Reprinted from Bracing Views with the author’s permission.
Comrades, it has finally happened: I’ve been accused of being pro-Russia.
I was accused because I advocate for diplomacy and a negotiated settlement to the Russia-Ukraine War. Generally, I’m pro-peace and anti-war, but that’s a bad thing to be in the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
Apparently, the only way to be pro-Ukraine is to advocate for and work toward a complete Ukrainian military victory over Russian forces, meaning that all Russian forces must be expelled from Ukraine, no matter the cost. That also means that Ukraine should get every weapon system they request from the U.S. and NATO, no matter the cost and no matter how many people are killed with these weapons. Putin is evil, Russians are bad, and the only thing “they” understand is maximum violence.
Comrades, I figure I should embrace my pro-Russia identity and really explain it. So here are the top ten reasons “From Russia With Love” is my byword:
-
I want Ukraine to win the war and Russia to lose, and I accept that Putin’s invasion a year ago was both illegal and immoral. That makes me pro-Russia.
-
While I want Ukraine to win, I don’t believe the best way to “win” is a long war fought on Ukrainian territory at immense cost to all involved. That makes me pro-Russia.
-
I believe negotiations are possible between Russia and Ukraine and that an immediate cease fire will save countless Russian and Ukrainian lives. That makes me pro-Russia.
-
I don’t believe Western military aid to Ukraine is disinterested or driven by a love of democracy. That makes me pro-Russia.
-
I worry that a lengthy war as well as a more intense one could lead to dangerous escalation, perhaps even to nuclear war, a risk illustrated by the “doomsday clock” moving ever closer to midnight. That makes me pro-Russia.
-
I worry that a war that ends with Putin being overthrown could lead to a destabilized Russia in which nuclear surety is compromised. That makes me pro-Russia.
-
I believe that history began before Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine and that NATO expansion to Russia’s borders was unnecessary and unwise. That makes me pro-Russia.
-
I note the enormous profits being made by US fossil fuel companies, especially from LNG (natural gas) shipments, partly due to the destruction of Nord Stream 2, as well as the profiteering by arms merchants and a soaring Pentagon budget, and I question US motivations in this war. That makes me pro-Russia.
-
I note the mind numbing casualties already produced by this war (roughly 100,000 troops killed or wounded on each side), the millions of refugees, the untold billions in destruction inflicted on Ukraine, and I seek a way to say “no” to more killing, “no” to more war. That makes me pro-Russia.
-
I call on all sides to show maturity, to seek another way beyond yet more violence and killing, a way that respects the security interests of all involved, a way that fosters peace and reconciliation. That makes me pro-Russia.
Comrades, there you have it. I think you’ll agree I am pro-Russia, an acolyte of Putin, a willing puppet or useful idiot of Russian imperialism. The clincher is that I haven’t added a tiny Ukrainian flag to my Facebook profile photo or to my Twitter feed, so, really, what more proof do you need?
William J. Astore is a retired lieutenant colonel (USAF). He taught history for fifteen years at military and civilian schools. He writes at Bracing Views.
All of us who oppose this U.S. proxy war have been accused of being Russian and/or Putin stooges. Such is the current state of propaganda and brainwashing in the U.S.
I often want to ask anyone who talks about NATO’s “recent” expansion to the borders of Russia, to acknowledge that NATO was on the borders of the Soviet Union almost from the beginning. Norway was an original member in 1949, and Turkey joined in 1952, and they both bordered the USSR.
So what is your point? That Russia readily accepted NATO’s inclusion of Norway and Turkey, and that, as a result, should happily continue to accept the never ending expansion? Russia’s policy was/is that once the Warsaw Pact folded, so should NATO have ceased to exist. Or at least that it shouldn’t extend east of Germany. It would be difficult to be more reasonable than that.
My point is exactly the opposite of your “state a falsehood as a question and hope it sticks” BS.
Feb 1, 2023 — Jimmy Dore: “Your enemy is not China. Your enemy is not Russia. Your enemy is the Military Industrial Complex.”
One and the same Eisenhower warned about.
The military/intelligence/industrial complex is a tool of the ruling class. I totally oppose all military and spook organizations, but the real ones behind the curtain are the rich who run everything, and the system they’ve set up to perpetuate all this crap.
I’m Pro-Russia, Pro-Ukraine & Pro-World. I’m neither Pro-Putin nor Pro-Zelensky nor Pro-Biden. Just because Russia is not a democracy doesn’t mean Ukraine is a democracy. Just because the US is a democracy doesn’t mean it is part of the solution and not part of the problem. In fact, the USA is part of the problem.
The USSR & Warsaw Pact were dissolved long ago. Not only is NATO still around, its membership has expanded over the years and includes most former Warsaw Pact Members. The US has been expanding NATO & its bases to Russia’s borders. Ukraine persecutes its Russian speakers. That’s why they want to join Russia.
Peace now!
The U.S. is not a democracy, it only has a thin veneer of democracy. https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746 The U.S. is a oligarchy/plutocracy/police state that only pretends to be a democracy.
The nation-states that you’re pro are the problem as much as anything. When we learned that Russia had invaded, my first comment to my wife is that countries should be no larger than 50 people so they couldn’t do this kind of crap. All war is a result of human overpopulation and the resulting civilization. See Derrick Jensen’s writings and/or lectures for more details.
“I want Ukraine to win the war and Russia to lose, and I accept that Putin’s invasion a year ago was both illegal and immoral. That makes me pro-Russia.”
Oh really? Both illegal and immoral! What is this russophobic rant doing here, on antiwar.com?! If William Astore thinks that Putin’s military intervention in Ukraine is both illegal and immoral then he doesn’t know anything worth knowing about the roots of the conflict. A worthless piece of Yankee propaganda. The retired lieutenant colonel can take his “experience” with him and hit the road. He has nothing to offer.
Pinning this situation on Russia is nothing but U.S. propaganda, considering over 30 years of U.S. provocation leading to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
But that said, if you’re anti-war, you have to oppose Russia’s invasion. I don’t agree that Russia’s invasion here was necessarily illegal; Russia has laid out a credible legal argument that supports its position that the invasion was legal. I don’t take a position on that one way or the other, but I oppose the invasion for anti-war reasons, and Russia should have found a better way to resolve this.
What better way? Russia waited patiently 8 years for Kiev to stop killing its own citizens in Donbass and to implement the Minsk agreements. I am also “anti-war, ” except that unfortunately war is part of our violent, fraudulent civilization. I think Russia had no better alternative, but I don’t have time to go into details here.
My idea was to work with China to pressure the U.S. into backing off NATO expansion and stop Ukraine from attacking its ethnic Russians. The U.S. is pulling crap against China too, and I think China would have been amenable to working with Russia on this even in its own self-interest (China’s).
But that aside, it’s not the job of ordinary citizens to figure this out, it’s the job of Putin and other leaders. If you want to become the leader of a major country, it’s your responsibility to figure out stuff like this. Or you can just invade, which is always the wrong thing to do.
Evil is never stationary. It either pushes forward or it gets pushed backward. Putin has been up against pure Evil. His only recourse was to push back.
With the U.S./NATO pumping Ukraine full of lethal war materiel, and raising up a NATO trained army, and persecuting and shelling the ethnic Russians in the Donbass, what better way would you have found to resolve this, since the U.S. was insisting on making Ukraine part of NATO and had overthrown the democratically elected leader in the 2014 Maidan coup? Remember the U.S. refused to discuss Russia’s legitimate security concerns in any negotiations. How many times should Putin keep turning the other cheek?
As I said in my response to Konrad above, it’s not the job of regular people to figure this stuff out; it’s the job of the leaders like Putin.
That said, my idea was that Russia should have worked with China to pressure the U.S. to back off in Ukraine. China would have had a lot of leverage because of the huge amount of goods they provide to the U.S., and would have had incentive to get involved because of the crap the U.S. is pulling against them too. Don’t know that this would have worked, just one idea.
Maybe working with China would have cost Russia too much.