Symbolically on 09. of March this year I published the first draft of analysis The Spring in Ukraine because a friend asked me what do I think about it. Today, regrettably almost everything appeared to be the truth.. It seems that global governance is not at all unpredictable. Here is one extract : First association that came to my mind while reading this case, was a comparison to Kosovos parliament declaration of independence from Serbia in 2008 when U.S. and many European states officially recognized Kosovo based on the international law of self-determination, secession, and recognition. The same group of allies that acted in Ukraine case had supported and followed through the entire process of so called democratization of Kosvo. Despite international debate whether independence of a dysfunctional international protectorate of 2 mil people, might encourage separatist movements around the world, the “cluster” supported this process. Looking at Kosovo today, and its population devastated by disrespect of human rights, crime, economic crises, poverty and corruption that dominates self-proclaimed country for more than 6 years, it is obvious that democratization, economic reforms or the wellbeing of locals, were not the major interests of the protagonists of Kosovo’s independence. Another interesting parallel may be drown with Bosnia and Herzegovina where similar violent protests recently erupted in 2014, and western media swiftly named them “Bosnian spring” similar to Arab spring and ongoing “spring” in Ukraine. Bosnia and Herzegovinas declared independence from the former Yugoslavia in1992. Today, 20 years after, violent protests erupted because corruption is widespread and high taxes for the countrys bloated public sector eat away at residents paychecks. Privatizations have decimated the middle class and sent the working class into poverty. Some observers believe widespread corruption has allowed been to flourish, benefiting an elite group with political connections. They have penetrated the state, turning the government itself into a facade, said Denisa Kostovicova, an associate professor of global politics at the London School of Economics. What now appears as a dysfunctional state is in actual fact a very functional system that distributes the privileges, but only to the networked. The same cluster that governs Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina and many other places is currently reshaping Ukraine and map of Eastern Europe. And the third parallel may be a ‘Transnistrisation’ of Crimea. Just like Crimea is planning now, Transnistria already held a referendum in 2006 in which 98% of voters opted for joining Russia. Full annexation did not happen, though the region is to a large extent effectively under Russian control. In the case of Transnistria,a process has lasted 22 years and has not brought the conflicting parties any closer to finding a solution with similar results like previous two cases. There are numerous other examples were we have witnessed the same methodology how to create small scale wars and government changes in more than 50 countries, including Iran, Zimbabwe, Burma, Venezuela, Ukraine, Georgia, Palestine, Western Sahara, West Papua, Eritrea, Belarus, Azerbaijan and Tonga and, recently, Tunisia and Egypt. Methodology has been successfully applied by groups in Georgia (2003), Ukraine (2004), Lebanon (2005), The Maldives (2008) and Egypt (2011). Methodology can be summarized in a few simple principles: Power in society is not fixed, and can shift very swiftly from one social group to another. It can become fragile and can be redistributed, especially in non-democratic regimes. Ultimately, power in society comes from the obedience of the people. And those people – each of whom is individually a small source of power – can change their minds, and refuse to follow commands. In addition to that essential principles for the success of the movement are unity, planning and non-violent discipline. There must be a shared vision of tomorrow and a grand strategy for how to attain it. No movement can succeed if it bites off more than it can chew; instead, successful movements win small victories and build on them. The power lies in the mobilization of a great number of people around a common vision of tomorrow, building common strategy, followed by efficient tactics and of course maintaining an offense and discipline against opponent regime. The downside of similar revolutions around the world are usually long term economic crises, week and fragmented political regimes, foreign control of critical resources, dysfunctional government institutions, huge indicators of corruption, rapidly increasing poverty and crime etc. So called “western funded government changes and democratization” had left behind horror of war and robbery instead of prosperity in almost all places where they had accrued. Because key stakeholder major interest was not democracy itself nor assistance to the people. From my point of view this case is a clear cut, of a “market driven” government change, because I spent waste majority of my life in a similar “democratization process” orchestrated by the same cluster, but for an average reader this might be inconclusive as it still does not reveal who is going to profit from this crisis in Ukraine on individual level, and presumably therefore who had motives to orchestrate bloody conflicts and seize the power. So I decided to take this analysis into a deeper water, to look for clues, what kind of “markets” are we talking about and who are the people and organizations in this “cluster” behind small scale wars and “democratization”. In order to understand better interests of all stakeholders for a moment lets take a look at the external environment and global trends that may come to play in Ukraine’s case: Global Population Growth, increased demands for resources, A widening governance gap, The legitimacy of the groups taking decisions about global governance will be more and more challenged, Global insecurity, Global energy insecurity,Global food crisis and degradation of biodiversity, Unabated degradation of water, A declining social capital, A declining infrastructure investment.... ... Consequently “security and arms cluster” is a major stakeholder in Ukraine crises and made it its latest playground. Despite the commonly spread beliefs that companies in the war business, mostly producing arms or supplying other resources, are serving national interests, this is not the case. Security and arms industry is competing with the energy sector for the most profitable sector in world’s trade, and it had overgrown national boundaries long time ago. Increasingly these are multinationals with diverse shareholders. Why is this important ? It is hard to imagine that two leading arms producers in the world USA and Russia do not share the same interests when it comes to orchestrating small scale controllable conflicts. Logics would say the opposite. Even if security and arms production companies would be controlled by national governments. And they are not. According to Deutsche Welle the wealth of Putin’s tycoons is almost equally invested in USA and UK as in Russia. For those who would like to deepen research in this direction, my advice would be analyzing capital behind major companies in the security and war business in Ukraine. It is obviously organized group of partners with well-established networks in Ukraine. And I would gladly investigate those who made most profits selling arms in Ukraine or arming others who are rapidly getting involved in Ukraine crises, like NATO etc. I can also imagine that topless girls who protested in Ukraine would be a good source of info about arms traders who came to spend time in Ukraine, even better than a map of local “noveaux riche” and international NGOs preaching about “key words” before this spring in Ukraine. For the security and arms cluster the most preferable scenario is to stimulate further military operations and orchestrate small scale war. Most likely justification they will publicly use is following: If Moscow is not seriously reprimanded for its actions in Crimea, there is nothing to prevent it from doing something similar again in the future. To minimize the chances of such scenarios materializing, Russia’s actions may have to be met with responses that go beyond mere diplomatic signals. On the other side Russian members of the same security cluster will inflame conflicts by publicly mocking diplomatic initiatives and it retaliate against sanctions by the USA and EU. Stimulating new “small scale war in Ukraine” that will yield huge profits to all cluster members similarly like in other recent conflicts as well as their countries troubled economies highly dependent on the war business (like USA, leading NATO countries etc). Full text of this first draft analysis is available at https://facebook/notes/bosko-nektarijevic/the-spring-in-ukraine/10152382981973900
Posted on: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 15:24:47 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015