on the edge of the abyss


The war in ukraine it brought the world to the brink of an extinction crisis that hinges on the escalation of the conflict between the major nuclear powers. And it occurred when the post-Cold War world began to break down without a new multipolar order being established. Much of the support or criticism with strong ideological content is meaningless in this new reality, as is the alignment by blocks that do not finish conforming. Argentina is inserted in an area of ​​influence of the United States, which demands unconditional alignment while promoting financial suffocation through the IMF. On the contrary, it found in Russia and China agreements for multi-million dollar investments in infrastructure that would help him out of the crisis.

There are no ideological blocs in dispute. The United States does not support democracies that do not align with them. And it has supported and promoted dictatorships to overthrow democratic governments. Russia’s problem is the security of its borders and the preservation of its area of ​​influence and not the “denazification” of Ukraine. In this scenario, after the fall of the USSR, the United States provoked the Russian reaction by advancing with NATO on the countries surrounding Moscow. Russia allowed this advance because it did not have the strength to prevent it but it was obvious that it would react when cornered.

The criticism of macrismo because Argentina did not assume a pro-American position was based on a false ideological argument: Washington-democracy versus Moscow-authoritarianism. At both poles there are both. And this false development sustained in the declarations of the macrismo, especially by the radical macristas, is mixed with the nonsense that characterize the networks.

Like the Flavia Palmiero that mixed the war in Ukraine with the Sputnik vaccine that saved tens of thousands of lives. But what is now shown as bizarre with the Palmiero was seriously affirmed when these drugs began to arrive from Russia at the same time that Donald Trump accumulated them in the US and prevented their distribution in the world.

For the Argentine Trotsquism, Vladimir Putin he is an equivalent of Stalin and from there they deduce their position. And a part of the left — including a sector that supports the ruling party with many criticisms — accused the government of aligning itself with Washington because it did not support the Russian invasion and because the Foreign Ministry statement asks Russia to “cease war activities ”.

These positions are traversed by a kind of ideological nostalgia for the old Soviet Union, a reminiscence that would be embodied in the figure of Putin. But the president of the Russian Federation took it upon himself to distance himself from the Soviet past by blaming Lenin for having granted the independence of Ukraine, which until then had been part of the tsarist empire.

To criticize the Foreign Ministry statement, some wanted to make a comparison with Lula. But the popular leader of Brazil — who is trying to close an alliance with his old adversaries from the neoliberal center to confront Jair Bolsonaro in the presidential elections — was much more critical of Russia.

There is no left-right conflict, capitalism-socialism or democracy-authoritarianism. There is a conflict of interest in the context of the breakdown of an anachronistic global institutionality and the emergence of a new multipolarity.

The new pipeline that will carry Russian gas through the Baltic and Germany will solve a large part of Europe’s energy shortage, but will create a relationship of interdependence with Russia that makes NATO anachronistic.

The United States views these realignments with concern and has tried to boycott Nord Stream 2, whose approval has now been blocked by Germany. Five European companies in addition to the Russian ones participated in the monumental work. Other companies that would have participated desisted from doing so due to threats of retaliation made by Trump. The gas pipeline is finished and the only thing left is that approval from the Germans.

While Germany froze this decision “for the moment”, the whole of Europe is in suspense, because Russia supplies 40 percent of gas to the continent. There is no replacement for that volume, neither natural gas nor LNG. Neither Qatar, nor the United States, nor Norway nor Azerbaijan are in a position to replace that amount. However, Russia also has a strong economic dependence on the export of its gas.

In this context of interdependence, the Russian corporation Gazprom He reassured the Europeans by announcing that he will not suspend the provision of the fluid, despite the financial reprisals that are being taken against leaders of that country, from all areas, including the editor of Russia Today. But they haven’t touched any of Gazprom.

While the United States and Great Britain insist on NATO, Germany and France have raised objections and the need to form a European alliance more defined by European interests. The war in Ukraine also highlights the ineffectiveness of the UN to resolve these conflicts. Lula emphasized in the Security Council where the decision-making capacity is only in the five powers that integrate it with the right to veto and permanent presence.

Although not related to the war, the IMF’s unusual loan to Argentina clearly showed its goal of bringing associated countries into the US sphere of influence. As a global institution, it was created by the Bretton Woods agreements supposedly to attend to problems of the external sector of the associated countries. But in fact, the dynamics of the IMF obeyed the need of the United States in the Cold War to strengthen the neoliberal hegemony in the sector of the planet he controlled. The free market guarantees the hegemony of the strongest economies and subjugates the weakest.

The United Nations and its Security Council, NATO and the IMF represent a reality that is being left behind while the new global configuration is not finished being shown. They have become obsolete as global institutions. Either they disappear or they reformulate.

The way in which the war in Ukraine will affect Argentina will depend on its development. If Russia turns its agricultural production over to China, Argentina would have to look for the markets that they would be forced to leave. And no doubt the rise in the price of oil and gas will rebound strongly. But the conflict is just beginning and no one wants it to continue. Russia announced that it will not occupy Ukraine and that it is ready to talk. The Pope, who expressed his concern about the war, could become a channel for dialogue. And the worst can also happen: everyone involved has nuclear arsenals.

The position of the Argentine government was criticized by left and right. But she has been very careful. Argentina has to lose if it fights with Washington, with which it has a long future of negotiation and permanent bid for the debt. But that is the only thing that the power of the North has to offer.

On the other hand, Russia and China have committed investments for the construction of power plants and other large infrastructure works on roads and railways. The Foreign Ministry’s statement is very careful, it does not speak of “invasion” or “aggression”, as the right demands, but it proposes to de-escalate the conflict and asks Russia to “cease the military actions”, which angers a sector of the left, although everyone agrees that war is always synonymous with misfortune.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.