which people of diverse opinions, including the left and the extreme right, have taken part on both sides."
> 
> "In primo luogo, l’inizio della guerra nel Donbass fu un processo complesso. Da parte filorussa, gli attori principali erano tre: il movimento di base, emerso come reazione alla vittoria di Maidan; le élite regionali che hanno cercato di usare il movimento separatista per mantenere il loro potere, che vedevano minacciato dal nuovo governo post-Maidan; la Russia, le cui azioni hanno intensificato la violenza e approfondito il divario tra le parti in conflitto. Se non fosse stato per le azioni della Russia, il conflitto nel Donbass avrebbe potuto limitarsi a scontri di piazza tra manifestanti filo-ucraini e filo-russi, piuttosto che degenerare in una guerra a tutti gli effetti."
> 
> "In the first place, the start of the war in the Donbas was a complex process.  On the pro-Russian side, the principal actors were three:  the movement from below, that emerged as a reaction to the victory of Maidan;  the regional elite, that sought to use the separatist movement to maintain their power, that they saw threatened by the new post-Maidan government;  Russia, whose actions intensified the violence and deepened the division between the parties in conflict.  If it had not been for the actions of Russia, the conflict in Donbas could have been limited to clashes in the squares between pro-Ukrainian and pro-Russian demonstrators, rather than degenerating into a war with all its effects."
> 
> https://www.officineciviche.it/sociale/ucraina-una-prospettiva-solidale-e-popolare-ne-parliamo-con-taras-bilous/ <https://www.officineciviche.it/sociale/ucraina-una-prospettiva-solidale-e-popolare-ne-parliamo-con-taras-bilous/>
> 
> 
> Thus Bilous recognised the existence of a "movement from below" (movimento di base, which can also be translated as "grass roots movement") in Donbas.  This was presumably what impressed Kagarlitsky back in 2014.  He may have exaggerated it, but he did not invent it.
> 
> 
> 
> ***
> 
> 
> 
> Some dogmatic commentators say:  "Ukrainian fascists played a major role in the Maidan rebellion.  The United States supported the rebellion.  Therefore the rebellion was a US-backed fascist coup".
> 
> Other dogmatic commentators say: "Russian fascists played a major role in the Donbas rebellion.  Russia supported the rebellion.  Therefore the rebellion was a Russian-backed fascist coup".
> 
> 
> 
> Both positions ignore the complexity of the situation.
> 
> 
> Chris Slee
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace/attachments/20220704/c611984c/attachment.htm>