More than a month in the Russo-Ukrainian war, the narrative has turned violently warmonger in the West. In fact, the media amplify demands for US military intervention and (repeated) calls for Putin’s assassination. Meanwhile, those demanding to prioritise ending civilian suffering over politicking endure relentless attacks and denigration in all NATO countries.
In this climate, there is little room for clear-headed conversations about the US and its allies’ response to the crisis. Yet, the President of the United States and other world leader must be held accountable for their decisions. Thus, voters should understand what policies that the US are – more or less openly – pushing over Ukraine.
Military support: Increasing casualties, risking a world war
Even though Biden is still reluctant for now, the Ukrainian government keeps demanding that NATO steps up its involvement. In the US, many support the Ukrainian President’s request to establish a no-fly zone to intercept Russian aircrafts. Needless to say, that means killing ‘large numbers of Russian military personnel, including beyond Ukraine’s borders’: a war against Russia.
Luckily enough, many political leaders met with hesitation or disregarded altogether most calls for a direct interventions. But NATO governments are either benevolently ignoring or favouring mercenaries fighting for the Ukrainian government. Even though those who managed to return home denounced the Ukrainian army for having treated them like ‘cannon fodder’. Sadly, mercenaries’ ruthless behaviour and uncertain international-law status are pushing the death toll up. Furthermore, the presence of foreigners favours the spread of unconfirmed rumours that may escalate tensions between Western countries and Russia.
Additionally, NATO countries are providing large amounts of military equipment to the Ukrainian armed forces. Undoubtedly, these weapons will prolong the war, increase civilian causalities on both sides. Not to mention the risk implicit in delivering arms while bombs blast virtually a few tens of kilometres eastwards. And, incidentally, they ‘won’t make any difference to Ukraine’.
Economic sanction: A test of corporations’ power in the woke West
At the same time, the US and, to a lesser extent, NATO allies are pushing massive economic sanctions against Russia. Namely, while most of these measures ‘are not unique […] the application of all of them together is unprecedented.’ First, the US revealed the full extent to which it can weaponize the dollar. However, banning several Russian banks from using the SWIFT system to process international payments will not devastate Russia’s economy. Rather it will just make life harder for the ‘Westernised’ Russians travelling or living abroad who usually oppose Putin. Further, it makes it nearly impossible for civil society organisations advocating peace and democracy to receive already-scarce funds from abroad. Relatedly, the West’s censorship of RT, Sputnik and other media companies created the perfect alibi for Russia’s umpteenth crackdown. So, after more than 20 years, the Echo of Moscow, Russian liberals’ State-funded radio, went off the air. Likewise, as the Kremlin exploits to big-tech companies’ censorship to further limit the flow of ideas by banning social media. If anything, the West has renounced to end civilians’ suffering by winning ordinary Russians’ hearts and minds.
Really, companies’ spontaneous banning of trading in Russia or with Russian partners is the most interesting aspect of these sanctions. As the University of Chicago’s Professor Zingales recently argued, this ‘privatization of sanctions’ is extremely dangerous. In fact, US corporations pretend to act on the basis of moral imperatives and values, but actually simply chase profits. Indeed, corporate America’s muted reaction to the enslavement of Muslim Uighurs in China shows that values are irrelevant per se.Practically, liberty and democracy only matter when supporting them will improve shareholders’ returns by boosting reputation and increasing sales. Thus, the effectiveness of US sanctions is really beyond the scope of the federal government’s control. Rather, it rests on a hateful alliance between profit-seeking media companies executing their shareholders’ partisan agenda and radical opinion-makers.
Hence, given the Chinese market’s importance for US companies, an attack on Taiwan may generate much less pushback, if any. Moreover, the dollar’s weaponization is accelerating investors’ flight from the Treasury and the greenback — a ‘global monetary reset’. Consequentially, both neutral countries like India and hostile powers like Iran are becoming increasingly less vulnerable to currency-based sanctions. More importantly, as China’s Yuan starts to behave as a ‘safe-heaven asset’, Taipei’s door is shut wide open.
The costs abdicating pacifism
Summarising, the cost of not attempting to bring about a pacifist solution to the war in Ukraine is enormous. Today, the US and NATO risk World War III to deliver weapons that may not save the Ukrainian government. Tomorrow, reliance on private companies’ sanctions and the dollar’s premature weaponization may lead the US in a war with China.
But is Ukraine’s government worth the risk?
Continues …
