Kos recently had a post about tankies and their opposition to aiding Ukraine. For those who don’t know what a “tankie” is, here’s the quick version from Kos:
Ah yes, time for another check in on our favorite fools, the tankies. Previous editions here, here, here, and here. As a reminder, or for the uninitiated, a Tankie is someone who believes that imperialism is bad, and only the United States can be imperialist. Everything else, and I mean everything, is the fault of American imperialism. It looks like this:
Thus, the tankies (named after leftists who continued to defend the Soviet Union even after its violent suppression of pro-democracy movements in Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968) absolves Russia of all blame for its overtly imperialistic invasion of Ukraine, claiming Russia was “forced” to do it and “had no choice” because something-something American imperialism.
If you are curious about where tankies are coming from, William Scott Ritter Jr. more commonly referred as Scott Ritter has a long and fascinating career as the linked biography at Wikipedia shows. It’s an interesting read, to say the least.
Consortium News has a January 24, 2023 report by Ritter:
The West’s recent approval of more military assistance for Kiev risks nuclear nightmare, fails Ukrainian expectations and rebukes the World War II history enshrined in a prominent Soviet war memorial in Berlin.
I’m linking to it here because of the contrast it provides to the reports and analysis about Ukraine appearing here at Daily Kos.
To say it appears to come from an alternate universe is possibly an understatement. There may be some good points in it — but overall it’s a fascinating look at how far opponents to aiding Ukraine will go to make their case. I’ll summarize it here, but I urge reading it to get the full flavor.
According to Ritter, it goes back to World War Two and the effort by Russia to overthrow the Nazis, culminating in their victory in Berlin and the monument which remains there today commemorating their victory.
Carved into the granite of the monument, in Cyrillic letters, is an inscription that reads “Eternal glory to the heroes who fell in battle with the German fascist occupiers for the freedom and independence of the Soviet Union.”
In a turn of events which must have Vasily Chuikov and the Soviet heroes to whom the Tiergarten war memorial was dedicated turning in their graves, the forces of fascism have once again reared their odious heads, this time manifested in a Ukrainian government motivated by the neo-Nazi ultra-nationalistic ideology of Stepan Bandera and his ilk.
From there Ritter goes on to claim followers of Stepan Bandera continue to persist with international connections — and also as a major factor in Ukraine.
...Instead, Ukrainian fascists, funded by the C.I.A., operated as a political underground, running sabotage operations and fomenting anti-Soviet/anti-Russian ideology amongst a population where the precepts of Ukrainian nationalist ideology ran strong.
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, at the end of 1991, these Ukrainian nationalists emerged from the shadows and began organizing into political parties backed by gangs of violence-prone extremists who promulgated, through physical intimidation, a cult of personality built around the person of Stepan Bandera.
According to Ritter, Ukrainian NeoNazi forces are getting training and massive amounts of aid from the West, and the press is failing to report it. Yes, there are some NeoNazis in Ukraine (and in the U.S. for that matter), but they are hardly the major factor in Ukraine that Ritter would make them out to be.
If I can make sense of the rest of it, Ritter is arguing that the aid will be insufficient, and none of the weapons systems being supplied will be viable on the Ukrainian battlefield because they’re crap, break down frequently, and can’t be supplied or maintained. The end result will be the mass slaughter of Ukrainians to no good purpose.
If anything, Ritter seems to be calling for far larger amounts of aid. To be fair, Kos and other writers at Daily Kos have been harping on the logistical issues for some time. Ritter may not be entirely off base here about the equipment, but the rest of it?
Ritter returns to his original imagery:
...This angst was perhaps best captured by Petr Bystron of the right-wing Alternative for Germany party. “German tanks [fighting] against Russia in Ukraine,” Bystron challenged his colleagues, “remember, your grandfathers tried to do the same trick, together with [Ukrainian nationalists] Melnik, Bandera and their supporters.
“The result was immense suffering, millions of casualties on both sides and, eventually, Russian tanks came here, to Berlin. Two of those tanks remain on permanent display nearby, and you must keep this in mind when you pass them by every morning,” Bystron said, referring to the two Soviet T-34 tanks at the Tiergarten memorial to fallen Soviet soldiers...
...Ukraine and NATO should heed the history lesson that Petr Bystron presented to his fellow German parliamentarians — German tanks do not historically fare well against Russian tanks on Ukrainian soil.
And Ben Wallace and Mark Milley should pay attention to the order of battle of the Russian forces opposing the Ukrainian Army, especially around the critical battlefields in and around the strategic city of Bakhmut. There, Russian soldiers belonging to the 8th Guards Army are poised to continue in the tradition of Vasily Chuikov’s heroes of Stalingrad and Berlin, destroying the forces of fascism on the field of battle.
According to Ritter, it’s not Putin acting out of hubris and ignorance, but the West — who are supporting Nazis in Ukraine. Russia is simply continuing the battle against Fascism, just as it did in World War Two. Read the whole thing and see what you think.
As something of a counterpoint to Ritter, I’ll take the liberty here of quoting from Timothy Snyder’s January 23, 2023 edition of his Substack newsletter: Thinking About:
Why does the world need a Ukrainian victory?
1. To halt atrocity. Russia's occupation is genocidal. Wherever the Ukrainians recover territory, they save lives, and re-establish the principle that people have a right not to be tortured, deported, and murdered.
2. To preserve the international legal order. Its basis is that one country may not invade another and annex its territory, as Russia seeks to do. Russia's war of aggression is obviously illegal, but the legal order does not defend itself.
3. To end an era of empire. This could be the last war fought on the colonial logic that another state and people do not exist. But this turning point is reached only if Russia loses.
4. To defend the peace project of the European Union. Russia's war is not directed only against Ukraine, but against the larger idea that European states can peacefully cooperate. If empire prevails, integration fails.
5. To give the rule of law a chance in Russia. So long as Russia fights imperial wars, it is trapped in repressive domestic politics. Coming generations of Russians could live better and freer lives, but only if Russia loses this war.
6. To weaken the prestige of tyrants. In this century, the trend has been towards authoritarianism, with Putinism as a force and a model. Its defeat by a democracy reverses that trend. Fascism is about force, and is discredited by defeat.
7. To remind us that democracy is the better system. Ukrainians have internalized the idea that they choose their own leaders. In taking risks to protect their democracy, they remind us that we all must act to protect ours.
8. To lift the threat of major war in Europe. For decades, a confrontation with the USSR and then Russia was the scenario for regional war. A Ukrainian victory removes this scenario by making another Russian offensive implausible.
9. To lift the threat of major war in Asia. In recent years, a Chinese invasion of Taiwan has been the leading scenario for a global war. A Ukrainian victory teaches Beijing that such an offensive operation is costly and likely to fail.
10. To prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. Ukraine gave up nuclear weapons. Russia, a nuclear power, then invaded. If Ukraine loses, countries that can build nuclear weapons will feel that they need to do so to protect themselves.
11. To reduce the risk of nuclear war. A Ukrainian victory makes two major war scenarios involving nuclear powers less likely, and works against nuclear proliferation generally. Nothing would reduce the risk of nuclear war more than Ukrainian victory.
12. To head off future resource wars. Aside from being a consistent perpetrator of war crimes, Russia's Wagner group seizes mineral resources by violence wherever it can. This is why it is fighting in Bakhmut.
13. To guarantee food supplies and prevent future starvation. Ukraine feeds much of the world. Russia threatens to use that food as a weapon. As one Russian propagandist put it, "starvation is our only hope."
14. To accelerate the shift from fossil fuels. Putin shows the threat that hydrocarbon oligarchy poses to the future. His weaponization of energy supplies has accelerated the turn towards renewables. This will continue, if Russia loses.
15. To affirm the value of freedom. Even as they have every reason to define freedom as against something -- Russian occupation --, Ukrainians remind us that freedom is actually for something, the right to be the people they wish to be, in a future they can help shape.
I am a historian of political atrocity, and for me personally number 1 -- defeating an ongoing genocidal project -- would be more than enough reason to want Ukrainian victory. But every single one of the other fourteen is hugely significant. Each presents the kind of opportunity that generations of policy planners wish for, but almost never get. Much has been done, we have not yet seen and seized the moment.
This is a once-in-lifetime conjuncture, not to be wasted. The Ukrainians have given us a chance to turn this century around, a chance for freedom and security that we could not have achieved by our own efforts, no matter who we happen to be. All we have to do is help them win.
23 January 2023
PS What can you do personally? Keep in touch with your elected representatives. Support military and humanitarian assistance. Make your views known. Write a letter to the editor. Share this post widely. Fly a Ukrainian flag. Put a sticker on your computer. Buy and wear Ukrainian merch. In great causes, small gestures matter.
If you want to keep Ukrainian soldiers alive, consider supporting this Ukrainian NGO and this international NGO (a 501(c)3). Here is a way to keep Ukrainians warm during winter (a 501(c)3). One of my commitments, with wonderful colleagues, has been Documenting Ukraine, a project that supports those in Ukraine who are chronicling the war (also a 501(c)3, "Partners" here). Thank you for reading, thinking, caring, and doing.
If you want to support Snyder’s work, consider subscribing.