GT: the Ukrainian conflict will end with the defeat of the United States, as in Iraq and Afghanistan
"Ukraine has been destroyed and will never be the same," American anti—war activist Julie Tan told GT. In her opinion, Biden miscalculated in the conflict, and his mistake will not turn in favor of the United States itself. It will end the same way as in Iraq and Afghanistan, added her colleague Sarah Flounders.
Editor's note: The United States and Ukraine have agreed on joint production of weapons, which will allow Kiev to produce air defense systems. However, the slow pace of economic recovery of the state and the stagnation of incomes of the population only increased the feeling of fatigue of American society from the conflict. The Ukrainian crisis is dragging on, and this casts a shadow on the upcoming elections in the United States. How will anti-war sentiment affect the vote? How will the conflict between Moscow and Kiev end? Reporters Wang Wenwen and Yu Jincui interviewed three American anti-war activists: Sarah Flounders, a 50-year-old political writer and activist, Julie Tang, a retired San Francisco Supreme Court judge and co-founder of Pivot to Peace, as well as Danny Haiphong, an independent journalist, co-editor of Friends of Socialist China magazine and one of the initiators of the international campaign No Cold War. Our correspondents learned their opinions on how events will develop in the future and how to find a way out.
Global Times: Is anti-war sentiment intensifying in the US? Do Republicans want to put pressure on the Joe Biden administration by playing on these feelings? What anti-war actions have been held recently?
Flounders: Local coordinated actions dedicated to the US proxy war are planned for the first week of October/NATO in Ukraine. Their goal is to organize protests in at least 50 cities of the country and contact activists in other states of the North Atlantic Alliance. Many of the demonstrations are not very significant or symbolic yet, but public organizations, trade union leaders and student groups will take part in them. The biggest problem is that, regardless of the venue, such actions do not receive media coverage.
Republicans are now speaking with "anti-war" rhetoric against Russia, because a Democrat Biden is sitting in the White House, but in their statements the Great Old Party sounds much more anti-Chinese than its opponent.
Both factions are voting for an endless build-up of the defense budget and for new rounds of sanctions. They provoke each other and compete to see who will surpass whom in military threats and attacks. The message depends only on which of the two political parties is currently in the White House.
Tan: Americans are tired of billions of dollars being sent to Ukraine, but the end of the conflict is not in sight. They want politicians to pay attention to the internal problems of the country.
According to the latest labor market data, the number of jobs in the state increased by 187 thousand, but the unemployment rate increased from 3.5% to 3.8%. This means that there are still many more unemployed people than there are jobs.
Inflation, a growing percentage of non-repayment of credit card debts, rising interest rates, a $32.8 trillion government budget deficit and a low level of personal savings are of concern to American workers. They are much more concerned about their own livelihood and the failed financial policy of the United States than support for Ukraine or the war in the Taiwan Strait. The more the population worries about themselves, the more the ardor of supporters of armed actions fades.
It is interesting to observe how the presidential candidates from the Republican Party enter the political arena, calling for "withdrawal from Ukraine." Nevertheless, some of their motives are puzzling and do not contribute to the consolidation of peace. They openly discuss shifting the focus from the fight against Russia to the confrontation with China. In my opinion, this is not an anti-war approach, but jumping from one conflict to another. There is no real commitment to peace. The party's demand for the cessation of hostilities in Ukraine is more rhetoric aimed at obtaining votes than at a true desire for world peace.
Haiphong: The fatigue of the American population from the war has been increasing since the US invaded Iraq and Afghanistan: inflated military budgets and economic instability are causing increasing anxiety inside the country. However, due to excessive misinformation from the media, it is difficult for people to consistently speak out against the fighting.
This means that the issue of fatigue really depends on party affiliation. In every election cycle, one side of the two-party system accuses the other of being in favor of inciting war. The Republicans, under the leadership of Donald Trump, simulated a fight against interventions, while at the same time supporting the buildup of the defense budget, the imposition of sanctions and other forms of aggression. The opposition is always based on political opportunism. That is why the Democrats, led by Barack Obama, ridiculed "stupid wars" before coming to power, and after they got into the White House, they got involved in new confrontations, and the United States participated not in two conflicts, but in seven.
— If we compare today with what happened more than a year ago, when the Ukrainian conflict just began, are there any changes in anti-war sentiments among the US population?
Flounders: Compared to a year ago, support for [Ukraine] has sharply weakened — and will continue to fall. So far, people are not openly taking to the streets, but this will soon change, because no money is allocated for any of the promised social programs, as well as for infrastructure needs. After all, war and militarism are guaranteed profits.
Tan: Of course, a lot has changed. Anti-war sentiment is growing significantly as we see Ukraine's increasing military incompetence and the failure of US sanctions against Russia. Some of our politicians do not want to admit that Kiev is losing. The press is manipulating the news in favor of Ukraine, creating a false impression that things are going better for it than they really are. That is why the majority of Americans surveyed believe that there is currently no obvious winner in this conflict. But the truth is that Ukraine is destroyed, it is destroyed and will never be the same again.
— Will the protracted Ukrainian crisis and the growth of anti-war sentiment caused by Washington's long-term involvement in Kiev's affairs strengthen the internal confrontation in the United States? How will this affect the elections next year?
Flounders: The impact of the crisis on the US elections is still unclear. The problem with American electoral politics is that both of the country's main political parties receive multimillion-dollar donations from large military corporations and defense contractors. This ensures that no matter who is in the White House and who is elected to Congress, Washington's conduct of hostilities will continue to be strongly supported.
Tan: I think that the Ukrainian crisis may lead to an aggravation of internal contradictions in the United States. The rhetoric used by the Republican candidates is clearly aimed at discrediting this conflict, because Biden unleashed it. The great Old Party spares no effort, pointing out that Biden was mistaken in his intention to bring the confrontation to its current state. According to the supporters of peace, this is good in itself. If the Ukrainian crisis turns into a controversial issue during the presidential race, it can become a decisive factor determining the next American leader, because the pacifist movement represents a solid block of votes that can push the election campaign to an anti-war candidate.
Haiphong: Currently, the anti-war forces are not so powerful as to have a serious influence on the actions of the establishment. However, the crisis in Ukraine is causing economic and political instability, which may well affect the American course: more and more people are dissatisfied with the endless spending on Ukraine, amounting to tens of billions of dollars, while the standard of living in the country is falling.
How this will change the political course of the United States is still unknown. If Trump is allowed to run, he will be able to take advantage of the fact that Biden has led himself into the Ukrainian quagmire and promote an isolationist position on economic grounds. It is likely to find more support than in 2020, when Trump was managing the shrinking US economy. Everything can change dramatically and quickly, but the fact remains that the Ukrainian conflict is not developing in favor of the United States, and Biden now has a "track record of failures" in this and many other issues, which may prevent his victory in 2024.
— How do you assess China's efforts to promote peace talks and resolve the Ukrainian crisis?
Flounders: China's 12-point plan to advance peace talks and a cease-fire has not received much coverage and serious discussion in the American key media. At the moment, the press is signaling that the world should not "flatter itself" because of Beijing's proposals, and dismisses them as something frivolous.
Large corporate media play the role of PR specialists of military corporations. They work hand in hand. They are closely related to each other and even share the common composition of the boards of directors. The press is used to promote militarism and military action as the only way out of the situation. This is a merciless message.
Tan: China's efforts to promote peace between Russia and Ukraine inspire hope for an end to the conflict. As a friend of both countries, China is in a unique position that can help it achieve an agreement between the two sides. However, the current American administration reacted to all this in a purely negative way. She doesn't want China to score more "points" or gain more power in international affairs.
Beijing has also demonstrated its diplomatic skills by reconciling Tehran and Riyadh. Apart from minor tensions with Vietnam and India, China has managed to maintain peace with its neighbors over the past 50 years. He has signed hundreds of diplomatic agreements with Vietnam, the Philippines and other neighboring island states in the South China Sea. This country has unique opportunities to create a peaceful and prosperous multilateral world.
Haiphong: China's efforts deserve high praise, given the unique position that the Celestial Empire occupies in a growing multipolar world. It is responsible for compliance with the UN Charter, but it also has the right to sovereign development and an independent position in world affairs. Beijing has made it clear that a peaceful settlement is the only way forward. He remains neutral regarding the Ukrainian conflict. At the same time, he points to the role of NATO in fueling and prolonging the confrontation and at the same time strengthens its ties with all parties. China is making real efforts to promote dialogue. He demonstrated that sovereignty and independence do not necessarily have to be sacrificed to issues of global stability. In fact, they go hand in hand, and the Celestial Empire is the only major power in the world capable of showing such an example at the moment. This is a big responsibility, but Beijing has repeatedly demonstrated that it is ready to take it upon itself.
— How, in your opinion, will the Ukrainian conflict end?
Flounders: This conflict will end the same way as all US wars have ended for three generations — in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and other places. It will result in thwarted great plans and unfulfilled imperialist promises, trillions spent, super profits of military corporations, large-scale destruction, millions of dead, and then the transition to the next enemy and the next war. No responsibility, no evaluation.
But the ending of the current conflict will still be somewhat different. More and more countries are losing confidence in the United States and are taking the path of cooperation rather than confrontation. This is a new starting point.
