Roger Waters, nekdanji frontman skupine Pink Floyd in avtor njihove monumentalne kritike totalitarizma “The Wall”, je pripadnik generacije iz 1960. let, ki se je borila za mir. Njihov projekt odpora je bila ameriška agresija na Vietnam in nepotrebno umiranje ljudi na obeh straneh. Waters se je zato tudi v primeru ukrajinske vojne postavil na stran miru. Nekajkrat se je javno izpostavil, tukaj je denimo njegov zelo znan intervju iz začetka avgusta letos:
In seveda bil deležen številnih kritik s strani liberalcev in libertarcev sedanjih generacij. Zdi se, da je med slednjimi danes šel v pozabo zgodovinski spomin na devastacije, ki jih prinašajo vojne. In da jim slab mir ne pomeni več kot vojna. Waters je postal nezaželjen v medijih in nekaterih državah, na Poljskem so mu prepovedali koncert.
Toda Waters nadaljuje svoj boj za mir, čeprav je to skrajno nepopularno. V začetku septembra se je angažiral z odprtim pismom Oleni Zelenski, ženi ukrajinskega predsednika:
Dear Mrs Zelenska,
My heart bleeds for you and all the Ukrainian and Russian families, devastated by the terrible war in Ukraine. I’m in Kansas City, USA. Iread an article on BBC.com apparently taken from an interview you have already recorded for a program called Sunday with Laura Kuenssburg which broadcasted on the BBC on September 4th.
BBC.com quotes you as saying that if support for Ukraine is strong the crisis will be shorter. Hmmm? I guess that might depend on what you mean by “support for Ukraine?” If by “support for Ukraine,” you mean the West continuing to supply arms to the Kiev government’s armies, I fear you may be tragically mistaken. Throwing fuel, in the form of armaments, into a firefight, has never worked to shorten a war in the past, and it won’t work now, particularly because, in this case, most of the fuel is (a) being thrown into the fire from Washington DC, which is at a relatively safe distance from the conflagration, and (b) because the “fuel throwers” have already declared an interest in the war going on for as long as possible.
People like you and me actually want peace in Ukraine, don’t want the outcome to be that you have to fight to the last Ukrainian life – and possibly even, if the worst comes to the worst, to the last human life.
If we, instead, wish to achieve a different outcome we may have to seek a different route and that route may lie in your husband’s previously stated good intentions.
Yes, I mean the platform upon which he so laudably ran for the office of President of Ukraine, the platform upon which he won his historic landslide victory in the democratic election in 2019.
He stood on the election platform of the following promises.
To end the civil war in the East and bring peace to the Donbas and partial autonomy to Donetsk and Luhansk.
And to ratify and implement the rest of the body of the Minsk 2 agreements.
One can only assume that your husband’s electoral policies didn’t sit well with certain political factions in Kiev and that those factions persuaded your husband to diametrically change course ignoring the people’s mandate. Sadly, your old man agreed to those totalitarian, anti-democratic dismissals of the will of the Ukrainian people, and the forces of extreme nationalism that had lurked, malevolent, in the shadows, have, since then, ruled the Ukraine. They have, also since then, crossed any number of red lines that had been set out quite clearly over a number of years by your neighbors the Russian Federation and in consequence they, the extreme nationalists, have set your country on the path to this disastrous war.
I won’t go on.
If I’m wrong, please help me to understand how?
If I’m not wrong, please help me in my honest endeavors to persuade our leaders to stop the slaughter, the slaughter which serves only the interests of the ruling classes and extreme nationalists both here in the West, and in your beautiful country, at the expense of the rest of us ordinary people both here in the West, and in the Ukraine, and in fact ordinary people everywhere all over the world.
Might it not be better to demand the implementation of your husband’s election promises and put an end to this deadly war?
Vir: Independent Media Institute
Watersovo odprto pismo seveda ni naletelo na odprta ušesa pri gospe Zelenski. V skladu z narativo levih liberalcev in desnih libertarcev mu je odgovorila, da je pot za mir v Ukrajini le, da se Rusija umakne iz Ukrajine in naj se Waters raje zavzame za mir pri Putinu.
Waters ji je odgovoril, da je bila pot za mirno rešitev povsem odprta v prvih mesecih vojne, ko bi ukrajinska in ruska stran še lahko našli mirno rešitev za položaj ruske manjšine v Ukrajini. Vendar je pot za mir odprta tudi danes. Da se izognemo nuklearnie vojni kot v primeru kubanske krize iz leta 1962, bi bilo potrebno, da se po telefonu slišita predsednika Biden in Putin. Samo ona dva lahko naredita konec tej vojni. Morda to ni v interesu nobenega izmed njih, je pa v interesu vseh nas ljudi tega planeta.
Mrs Zelenska’s Sept 5 tweet:
It is Russia that invaded Ukraine, destroys cities and kills civilians.
Ukrainians defend their land and their children’s future. If we give up – we will not exist tomorrow.
If Russia gives up – war will be over.
Dear Mrs Zelenska,
Please excuse my tardy reply to your twitter response to my open letter. I am in the middle of a North American tour. I confess I never dreamed you would respond personally, I am bowled over, so thank you. I note what you say, but I’m fairly sure that ‘giving up’ just like that, is not an option that any side is considering. I feel I’m getting to know you a little, I see that you, like me, trained as an architect, so maybe we have a common interest in building things. That is good because we all need to focus on building something now, and obviously that something is peace in your country. My research leads me to believe that peace in the Ukraine is what the vast majority of the people of the Ukraine voted for when they elected your husband as President. And that majority expected him to use his huge mandate to negotiate a settlement between the Ukraine and the Russian Federation that would meet the security needs of both nations and provide a credible alternative to this disastrous war.
I believe even after hostilities began, last April, two months into the war, such a settlement was on the table, it was in Istanbul wasn’t it? What happened?
You were so close to a ceasefire. I smell interference from Washington, I’m quite prepared to be wrong of course, but in my experience, if it smells like fish and looks fishy, it’s probably what passes for foreign policy in Washington DC. Anyway, it’s all water under the bridge now. What I am suggesting is that the only sane course is for all sides, and I say all sides, not both sides, because clearly this is a proxy war that involves the USA, so all sides need to agree to an unconditional ceasefire and the beginning of talks. I for one Olena will continue to bang the drum of peace, however unpopular that may be in these bellicose times. The mainstream media in the west seems intent on encouraging public support for escalation of the proxy war between the USA and the Russian Federation that is raging in the Ukraine, even to the point of contemplating playing nuclear chicken. Wow! How very irresponsible of the gentlemen of the press.
Back in 1962 we faced a very similarly deadly situation in the Caribbean. It was called the Cuban missile crisis. The whole human race came perilously close to extinction in a nuclear war, and we all knew it. That crisis came about because the USA, quite rightly, perceived an existential threat because the USSR was installing nuclear missiles in Cuba, only a stone’s throw from the US mainland. Today the roles are reversed, it is the USA that seeks, through NATO to install nuclear weapons in Ukraine, right on the Russian border only a stone’s throw from Moscow, and The Russian Federation perceives that as an existential threat. So Ukraine has become today’s Cuba.
That we all survived the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, if only just barely, can be partially explained by two things that happened. The first, and probably most important thing was that, unlike in the current crisis, in 1962 the Presidents of the USSR and the USA, Nikita Khrushchev and John Fitzpatrick Kennedy spoke to one another, repeatedly, soberly, politely and respectfully, on the telephone.
The second thing was just as crucial and is fascinating, and also, at least in the West, very little known.
It is the story of a Russian hero Vasily Aleksandrovich Arkhipov (1926–1998).
Quoting Wikipedia, Arkhipov: ”was a Soviet Naval officer credited with preventing a Soviet nuclear launch during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Such an attack likely would have caused a major global thermonuclear response.
“As flotilla chief of staff and second-in-command of the diesel powered submarine B-59, Arkhipov refused to authorize the captain and the political officer’s use of nuclear torpedoes against the United States Navy, a decision which required the agreement of all three senior officers. After his death, Arkhipov has been widely recognized as someone who had ‘saved the world’ with his actions.”
Wow, Vasily, on behalf of the whole human race, thank you for doing the right thing.
I have literally just now, this morning, received an Email from MAPA (Massachusetts Peace Action) reminding me that back in 1962, the two Presidents resolved the crisis by compromising. Khrushchev agreed to remove the Russian missiles from Cuba and as a ‘quid pro quo’ Kennedy agreed to remove American missiles from Turkey! They spoke, they compromised, job done? It’s called diplomacy. What has happened to diplomacy? Why doesn’t President Biden do the right thing and speak to President Putin? Why have the powers that be in the USA steadfastly refused to address Russian concerns vis a vis the potential existential threat of a fully-fledged, nuclear armed, Ukraine joining NATO on Russia’s doorstep?
Though you and I, Mrs Zelenska, are still trying to communicate to promote peace, albeit through the desperately unhelpful fog of partisan propaganda, every day more Ukrainian and Russian lives are tragically lost. Un-fathomably, the President of The United States of America, speaks publicly, in raucous and bellicose tones, of removing his opposite number in Russia from power. What! Mr President the world is not a unipolar Marvel Comic strip. What are you thinking? The Powers that Be who pull your strings and presumably tell you what to say, have a powerful echo chamber in the whole of the mainstream media, but ‘we the people’ have a voice too, and we will continue to use it, in spite of your efforts to subvert the law, ignore the constitution of the United States, and suppress basic human rights even to the point of imprisoning journalists who actually believe in liberty and democracy. Yes, Mr President, I’m talking about Julian Assange.
More and more we are noticing that US foreign policy, as planned thirty years ago, by The Project For The New American Century, by Wolfowitz and Kagan, Kristol, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the rest of the neocons, has increasingly become, the voice of the school yard bully, “Do as we say or we’ll kick your teeth in.” Really? Do you really think the American Empire should be trying to start a war with Russia? And then China? Are you crazy? ‘We the People’ don’t want that, because ‘We the People’ are not crazy. And the Russian and Chinese people don’t want that either, because they too are not crazy, but by God if you do start one, we better all get ready for a bloody nose because as I recall the Russian people didn’t want a war with the Germans either, but twenty six million of them died giving the Nazis a very bloody nose.
So where was I Mrs Zelenska, I’m sorry I got a bit side tracked, oh yes, why don’t you prevail upon your husband to ‘do the right thing’, and ‘We the People’ in the USA will try to prevail upon poor old Uncle Joe Biden to do the right thing, and the Russian people will prevail upon the ‘stripped to the waist’ Vladimir Putin to do the right thing, and maybe, together, ‘We the People can prevail upon all our leaders to do the right thing, and maybe we can save the world from the imminent destruction upon which they seem hellbent. Maybe we can prevent The Powers that Be from sacrificing this, our beautiful planet home, on the altar of their deadly unipolar warmongering.
Vir: Independent Media Institute
No, Watersovi pozivi k miru niso naleteli na odprta ušesa ne samo pri gospe Zelenski in njenem možu, ampak pri večini javnosti, s katero mislim medije in mnenjske voditelje. Kajti če vprašate navadne ljudi, ti podpirajo mir in ne nadaljevanja vojne v Ukrajini. Toda z miniranjem kritične infrastrukture (vseh štirih cevi Severnega toka), ki smrdi po ameriškem angažmaju, po ruski formalni priključitvi štirih ukrajinskih regij k Rusiji in po Putinovem iniciranju “svete vojne proti Zahodu” se zdi, da nepovratno tonemo v sodobno kubansko jedrsko krizo.