Category: russia

America Triggered the Ukraine War?

June 23, 2022

I thought I could get a balanced view of news by listening to TV anchors and reading columnists from both the left and the right. I wrote a blog on this a few months ago. That was my thinking until I received an article from my cousin Tamas, who is in Vienna. He sent me an article presenting a scholarly view of the origin of the Ukraine war. The argument floored me.

You thought Russia started the war, right? Russia was massing its military for months on the Ukraine border before attacking. And remember, Russia occupied Crimea in 2014, so this war was a continuation of their aim to gain more territory. But no. Hungarian economist Karoly Lorant explains in an article in the conservative Hungarian daily Magyar Hirlap, that the war started way back in 1998 when the Americans passed a resolution to expand NATO, which President Clinton called a major foreign policy victory.

Going further back, Secretary of State James Baker told Gorbachev that if Germany as a whole could be a member of NATO, “NATO forces would not be extended as much as an inch to the east.” This was at a meeting at the Kremlin on February 9, 1990.

The world situation changed entirely when the Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991, and fifteen independent states emerged. According to Lorant, one result was the Americans had begun to support the expansion of NATO and talked about a unipolar world, with the US being the global force.

Lorant cites events supporting the expansion of NATO via the “Partnership for Peace Program” to cooperate with and encourage the democratization of Eastern European countries (many belonged to the former Soviet Union).

National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote a book “The Gand Chessboard” (1997) in which he explained that Belorussia and Ukraine were an important part of Russia, without which Russia was a weak country. Lorant’s thesis is that, with the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Russia has lost its power, particularly considering the loss of Belorussia and Ukraine. While the Russians were losing ground, the Americans were intent on expanding NATO.

According to Lorant, the Russians have been pushed back since the 1990s and, from their point of view, the situation had become untenable. No surprise that in January 2022, in Geneva, the Russians wanted the Americans to guarantee that Ukraine does not become a member of NATO. The Americans refused the request. So Lorant concludes that the continuous squeezing of Russia since the 1990s has created the condition for the war and the primary culprit is the US.

Although the facts may be true, I do not buy for a minute the conclusions Lorant draws from them. Russia is the transgressor in the Ukraine war; it is an unprovoked war (even Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, the right-wing leader of Hungary called Russia the aggressor in his speech on May 16, 2022). Ukraine did not invite the Russians to come in to help, unlike in the Cuban missile crisis (which, some people think, is comparable to the Ukraine situation), when Fidel Castro invited the Russians. Zelenski, the President of Ukraine, was elected democratically, and he did not invite the Russians to come into the country.

Second, the concept of territorial influence, that Russia has influence by right over Ukraine, or that historically Ukraine belongs to Russia, is not convincing today. That doctrine may have held water in the past, but now independent countries have the right to self-determination. In contrast to the Russian aim to recover lost territories, European countries have not gone back to their colonies trying to recover their lost territories.

Third, I think influence shows through technology and industrialization today and less via military action. The last time we visited Hungary, I expressed my surprise to Tamas at the high level of foreign ownership of grocery stores and banks. He explained foreign countries took over Hungary without a single life being lost by taking ownership of industry after Hungary declared independence in 1989 and the Soviets left the country in 1991.

For example, the spread of the iconic iPhone and Facebook has probably created more sustainable influence in countries where they are used than military action could ever provide. That is why brute military might with tanks appears old-fashioned to me and a losing idea in the long run. I thought that by using their natural resources and closer cooperation with the old Soviet satellite states, Russia could have established a successful industrial block. But, no; instead, they invaded a country with brute force.

And now I gather from Mr. Lorant’s scholarship that it was the US that triggered the war after continuous attempts to promote NATO and squeeze Russia until Russia saw no option but to invade Ukraine to regain its former territory.

So I learned that besides reading the full spectrum of left-to-right opinions in the west, which I thought would give me a balanced view, I should also read pro-Russian views, such as Lorant’s article, (based on excellent scholarship), that may substantially differ from our western view. That does not mean that Mr. Lorant changed my mind; he outlined a historical context that is interesting but irrelevant today. Just my opinion.

What if the Russians Take Over Ukraine?

March 10, 2022

The Russian bully is devastating Ukraine by bombing. Atrocities abound: they bombed hospitals, with children inside. It is unfathomable in today’s world what is going on. The type of ground war going on in Ukraine belongs to the past. A hundred years ago, maybe. But today, with the technology and nuclear power that many nations possess, this old-fashioned war is an anachronism. Be it as it may, it is happening and the Ukrainians are putting up a terrific fight to keep their country.

Why? Well, first, it is their country. It is human nature to protect your house, country, your territory. Property is important globally; people fight for their piece of land. That people can deprive you of your property by crude force is wrong.

Second, the Ukrainian people know the Russians from the time they were part of the Soviet Union and their experience had not been a happy one under Soviet rule. There was the collectivization of farms; confiscation of private property; forbidding free discussion except for communist dogma.

Communism following the Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin doctrine had not materialized, as originally conceived in the Soviet Union. For example, the tiny pieces of land, minuscule vegetable gardens farmers could keep for their use, flourished, while the large collectivized farms, the “kolhozes”, suffered a failure. The lesson learned was that people should be rewarded according to their efforts and initiative. When all people are rewarded equally regardless of their effort and contribution, people do the least effort since those who produce more are rewarded the same as those who produce less.

No doubt Ukrainians are against the Russians and what they would do to their country should they take over the country. But what would happen to the average Ukrainian? Suppose you are an electrical inspector working for a small city where you live. Your job is to go out every day and inspect what people do in their homes, to their electrical circuits, and make sure their activities meet the local code. What would happen after that Russians take over? Would you not be doing the same work? The work is important and will continue to exist and therefore your job would be safe and continue. So why would you object to having a Russian-controlled government when your job would remain and your current boss may continue to be your future boss?

Because the ongoing Russian bombing has devastated homes, killed people, and created a terrifying environment. Fierce resistance and hatred have developed towards the Russians.

The only way the Russians can take over Ukraine now is by installing the military to run the country. The current Ukrainian administration will be arrested, imprisoned, sent to reeducation camps, or executed (similar to what happened in Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968). And that will further increase quiet resistance and non-compliance with Russian rules.

In the near term, there will be the reconstruction of roads, of homes, destroyed. The infrastructure for utilities will have to be replaced. The quality of life will decrease because of the rubble and devastation. In Hungary, they rebuilt little of the infrastructure that was destroyed in WWII while Hungary was behind the Iron Curtain.

Over time, from the top government officials down, the administration would turn into a pro-Russian team, advocating loyalty to President Putin. And Russians would control the media and propaganda would work to turn Ukrainians anti-West.

Oligarchs would gradually take over Ukrainian industry, concentrate power and wealth in a few hands similar to what happened in Russia. Resource development would be only for the benefit of Russia, robbing the country of its natural resources similar to what happened in the satellite countries under the Soviet Union (Hungary, Czechoslovakia). Disagreement with government (i.e. Russian) policies would not be tolerated and dissidents jailed.

Since independence in 1991, Ukrainians have embraced western lifestyles. A change going back to the Soviet ways of life would be catastrophic to Ukrainians. Just my opinions.