Connect with us

Features

Russia after Wagnar Mutiny: Putin’s Politics Redefined

Published

on

by Nilantha Ilangamuwa

The Gang of Eight in the US was thrilled, expecting a larger spectacle in the Western alliance’s fight against Russia. The CIA, with whom Ukrainian President Zelenskyy shared everything, assured a heavy bloodbath in Moscow. Alas, the inflated balloon unexpectedly burst, leaving their hope in tatters. But, the West’s lost dream does not mean Russia is a success.

As Alexander Dugin pointed out, “clouds begin to thicken again.” Russia has been shaken, prompting Russians and the Putin administration to rethink and redefine their approach. The so-called Wagner mutiny has exposed the hollowness of the narrative fallacies propagated by the West and its corporate media, which contains blatant falsehoods about perceived enemies of the West.

This is not the first time that mainstream Western media has attempted to exploit such incidents to tarnish designated enemies in an unsightly manner. Are you aware of the infamous Ukrainian figure Stepan Bandera, widely known as a Nazi collaborator responsible for the deaths of over a hundred thousand Jews and Poles, and his followers, such as Mykola Lebed, who deeply collaborated with the CIA to undermine the Soviet Union in Ukraine? Declassified government reports have revealed that Ukraine has served as a staging ground for the U.S. to weaken and threaten Moscow for nearly 80 years.

In 1997, Zbigniew Brzezinski, former U.S. national security adviser, emphasized the significance of Ukraine as a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard. Did you know that Vladimir Putin, as the newly elected leader of the Russian Federation, officially requested to join NATO in 2000, but the Clinton administration vehemently refused?

More recently, in December 2022, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel admitted that the West never intended to push for the implementation of the Minsk agreements and instead used them as a pretext to buy time for NATO to arm and train the Ukrainian armed forces. Shortly after the outbreak of the war, Russia and Ukraine reached a framework agreement to end the conflict, with Ukraine pledging not to join NATO. However, the objections of the U.S. and U.K. prevented its implementation. Subsequently, we witnessed the so-called 36-hour mutiny, led by Wagner, which perhaps stands as the shortest armed mutiny in Russian history.

However, the Western narratives not only failed miserably but also further damaged their own reputation. The inconsistent stances of the US administration regarding this mutiny from the outset indicate a lack of understanding of Russia’s socio-political reality. Despite this, US companies have capitalized on the conflict, holding Ukraine hostage, while Europe has endured unprecedented destruction.

It is crucial for the opposing parties to accurately grasp the geopolitical dynamics of Russia, as Europe needs Russia. Russia is the largest state in the world, spanning 17.1 million square kilometers across eleven time zones. It has been led by the same leader for 23 years and boasts the world’s fifth-largest military, with 1.15 million active-duty troops and at least two million reserve personnel.

Contrary to the analysis presented by Western media, the head of the Wagner private military company, who challenged several high-ranking officials of the Russian army, along with approximately two thousand supporters, had no intention of invading Moscow, overthrowing President Putin, or plunging Russia into civil war. Even disregarding the facts, a basic understanding of mathematics would debunk these false interpretations. However, for the stubborn, egocentric hyper-minds, true comprehension remains elusive, with truth always serving as their archenemy.

Yevgeny Prigozhin, the head of Wagner’s company, is a self-proclaimed general skilled at perpetuating small lies to facilitate grand scams. His primary objective is to maximize profit, not govern Russia. He never opposed President Putin or the administration as a whole. A closer examination of his messages, assuming their authenticity, reveals that his public protest stems from a dispute with Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu. This crisis has been developing internally for years since Shoigu objected to awarding certain military contracts to Wagner.

This so-called mutiny may be an unintended consequence of a private military unit receiving more preferential treatment than the regular army during operations. Alternatively, it could be the result of conflicts arising from the substantial funding—over one billion dollars—allocated to Wagner by the central government in just one year. Prigozhin is a businessman who has amassed significant wealth through his private army. According to reports, his declared personal wealth is US$1.5 billion and continues to flourish.

Putin’s decisive response showcases his strong leadership, prioritizing the state’s structure over personal ties. Upholding the state’s institutions, Putin safeguards Russian society and recognizes their crucial role in his leadership.

Another intriguing observation is Prigozhin’s endorsement of President Alexander Lukashenko’s proposals. President Lukashenko is widely recognized as one of President Putin’s most trusted politicians. This raises the question of what motivated Prigozhin to place his trust in Lukashenko and choose Belarus as a retreat. It remains to be seen whether Wagner utilized the mercenary army to strengthen Lukashenko’s position, as he faces political instability. Only time will provide the answer to this question.

This agreement raises doubts about whether the incidents in Russia over the past weekend were orchestrated as part of a carefully planned drama. If so, even individuals with basic knowledge of military operations and strategies have doubts about whether the strengthening of the Belarusian-Ukrainian border, which stretches approximately 1,084 km, was in preparation for a decisive military operation in the future. As the Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu stated in his book “The Art of War,” ‘all warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.’ Putin may have grasped this strategy long ago during his time in the KGB.

However, the Wagner ‘mutiny’ raises a significant social issue: the potential social divide that can arise when private military companies challenge the state’s legitimate military forces. This issue is particularly important for the future of the region, as the Ukraine-Russia war has transformed into a conflict between two ideologically distinct worlds rather than two countries.

The Wagner incident sheds light on the Russian people and their social opinions. While the Wagner mercenary army undeniably maintains a level of popularity, it is important to note that the company heavily invests in PR campaigns and utilizes troll farms to bolster its image. Meanwhile, Russia’s invasion has proven to be more protracted than initially anticipated. But, historical precedent shows that Russians have endured prolonged wars before, albeit reluctantly.

Despite this, a formidable political alternative capable of challenging Putin’s leadership has yet to emerge. Western countries have made attempts to create viable alternatives since 1991, but their lack of understanding of Russian society has hindered their success. Destabilizing Russia’s internal structures can weaken its strength, a fact that former KGB operative Putin is well aware of. To dismantle Putin’s administration, one must employ individuals with a profound understanding of his character. Thus, when Prigozhin voiced his protest, Western countries and their pro-Ukraine media hailed him as a hero.

Whether the Wagner mutiny is factual or merely a scene from a drama, it highlights the challenges faced by states that rely on private armies. Two years prior to President Putin’s military operations in Ukraine, Eric Prince, the former head of the US mercenary company previously known as Blackwater (later renamed Xe Services and then Academi in 2011), held a meeting with top officials of Ukrainian President Zelensky on February 23, 2020. During this meeting, Prince proposed that his private army was ready to engage in war against Russia.

Eric’s mercenary army first gained public attention during the US invasion of Iraq, has been involved in operations across various regions, including Africa. Although Eric Prince’s mission in Ukraine failed, there are other private military companies actively involved in conflicts against Russia. Reports suggest that officers in these companies can earn as little as two thousand US dollars per day, highlighting the lucrative nature of such operations.

However, the detrimental impact of maintaining private armies on official state forces should not be underestimated. In response, the United Nations adopted the International Convention Against the Recruitment, Use, Financing, and Training of Mercenaries on December 4, 1989, which came into force on October 20, 2001. It is worth noting that some of the world’s largest and most powerful armies, including those of the United States, Russia, China, France, and the United Kingdom, have not ratified this convention. This inconsistency raises questions about the true stance of these countries on the use of mercenaries and private military companies.

In March 2024, Russia will hold its presidential elections, eight months ahead of the US race. It will be President Putin’s first election since the 2020 constitutional amendment. The upcoming winter holds immense significance for all parties involved and may determine the outcome of the war. The impact of his invasion of Ukraine and the presence of mercenary forces throughout his tenure will undoubtedly shape the presidential election’s outcome, a crucial task in times of war. Whether the Wagner incident is genuine or orchestrated, it has given President Putin’s politics a new dimension. As one of Russia’s longest-serving leaders, Putin faces a critical juncture, and the choices he makes will undoubtedly shape the future, for better or worse.



Features

Eastern University and the making of a culture of peace

Published

on

by Jehan Perera

There is an important change in the way peace is being understood in Sri Lanka. The notion that peacebuilding is not simply the responsibility of governments, politicians and peace organisations, but is also a responsibility of educational institutions, appears to be permeating the consciousness of at least a section of the academic community. This was visible on International Peace Day at an event held at Eastern University by the Faculty of Health-Care Sciences. The event was unusual not least because the medical and nursing faculty of the university had decided that peacebuilding was relevant to its academic and professional responsibilities.

Peacebuilding has too often been treated as something undertaken after conflict, when the fighting has stopped and the immediate task is to rebuild relationships between communities. But peace cannot be sustained by governments and peace organisations alone. If it is to become long lasting, the values and practices of peace have to become part of the institutions through which a society educates its younger generations. Universities and other educational institutions are therefore important to peacebuilding. They are among the places where the foundations of a culture of peace can either be built or neglected.

The experience of the Faculty of Health-Care Sciences at Eastern University provides a practical example of what this can mean. Led by its Dean, Prof Thillainathan Sathaananthan, the faculty organised an event which went beyond the ordinary academic scope of a medical faculty. University academics are experts in writing project proposals and applying for research grants. On this occasion, the members of the Faculty of Health-Care Sciences used those skills to apply for a UNESCO grant that they won to conduct an International Peace Day event. The significance lies less in the Rs 200,000 grant than in the decision to use the university’s institutional capacity and resources to invest in peacebuilding. The event at Eastern University needs to be understood as more than a successful university programme. It represents a possible paradigm shift in peace thinking.

Institutional Commitment

The Peace Day event obtained the support of the university administration, including Vice Chancellor Prof P Peratheepan, and reached out to secondary schools in the vicinity to mobilise their attendance. The event itself was meticulously organised. There were cultural items including traditional and modern dance and song in the three languages, performed by combinations of solo, duet and multiple singers, dancers and actors drawn in part from nearby secondary schools. There was a panel discussion by senior academics on the general theme of peacebuilding and how to prepare for it. A discussion among the students followed, where each student spoke on behalf of a religion that was not theirs. This is significant because peacebuilding cannot remain an idea discussed by specialists at conferences. It has to become part of the way institutions educate and prepare people for life in a plural society.

The Faculty of Health-Care Sciences at Eastern University has provided a model through its Peace Medicine course modules that were introduced to the curricular as a compulsory core course over 10 years ago. Two senior academics, Dr Kuveriel Eliyas Karunakaran and Dr Thillainathan Sathaananthan, have written a book on “Peace Medicine- A Health Care Concern” that was published five years ago. Its Peace Medicine Module integrates principles of medical ethics, compassion, equity, social justice and community engagement into health education and practice. In his introduction, former Vice Chancellor of Eastern University, Prof T Jayasingam noted “This book is an introduction to a theme which had already been operating in the Faculty of Health Care Sciences as a course.”

Doctors, nurses and health workers know better than anyone the harm that war and violence does. They are the people who treat the wounds and trauma that violence leaves behind. In a hospital, a patient is not asked what their religion or ethnicity is before they are treated. Health care is one of the places where peace is practised every day. The Faculty has therefore found a way of connecting its professional responsibilities with the wider social responsibility of peacebuilding. The question is whether this experience can be replicated throughout the country, at universities and at other educational institutions, so that peacebuilding becomes part of the consciousness of education itself. If that happens on a sufficient scale, it can begin to generate a culture of peace that becomes increasingly difficult to reverse.

Local Action

The Eastern University event corresponded closely to the United Nations theme for this year’s International Day of Peace, “Invest in Peace – For Everyone, Everywhere, Every Day”, which honours the “everyday architects of peace”, people driving local action, laying the groundwork for stability and building lasting peace from the ground up. The emphasis on investment is important. An investment means that something is put in: time, courage and resources. There is no more violent conflict in Sri Lanka today. But the absence of war does not automatically produce a culture of peace. The factors that fed the country’s conflict have not disappeared from the world. Racism, corruption and the violation of laws and human rights are the raw materials of conflict. So too are unresolved grievances, discrimination and the failure to recognise the suffering of others.

A country that does not deal with its past does not escape it. The past can return in the next generation. This is why the experience of Eastern University needs to be replicated countrywide, both at universities and at other educational institutions. The objective should not be to turn every academic discipline into peace studies. Rather, peacebuilding needs to become part of the consciousness of education itself. Eastern University shows that a medical faculty can develop Peace Medicine. A law faculty can examine the relationship between justice, rights and peace. Faculties of education can prepare teachers to work in diverse communities, while the humanities and social sciences can examine the different narratives through which communities understand their histories. Every institution can find its own way of making peacebuilding relevant to what it teaches.

Sri Lanka has had many declarations, pledges and programmes in the past. What matters is whether these produce changes in behaviour and institutional practice. Peacebuilding requires confronting difficult issues rather than avoiding them. It requires respect for different identities, but also engagement across those identities. It requires dealing with grievances in the present while also addressing unresolved issues from the past. It requires truth, accountability, reparations and guarantees of non-recurrence. It requires people to learn that the rights of another community do not diminish their own rights. The International Peace Day event at Eastern University was evidence of a change in the way at least some academics in a part of the country deeply affected by war are thinking about their responsibilities. Peace needs to be invested in and the most important investment will be in the minds of those who will inherit the future.

Continue Reading

Features

Quality assured education commodities

Published

on

by Ahilan Kadirgamar

I have always noticed the little paper tags that are inside the packaging of some products that say quality assured or quality control. I often wonder who might have checked the product and stamped that tag, but I also forget the tag soon enough. Decades later, when I entered academia, I was taken aback by the emphasis placed on quality assurance in our universities. It is not something that could be forgotten and done away with; the entire university system is obsessed with quality assurance.

Beginning with the staff induction programme, quality assurance is drilled into the newly recruited lecturers. It is the norm, not seen as doing any harm and only trying to improve quality. It is accepted as given, and not questioned. Quality Assurance Cells and Committees are omnipresent and hover above the Departments and, at times, even the Faculty Boards. Quality Assurance reviews are feared by the Deans and Vice Chancellors. University life itself seems secondary to the rule of quality assurance. What do we make of this system of quality assurance and what are its implications for our university system?

Corporate speak

Universities globally have been going through major changes with neoliberal education policies. In many countries, universities increasingly became corporatised to be run like businesses in the 1980s. As state support for universities declined, cost cutting became the norm. They started hiring adjunct or part-time staff. Many public non-fee levying universities around the world began to charge fees. Decade by decade, tuition fees became more and more exorbitant, forcing students to take student loans. The total student debt in the United States now stands at close to US$ 2 trillion; which is about 20 times the GDP of Sri Lanka. As the higher education landscape transformed in the West, university administrations began to recruit Presidents, Vice Chancellors and administrative officials with corporate backgrounds and experience.

Such corporatisation of universities in the West has since been imported into countries like Sri Lanka, introducing a new corporate vocabulary, including quality assurance, graduate competencies, programme outcomes, intended learning outcomes, etc. University teaching has become secondary to documenting so-called outcomes. The teacher-student relationship, the environment of the lecture hall and even administering the university have been over-determined by the processes of ensuring quality. How did such major changes come about in such a short time? Indeed, academics of just two generation ago, would never have heard of these terms and processes in the Sri Lankan university system.

World Bank Trojan horse

Since the early 2000s there have been a number of World Bank projects that have drastically changed the character of Sri Lankan universities. Quality assurance as a central agenda within universities, and many other changes to the working of our universities, came through these World Bank initiatives. The Improving Relevance and Quality of Undergraduate Education (IRQUE) project and Higher Education for the 21st Century (HETC) project were two such earlier projects that set up the Quality Assurance and Accreditation Unit (QAAU) under the University Grants Commission (UGC) and established systematic quality assurance reviews for state universities. The public often thinks these are grants from the World Bank to modernise our universities. However, they are not grants but loans.

The most recent such project, Accelerating Higher Education Expansion and Development (AHEAD) is a US$ 100 million loan from the World Bank implemented from 2018 to 2023, which consolidated the quality assurance structures from the earlier projects. Furthermore, these projects are implemented with tremendous arrogance, prioritising their implementation over all other concerns in the universities, when the project over six years for example accounts for just one fourth of our budget allocation for universities this year.

The AHEAD project drastically changed course curricula, sought to increase student enrolment in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM) disciplines, commercialise the university research agenda and create university-business linkages. All of this was pushed to supposedly help us face development challenges. We have heard the ideological attack on our universities and even students claiming they are “unemployable graduates”. These changes to our higher education system were supposedly going to create jobs and increase employment.

The irony of the AHEAD project is that just as it was ending in 2023, apparently after having reached its targets, the Sri Lankan economy was collapsing. The World Bank often gets the direction of causality wrong. It is the economy that creates jobs for graduates, and not the training or kind of graduates that create jobs. It is decades of World Bank policies, and those of its ideological twin the IMF, that have led to such high youth unemployment, not only in Sri Lanka but also in many other countries in the global South.

Sri Lanka entered an IMF agreement in March 2023 and started a new Country Partnership Framework with the World Bank in June 2023. These programmes have little to say about, and actively discourage, government initiatives that aim to create an industrial policy or an employment creation policy. Instead, they push for austerity measures, which not only restrict the allocation for education among other sectors, but also end up contracting the economy to the detriment of increasing employment. Their goal is the commercialisation of higher education, to make universities into businesses and run them like factories.

In this context, the ideology of quality assurance is powerful. The International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO), whose different standards are necessary for marketing, is the institution that came up with the concept of “quality assurance”. It promoted quality assurance as a process of identifying defected products. Therefore, when the World Bank promotes this conceptual framing, our students are, in fact, seen as products on the assembly line, with quality assurance processes aiming to prevent the release of defected products from the university system. For the US$ 100 million we borrowed for the AHEAD project and the many more million dollars in similar World Bank projects, there is no evidence of increased employment of graduates.

Commodity fetishism

Over a century and a half ago, Karl Marx critiqued the economic analysis prevalent at that time that associated some inherent or monetary value for commodities without considering the social relations that underlie the production of those commodities. Marx called this commodity fetishism. Furthermore, he theorised that such commodity fetishism was also a reason for the alienation of human beings from the world. If our labour and what we produce is seen devoid of the social relations that underlie them, we lose our connection with the people and the world. In this process we become alienated from what we produce and the world.

We are now in a world where our students themselves are fetishised as commodities for the market. Universities are no longer communities concerned about knowledge and human growth, but mere factories producing commodities, which have to be produced without defects to be marketed. In this way, quality assurance has become the cause for the alienation of students, academics and our universities themselves, from the larger relationship with our economy and society.

Our university system does need reform. It is grossly underfunded and not providing the financial support and facilities for our students. Universities have become hierarchical spaces without the academic freedom and democratic ethos necessary for producing knowledge. Academics and students need to engage more with their communities to make their learning and research meaningful, not to mention their contribution to and integration with society. However, when it comes to even questions of governance and regulation of the universities, such concerns are merely reduced to improving quality. In our contemporary times, this singular focus on quality assurance, as opposed to addressing the larger structural issues, is crippling our universities. There may be no way out, but to put back quality assurance where it started, those little tags on goods, to perhaps be noticed but quickly forgotten.

Ahilan Kadirgamar is a political economist and Senior Lecturer, University of Jaffna.

(Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies)

Continue Reading

Features

Thailand’s biggest new global star …

Published

on

The entertainment scene, globally, is agog with excitement, and, why not!

Yes, a new global star has emerged … from Thailand, and she hit the headlines by winning America’s Got Talent.

Rattikarn Amloy, known to millions by her stage name Nene Royal, was crowned the winner of America’s Got Talent (AGT) Season 21 at the live finale at Pasadena Civic Auditorium, California, taking home the USD 1 million grand prize.

The 16-year-old rocker, from the holiday island of Phuket (I’ve been to Phuket, courtesy Tourism Authority of Thailand), has struck a power chord around the world, and is the first Thai national ever to win the hit NBC show.

She beat nine other finalists, including runner-up magician Geno Ploeger, after a blistering final performance.

Nene’s story is pure rock and roll fairy-tale. She says she picked up a guitar at age seven, fell in love at the first chord, and taught herself mostly by watching videos online. That dedication earned her a music scholarship to Kajonkiet International School Phuket.

Her audition at America’s Got Talent — a swaggering, shredding rendition of The Cranberries’ classic ‘Zombie’ — exploded online, amassing over 200 million views across AGT’s platforms, more than any act this season.

She kept wowing: ‘Hysteria’ by Muse, then ‘Black Hole Sun’ by Soundgarden which earned her Spice Girl Mel B’s Golden Buzzer, sending her straight to the live shows.

For the final, she unleashed ‘Seven Nation Army’ by The White Stripes. Judge Howie Mandel shouted: “You should win. Give her the million, America.” Mel B praised her “mysterious, mystical stage presence”.

And for the grand finale, she lived every teen rocker’s dream — performing on stage, alongside US rock giants Linkin Park.

When host Terry Crews announced her as winner, the teenager collapsed to the stage floor in tears. “I’m very happy and you know I’m emotional right now,” she said.

And Thailand erupted. Her school held watch parties, posting: “You did it, congratulations, champion. We are so proud of you.”

Even Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul sent a personal congratulation. He had earlier hosted Nene at Government House in July, where she played guitar while he sang a Thai rock song. His office said her talent “brought pride to Thai people.”

Corporate Thailand also rallied behind her — Charoen Pokphand Foods, owned by billionaire Dhanin Chearavanont, even rented a giant billboard in Times Square, New York, to cheer her on.

With her blistering guitar solos, rock-ballad shrieks and fearless spirit, little Nene Royal has just become Thailand’s biggest new global star.

What’s more, this amazing teenager will be bringing her powerful vocals, guitar skills and signature rock-metal style to the stage, as opening act, before one of the world’s biggest rock bands, America’s Avenged Sevenfold, in Singapore, on 13 October.

Unfortunately, we are still to see a local artiste, grab the spotlight, on a global scale … like Thailand’s Nene.

Yes, they do shine, but mostly on social media, and that, too, with the aid of AI (Artificial Intellegence).

Continue Reading

Trending