Global hypocrisies exposed

Consequences: Maxar Satellite image of the aftermath of an airstrike on the Mariupol Drama Theater, in southern Ukraine, on March 19. Rescuers searched for hundreds of civilians feared trapped under the wreckage. — AFP

“WAR! What is it good for? Absolutely nothing!” These are the opening lyrics of the 1970 song War! by Edwin Starr, which at the time was a protest against the Vietnam War. Now, with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the song has suddenly become relevant again.

People all around the world have looked on with shock and horror at the unfolding heartbreaking scenes of war in Ukraine. Unsurprisingly, many have reacted emotionally, especially as we have not even overcome the trauma of the Covid-19 pandemic. Non-military facilities in Ukraine have been bombed and hundreds of civilians have been killed, including children. Ten million Ukrainians – almost one quarter of its population – have become refugees, exacerbating the global refugee crisis. Six and a half million are internally displaced.

Many blame Russia, or specifically President Vladimir Putin, casting him as a 21st century Hitler – or “Ras-Putin” – with a nuclear arsenal capable of triggering World War III, which would spell the end of the world. But depicting him with a Hitler moustache is a bit juvenile, no?

Ukraine President Volodymir Zelenskyy, on the other hand, is hailed as a hero – certainly an unlikely one – and a modern-day Winston Churchill despite his unlikely background as a former comedian. So Zelenskyy and Putin are pitted as opposites: democratic vs despotic, loved vs hated, millennial vs late baby boomer, sympathetic entertainer vs hypermasculine show-off – in short, black and white.

But the reality of geopolitics, which this conflict is about, is far from black and white, especially if you look back historically, way back to the Cold War era, which lasted for 44 years (1947-1991). It was a period of geopolitical tension between the United States and the then-Soviet Union (USSR) and their respective allies, usually referred to as the Western and Eastern blocs.

But before looking at post-WW II history, let’s look at the reaction of some people in this part of the world – specifically, Indonesians – to the situation in Ukraine. Insights were provided by international relations lecturer Radityo Dharmaputra in his article titled “Why do so many Indonesians back Russia’s invasion of Ukraine”. Partly because of “a strong anti-American and anti-Western attitude [and their] war on terror”. It is also about likes (strong leaders) and dislikes (American hypocrisy).

Another reason for Indonesians’ support of the Russian invasion is the majority of Indonesians still think they did the right thing in East Timor (1975-1999). They dismiss accounts of atrocities there as Western propaganda and see the “loss of East Timor” as a Western/Australian plot.

Besides the propaganda around the Russian invasion of Ukraine, there have certainly been much more balanced and historical accounts provided by academics and political observers: about Nato (the North Atlantic Treaty Organi-sation) and the Warsaw Pact; parallels and references to Afghanistan, Palestine, Syria, Iraq, etc; the fact that the invasion of Ukraine is yet another proxy war; the threat of nuclear war; implications for the world order; and certainly Western, especially American, racism and hypocrisy. The London Economic, an alternative media platform, listed 36 countries that the United States has bombed or interfered in since WWII.

Already in 2015, John Mear-sheimer, an American political scientist and international relations scholar, said in his lecture “Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault” that Western powers had encouraged Ukraine to be part of the West.

Ukraine is on Russia’s doorstep (sharing a land border of almost 2,100km). Furthermore, Ukraine used to be part of the USSR, so it’s no wonder Putin is getting more than the heebie-jeebies about what he feels is the encroachment of Russian territory and sovereignty. Heaven forbid that Ukraine will inspire Russian citizens to revolt against their 21st-century czar, who is known to poison political enemies.

Another analyst, Kim Iversen, an American-Vietnamese journalist described as one of the most successful and progressive American talk show hosts and YouTubers, spoke on March 1 on YouTube about how “Ukraine-Russia is REALLY About the Demise of US Hegemony, Petrodollar” – basically, about a new world order.

Then there is an analysis by Palki Sharma, Indian journalist and editor at World Is One News. She basically takes the same stance as Mearsheimer, that the United States pushed Russia to invade Ukraine. Her newscast on Tuesday was called “Russia Turning Ukraine Into Europe’s Syria? Will Mercenaries Assassinate Zelensky?” Yikes!

The most recent interview I listened to was by Rania Khalek, a Lebanese-American writer and political activist, speaking to Ali Abunimah, a Palestinian-American journalist, one of the founders of the Electronic Intifada online publication which covers the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from a Palestinian perspective. The one hour and 25-minute interview is titled “Ukraine War Exposes US Hypocrisy, Double Standards & Racism”. Right, no beating about the bush there.

While it is true that there is a long history of hypocrisy and war crimes by the United States and the West, it should not be used to justify what Putin is doing. Nato expansion happened partly because Eastern European nations (former Soviet countries) did not want to be under the Russian sphere of influence.

Putin saw the 2010 Arab Spring revolts and was alarmed that such things might happen in Russia (hence his backing of Syrian President Bashar Assad). He was even more concerned when people power occurred in Ukraine in 2014. As a KGB man who experienced the collapse of the Soviet empire, he was likely shaped by fear of people power. People making content along the lines of “America bad, therefore, Russia not so bad” is music to Putin’s ears.

In the meantime, it’s the people of Ukraine who suffer. There is an Indonesian saying: “When elephants fight each other, the mousedeer dies in the middle.” This is always the case with proxy wars, not just in Ukraine, but also in Afghanistan, Syria and Yemen, for example.

Russia is now being accused of committing war crimes. But as philosopher Noam Chomsky said, “For the powerful, crimes are those that others commit”.

If I may cite another Indonesian elephant proverb: “The elephant perched on one’s eyelids is not visible, but the ant across the ocean is clearly visible.” The fault of others is so visible even when far away, but we are so blind to our own. – The Jakarta Post/Asia News Network

Julia Suryakusuma is the director of the Gender and Democracy Center of the Institute for Research, Education and Information on Economy and Social Affairs (LP3ES), Indonesia.