Proto-Protestantism: The Wider Implications of The Ukraine War (II)

31 March 2023

The Wider Implications of The Ukraine War (II)

The hypocritical and frankly spurious ICC indictment of Putin for war crimes was timed perfectly to coincide with Xi's recent trip to Moscow, and meant to embarrass the Asian leader who got to claim the credit for the Riyadh-Tehran agreement. Washington's posture regarding the ICC is hypocritical, self-serving, and even ridiculous as the American government consistently claims the court (which it helped to create) has no jurisdiction over either the United States or Israel because they are not signatories to the treaty. However, when it comes to non-signatories such as Russia (who also refuses to acknowledge the court), the ICC has full jurisdiction – or so it is argued.

Apart from the move to send tanks and now jets to Ukraine there are further signals of escalation. The US is considering giving cluster bombs to Ukraine even though it condemns other nations for using them. The US only signed the treaty which bans these cruel weapons a few years ago and yet often pretends as if this was always the case. And yet clearly Washington has not disposed of its (now illegal) stockpile, and there are those in Washington willing to pass them on to Ukraine. To use them in territory that Kyiv wishes to claim as Ukraine is madness – as (assuming the territory is recaptured) they will plague its own people for a generation or more to come. And if not for the contested territory – then where will they be used? In Russian territory?

Additionally, the UK is now planning to send armour piercing shells to Ukraine in order to defeat Russian tanks. However, these shells are tipped with Depleted Uranium (DU) which the US has used extensively in places like Iraq. The end result is contamination with a spike in cancers and birth defects as these are effectively low-grade radioactive weapons – not quite a 'dirty bomb' as Putin claimed, but far more impactful and dangerous than the dismissive rebuttals coming from Washington and London. Their use should constitute a war crime on the order of using chemical weapons – a charge the US always avoids even when it uses not only depleted uranium but things like phosphorus, Agent Orange and until very recently cluster bombs. These weapons are truly evil for they continue to maim and kill decades after their battlefield use.

Putin has responded by suggesting that he will deploy tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus – an unfortunate escalation to be sure. But if you listen to what he's saying, which Western media will rarely report, it's in response to the UK's deployment of Depleted Uranium weapons and no different than the US deployment of nuclear weapons in allied countries such as the UK, Germany, Türkiye, and Italy. Thus while US and EU protests are hypocritical, Western populations are led to believe that all the aggression is coming from Moscow, when in reality Russia has been biting its tongue and enduring NATO advancement and militarism for well over twenty years. Pushed to the brink, Putin acted, and was caught in a trap that was laid for him – which will forever paint him as the aggressor. At some point the fault-finding becomes meaningless as the tit-for-tat escalations drives the world increasingly toward the brink.

Listening to some commentators on the Right there almost seems an eagerness for global war. This combined with some who view it as inevitable, is cause for concern. This age will be characterized by wars and rumours of wars but as the Church is not faithful to the teaching of Christ and the apostles on these matters – it is the response of the Christian community that is of concern. The acculturated Church will all too easily succumb to the war propaganda. We've seen it over and over again and the teachings and ethics of the New Testament will be turned on their head and the Kingdom of Christ substituted for a nationalist bloodthirsty idol that demands lives and sadly too many in the Church will be willing to give it and give up the lives of their children, and approve of the murder of others.

American nationalists are upset by the recent meetings between Xi and Putin and fear that China may provide arms to Moscow – thus threatening to tip the scales and wreck the NATO plan for Ukraine and thwart the planned collapse of the Putin regime. I'm sure Xi is weighing all the options. He knows that Washington is planning for war even now and if he views it as inevitable, he may see the arming of Russia as being in accord with his interests. Will he be willing to let the Russians become cannon fodder, just as the West is using the people of Ukraine?

There are those in the West that are foolishly creating an axis that doesn't actually exist but could come together or it could be said is almost being forced together. Russia, Iran, China, and North Korea are not natural allies and in fact there are great historical antagonisms. But US policy is driving them into a functional bloc.

Some want this war – a global conflagration with the aforementioned nations in a contest with NATO, AUKUS, and the other Pacific satrapies of the US Empire – nations like South Korea, Japan, and of course Taiwan.

Be careful what you wish for – sometimes these threats become self-fulfilling prophecies.

But these blocs are not as solid as some think – on either side. China's brokered peace deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran demonstrates the America's long-time ally in Riyadh is drifting. Some have labeled the episode as the American Suez, a reference to the British Empire's swan song in 1956, and its final acquiescence to US domination. As previously mentioned, at the very least it's a slap in the face to Washington and a loss of prestige and yet it moves Iran from a position of utter hostility to the West to one of triangulation given Riyadh's relationship to Washington. On another level Riyadh though dependent on Washington for security and for backing its war in Yemen, nevertheless seems willing to pursue its own agenda at points. Many are speaking of a new Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) beginning to form, which will not upset China as much as it will those in Washington. It was much the same during the US-Soviet Cold War.

Let us hope indeed that this Saudi-Iranian agreement ends the largely ignored, misunderstood, and misrepresented war in Yemen. Iran is not the major player in that bloodbath that some would make it out to be, but it can cut off arms and help in negotiating a peace. And that too would be a loss of face for Washington – a Middle Eastern war ended without the US State Department guiding the process. If China wants to rub Washington's face in it – Beijing should make a move to negotiate a peace deal. Although given that it's basically a US-sponsored proxy war, it may prove difficult.

Iran's status is not entirely clear in this American nationalist-constructed axis. Beijing and Pyongyang are not nearly as close as some think, nor are Russia and China. But a multi-faceted war might bring them together – for a time. And certainly, America's policies are all but driving these nations together as they share a common interest – they are targets of America's war machine.

Likewise NATO is not nearly as unified as some would like and while it's one thing to bomb Serbia, Afghanistan, and Libya – and to arm Ukraine, a war on a global scale might push the alliance to the breaking point – if not at first, then later.

The World Wars gave rise to the American Empire – but also broke and ended many more. The US should take heed because it may emerge from such a conflict, not the unipolar power it still dreams of being – but instead a broken empire in decline and facing fragmentation.

And this entire discussion has ignored the elephant in the room – nuclear weapons. Should such a war be pursued to the utmost, to the point of regimes being placed in existential danger, then these weapons could come into play. One thinks of the utter collapse of Germany and Japan and the fall of their regimes in 1945. Neither Russia, China, nor North Korea will allow for that kind of end. Tehran has no choice, the only question being, will the others allow it to fall in such a way?

And where would Israel fit in this war? The response of nuclear armed Tel Aviv could radically change the entire dynamic. And given that another intifada looks very possible, the timing could prove interesting.

There's also a presidential election that's picking up steam and the now-indicted Donald Trump is at the centre of it. What will happen if the US implodes? Will China makes its move? And how will a desperate US regime respond?

Let us hope and pray that the warmongers are not heard. But given John Bolton's resurgent popularity and his revisionism concerning the Iraq War (in connection to the twenty year anniversary) – the signs are not good. The fact that such evil and murderous architects of death are being once more given credence and a public platform via mainstream media is a sure warning to not just the American public, but the world.