Ukraine and the 'Johnson thwarted peace' myth

I was involved in a panel discussion about defence expenditure this week. A trade union activist I greatly respect justified his argument against providing military aid to Ukraine by invoking a Putin-propagated myth. The essence of this conspiracy theory is that Boris Johnson thwarted efforts to achieve a negotiated peace in April 2022. There are few politicians that I have more contempt for than Boris Johnson, so I can understand how anyone can believe such a thing was possible. My surprise was that this myth has not only been debunked in mainstream fact-checks but also in left-wing media sources like Novara Media. The Kremlin and their useful idiots propagate it in a few media sources.

Let’s start by remembering that these events happened after the Russian invasion and the initial discovery of Russian war crimes, including the Bucha massacre. It was also after Russian State media, with the explicit support of the regime, including Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chair of the Security Council of Russia, published the genocidal statement ‘What Russia Should do with Ukraine’. The author argues that Ukraine's existence is "impossible" as a nation-state, and after the war, forced labour, imprisonment, and the death penalty would be used as punishment. None of this sounds like a country seriously interested in peace.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/04/21/ukraine-russian-forces-trail-death-bucha

And they weren’t even close, as objective analysts closer to the talks confirmed. While the negotiators agreed upon some broad principles, as anyone with negotiating experience knows, deciding on principles is much easier than agreeing on the details. 

These details included a Russian demand that Ukraine cap its armed forces at 85,000 troops, 342 tanks and 519 artillery pieces, which would be around a 60-70 per cent reduction of Ukraine’s military strength. Ukraine was understandably sceptical about signing away its capacity to defend itself, given that it had just been invaded by Russia weeks beforehand. And given Putin’s track record on keeping agreements, feared this would be a temporary pause to reorganise and launch another, better-prepared invasion. The Russian initial plan was disintegrating at this time, and Putin needed a breather.

The other essential requirement was not NATO membership, which wouldn’t happen, but rather that undefined Western nations would provide security guarantees but with no bases in Ukraine. It was this that Boris Johnson rightly pointed out was unrealistic. Few, if any, European countries would give such a guarantee outside the NATO military alliance. The Russians could sweep across Ukraine and sit on the Moldavian, Hungarian and Polish borders. That would require a massive offensive to dislodge the Russians who would dig in, as they have in eastern Ukraine. There is neither the capacity nor the political will to do that. Anyone with a rudimentary grasp of history will grasp that Putin is using the Hitler Czechoslovakia playbook.

In simple terms, no credible deal was on the table, so the only option was to fight on. A decision overwhelmingly supported by Ukrainians in polling after the Bucha massacre. Ukrainians understand this is not a manageable conflict in which you can exchange a bit of land for peace. Putin wants nothing less than the obliteration of Ukraine. They are the frontline against the new fascist menace, and the West should support them and prepare for the worst if they fail. There is a respectful exchange of left-wing positions on the war in the Scottish Left Review.

I fully appreciate the desire for peace and the opposition to less than productive defence spending. I just come from a different left-wing political tradition. The most important influence on my teenage political thought was a former Welsh miner who fought in Spain against fascism. He would have recognised Putin as he did Hitler and understood that appeasement is a strategy doomed to failure. 

Nordic inspiration

Comparisons with Nordic countries are in vogue with the Cabinet Secretary for Education recently extolling the merits of the Swedish free schools. Looking to Scandinavia for public policy inspiration is very worthwhile and the work of Nordic Horizons and others is important in promoting a dialogue. These countries are of similar size and geography to Scotland and share at least some common attitudes and cultural links.



Last week I was giving a presentation to a visiting delegation of Norwegian trade unionists on the Scottish health and social care system. This was a privilege because we usually look to them for inspiration. For example, the Norwegian health service has a much better staffing ratio per head of population than Scotland. They also have a genuinely ‘local’ council structure, serving real communities rather than our historical compromises. Of course their greatest achievement is a more equal society that delivers better outcomes in almost every measure.

This visit was one of a number of similar trips by Norwegian unions to Scotland in recent years. They are concerned that market principles are invading their public services, largely based on the English model promoted in the New Labour years and taken to new lows by the ConDems. They come to Scotland to learn how another small country has taken a different path of public service reform based on cooperation not competition. I was able to give them an historical overview and update them on the work of the Christie Commission that again sets a very different course from other parts of the UK.

Interestingly, they were less than impressed by the Swedish free schools and pointed to recent studies that question how effective they have been. The number of low performing pupils has increased since the free school system was introduced. They regard this as a good example of how market principles are undermining the success of the Nordic approach in creating and maintaining a more equal society. It is equality that makes the difference and this is reflected in UK studies that show that school systems are less important than social class determining positive education outcomes.

I would therefore look to Finland instead of Sweden where they combine the highest levels of attainment in the OECD‟s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and have “high and consistent performance standards across the entire education system”. It is important to note though that Finnish success in world education rankings is not just about their school model. It is a country that values social cohesiveness. Finns pay relatively high taxes which provide the money for high quality services which all contribute to the well being of their children.

So while we should continue to take inspiration from Scandinavia, we should remember that some developments there are driven by the same neo-liberal policies that have caused so much damage in the rest of Europe. I wonder if Mike Russell would be as keen on free schools if he fully appreciated the link to the English market reforms? Well he might, but the rest of us should be more wary.

Norway

I hosted a visit today from our sister union in Norway, Fagforbundet. We spent the morning discussing organising strategies and health policy. In the afternoon I took them over to the Scottish Parliament for a tour and a discussion with the Shadow Health Secretary, Jackie Baillie.

I always enjoy a discussion with trade unions from Scandinavian countries. They understand the importance of collective provision and universalism. These are some of the most equal societies in the world and as a consequence benefit from good health, low crime rates and are better educated. We have much to learn from them.

Coming back on the train I noticed in the station bookshop that The Spirit Level is available in paperback and moving up the bestsellers chart. This is essential reading for anyone interested in understanding why more equal societies do better.

There are also positive signs that Ed Milliband gets this message. In his speech at the Labour Party Conference today he said:

"And we need responsibility at the top of society too. The gap between rich and poor does matter. It doesn't just harm the poor it harms us all. What does it say about the values of our society, what have we become, that a banker can earn in a day what the care worker earns in a year? It's wrong, conference."

Spot on. This is just the sort of policy Labour must articulate. And Norway is one country we can point to for positive outcomes from this approach.

Is Scotland's future Nordic?

Last night I attended an event we supported in the Scottish Parliament, Northern Horizons: Is Scotland’s future Nordic? This was a very well supported gathering of politicians, academics, business, trade unions and others with an interest in exploring the Nordic model and how it could apply to Scotland.


UNISON Scotland has regular contact with our sister unions in Scandinavia, particularly Norway - a country of similar size and population to Scotland. There are three aspects of their model that most appeals to me:


 The respect for the public realm funded through fair taxation that supports a more equal society. As recent research has shown (The Spirit Level et al) more equal societies do better at almost everything.


 A strong social partnership model leading to stable industrial relations.


 Political pluralism with proper research and debate for long term solutions. Change is incremental and politicians don’t see the need to react to every fleeting media headline.

Contributions from Scandinavians living in Scotland were particularly interesting. One contribution highlighted our use of ‘working mothers’ when in Norway they would say ‘working parents’. This is more than nomenclature. It reflects a culture of support for working parents that is reflected in their impressive kindergarten system. Several speakers, including business leaders, reflected that the biggest culture shock for them in Scotland was our unequal society and the social consequences that follow from that.

UNISON sponsored a Compass booklet in 2005 by Robert Taylor on the Swedish model that questioned the ‘conventional wisdom’ of the allegedly superior British model. As I re-read this booklet on the train to Edinburgh, I was struck by how prophetic this was post the banking collapse. It’s a pity that more people in government (UK and Scottish) didn’t take note of the message in this booklet. However, we still have an opportunity to learn from our Scandinavian cousins and I look forward to taking this debate forward.