The declarations made to the press by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on his trip to Brazil were startling, if not somber. The naturalness, self-confidence and opportunism with which he goes to Latin America to expand the declaration of war on Russia made by his Minister of Foreign Affairs in full parliament, and forcing warlike alliances in Chile, Argentina and now Brazil, brings several warnings to the world.
When Annalena Bärbock of the Green Party says that her country, along with others, is at war with Russia, she dismantles the argument of mere military support for Ukraine. It is no longer even possible to speak of a proxy war. The war of the NATO countries against Russia becomes official. I wonder if she has a mandate from the German people to do so, and why Scholz didn’t immediately dismiss her.
Scholz’s open positions on the Ukraine war are in solid congruence with NATO’s destructive desire and Zelensky’s delusional insatiability for more and more weapons and no peace talks.
Scholz’s total alignment with NATO rhetoric is disturbing, and made me wonder whether Annalena Bärbock’s open declaration of war could really just be negligent from an internal point of view or actually supported by at least one German government provision.
Scholz has said and repeated that Russia must admit defeat, withdraw and return the conquered territories to Ukraine. This statement is alien to the military and political reality on the ground, and any possibility of bringing any conflict to a diplomatic resolution. It can therefore only be understood as an open signal that Germany will not negotiate anything and accepts only a full Russian surrender, including the return of the Donbas. The war will be eternal while it lasts.
Scholz’s statement is startlingly irresponsible in the context of how close his country is geographically to Russia, historical relations and contemporary economic realities (Germany is now using coal), and the danger of an escalation. NATO has never heard of diplomacy, but Scholz should at least be diplomatic in his vocabulary and public rhetoric. If clipped, it could be a speech by Clinton or Trump, or any Pentagon spokesperson.
It is mediocre that the son of two workers in the German textile industry, who entered the Social Democratic Party at the age of 17 and defined himself as a “young socialist”, dissociates himself from his past and the past of his party. The Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (SPD) played a key role in the German Revolution of 1918-1919, which proclaimed Germany a republic, and which helped to make Germany in its Federal Constitution a social-democratic state enshrining the class struggle as a form of of State.
But really extrapolating was Scholz’s request that Lula send ammunition to Ukraine. Lula made a point of publicly and clearly refusing, in his subtlety he asked that the word “peace” be pronounced more and requested the creation of a negotiating group including Germany, France and “Chinese friends, who can play an important role” .
This request for ammunition from Brazil for the war in Europe is an act of political alienation or bad faith by Scholz, considering that one of the main items on the agenda is the joint fight against the rise of the extreme right.
Countries that are not part of this war, unlike Germany, did not need to feed the propaganda machine by instrumentally suppressing knowledge about the extent of neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine that these weapons are also aimed at. But in addition, we recognize them as part of the state apparatus of Ukraine. We don’t lie to ourselves and we are able to assimilate reality.
It is not contentious fact that Ukraine has neo-Nazi militias on the government payroll, who act and kill civilians as part of their regular army using torture as a method, terrorize Russian minorities for over 8 years, and ignited a civil war in the Donbas . How much closer can you get to 1933? Not to forget, the US, several European countries and the European Union funded neo-Nazi militias in the region. The UK government even trained them. An old modus operandi, as they are the most ruthless to defeat the enemy. Whether Russia had the right to invade is a different matter, and does not preclude the ability to negotiate peace.
Scholz also doesn’t seem to be reading the environment he finds himself in. The PT and the Latin American left have historically been critical of US interference in the eastern bloc and its claim that the eastern bloc is a “US zone of influence”.
It is written in blood on the pages of common history on this continent and in the wave of contemporary lawfare as the US manufactures its own international law by marginalizing bilateral agreements. With Russia it was no different; Since the second Bush administration, each and every diplomatic treaty ensuring the end of the cold war has been unilaterally rescinded by the US.
Here one is well aware that Zelensky is a product of a government formed in a color revolution (coup d’état) led by US neoliberal “neocons” and operating as an extended US interest in the eastern bloc. The Brazilian left has not forgotten the direct participation of the Department of Justice and the US State Department in the parliamentary coup against Dilma and that Lula’s arrest was a gift from the CIA. It’s not a historical coincidence or the zeitgeist, it’s US state policy.
Scholz was vexatious in his arrogance in ignoring the new position of countries like Brazil in the world, and the less comfortable position of Germany and nations hitherto founded on the myth of hegemony. The new geopolitical realities no longer support the cult of the hegemonic ideas of the so-called “western world” (the collective west).
And, although societies founded on the pillars of exploitation and sedimented on ideas of cultural superiority for centuries, insist on perpetuating this role and the cold war with Russia, reality is already beginning to demonstrate that the cultural ignorance and passion for domination of these nations it doesn’t have as much breath or influence. They are no longer so masters and the rest are not so much slaves. The chessboard of the old powers collapsed.
In this context, Lula’s speech is brilliant when he naturalizes multilateralism as a reality, when he declares that the UN does not correspond to political reality and is operating anachronistically as if there were a cold war, and that Brazil and the African countries want to join the UN security. It announces new roles. This message seems simple, but for me it goes to the heart of this war and the new reality we are building. It buries the end of the cold war and its international mechanisms, and heralds the emergence of a new world order. Lula exposed the European imperialist left and co-opted by neoliberal ideas. Scholz can learn from Lula, the opportunity remains.
Join our WhatsApp group, click this link
Join our Telegram channel, click this link