Mao was wrong: when things go wrong, paper tigers become more fearsome
Any abstract appeal to peace is not enough: the term “peace”, taken by itself, does not allow us to draw fundamental distinctions. The occupiers always sincerely want peace in the territories they occupy. Israel wants peace in the West Bank. In Ukraine, Russia is on a peace mission … Lenin himself believed that a great war could create the conditions for a revolution. Today, to prevent war, some form of revolution is needed. Let us recall the words spoken on February 2 by the Russian Foreign Minister Sergej Lavrov: if a Third World War broke out, it would be a highly destructive nuclear conflict; and Russia would be in “real danger” if Kiev acquired nuclear weapons. Years ago, as is well known, Putin stated that if, during a future war, Russia lost on the battlefield, it would be ready to use nuclear weapons first. Mao Zedong was wrong: when the war goes badly, the paper tigers become more fearsome.
The obsession that Russia should not only lose in Ukraine, but that it should be seen to lose (in Boris Johnson’s terms) is very, very imprudent. Words carry weight and increase tension. Political leaders in danger are willing to take every risk to save face. Before the Russian attack, Zelenskyi was right to warn the United States against repeating over and over that war was imminent: he knew it was true, but he also knew that repeating it can be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Where is the wisdom shown by Kennedy and Khrushchev today at the time of the Cuban crisis?
On March 5, Putin defined the sanctions promulgated against Russia as “equivalent to a declaration of war” and that he would have considered belligerent Western nations that imposed a flight ban on Ukraine. We must read these statements in the context of what Putin repeated several times in the previous days: economic exchanges with the West must proceed as usual; Russia will keep its commitments and continue to sell gas to Europeans … The moral is that Russia is not returning to the good old Cold War, with its established rules: during the Cold War, international relations were clearly regulated, thanks to the spectrum of the “Mad” (“Mutually Assured Destruction” [reciproca distruzione garantita]) of the two superpowers. When the USSR invaded Afghanistan, thus violating those unwritten rules, he paid dearly for the infringement: the war in Afghanistan was the beginning of its end.
No, the “Mad” is now behind us. Old and new superpowers are now putting each other to the test: they try to impose their own version of the global rules, applying them by proxy on smaller nations and states. Russia tries to dictate a new model of international relations: no longer the Cold War but warm peace, a peace that amounts to a permanent hybrid war, in which military interventions are redefined as humanitarian peacekeeping and genocide prevention missions. When the war broke out, we read that “the Duma expresses its unequivocal and strengthened support for measures proportionate to humanitarian purposes”. How often in the past have we heard similar statements applied to interventions in Latin America or Iraq; now it is Russia that takes that place. (And therefore Julian Assange should be our hero more than ever). While, in a country it intends to control, Russia bombs cities, kills civilians, attacks universities, trade should proceed normally, and everything else outside Ukraine should continue as before … this we must oppose unconditionally.
Text collected from Letizia Tortello
Unlimited access to all site content
€ 1 / month for 3 months, then € 3.99 / month for 3 months
Unlock unlimited access to all content on the site
#world #Russia #dreams #wars #hybrid #permanent