Archive for the ‘Neutrality’ Category
Cluster bombs in Ukraine – hypocrisy in the Morning Star (a British Tankie publication) and the Irish organization People Before Profit
Jim Denham writes a useful article about cluster bombs controversy and Russia’s genocidal imperialist invasion of Ukraine.
Jim’s text (reprinted in full below) is recommended reading, especially for unfortunate, misled, and baffled readers who saw a slogan circulated by the Irish radical left organization, People Before Profit (PBP) : “Cluster Bombs Shouldn’t Exist – Never Mind Be Used”. Did these people raise the issue of cluster bombs when the Russian military was using them to kill Ukrainians? We have been over this PBP ground already, and a key point needs repetition here and in the future :
The only mentions of what might be the wishes and intentions of the people of Ukraine, in an article devoid of any reference to Russian war crimes are, “In Ukraine, there are even demands for cluster bombs and phosphorus weapons”and “We stand in solidarity with all those protesting, and with those in Ukraine and Russia who are bravely raising their voices against war.” Who in Ukraine is bravely raising their voices against the heroic resistance of the mass of the Ukrainian people? There is not a word of solidarity for those in Ukraine raising their bodies and weapons against Russia’s war upon their lives, their homes and their freedoms.
https://tomasoflatharta.com/2023/06/16/neutrality-yes-solidarity-yes/
Above: a cluster bomb capsule on the ground amid the Russia-Ukraine war in Avdiivka, Ukraine, on March 23, 2023 [GETTY IMAGES]
Cluster munitions are horrible weapons that can be delivered by rockets, missiles, and aircraft. They open in mid-air and disperse dozens and even hundreds of smaller submunitions, also called capsules or bomblets, over an area the size of a city block. Many submunitions fail to explode on impact, leaving duds that act like landmines, posing a deadly threat to civilians for years and even decades.
Read the rest of this entry »The Neutrality Policy of the Irish State – A rational defence strategy is required
The left campaign to defend the current Irish foreign policy of Neutrality should be supported – (more accurately the campaign should be styled Non-Alignment, in the sense of 100 per cent opposition to membership of NATO or any other imperialist military alliance).
Opponents of the Dublin government’s attempt to move closer to NATO got lucky.
Foreign Affairs Minister Micheál Martin set up a public “consultative” forum examining Irish foreign policy – which is designed to push the Irish state closer to NATO. President Michael D Higgins launched an effective public attack
Irish President Michael D Higgins Mocked a British Empire Dame from Waterford, Louise Richardson – Is this Expert a good choice to chair an Irish Public Forum on the Neutrality Foreign Policy?
Higgins forced the issue into the mainstream media. Otherwise, the Forum would have taken place with much less publicity. Opponents of the government cannot rely on a lucky break like that every time.
The Irish State has ignored its responsibility to police our skies and our seas. It allows other states – primarily Britain – to do that job. Today, in 2023, international global tensions have risen to an alarming degree, and a very serious imperialist and genocidal war is occurring in the heart of Europe, in Ukraine. Russian imperialism is threatening the Irish state’s balancing act. Putin’s regime has openly threatened military action against the Irish state. That should not be laughed off or ignored. That is the reason the Dublin government is under pressure to get involved with a military alliance.
Read the rest of this entry »Irish President Michael D Higgins Mocked a British Empire Dame from Waterford, Louise Richardson – Is this Expert a good choice to chair an Irish Public Forum on the Neutrality Foreign Policy?
The Irish President Michael D Higgins is publicly opposing Dublin government attempts to soften deep public opposition to participation in the imperialist military alliance, NATO.
Speaking at length in a Sunday Business Post interview (June 18 2023) the Irish Head of State (a largely ceremonial post) concisely summarised the main issue :
Ireland’s foreign policy was one of “positive neutrality, and it can be defined very simply as Ireland’s right to belong to any group that it chooses in relation to non-militaristic international policy… If you interfere with that, there’s no difference between you and Lithuania and Latvia.”
Irish Times Online, June 18 2023
Set against the background of Russia’s genocidal invasion of Ukraine in 2022, President Higgins has upset the right-wing Fianna Fáil/Fine Gael/Greens + Gombeens coalition government (FFFGGG). Foreign Affairs Minister Micheál Martin set up a public “consultative” forum examining Irish foreign policy – which is designed to push the Irish state closer to NATO.
To his credit, unlike many left-wing public representatives in Ireland, President Higgins unambiguously sides with the masses of Ukraine against the genocidal Russian invasion.
See for example :
Ukrainians Reject “Ridiculous” Calls for Negotiations with Putin’s Ethnic-Cleansing Invaders – That should be the Common Sense Policy of the Radical Left
Supporting, unambiguously, the right of Ukraine to defeat the genocidal Russian invasion with weapons supplied by NATO, does not mean supporting membership of NATO or its aims. Irish Citizens’ Army (ICA) commander James Connolly was a leader of the Easter 1916 Rising – using weapons supplied by the German war-mongers who were at war with the ancient enemy of Irish Independence, British Imperialism. The ICA proudly promoted a famous banner at Liberty Hall, headquarters of the Irish Transport and Geneeral Workers’ Union (ITGWU) : “We Serve Neither King nor Kaiser, but Ireland”.
President Higgins is out of step with current Irish establishment thinking on such matters. He made derogatory throwaway remarks about the chairperson of the Dublin government’s consultative forum, and its chosen experts. :
Michael D highlighted the composition of the panels at the forum saying they include “the admirals, the generals, the air force, the rest of it” as well as “the formerly neutral countries who are now joining Nato”.
The President made comments about the forum chairperson British Empire Dame Louise Richardson, and then offered a very qualified apology :
[I think this is best categorised as a Michael D Classic : A Non-Apology Apology]
President Michael D Higgins has apologised for any offence he caused by making a “throwaway remark” about the chair of the Government’s Consultative Forum on International Security Policy being a Dame of the British Empire (DBE).
A clarification issued by his office on Monday said President Higgins referred to Prof Louise Richardson of Oxford University and her “very large letter DBE” in a casual manner during the course of a long interview, which was published in the Business Post on Sunday.
The references to the DBE were received in some in some quarters as the President disparaging the objectivity of the Waterford-born academic, in advance of her chairing the forum.
The statement from Áras an Uachtaráin referred to President Higgins looking through a copy of the programme for the forum at the time of the interview. It said he was referring casually to the fact that almost every reference to Prof Richardson in the programme was in a bold typeface, with DBE in capital letters after her name.
Irish Times Online, June 18 2023
This spat is unlikely to benefit the Dublin government. The public pressure against the British Empire Dame Richardson should continue. We offer two further items of evidence meaning Dame Richardson should immediately withdraw from the role given to her by the forelock-tugging Dublin Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Fianna Fáil leader Micheál Martin.
Dame of the British Empire Richardson opposed the campaign of H-Block/Armagh political status prisoners, backing the terrorist policy of the Thatcher British Government
Dame Richardson strongly opposes the campaign in Oxford University starting “Rhodes Must Fall” (RMF) – this is a spin-off from the Black Lives Matter mobilisations. https://euroclio.eu/2020/08/13/the-legacy-of-cecil-rhodes-at-oriel-college/. here is the context :
When a protestor left a sign on the doors of Oxford’s University Church reading ‘Rhodes, You’re Next’, there was little doubt that the monumental Black Lives Matter movement, sweeping the world after the death of George Floyd, would next be turning its attention to the statue of the imperialist figure adorning Oriel College’s entrance arch.
With the pulling down of a statue of Edward Colston in Bristol only days earlier, a fresh series of protests, beginning on Tuesday 9th June, sought removal of the controversial monument of Cecil Rhodes, fuelled by the 19th century mining magnate’s association with colonialism and racism on multiple accounts.
On the 12th June, the University’s Vice-Chancellor, Professor Louise Richardson, released an open letter that reached no binary view about Rhodes’ legacy, though did warn against “hiding our history” and indicated little accord to the aims of the protestors. Her statement was also later criticised by fourteen dons at the University who wrote that it was “inappropriate” of Professor Richardson to “ventriloquise” the anti-apartheid leader, Nelson Mandela, by using his words to defend a colonial-era statue. (1)
British Empire Dame Louise Richardson Must Go Now!
John Meehan June 20 2023
Neutrality Yes! Solidarity Yes!
Guest post by Des Derwin
Neutrality is not opposition to ‘both sides’, or to Ukraine, in the war in Ukraine. But it is being presented that way in the build up for the People’s Forums On Irish Neutrality being held throughput the month of June.
A range of organisations are hosting fora in Limerick , Dublin, Cork and Galway. Some of them are organising demonstrations at the three locations of the government Consultative Forum on International Security Policy at Galway, Cork and Dublin.
There is also another, separately organised apparently, public meeting in Dublin on 24th June.
There are some heavy hitters speaking at some of the meetings, like Clare Daly, Mick Wallace, George Galloway, Bernadette McAliskey, Medea Benjamin and Yanis Varoufakis.
Many of the speakers have been associated with strong opposition to solidarity with Ukraine and with blame on NATO and ‘the West’ for the war. The hosting organisations largely represent positions between regarding the war as a war of NATO against Russia and regarding the war as a war between NATO and Russia.
A leading figure in Galway Alliance Again War posted on Facebook (11th June) what is designated as “an excellent article by Scott Ritter on the West’s proxy war against Russia”.
In its newsletter to members (9th June) urging them to support the People’s Forums On Irish Neutrality, People Before Profit says,
“They [the government] are using the Ukraine war to end neutrality. But a recent poll shows that 87% of people support a ceasefire to facilitate negotiations. If we had a government that really supported neutrality, it would be promoting negotiations”.
On 3rd March the Irish Anti-War Movement re-posted an article from Stop The War in Britain, titled One Year On, This Is Clearly a Proxy War Between NATO and Russia. It says,
“That means recognising that the war in the east has been going on for nearly a decade, and that the western powers represented by NATO have developed a firm policy of expansion taking in most of the east European states on or close to Russia’s borders. Russia was opposed to Ukraine joining NATO which it saw as a threat to its own security…One year on, this is clearly a proxy war between NATO and Russia, with western troops stationed very close to Russian borders, two formerly neutral countries – Sweden and Finland – joining NATO, Ukraine becoming a de-facto member of NATO, and the provision of weapons growing.”
The only mentions of what might be the wishes and intentions of the people of Ukraine, in an article devoid of any reference to Russian war crimes are, “In Ukraine, there are even demands for cluster bombs and phosphorus weapons”and “We stand in solidarity with all those protesting, and with those in Ukraine and Russia who are bravely raising their voices against war.” Who in Ukraine is bravely raising their voices against the heroic resistance of the mass of the Ukrainian people? There is not a word of solidarity for those in Ukraine raising their bodies and weapons against Russia’s war upon their lives, their homes and their freedoms.
On its Facebook page on 27th April PANA (Peace and Neutrality Alliance) introduced a video with:
“In this short video [US economist] Jeffrey Sachs gives us a brief historic background on the ongoing proxy war between Russia and the United States in Ukraine and explains why we need immediate peace and negotiations here to avoid a nuclear war between these superpowers.”
Among the speakers at the People’s Forums, George Galloway was a regular contributor on RT (Russia Today), a Russian government television station. On 14th February 2022 he famously tweeted:
“Y’all said #Russia was about to invade #Ukraine. I told you it wasn’t. You were wrong. I was right. Again. Show some bloody humility. Especially if they’re not even paying you to act like an idiot” (my emphasis – DD.)
In an interview with the Global Times on 12th February 2023 he said:
“The West is ready to fight to the last drop of Ukrainian blood, but not their own…They [the Russian leadership] just want not to have enemy missiles on their border. That’s why Ukraine will have to be completely demilitarized and properly neutralized before this conflict can end.”
At the Eurasia Media Forum in Almaty, Kazakhstan, in May 2019 George Galloway shared a plush platform with far right Trump strategist Steve Bannon:
A speaker at the second Dublin meeting (24th June), Neutrality: Who Cares?, Medea Benjamin of the US ‘women-led’ peace organisation CODEPINK, together with Nicolas J.S. Davies, wrote the book War in Ukraine: Making Sense of a Senseless Conflict, published last year. It is probably the premier text now of the ‘proxy war, NATO caused it’ current throughout the English-speaking world. It was famously reviewed in a podcast by Bill Weinberg and in an article by Linda Mann, ‘Their Anti-Imperialism and Ours’.
In his podcast Bill Weinberg (11th December 2022) indicates, page by page, how the Benjamin and Davies book designates the 2014 popular Maidan revolt a US orchestrated coup, “engineered” and an “operation”, bemoans the “flooding” (sounds familiar) of Ukraine with Western weapons, and repeats the ‘arguments’ against Ukrainian nationhood, including those in Putin’s pre-invasion speech. Weinberg indicates how the book sets out to legitimise the Russian referenda for ‘independence’ in the Donbas separatist republics, regrets how the “corporate media” “amplifies” “allegations” of Russian war crimes and compares reports of Russian atrocities to the notorious Kuwait atrocity reports, and opposes cultural boycotts and sanctions against Russia. And Weinberg points out how it reflects the New York Times editorial gently suggesting concessions brokered over the heads of the Ukrainians, talks up Russia’s security concerns and ‘encirclement’ from NATO, and NATO’s “role” in provoking the war, and chants the US and NATO’s undoubted crimes while neglecting Putin’s and Wagner’s record in neighbouring countries, Syria and Africa.
Linda Mann picks out for special attention a passage from Benjamin and Davies which both justifies the invasion and which, as Mann says, implies that “an aggressive war was on the table from the beginning”:
“The massive Western [military] support put Russia in a predicament…. In November 2021, Russia still enjoyed ‘escalation dominance,’ meaning that it could bring greater military force to bear than the US or NATO in any war in Ukraine. But Russia’s escalation dominance would keep diminishing as Ukraine’s military was gradually armed and trained up to NATO standards, with or without actual NATO membership.
“This meant that from Russia’s perspective, if they were going to have to fight to defend the Donbas and Crimea, every year they waited to do so would reduce their escalation dominance, tipping the balance in favor of Ukraine and increasing the risk of a potential nuclear war with the US and NATO.
“The United States military was well-aware of the predicament in which it was deliberately placing Russia’s leaders” (pp. 66 – 67, my emphasis – DD).
Medea Benjamin attended the (poorly-attended) Rage Against The War Machine rally in Washington on 19th February. This event brought together ‘leftists’ like herself and right-wingers and far-right-wingers, and featured some attendees with Russian flags and Z signs. She was to speak but told Chris Hedges, who did speak, in an email that,
“I supported the Rage Against the War Machine Rally from the time of its conception and I support it today, even though I will not be one of the speakers because the organisation I have been associated with for 20 years, CODEPINK, urged me not to speak…”
In the same article Chris Hedges wrote:
“I will also be joined by Ron Paul, Scott Horton and right-libertarian, anti-war figures whose political and cultural opinions I often disagree with. The inclusion of the right-wing has seen anti-war groups I respect, such as Veterans for Peace, refuse to join the rally. VFP issued a statement sent to me on Friday saying that ‘to endorse this event would have caused a huge disruption in VFP and had little effect on the outcome of the demonstration.’”
Sevim Dagdelen, an MP and deputy leader of Die Linke party in Germany, was a regular guest on the Russian state television channel Russia Today. There “she repeatedly explains that the European Union, the German government and NATO had overthrown the Yanukovych regime with the help of fascists in Ukraine”(Suddeutsche Zeitung, 16th March 2014). She dismissed fears of a Russian invasion of Ukraine, days before the invasion, as an “information war” and reminiscent of 2003, when the US and the CIA “drew the world into a murderous Iraq war” with “told stories” (NTV, 13th February 2022). “NATO has expanded, not Russia” Sevim Dagdelen told a primetime audience [on the ARD channel] a week before the invasion. (Politico, 24th February 2023). In March 2020 the leadership of Die Linke were “appalled” by Dagdelen and others in the Sahra Wagenknecht caucus of the party for blaming NATO for the Russian invasion (SPIEGEL Politik, 1st March 2022). She refused to call the massacres in Bucha and Mariupol “war crimes” (Zeit Online, 11th May 2022).
Dagdalen’s ally in Die Linke, Sahra Wagenknecht, and writer and feminist Alice Schwarzer have led the “negotiations and compromises” initiative in Germany around their Manifesto for Peace “in which they call for a halt to arms deliveries and for negotiations”(quote from Alice Schwarzer’s website introducing the Manifesto). They and other signatories organised the Rebellion for Peace rally in Berlin on 25th February 2023. “Speakers at the rally on Saturday included Wagenknecht, Schwarzer, a US-based professor… Jeffrey Sachs [again – DD], and a retired Bundeswehr officer turned private sector consultant, Erich Vad. All argued for negotiations with Russia, some were highly critical of NATO and the German government”(Deutsche Welle website, 27th February 2023).
Wagenknecht and the rally faced criticism from her own party Die Linke, before and after the event, even though the party holds “a position comparable to Wagenknecht’s on Ukraine: that Berlin should engage more for negotiations and less for weapons exports. However, the party has often sought to distance itself from its outspoken former leader’s comments on the war.”(Deutsche Welle, ibid).“Leading members had warned that the rally would attract far-right factions of Germany’s society. Observers noted many isolated cases of pro-Russian or right-wing symbols among the participants. Germany’s populist far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) was vocal in its support for the event while also noting the participation of its members” (Deutsche Welle, ibid). When asked whether AfD politicians could also take part in the demonstration, co-organiser, and former Finance Minister, Oskar Lafontaine replied that there was no “attitude test “ (Global Happenings website, 24th February 2023).
“‘Our fears were confirmed,’ Die Linke‘s vice chairperson Katina Schubert told the Suddeutsche Zeitung newspaper [following the rally]. Schubert used the term “Querfront” (cross-front) to refer to collaborating with conservative revolutionaries, an expression used in Germany’s Weimar Republic…‘Whoever starts a call appealing to the cross-front, reaps the cross-front,’ Schubert said. Schubert said that ‘the confusion of victim and perpetrator was a recurring theme in the speeches’” (Deutsche Welle, ibid).
At the end of the rally, Lafontaine, Wagenknecht, Schwarzer and Vad, as well as Left Party politician Sevim Dagdelen, stood hand in hand on the stage.
In January Clare Daly and Mick Wallace were among 19 members of the European Parliament to vote against a resolution calling for the establishment of a special international tribunal to prosecute Russia’s leadership for the crime of aggression against Ukraine (Irish Times, 19th January 2023). In April 2022 Mick Wallace told the radio station, Ireland South East, that, “In my opinion Ukraine is being used by the US and NATO in their war to undermine Russia.” In October 2022 Clare Daly and Mick Wallace were among 26 MEPs to vote against a resolution to condemn “gunpoint” referenda and call for increased support for Ukraine.
Explaining her October vote Clare Daly said:
“I condemn the illegal aggression of Russia, but I disagree with a one-sided narrative that excuses the Western role in what is now happening. I urge a ceasefire, negotiations and genuine EU efforts to secure a peace. I oppose the policy of collective punishment, sanctions that also hurt European citizens, the flooding of Ukraine [sic] with weapons, and other actions that escalate the war and run the risk of igniting a direct conflict between NATO and Russia. I find much to agree with in this resolution. But unfortunately, this text also contains elements I cannot vote for. Demands for pumping even more weapons into Ukraine, demands for neutral states to abandon their neutrality, unrealistic conditions for ending the conflict, the continuation and entrenchment of a sanctions policy that isn’t helping anyone, and the presence of ominous threats and bellicose rhetoric which only inflame tensions and make peace less likely. That is why I cannot vote in favour of the resolution.”
Another speaker is Catherine Connolly TD. She accompanied Clare Daly and Mick Wallace on one of their journeys to Bashar Al-Assad’s sector of war-torn Syria. Her take on another of Putin’s wars may be illustrated by her address to the Ukrainian ambassador visiting Dáil Eireann on 23rd February 2022 (the day before the invasion):
“I do not want to waste my time giving my opinion of Putin. I am on the record about it. He is a dictator with no respect for democracy. NATO’s role in all of this has already been outlined by some colleagues on the left, but certainly not on the right. NATO has played a despicable role in moving forward to the border and engaging in warmongering”
Our neutrality and theirs
Neutrality is under pressure from government, media and establishment, using the war in Ukraine to open the possibility of ending Ireland’s formal military neutrality. It must be added that this pressure is accelerated from Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.
Putin has been the best recruiter NATO could hope for, ending Finland’s and Sweden’s long-standing neutrality overnight. The biggest diffusion of the assault on neutrality in Ireland would be the defeat of Putin’s aggression.
Ireland’s neutrality does need to be defended. A broad alliance organising a campaign of meetings and demonstrations is needed. But the campaign should be about neutrality. It should not be about equating both sides in the war in Ukraine, blaming NATO and ‘the West’ for the war, opposing the military means for Ukraine’s defence or pushing a strategy of ‘ceasefire and negotiations’ now which would halt Ukrainian defence and freeze the murderous Russian occupation in its present positions.
Irish neutrality is perfectly compatible with demanding that Russia withdraw from Ukraine immediately and stop its barbarous assaults on civilians and civilian infrastructure, with support for the right of Ukraine to arm and defend itself, with support and solidarity for the Ukrainian people and labour movement, and with backing for self-determination for Ukraine.
Irish neutrality – in so far as it still survives or ever really applied at all – is about staying out of superpower military alliances and remaining neutral in wars between the powers or between countries or forces waging rivalries for local capitalist domination. In practical words it might be expressed as staying out of NATO and common European armies, and not multiplying military spending when there’s a crushing housing crisis (or at all). That neutrality should be maintained and defended. It is the neutrality that we who support the resistance of the Ukrainian people claim! It is the neutrality that we have as much right to defend as any alliance of political positions seeking to monopolise and define neutrality for their own purposes in relation to the war in Ukraine. Those claiming to defend Ireland’s neutrality are, for all practical purposes, not neutral when they oppose military aid to Ukraine. In effect that policy if implemented would lead to the defeat of Ukraine, and victory for Russian aggression.
No socialist, democrat or humanitarian should be neutral in a war of liberation of an oppressed people, a war of revolution against capitalism, a civil war against counter-revolution or a war of democracy against dictatorship or fascism, or, as in the case of the war in Ukraine, a war of national defence against an imperialist invasion. The left wasn’t neutral on Vietnam. The left wasn’t neutral on Iraq. February 2022 was not July 1914. When we are ‘anti-war’ we realise that there is a huge difference between wars of occupation and domination and wars of resistance. When we are neutral we remember the words of Desmond Tutu that, “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor”. When we long for peace, as we always do, it is not the peace of the graveyard, Pax Romana, the peace of capitulation or acceptance of the status quo, but the peace of justice and of the defeat of aggression, torture, reaction, rape, mass murder and ecocide.
James Connolly as ever put it so well in January 1916:
“We believe that in times of peace we should work along the lines of peace to strengthen the nation, and we believe that whatever strengthens and elevates the working class strengthens the nation. But we also believe that in times of war we should act as in war. We despise, entirely despise and loathe, all the mouthings and mouthers about war who infest Ireland in time of peace, just as we despise and loathe all the cantings about caution and restraint to which the same people treat us in times of war. Mark well then our programme. While the war lasts and Ireland still is a subject nation we shall continue to urge her to fight for her freedom.” (‘What Is Our Programme’, Workers Republic, 22 January 1916).
The view of the war in Ukraine as a war by NATO, or a ‘proxy inter-imperialist war’, and an urge to deny all support to Ukraine, even sanctions on Russia, even training on de-mining, underpins the neutrality being presented in the June series of People’s Forums On Irish Neutrality and the ‘Conversation’ on Neutrality:Who Cares?. The view – obvious to almost everyone independent of the shocking campism which is almost universal across the organised radical socialist left in Ireland – that Ukraine has been subject to aggression, invasion, war crimes and occupation, supports the belief that neutrality cannot be an argument for denying solidarity to Ukraine or for effectively giving succour to Putin. That neutrality cannot be an excuse for almost complete ‘anti-war’ inactivity on the streets against the horror right here in Europe. A horror that cannot be downplayed and has been recognised by the UNHCR as the largest annual global increase of people forcibly displaced in decades (Irish Times, 15th June 2023).
Certainly there are supporters and organisers of these events who are interested only in the principle of neutrality, or who firmly believe that a just peace is a possible option right now in Ukraine. And one of the Dublin speakers (from Sinn Fein) has often expressed his solidarity with Ukraine. But we must go on the declared positions and records of the principal figures to observe what is being broadcast through these initiatives.
The cancellation of the original venue for the Galway meeting, or the venues of similar meetings in London and Vienna, is not an appropriate or democratic response to them, or even to the strongest apologists for Putin. The meetings should be allowed go ahead without hindrance or disruption and the case for solidarity with Ukraine argued, and given a voice, in other fora like this one.
That opinion poll
The deployment of the PANA (Peace and Neutrality Alliance) opinion poll in their newsletter supports the ‘ceasefire and negotiations’ position of People Before Profit. Many of the organisers of these meetings are determined to maintain this position, so boldly led by Sabina Higgins in July 2022 yet so promptly clarified by President Michael D. Higgins in a statement which called for “an immediate Russian withdrawal”. Indeed some of the speakers in these Forums signed the Oireachtas members’ letter last February reiterating the ‘ceasefire and negotiations’ position. This too was promptly clarified by Senator signatories “endorsing stronger sanctions, recognising the importance of prosecution for war crimes”, condemning “the illegal Russian invasion”, recognising “Ukraine’s right to national sovereignty” and supporting “initiatives towards peace based on the strong principles of the UN Charter” including “Article 51 on the inherent right to self-defence”.
A PANA press release on 25th May 2023 carried the results of an Ipsos Omnipoll it had commissioned which,
“Reveals 87% of people in Ireland support a ceasefire to facilitate negotiations to end the War in Ukraine…The question asked: “Are you in favour or not in favour of a ceasefire to facilitate negotiations between Russia and Ukraine to end the war?” The response was: In Favour 87%, Not in Favour 8%, DK/No Opinion 5%. This is a massive endorsement of PANA’s position taken at the very start of the war.…In the year that marks the 25th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement that brought the war in Ireland to an end through a process of a ceasefire and negotiations, should we not retain this same philosophy in the horrific war now raging in the Ukraine.”
Whatever about the effect of a question on ‘peace’ put to people by a pollster, the same 87% or so of Irish people are very likely to give a similarly positive response to a question of Russia getting its troops out of Ukraine now, or of whether Ukraine should be given the resources it needs for its defence.
Actually the PANA (Peace and Neutrality Alliance) poll jars with a series of recent polls whose finding would not at all support the thrust of PANA’s message on the war.
An Irish Times/IPSOS poll (reported 28th October 2022), found that,
“An overwhelming majority of voters (72 per cent) say that Ireland and the EU “must continue to stand by Ukraine even if this means energy shortages”, with just 20 per cent disagreeing with the statement.”
As reported in The Irish Examiner (24th February 2023) a poll by the European Commission,
“found 76% of Irish people expressed satisfaction with measures taken by the EU to support Ukraine following the start of the war with Russia a year ago. It is the second highest level of support among the 27 EU member states after Portugal (79%) and considerably above the EU average of 56%. The Eurobarometer poll also showed even higher levels of satisfaction among Irish people with the Government’s reaction to the invasion. According to the survey, 78% of respondents in Ireland have supported measures taken by the Government to date. The EU average is 55%.”
On neutrality the findings would moderate perceptions that the eroders are vastly out of step with the Irish people:
“However, Irish people were less enthusiastic than most Europeans about having a common EU defence and security policy. Just over two-thirds (69%) were supportive of such a measure compared to the EU average of 77% with other countries including Austria, Romania and Sweden even more lukewarm about a common defence and security policy.”
The Irish Examiner (28th March 2023) reported on another Eurobarometer poll which indicated that,
“…91% of people here [in Ireland] agree the EU should reduce its dependency on Russian energy as soon as possible, compared to the EU average of 84%…The public here are much more likely to be satisfied with both the Government’s (78%) and the EU’s (76%) reaction to the Russian invasion of Ukraine than the EU averages of 55% and 56%.”
A new Irish Times/Ipsos poll (Irish Times, 17th June 2023) shows people holding the line on Irish neutrality, with 61% saying they support Ireland’s current model of military neutrality (a decline in support for neutrality of five points since last year). There is 55% support for “significantly increasing Ireland’s military capacity”. “More than half of all voters”, the paper reports, “say that Ireland should continue to accept all Ukrainian refugees who arrive.” In an Irish Times/Ipsos poll last year 36% said that Ireland should continue to accept Ukrainians “no matter how many arrive”. On refugees in general 48% said “they think that there are ‘too many refugees in Ireland now'”, but, the Irish Times says, “the numbers suggest that at least some of those…also believe that Ireland should keep taking them”.
And whatever about Irish opinion, in a Gallup poll across Ukraine in September 2022, 70% of Ukrainians favoured fighting to win, and 91% of those who backed the war defined victory as retaking all seized territory. In a poll conducted in October 2022 across the ‘pre-February’ territory of Ukraine by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology, 86% of respondents answered that it is necessary to continue the armed struggle anyway, even if shelling continues. In particular, 71% among them fully agree with this opinion (the remaining 16% rather agree). Only 10% of respondents answered that it is necessary to proceed to negotiations to stop the shelling as soon as possible, even if it is necessary to make concessions to Russia.
In May 2023 the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology conducted a telephone poll across Ukraine, except for Crimea, in its latest round of questions about the population’s readiness for territorial concessions. 84% of respondents continued to adhere to the view that no territorial concessions are acceptable, even if this means that the war will last longer and there will be other threats. Only 10% believe that in order to achieve peace and preserve independence, it is possible to give up some territories.
The nuanced and varied, but almost universal, consensus on Ukraine, on the Irish organised radical socialist left, is conspicuously put on display in the unitary and cross-over platforms for these People’s Forums and Conversations. It is a consensus that essentially abandons the people of Ukraine, and either soft-peddles on Putin or blames ‘the West’ equally for the war. It is a consensus that is branding the left as defenders of dictatorship and playing right into the hands of politicians, press, publicists and propagandists that have always tried to brand the left in this way.
Neutrality Yes! Solidarity Yes!
Des Derwin
17th June 2023
Against Half-Solidarity and False Pacifism – Statement of the Russian Socialist Movement on May Day
Source : https://www.europe-solidaire.org/spip.php?article66416
This excellent statement diagnoses a political blight – False Pacifism – which has entered the bloodstream of significant parts of the Irish left and trade union movement. We are dealing with an international phenomenon :
May Day is not only International Workers’ Day but also a day of solidarity with the oppressed peoples and civil disobedience against war. For example, one can remember the 1971 May Day protests against US imperialist aggression in Vietnam in Washington. During that time, the antiwar movement’s stance was clear: halt the war, complete the withdrawal of American troops, and support the right of the Vietnamese people to self-determination. Nowadays the Left is also leaning toward pacifism but its present iteration is much more ambivalent. While it still highlights issues of American imperialism, the prevention of nuclear war, and condemns militarization and war as means of resolving conflicts, it faces challenges in precisely identifying the aggressor and exhibits a willingness to tolerate Russia’s annexation of Ukrainian territory and the continued presence of Russian troops there. Thus this version of pacifism is deprived of real solidarity with the oppressed peoples.
Read the rest of this entry »Two Contrasting May Day Celebrations in 2023 – Ghent (Belgium) V Dublin (Ireland)
Ghent, Thomas Weyts Reports
This year we also participated in the 1st May parade in Ghent with a beautiful group of Ukrainian people and solidarity Belgians.
With a clear message: Russian troops out of Ukraine, stop the bombing. Solidarity with Ukraine and its people! We will continue to take action as long as necessary.
We also continue to shake the high tree of the trade unions and the progressive movements: come out of your room, show your solidarity with Ukraine, in words but especially in deeds!
We thank the fine people of Peace for Ukraine-Ghent, the European Network for Solidarity with Ukraine, Ghent4Humanity Refugee Support, SAP Anti-capitalists and all the other people who were there, but also all the participants at the parade and by the side who showed their sympathy.
https://www.facebook.com/100049340987344/videos/788647199647966/?idorvanity=1354716241617827
Dublin : John Meehan Reports :
Dublin Council of Trade Unions (DCTU), organisers of the May Day march in Ireland’s capital city, made sure that nothing politically worthwhile was said from the platform about Ukraine. Mick O’Reilly spoke about “War and Peace” – at best the speech was woffle; at worst it was a left-evasionist exercise which avoided making a clear call for the immediate withdrawal of the Russian genocidal troops from Ukraine, or demanding an end to the murderous Russian bombing of civilian targets (including hospitals and schools) in the invaded territories.
Read the rest of this entry »
Tomás Ó Flatharta 