Prepare yourselves: we’ll pay for this war thanks to our decadent politicians

 

 

The ‘little local war’ in central Europe goes on. According to the international MSM, there’s no other news suitable to grace their front pages. There are ‘frontliner’ reports galore, dripping with hyperbole, with headlines like “​​Kyiv under attack in ‘horrific rocket strikes not seen since 1941” right at the top of the DT’s online edition (paywalled link).

It is the time of the MSM armchair generals and ‘expert analysts’ displaying their anti-Putin credentials. They’re now explaining to us the whys and wherefores while still lapping up Ukrainian demands as if they were the wisdom of the ages. There are the cries for’ sanctions’. As far as Ukrainian politicians are concerned, they cannot go far enough:

“Kyiv said that its Western allies would have the blood of innocent Ukrainians on their hands if Europe failed to restrict Russia’s access to the world’s main payment clearing system.” (paywalled link)

Demand the economic destruction of Ukraine’s Western allies rather than demand the West get their fingers out and talk to Putin – that’ll work! But then again, talking to Putin was and is anathema. The sanctions the mighty West has been imposing so far are all directed at single Russians, especially Russian oligarchs. I found this reason extremely convincing: (not!)

“A UK diplomatic source said in relation to the five oligarchs sanctioned: ‘These are people who have international lifestyles. They come to Harrods to shop, they stay in our best hotels when they like, they send their children to our best public schools, and that is what’s being stopped. So that these people are essentially persona non grata in every major Western European capital in the world. That really bites.’ (link)

Oh dear. Do I detect a bit of … resentment and jealousy? Starmer of course supports these personal sanctions while Ms May, in full-on nanny manner, said ‘Russia needs to feel the cold wind of isolation’. Yes, that’ll bite as well – but let’s perhaps remember that not all of the world is singing from the West’s hymn sheet. ‘Teh Rich’, Russian or not, will always find a welcome.

Meanwhile Fraser Nelson writes in the DT that this event ‘changes the world as we know it’, comparing it to the 9/11 shock. Well, excuse me – but I seem to remember that those 9/11 terrorists struck out of the blue, that the international spy agencies were caught out cold. Never mind – our esteemed journalists are scrambling to get another thoughtful thought-piece published while the going is good, weak historical comparisons notwithstanding.

Mr Nelson thinks that “we” can survive without Russian gas and oil -even though we don’t import that much from Russia anyway. It’s a nice tale though, nicely helping the green-renewable-industrial-complex and net zero, with extra money needed for ‘more military’:

“It means finding alternative sources of energy to Russian oil and gas – as well as funding a far-greater military presence on Nato’s eastern flank that makes it quite clear what the consequences of any Russia salami-slicing would be. A bigger, more heavily-deployed military will represent an upheaval, a change of mindset – and a battle that no one wishes to have. But the other methods of keeping the peace in Europe have just been exhausted. If Putin is to be deterred from his ambitions for a Greater Russia, there really is no alternative.” (paywalled link)

That reminded me forcefully of a song popular in the late 1870s:

“We don’t want to fight but by Jingo if we do, We’ve got the ships, we’ve got the men, we’ve got the money too, We’ve fought the Bear before, and while we’re Britons true, The Russians shall not have Constantinople.” (link)

Only now we’ve got no ships, no men and no money … Turning our Armed Forces into a ‘diverse’ and ‘genderised’ Force was more important. While “we” worried about woke and gendering Russia did not. Richard Littlejohn has a fine essay on this in the DM – worth reading (link).

Now “we” will pay for that and for that ‘little local war’ which our leaders didn’t prevent. No, there’s no ‘alternative’, just as there was no alternative to getting Ukraine to observe the Minsk II protocol, rather than provoke Russia, just as there was no alternative to refusing to talk to Putin about his demands in regard to NATO.  James Forsyth remarks in his opinion piece in The Times:

“The West has long been clear that it would not fight for Ukraine. The strategy was to try to deter Russia through economic measures. Johnson has threatened sweeping sanctions designed to “hobble” the Russian economy but, inexplicably, they were not in place before the invasion began. He and other western leaders certainly can inflict sanctions that would make Russian eyes water. The problem is that they’d make British eyes water, too: a point he’s rather reluctant to accept.” (link, paywalled)

Firstly – if the West was clear that it wouldn’t fight for the Ukraine, why have Western leaders pushed Ukrainians into this fight anyway? Secondly – doesn’t this beg the question if the whole thing, now become a shooting war, was only a means by Western swamp dwellers to damage the Russian economy in order to get rid of Putin?

And this is what “we” are going to have to pay for, literally? Is the nudge unit nudging us into accepting economic hardship – for this? There’s more (my emphasis):

“The prime minister’s refusal to set this out clearly has consequences. Senior Tories admit that his failure to do so thus far will add to the Kremlin’s sense that the West is too decadent to take the measures that will really hurt. It won’t be popular, but western governments need to prepare their voters for the fact that standing up to Russian aggression will lead to a spike in energy prices — making filling up your car and heating your home more expensive — and will send inflation still higher.” (link, paywalled)

Impoverishing us, keeping us poor, means we’ll have no time nor energy to fight against ‘our leaders’. There’s also international banking and ‘SWIFT’ from which Russia should be kicked out. The DM has this little report about Johnson valiantly striving at the G7 virtual meeting to achieve this, but the EU is resisting, especially Germany and Italy link). How dare they worry about their economies! 

It doesn’t matter that Russia and China have developed alternatives which they can use for trade between them, not when a Tory politician pooh-pooh’d this, telling the DM:

“’Suspending Russia from Swift is the single most effective, immediate act available to inflict serious harm on their financial system. Whilst Russia has developed alternatives, they are not the same, and there would be major dislocation.” (link)

Sure there’d be ‘major dislocations’ but, by jingo, “we” can take it, right? The PM was posturing on the grand G7 stage, putting the lie to the fact that Brits are pragmatic and not driven by ideology, trying to make us look principled (my emphasis):

“European concerns are said to centre on potential damage to their own economies if they are unable to buy Russian gas using the system. But ex-Cabinet minister Robert Jenrick said the crisis was now so serious that countries had to accept sacrifices to punish Russia.” (link)

That’s when my latest mug hit the wall! As far as I know, and correct me if I’m wrong, we are not at war with Russia. As far as I know, and correct me if I’m wrong, this ‘little local war’ is the outcome of both the glee with which western politicians, from the US president down, have given space and prominence to Ukrainian demands and posturings, while no sensible attempts were made to address Putin’s demands, the ‘diplomatic’ shuttling and zoom phones of foreign secretaries notwithstanding.

In consequence this means that “we” have to accept that our household energy bills will rise to e.g. £3,000 in the autumn, or so the experts predict. “We” will have to sacrifice our economic well-being for the Ukraine when we’ll face inflation which will rise to over 8% (link, link paywalled). 

There are parallels between the past two years where the PM’s ‘sciency posturing’ bought us so much misery and damaged our economy without our voices ever being heard and now, when the same scientifically illiterate, innumerate politicians from the PM down are blithely going to heap more hardship on us thanks to their economic illiteracy.

It’s not “we” who are decadent – it’s our leaders, it’s the Westminster swamp dwellers. Still, “we” will pay, as always: unasked and seemingly unwilling to really change things. Everybody happy now?

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email