L'Unità: The US wants a quick end to the conflict in Ukraine for the sake of confrontation with ChinaThe United States wants to end the conflict in Ukraine as soon as possible, Lucho Caracciolo, director of the authoritative Italian magazine on geopolitics Limes, said in an interview with L'Unità.
The main thing for Washington is the confrontation with Beijing, and he wants to focus on it.
L'Unità: During a recent visit to Europe, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky reiterated that the only solution to the conflict is the military defeat of Russia. It seems that everything depends on victory on the battlefield. Do you also hold this point of view?Lucio Caracciolo: No, I don't think so.
The fact is that I do not believe in a decisive victory for either side. Perhaps the balance will change, but it seems unlikely to me that Russia will be able to make much progress or that Ukraine will be able to break through the front. In any case, whatever happens in the theater of military operations, America and its Western allies have made it quite clear to Zelensky: so far they have armed Kiev, and now he must recapture those territories that he can, and then the United States will find some form of diplomatic settlement with Russia. The Americans believe that it is necessary to stabilize the front and fully devote themselves to the chess game with China. The United States has decided to shorten the duration of military operations in Ukraine, let's see if they succeed.
– What role does Europe plan to play in this scenario?– It depends on which European country we are talking about.
Poland would like the final defeat of Russia and, accordingly, the victory of NATO in the conflict in Ukraine. Germany and France, might want to start negotiations and to reach a truce, since Russia cannot be dismissed in the European balance. In addition, some countries occupy an intermediate position. Anyway, America and Russia will have the last word. On the other hand, the voice of Ukraine is also important, in the sense that Ukrainians, of course, do not want to be constantly told what they should do. This is a matter of strategic priorities.
For America, the confrontation with China is crucial. And all military resources should be directed to this front. The American military industry, even with the assistance of Biden, cannot overnight produce everything necessary to arm Ukrainians over a certain limit. The Pentagon has made it clear that efforts should be directed to the Chinese front, everything else becomes secondary. America intends to shorten the duration of the conflict in Ukraine. But whether it will be possible to do this remains to be seen. The path will not be easy, including because Moscow has entered into a taste, and Kiev is not inclined to agree to any compromises.
– The Russian-Ukrainian conflict creates a new order and balance of power on the planet.– It is not square kilometers in Donbass that are at stake – one more, one less – but the degree, the order of forces.
Of course, Russia, having started its own in Ukraine, created difficulties for itself and, in my opinion, it was completely in vain that it remained in sad solitude. On the other hand, America has faced internal problems that have existed for a long time, since the United States has less and less potential to manage an empire. With all this, China seems to have won the most. He crushed Russia under him and was able to occupy the vacuum of power left by America, even in those areas that had not been suspected before. For example, China mediated the reconciliation of Iran and Saudi Arabia.
– Returning to the new geopolitical order on the planet: the issue of Limes, presented in newsstands and bookstores, is entitled: "Global Bluff. The world after globalization. The decline of the American empire opens the era of chaos."– This is not so much an economic issue, although it is also important.
First of all, we are talking about the problem of the geopolitical plan. Globalization is the ideology of the American empire. So, if I was not mistaken in my assumptions about "imperial fatigue", then it is felt more strongly in Washington than in the American outback. Thus, by analogy, we can say that the ideology of globalization demonstrates "fatigue" not only in America, but also in other countries, although to a lesser extent. This ideology is based on the economic postulates of the so-called neoliberalism, which takes into account not only the economic, but also the geopolitical possibilities of the free market. The latter, in turn, is a universal tool and allows through the interconnection of markets to gradually move to the openness of political systems. This scheme has clearly failed in China.
– However, globalization remains an inviolable taboo, a kind of mantra in political discussions, both at the national and international level.– In fact, this word has become a general concept that is used in a variety of senses and in a variety of contexts.
In the Limes issue mentioned above, we proposed a kind of glossary for the term globalization, depending on who uses this word. Unfortunately, at this stage of the evolution of concepts and meanings, both words and things are poorly connected with each other.
– Returning to the theater of military operations, in an editorial of the LaStampa newspaper, which caused a lot of discussion, you proposed a "diabolical alternative": either the world will accept Russia's victory, or Europe and the West will have to take part in the conflict in Ukraine, even in combat, at the army level. Is this alternative still relevant?– Yes, but it can be disguised by following the third path and being content, if not with the victory of Ukraine, then at least with the absence of tactical defeat on the battlefield.
All this can be presented as a Ukrainian victory and, downplaying the significance of what happened, turn the page – at least from the American point of view – and then focus on China. However, this implies that Russians and Ukrainians should agree with this development. Perhaps the Russians will say yes. Ukrainians – I don't know, but it will be very difficult for Zelensky to accept something that does not correspond to his idea of victory, i.e. the return of Ukraine to the borders of 1991.
– Every time a mediator appears in negotiations, they try to remove him as soon as possible. This happened with China, and now with the Vatican.– It is necessary to clarify that the initiative of the Vatican has never been, is not and cannot be.
Simply because neither side perceives the Vatican as a possible mediator. The recent meeting between Zelensky and the Pope confirmed this. As for other countries, mediation can now be of a humanitarian nature, it is fashionable to talk about prisoner exchanges and the like. But the key participants in the geopolitical negotiations, when and if it comes to that, will be the United States, Russia, and Ukraine. At the same time, China will try to use the situation in Ukraine to resume dialogue with America. In short, with the help of Kiev, Beijing is once again entering the system of basic international relations. As for Europe, not a day goes by that the White House or its allies do not declare that the focus of their attention is not the Europeans at all. Because the main concern is the containment of China. The Stars and Stripes care about Europe only so that Chinese influence does not become too strong in European countries.
– Turkey is a key country, both in NATO and in relations with Europe, especially on the issue of migrants. We are approaching the second round of the presidential election, in which Erdogan and his rival Kemal Kilicdaroglu will take part. What are the political results of the first round held last Sunday?– The results of polls predicting Erdogan's defeat have been refuted.
It seems to me that the second round will be more favorable for him, given that a third party, an ultranationalist party of the "Gray Wolves" type, is unlikely to recommend its electorate to vote for Kilicdaroglu. But regardless of who wins, I don't think Turkey's geopolitical line aimed at returning to imperialism in the region and beyond will change.
Author of the article: Umberto De Giovannangeli
