Thursday, June 4, 2026

Trump Desperate For Exit From Iran War

Reprinted from the UK socialist website Left Horizons.

 

Trump desperate for exit from Iran War

By John Pickard

In the first major rebuke for Donald Trump, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives passed a ‘war-powers’ resolution this week, blocking Donald Trump from carrying out more strikes on Iran without congressional approval.

Trump will ignore the resolution, of course, and being passed by a small majority of 215 to 208, it will be subject to presidential veto. But it is an indication – yet another straw in the wind – of the underlying shift in US politics that Trump has engendered by his ill-conceived war on Iran.

The war, now well into its fourth month, is costing the USA around $2bn a day and the burden of that – and all the rest of Trump’s policies – is being borne by American workers, in terms of higher living costs, greater insecurity and more uncertainty.

The war is extremely unpopular among US voters and even two months ago polls showed that 56 per cent of Americans “opposed” or “strongly opposed” the war. Now that Trump is in a position where he has clearly ‘lost’, in the sense that he has not ‘won’ and the Strait of Hormuz is still closed, those polling figures will have skewed even more against him. His own personal approval rating has fallen, according to the New York Times (June 4) to -20, with only 37 per cent approval.

New York Times graphic, showing increasing NEGATIVE polling for Donald Trump

Measuring their Iran adventure by bombs dropped, ordnance deployed and the destruction of military (and many civilian) targets, Trump and his ‘Secretary for War’, Pete Hegseth, are crowing non-stop about a great ‘victory’. But it has become clear that the Iranian regime, whilst being severly wounded, is far from defeated, and in some respects is in a stronger position than it was before the bombing began on February 28.

Unsophisticated and cheap armaments

Iran has discovered that with relatively unsophisticated and cheap armaments – and to some extent by bluff – it has been able to close the Strait of Hormuz, depriving the world, not only of crude oil, but of many by-products of oil refining that are essential to agriculture and industry. Perhaps persuaded by Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, Trump clearly thought the attack launched in February was going to be a short ‘regime-change’ operation, much like the kidnapping of Maduro from Venezuela. In the event, it has left Iran with a powerful lever – complete control over the Strait – which it did not have before.

Meanwhile, the OECD has warned that the war is causing huge damage to world capitalism. “Failure to resolve the energy crisis in the Middle East” the Financial Timesreport says, “would plunge the world into a ‘dark scenario’ of tumbling growth and sharply higher interest rates…”

Even if there was a full agreement between the USA and Iran, today, and even if the oil began to flow ‘normally’ from the Gulf, it would still take months before oil and oil-products were flowing as they were before the war. A drop in world economic growth is already baked into the projections outlined by the OECD. What we will see developing in the coming months is what future historians will call the “Trump recession” and the longer the Strait of Hormuz is closed, the deeper will be the recession.

Trump’s negative poll rating sinks to a new low

The OECD economic prognoses, as well as the unpopularity of Trump in the polls, will inevitably have an effect. The economic cost of the war and the increasing likelihood of it being translated into anti-Republican sentiment in the mid-term elections in November constitute a significant pressure on the White House.

Despite Trump’s narcissistic tendencies, his inability to accept criticism and his surrounding himself with yes-men, at least a part of the message from the polls must be getting through. The problem for Trump, however, is that it is very hard to dress up a catastrophic failure in policy as a roaring success.

But dressing up a huge failure as a victory is exactly what his negotiators are trying to do in their contacts with Iranian representatives. It is likely, therefore, that the current ‘truce’ will last some time, as Iran plays ‘hardball’ over the closure of the Strait.

 Over the coming weeks, Trump’s team is likely to be forced into loosening sanctions on Iran and perhaps accepts Iranian/Omani control of the Strait yet being careful to not to appear to give too much ground. Even on the question of Iran’s nuclear programme, it is now unlikely that the US will get anything more than a few face-saving clauses written into an agreement. However humiliating the small print might be, Trump will shout loud and long about his great ‘victory’.

If Trump’s war on Iran seems to be approaching an ignominious end, it is also true that it has accelerated a general shift of US and world opinion against Israel, especially over its genocidal destruction of Gaza. Netanyahu, and a significant part of the Israeli right-wing establishment, believe that a policy of ruthless military aggression and expansion is in the best interests of the Israeli ruling class.

But Israel has depended over the decades on unstinting financial and military support from the USA, without which it would not be a Middle East super-power. Now that Trump is so desperate to extricate himself from the swamp of the Iran war, and with the Iranians demanding that Lebanese Hezbollah are part of any agreement, Trump has been obliged to sharply rebuke the Israeli leader over its policy in Lebanon.

Trump to Netanyahu: “you’re fucking crazy…”

According to a report in the Financial Times, Netanyahu called off a planned major bombing campaign in Southern Beirut, after an angry phone call from Donald Trump three day ago. “He later confirmed US media reports that he had told Netanyahu: ‘You’re fucking crazy.’ According to Axios, he added: ‘Everybody hates Israel because of this’ — an account that the White House did not dispute”.

Netanyahu and the Israeli military will go back on any commitment they might give to Trump. In wartime – and Israel is nowadays in permanent wartime – the IDF has always used ceasefires and truces as a means of gaining tactical advantage to use later. But in the longer run, the Israeli political establishment, and Netanyahu personally, will not avoid the earth-moving shift in world – and US – public opinion against them.

Shift in American sympathies from Israelis to Palestinians

The US Pew Research organisation revealed recently, that 60 per cent of US adults had an “unfavourable” view of Israel, up from 53 per cent last year. The figure is higher among younger Americans. In contrast, a Gallup poll found that more people sympathised with Palestinians than with Israel. Both polls indicate an ongoing shift in public opinion.

All the political processes we have outlined here are ongoing and, if one does not look carefully, may seem invisible and by their nature they are protracted shifts. It is likely that the Iran/US truce and associated negotiations will continue for many weeks before any agreement is reached. Likewise, in the short term, there is little possibility that the Israeli military aggression in Lebanon (or Syria) will end.

Gaza, meanwhile, has been utterly destroyed, leaving its two million population squeezed into an area around a quarter of its original land; living in tents and dependent on welfare just to stay alive They are still, we might add, subject to regular bombing by Israel. In the West Bank, Palestinians are subjected to constant state-sanctioned and settler-organised pogroms, driving thousands of Arabs off their land and farms.

It would be wrong to suggest that US imperialism, much less the current occupant of the White House, will make a U-turn on the policies it has pursued in the Middle East for decades, or to suggest that the Israeli right-wing, so dominant in its domestic politics, will somehow ‘moderate’ its goals.

But as Marxists we do need to recognise when important subterranean shifts are taking place, in the world and in the USA. These shifts will become more evident and be more significant in the future. As Marx once said, the “old mole of revolution”burrows away, and if we know what we are looking for, we can begin to see the tremors on the surface. 

Opinion. Anti-Semitism: What it is and What it Isn't


Source: Jewish Voice For Peace


John Clarke

Toronto

5-4-26

I know I'm a glutton for punishment but I feel I must explore a particular element of the debate on the left a little further. This is the question of whether drawing attention to anti-Semitism gives comfort to the enemy and undermines Palestine solidarity. 

 

Previously, I suggested that it was important to properly distinguish between the false claim that anti-Zionism is inherently anti-Semitic and real and actual anti-Semitism. We may define the latter as hatred of hostility towards Jewish people because they are Jewish.

 

I want to stress that anti-Semitism plays a particular role within the political ideology of Zionism. Firstly, it is exceptionalized to a degree that is quite remarkable. Hatred of Jews is cast as being an utterly unique and eternal form of prejudice that can't be compared to other forms. As a racist ideology, Zionism takes this approach with complete confidence since the only suffering that matters is Jewish suffering. If you go to the +972 podcast page, there's a great interview with Nurit Peled-Elhanan, in which she explores the process of indoctrination on this question that the Israel school system inflicts on students.

 

The whole idea, of course, is to present the stolen Palestinian land that became Israel as, not only a reclaimed homeland, but as a vital place of refuge from an anti-Semitic hatred that can never be overcome.

 

Actually, anti-Semitism is a component part of an edifice of racism that has been developed over centuries. Like, Islamophbia, it began as a form of Christian religious hatred towards unbelievers, with Jews being especially reviled as 'Christ killers.' 

 

However, with the advent of 19th century racism, antisemitism changed its form. Now, with all human beings who were not white considered inferior, Jews were not so simply deviants in matters of religion but were a form of sub-humanity incorrigibly given to destructive forms of manipulation and conspiracy. Present day replacement theory, in presenting Jews as conniving enablers of the immigration of Black and Brown people into 'white' countries, expresses this clearly.

 

Having removed antisemitism from its proper context in order to justify a colonial project, Zionism goes on to create an entirely false version of this prejudice. Anti-Semitism is no longer primarily a question of hating Jewish people but it becomes a label that is placed on hostility to the political ideology of Zionism and its settler-colonial expression. This is sometimes referred to as the 'new anti-Semitism.'

 

This distortion of anti-Semitism soon leads to a situation where the attempt to stifle Palestine solidarity takes priority over challenging real and actual anti-Semitism. In fact, the latter is perversely welcomed. Zionism's 'founding father,' Theodor Herzl, actually declared that 'the anti-Semites will become our most dependable friends, the anti-Semitic countries our allies.'

 

This contradiction abounds today and we see examples of it all the time. When a right-wing killer murdered people at the Tree of Life synagogue, in 2018, because he thought Jews were assisting Central American refugees, the Israeli ambassador to the UN said that, as terrible as this was, it was still important to understand that support for Palestine was the main anti-Semitic threat.

 

Elon Musk's use of the Nazi salute has become infamous, yet the Zionist Anti-Defamation League dismissed this as 'an awkward gesture in a moment of enthusiasm.'

 

One of the leaders of the Freedom Convoy, Pat King, has expressed the vilest anti-Semitic sentiments, even claiming that Hebrew might become Canada's official language. Yet, as these fascists paraded, complete with Nazi symbols, the main Zionist bodies in this country, with an eye on right-wing Conservatives who supported the Convoy, were remarkably restrained in their response and failed to condemn the undertaking.

 

Of course, Israel's supporters, by treating Palestine solidarity as anti-Semitism, generate a completely inaccurate picture of the issue. They will undoubtedly use any incidents to try to stifle any criticism of Israel, as they did with the Bondi Beach attack in Australia and, as they are doing with shootings at synagogues here in Toronto. 

 

We, however, have no interest in distorting things. We understand the place that anti-Semitism occupies in the broader racist construction and see the difference between the false version and the real thing. Not only can we, on a principled and effective basis, make clear our opposition to anti-Semitism but, in doing so, we can expose the Zionists' cynical selectivity and their unpardonable readiness to disregard manifestations of hatred that actually do pose a threat to Jewish people. 

Tuesday, June 2, 2026

Ukraine's military has a real Nazi problem

Note: Shared from Responsible Statecraft . For the interests of our readers.


Ukraine's military has a real Nazi problem


Screenshot from original article. Source

In their zeal to deconstruct Russian propaganda, Western elites have tried to hide the fact there are Third Reich extremists among Kyiv's ranks.

 

Marta HavryShko

June 2, 2026

 

When Vladimir Putin launched his invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, he claimed one of his goals was the country’s “denazification.” The Kremlin still uses this narrative as a cornerstone of its war propaganda.

 

Both Ukraine and the West reacted by dismissing the claim outright as a cynical abuse of Holocaust history. Politiciansmedia outletsacademics, and educational institutions rushed to prove that Putin’s argument was fraudulent. 

 

But in their zeal to deconstruct Russian propaganda, Western elites created a propaganda myth of their own: there are no Nazis in Ukraine. Or, if there are, they are supposedly isolated cranks with no influence.

 

This fiction required the whitewashing of Azov, a unit founded in 2014 by the neo-Nazi group Patriot of Ukraine under the leadership of Andriy Biletsky. Azov became notorious for extremist ideology, Nazi symbolism, and allegations of war crimes in the Donbas. In 2018, the U.S. Congress banned the group from receiving American weapons, funding, or training. 

 

After Russia’s full-scale invasion, that stigma vanished almost overnight. Kyiv repackaged Azov, separating the most radical elements into a new formation, the 3rd Assault Brigade. Western media rebranded and whitewashed it. The language of “de-radicalization” and “depoliticization” became mainstream. Questioning this narrative became taboo and labeled as “Russian propaganda.” The result is a culture of deliberate silence.

 

Neo-Nazi networks are deeply embedded in parts of Ukraine’s military structure. Their presence is visible in units such as Azov, the Third Assault Brigade, the Russian Volunteer CorpsBratstvo, the German Volunteer CorpsKarpatska Sich, and others. Yet Ukraine’s Western backers continue to arm, fund, and train these units without meaningful scrutiny.

 

Even more striking is the normalization of Nazi imagery itself. Official Ukrainian military channels and mainstream media regularly publish images of soldiers wearing swastikasWaffen-SS insignia, and patches linked to neo-Nazi groups like Combat 18 and Misanthropic Division. This is no longer treated as scandalous. It has been normalized. 

 

Most disturbing of all, some Ukrainian military units have incorporated Nazi-linked symbols into their official insignia.

 

The far right and Ukraine’s military culture

 

Many Ukrainian military units using Nazi symbols are led by men shaped by Azov and the far-right milieu around it. For example, there is Oleksandr Kravtsov, the well-known commander of the Vedmedi unit, which was part of Azov. His body is covered in Nazi imagery, including 1488 — references to the white supremacist “14 Words” slogan coined by David Lane and the coded salute “Heil Hitler.” (“H” is the eighth letter of the alphabet.) Tattooed across his chest is the SS motto“My Honor Is Loyalty.” He turned that slogan into the motto of his own unit. SS lightning bolts became part of its official insignia.

 

After returning from Russian captivity, Kravtsov’s unit was folded into the Ukrainian military structure — first the 36th Brigade, then the 39th Coastal Defense Brigade. Nothing changed. The SS symbols and motto remained.

 

Many commanders in the 3rd Assault Brigade also came out of Azov and still hold extremist views. Unsurprisingly, they openly embrace the corresponding symbolism. A subunit of the 3rd Assault Brigade adopted a modified insignia(replacing two grenades with three) of the Dirlewanger SS Brigade — one of the most notorious Nazi formations of World War II. In 2025, the brigade unveiled the emblem publicly at a memorial in Kyiv. No scandal followed.

 

Azov also normalized the Black Sun — a symbol born in Himmler’s SS cult headquarters at Wewelsburg Castle and now used globally by neo-Nazis and white supremacist terrorists, including the 2019 Christchurch mosque terroristin New Zealand and the recent San Diego Islamic Center shooter.

 

After 2022, Black Sun spread rapidly through Ukrainian military culture. It appeared in Azov-linked units such as the Decepticons platoon and the Mortarsunit of the 3rd Assault Brigade. Soon it migrated further — into units with no openly ideological profile at all — and became part of the insignia of the 156th Zvaha Battalion and the Unmanned Systems Battalion of the 110th Brigade named after Marko Bezruchko.

 

Azov mainstreamed another Nazi-linked emblem as well: the Wolfsangel, used historically by several Waffen-SS divisions. Rebranded as the “Idea of the Nation,” it became one of the most recognizable symbols in Ukraine’s wartime military culture. The symbol now appears far beyond Azov itself. The newly created Nachtigall Battalion — named after the Nachtigall Battalion formed by German military intelligence in 1941 — uses the same Wolfsangel-inspired insignia.

 

Some units within Ukraine’s military do not hide their fascination with the Third Reich's military culture. For example, the 422nd Regiment of Unmanned Systems calls itself “Luftwaffe” and uses virtually the same eagle as Hitler’s air force. Its commander, Mykola Kolesnyk, regularly appears with the symbol on patches and clothing. The unit even sells merchandise featuring the Nazi eagle — hoodies, mugs, T-shirts, caps, keychains — to fundraise for the war.

 

Not just aesthetic choices

 

The use of Nazi symbols in Ukraine’s military is not merely an aesthetic problem. It is moral, political, historical, and legal.

 

First, it represents a form of historical revisionism and the gradual rehabilitation of Nazism itself — a direct challenge to the postwar Western consensus built on the memory of World War II. Within far-right military culture, Nazi imagery is often wrapped in romanticized narratives about anti-Soviet struggle. In practice this trivializes the sacrifice of the seven million Ukrainians who fought Nazism in the ranks of the Red Army alongside the Western allies (in contrast to the 300,000 who served in various military formations and police units on the side of Nazi Germany). 

 

It also desecrates the memory of Nazism’s victims in Ukraine: 1.5 million Jews murdered in the Holocaust, along with millions of Slavs, prisoners of war, Roma, the mentally ill, forced laborers, and countless others consumed by the machinery of racial extermination and exploitation. 

 

Second, the problem is not only historical. It is profoundly contemporary. Every SS rune, Black Sun, or Wolfsangel displayed by Ukrainian soldiers hands the Kremlin another propaganda victory. Russian propagandists do not need to invent imaginary Nazis in Kyiv. They simply point to the insignia openly worn by some of Ukraine’s most celebrated military units — including formations branded as “elite,” such as the 3rd Assault Brigade.

 

Third, there is also a glaring legal contradiction. By openly using Nazi imagery, these units violate Ukraine’s own 2015 memory laws, which explicitly ban the propaganda of the Nazi regime and the public use of its symbols. The law describes such acts as an insult to the memory of millions of victims and have penalties of up to five years in prison. 

 

Yet no one is prosecuted.

 

Why?

 

Because the Zelensky government — and President Volodymyr Zelensky himself as commander-in-chief — have made a political bargain with the far right. Since 2022, far-right activists and networks have flooded into the security and defense sector. In conditions of total war and chronic manpower shortages, this alliance became politically convenient, perhaps even inevitable. Now it is becoming entrenched.

 

The state depends on radicalized military formations for manpower and battlefield effectiveness. The far right, in turn, receives legitimacy, weapons, influence, and institutional protection. What emerged from wartime necessity is evolving into mutual dependence.

 

Ukraine’s Western partners have made their own bargain. They, too, depend on Ukrainian manpower to weaken Russia. And so they tolerate extremists inside Ukraine’s armed forces as long as those extremists continue fighting. More than that, they remain largely silent about the ideology and symbols involved, because acknowledging them would mean admitting an uncomfortable truth — that the neo-Nazi problem in Ukraine is not simply a Kremlin invention.

 Ukraine's military has a real Nazi problem

 

In their zeal to deconstruct Russian propaganda, Western elites have tried to hide the fact there are Third Reich extremists among Kyiv's ranks.

 

Marta HavryShko

June 2, 2026

 

When Vladimir Putin launched his invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, he claimed one of his goals was the country’s “denazification.” The Kremlin still uses this narrative as a cornerstone of its war propaganda.

 

Both Ukraine and the West reacted by dismissing the claim outright as a cynical abuse of Holocaust history. Politiciansmedia outletsacademics, and educational institutions rushed to prove that Putin’s argument was fraudulent. 

 

But in their zeal to deconstruct Russian propaganda, Western elites created a propaganda myth of their own: there are no Nazis in Ukraine. Or, if there are, they are supposedly isolated cranks with no influence.

 

This fiction required the whitewashing of Azov, a unit founded in 2014 by the neo-Nazi group Patriot of Ukraine under the leadership of Andriy Biletsky. Azov became notorious for extremist ideology, Nazi symbolism, and allegations of war crimes in the Donbas. In 2018, the U.S. Congress banned the group from receiving American weapons, funding, or training. 

 

After Russia’s full-scale invasion, that stigma vanished almost overnight. Kyiv repackaged Azov, separating the most radical elements into a new formation, the 3rd Assault Brigade. Western media rebranded and whitewashed it. The language of “de-radicalization” and “depoliticization” became mainstream. Questioning this narrative became taboo and labeled as “Russian propaganda.” The result is a culture of deliberate silence.

 

Neo-Nazi networks are deeply embedded in parts of Ukraine’s military structure. Their presence is visible in units such as Azov, the Third Assault Brigade, the Russian Volunteer CorpsBratstvo, the German Volunteer CorpsKarpatska Sich, and others. Yet Ukraine’s Western backers continue to arm, fund, and train these units without meaningful scrutiny.

 

Even more striking is the normalization of Nazi imagery itself. Official Ukrainian military channels and mainstream media regularly publish images of soldiers wearing swastikasWaffen-SS insignia, and patches linked to neo-Nazi groups like Combat 18 and Misanthropic Division. This is no longer treated as scandalous. It has been normalized. 

 

Most disturbing of all, some Ukrainian military units have incorporated Nazi-linked symbols into their official insignia.

 

The far right and Ukraine’s military culture

 

Many Ukrainian military units using Nazi symbols are led by men shaped by Azov and the far-right milieu around it. For example, there is Oleksandr Kravtsov, the well-known commander of the Vedmedi unit, which was part of Azov. His body is covered in Nazi imagery, including 1488 — references to the white supremacist “14 Words” slogan coined by David Lane and the coded salute “Heil Hitler.” (“H” is the eighth letter of the alphabet.) Tattooed across his chest is the SS motto“My Honor Is Loyalty.” He turned that slogan into the motto of his own unit. SS lightning bolts became part of its official insignia.

 

After returning from Russian captivity, Kravtsov’s unit was folded into the Ukrainian military structure — first the 36th Brigade, then the 39th Coastal Defense Brigade. Nothing changed. The SS symbols and motto remained.

 

Many commanders in the 3rd Assault Brigade also came out of Azov and still hold extremist views. Unsurprisingly, they openly embrace the corresponding symbolism. A subunit of the 3rd Assault Brigade adopted a modified insignia(replacing two grenades with three) of the Dirlewanger SS Brigade — one of the most notorious Nazi formations of World War II. In 2025, the brigade unveiled the emblem publicly at a memorial in Kyiv. No scandal followed.

 

Azov also normalized the Black Sun — a symbol born in Himmler’s SS cult headquarters at Wewelsburg Castle and now used globally by neo-Nazis and white supremacist terrorists, including the 2019 Christchurch mosque terroristin New Zealand and the recent San Diego Islamic Center shooter.

 

After 2022, Black Sun spread rapidly through Ukrainian military culture. It appeared in Azov-linked units such as the Decepticons platoon and the Mortarsunit of the 3rd Assault Brigade. Soon it migrated further — into units with no openly ideological profile at all — and became part of the insignia of the 156th Zvaha Battalion and the Unmanned Systems Battalion of the 110th Brigade named after Marko Bezruchko.

 

Azov mainstreamed another Nazi-linked emblem as well: the Wolfsangel, used historically by several Waffen-SS divisions. Rebranded as the “Idea of the Nation,” it became one of the most recognizable symbols in Ukraine’s wartime military culture. The symbol now appears far beyond Azov itself. The newly created Nachtigall Battalion — named after the Nachtigall Battalion formed by German military intelligence in 1941 — uses the same Wolfsangel-inspired insignia.

 

Some units within Ukraine’s military do not hide their fascination with the Third Reich's military culture. For example, the 422nd Regiment of Unmanned Systems calls itself “Luftwaffe” and uses virtually the same eagle as Hitler’s air force. Its commander, Mykola Kolesnyk, regularly appears with the symbol on patches and clothing. The unit even sells merchandise featuring the Nazi eagle — hoodies, mugs, T-shirts, caps, keychains — to fundraise for the war.

 

Not just aesthetic choices

 

The use of Nazi symbols in Ukraine’s military is not merely an aesthetic problem. It is moral, political, historical, and legal.

 

First, it represents a form of historical revisionism and the gradual rehabilitation of Nazism itself — a direct challenge to the postwar Western consensus built on the memory of World War II. Within far-right military culture, Nazi imagery is often wrapped in romanticized narratives about anti-Soviet struggle. In practice this trivializes the sacrifice of the seven million Ukrainians who fought Nazism in the ranks of the Red Army alongside the Western allies (in contrast to the 300,000 who served in various military formations and police units on the side of Nazi Germany). 

 

It also desecrates the memory of Nazism’s victims in Ukraine: 1.5 million Jews murdered in the Holocaust, along with millions of Slavs, prisoners of war, Roma, the mentally ill, forced laborers, and countless others consumed by the machinery of racial extermination and exploitation. 

 

Second, the problem is not only historical. It is profoundly contemporary. Every SS rune, Black Sun, or Wolfsangel displayed by Ukrainian soldiers hands the Kremlin another propaganda victory. Russian propagandists do not need to invent imaginary Nazis in Kyiv. They simply point to the insignia openly worn by some of Ukraine’s most celebrated military units — including formations branded as “elite,” such as the 3rd Assault Brigade.

 

Third, there is also a glaring legal contradiction. By openly using Nazi imagery, these units violate Ukraine’s own 2015 memory laws, which explicitly ban the propaganda of the Nazi regime and the public use of its symbols. The law describes such acts as an insult to the memory of millions of victims and have penalties of up to five years in prison. 

 

Yet no one is prosecuted.

 

Why?

 

Because the Zelensky government — and President Volodymyr Zelensky himself as commander-in-chief — have made a political bargain with the far right. Since 2022, far-right activists and networks have flooded into the security and defense sector. In conditions of total war and chronic manpower shortages, this alliance became politically convenient, perhaps even inevitable. Now it is becoming entrenched.

 

The state depends on radicalized military formations for manpower and battlefield effectiveness. The far right, in turn, receives legitimacy, weapons, influence, and institutional protection. What emerged from wartime necessity is evolving into mutual dependence.

 

Ukraine’s Western partners have made their own bargain. They, too, depend on Ukrainian manpower to weaken Russia. And so they tolerate extremists inside Ukraine’s armed forces as long as those extremists continue fighting. More than that, they remain largely silent about the ideology and symbols involved, because acknowledging them would mean admitting an uncomfortable truth — that the neo-Nazi problem in Ukraine is not simply a Kremlin invention.

 

Michael Roberts. Global profits: an upward turn?

by Michael Roberts

At the end of 2025, corporate profits in the major economies accelerated after stagnating in 2024. The global figure below is calculated from a weighted (by GDP) average of profits in the US, UK, Japan, Germany and China (taken from national accounts and in national currencies).   

Average annual growth in global corporate profits during the 2010s – the decade of what I have called the Long Depression since the Great Recession of 2008-9 – was 3.9%.  But in the first half of the 2020s, the average growth rate has doubled to 7.7%, although that’s still way less than the 16.1%  average growth rate in the credit-fuelled decade of the 2000s. There were only two periods of a fall in global profits: the mini-‘profits recession at the end of 2015 and in the pandemic slump of 2020.

In the ten years before 2007, China’s corporate sector led the way with an average annual rise of 26.7% in profits, more than three times higher than in Japan and the US.  But the picture changed in the 2010s, as China’s profits growth rate dropped away sharply.  Profits growth also slowed in the other economies, with the exception of Japan.  In the 2020s, so far, average profits growth in Japan and the US has increased, with the US rate more than doubling compared to the 2010s.  Both German and British corporate profits growth has been dismal in the first quarter of the 21st century.  So in terms of profits, Japanese capital has done very well, the US corporates too, while European capital has performed poorly.

What are we to make of this?  Well, the 2020s figures suggest that capital in the major economies is not heading for a slump, with the exception of Germany, where profits growth confirms the current recessionary environment.

If we zone in on the US, using the Basu-Wasner calculation of profits from official data, we find that in the 2020s, annual profits growth has been higher than even in the neo-liberal period of the 1980s. The higher figure in the 1970s is due to higher inflation.

Source: https://dbasu.shinyapps.io/Profitability/

The rate of profit on corporate capital is defined in Marxian terms as total profit (surplus value) divided by the stock of capital (fixed and circulating assets) held by companies plus the cost of employing labour in production. The overall rate of profit in the US economy has been modestly declining since the end of neo-liberal recovery period in the late 1990s.  But if you isolate the productive sector of the US economy (ie exclude real estate, finance, insurance and government), then the rate of profit on productive assets fell sharply through the 2010s to the end of the pandemic slump in 2020.  This explains the Great Recession of 2008-9 and the pandemic slump of 2020. But since then, the profitability of productive assets has risen.

What is the reason for the recovery in overall profits and the profitability of capital in the US – and for that matter in Japan?  This is disputed.  In a recent article, Ruchir Sharma, chair of the Rockefeller Foundation, reckons that US profits growth has only accelerated because of rising government budget deficits.  Falling taxation on corporate profits and rising government subsidies have boosted profits. “Overall corporate earnings have risen from 7 per cent of GDP in the late 1990s to 11 per cent today. The dynamism of American business has played a role, but so have tax cuts and government spending. Lately the US deficit has risen to more than 6 per cent of GDP and a deficit that high reflects a large transfer of income to households and corporations.” Sharma concludes that “deficits have accounted for more than half of corporate profits, twice the level of the dotcom era. Strip away government support, and US profits look less extraordinary.”  

Here, Sharma relies on the so-called Kalecki equation, which boils down to the proposition that investment drives profits, not vice versa.  If a government runs up a big budget deficit, in other words, ‘dissaves’, it can boost investment and thus profits. “So, under a well-established accounting formula, the Kalecki-Levy Equation, corporate profits are in part a mirror image of the government’s deficit. Based on this framework, deficits were the single largest contributor to the increase in earnings as a share of GDP since the late 1990s.”

But as I have argued on many occasions and posts, the Kalecki identity (profits=investment) is just that, an identity.  It does not show the causal direction. Does investment drive profits and does government ‘dissaving’ (deficits) drive up profits?  In my view, that causal direction is back to front.  In capitalism, profits drive investment.  And if we start from that direction, then the rise in profits is not due to government spending, but can only be due to a rise in the rate of exploitation of workers, as expressed in a rise in the share of profits in the US economy relative to wages. Corporate profits as a share of US GDP are at record highs.

Profits are not rising because of excessive government spending, but because there has been a sharp fall in labour’s share of national income – to an historic low.

If this rise in profit share can be sustained and accelerated, then the US rate of profit may well rise further from here.  Much will depend on whether the huge investment being made by the AI companies and their potential clients in data centres will deliver a step change in profits (by shedding labour and thus reducing the relative wage bill).  As Sharma said in a previous article of his: the US economy is now ‘one big bet on AI’.  

I’ll return to that story in my next post.