There is talk of war this morning. A thread….
Putin clearly agreed to take no action against Ukraine during the winter Olympics. The need to keep China on side shows how weak his position really is. It also suggests war could start tomorrow.
That Putin could win territorial gains in Eastern Ukraine appears indisputable.
That there is nothing that the West will do to stop him doing so, as also happened when he annexed Crimea and other parts of Eastern Ukraine in 2014, is also certain. No one has the ability to mount a military campaign to stop him.
But that does not mean that what is possible should happen. I do not for a moment agree that Russia has any justification for its actions.
At the same time I am profoundly disappointed by the responses of the UK government and those of other nations to this crisis. They are not calling out what this whole issue is really all about. There are at least four issues that underpin this situation.
The first is imperialism. Russia is seeking to recreate its empire. It is time that imperialism of all sorts was consigned to history, but too many in the West retain commitment to it for them to say so.
Second, this is about white male aggression. But then, so too is the response. This picture of the lunch at Saturday’s Munich Summit where white males were the only participants is clear indication of that.
Third, this is about the command of resources. Few wars have ever been about anything else. There have been wars that are not economically motivated, but they are rare.
Fourth, this is about illicit behaviour. Russia has no right to Ukrainian assets. But then, many Russian leaders’ claims over assets are illicit. But that is also true of many Ukrainian leaders’ claims as well. We need to understand the consequences.
There have always been illicit claims to assets. What has changed is that in the last forty or so years the mechanisms for making those claims have been widely promoted in the name of supposed economic freedom.
All the apparatus of tax havens, backed up and supported by the City of London, has been used to facilitate illicit claims to which blind eyes have been turned.
That Johnson is now saying sanctions against illicit funds in London might be taken is the clearest indication that although this has been possible for a long time we have chosen not to enforce the laws that might have let us prevent abuse.
Why does this matter? Because what the West has very clearly said for a long time is that the UK and other countries will turn a blind-eye to Russian illicit assets and as a result Russia has come to believe that making claim on such assets is acceptable.
Of course I cannot be sure that there is a direct causal relationship between tax haven and City of London corruption and the Russian belief that the West is indifferent to its corruption, but the likelihood that this relationship exists seems very high to me.
According to Boris Johnson we are facing World War III. I think that exceptionally unlikely, simply because it is entirely predictable that there will be no military involvement in Ukraine. I therefore think the claim unjustified.
I also think it exceptionally unlikely that Putin will move against any other country. The balance of risks from doing so would simply be too high within the equation of causations that I have noted above. Putin knows that.
But there is a matter to resolve, and that is the corruption. There is a war needed now. It is a war on corruption that is required.
The City has to swept clean, and if that means lawyers, bankers and accountants cannot survive the process, so be it. Tax havens need to be consigned to history.
If we are to eliminate the risks arising from avarice, from corruption, from illicit behaviour, and the nodded complicity with this that countries like the UK have provided, then we need genuine transparency.
We are suffering the consequence of limited liability. Putin has limited liability in one sense for his actions in Ukraine. He and we know that.
But we are also suffering the consequence of the abuse of limited liability companies that have been used to hide actions from view without belief that consequences follow.
That has to change. We need details of ownership and the full accounts of every limited liability company on public record now, without any exceptions. That is the price we must pay to end corruption.
If we need action as a result of what is happening in Ukraine it is that we need this renewed focus on transparency and accountability. They are really what democracy is all about. And we have forgotten that fact.
There is no transparency and accountability in Russia. But there is precious little here in the UK either, in truth. We have a prime minister and royal family who think that the law does not apply to them. That should be as shocking here as it is in Russia.
What we need is a focus on these essential issues. We must do that to eliminate the culture of irresponsibility in pursuit of illicit gain undertaken with the connivance of cooperative states that has led us to where we are today.
The possible war in Ukraine is all about corruption resulting in dire consequences for some, and maybe many.
If there is to be a lesson from this day, this issue, and this war if it happens (and I sincerely hope it does not) it is that we need to beat the mechanisms that facilitate corruption that permit dire consequences to happen.
That is the only way for democracy to happen. It is the only way for democracy to win. It is the only way to turn opposition to Putin into a truly just cause.
Will that peaceful war for openness, transparency and accountability, which will have victims and a cost in a society ridden with corruption like ours, happen? I do not know. But I am certain it should be pursued. ENDS

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Richard Murphy

Richard Murphy Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @RichardJMurphy

Feb 6
All the debt issues by the government to pay for Covid - about £450 billion of it - was in effect bought by the Bank of England. The government owns the Bank of England. So Covid debt is owed by the government to itself. Why do we have to repay it then? A longish thread…..
** Because this is a long thread it cannot be posted in one go. So, when you come to what might seem like a last tweet click the ‘more replies’ button on it and the next section of the thread will appear, or just read it as a thread. The thread may take a while to post in full **
Covid cost the UK around £450 billion. It so happens that since March 2020 the Bank of England has bought that same value of government bonds. All were issued to pay for Covid. In other words, neither taxpayers or financial markets have paid for Covid. The Bank of England did.
Read 100 tweets
Feb 4
UK energy prices increased by around 50% yesterday but the cost of producing most energy has not increased. Nuclear and renewables cost the same to produce, for example. So, the price increases deliver very large profits to some energy companies. Why is Sunak happy about that?
The problem is energy is priced at the cost of the most expensive unit sold. As a result, Russia can push up gas prices and create an economic crisis in the UK. If we had a nationalised energy system that supplied our energy at the average price we could avoid this.
Instead of our energy being priced at the cost of the most expensive source available we’d instead pay the price set by a basket of energy sources. We’d see nothing like the proposed cost increase as a result, and the crisis for families across the UK could have been avoided.
Read 9 tweets
Feb 3
If only the UK government had invested in renewables over all the years that campaigners asked it to do so and had invested in the R&D necessary to make us a world leader on this issue, as we could have done, we would not have needed today's energy price increase.
We have an energy crisis because our government failed. In 2010 when it was obvious that we needed a Green New Deal the Tories delivered a sham Green Deal that was soon closed down because it delivered nothing of consequence. Since then every opportunity has been missed.
I am proud to have been a member of the Green New Deal group since 2008. We have worked tirelessly to offer the alternative energy vision for the UK and the required economics to make it work. Shamefully, the government ignored us, and Labour has not been much better.
Read 4 tweets
Jan 31
The Chief Secretary to the Treasury, @SimonClarkeMP, claimed in several broadcast interviews this morning that increasing interest rates by 1% would increase the cost of government borrowing by £23bn a year. He's wrong. A quick thread...
According to the ONS Public Sector Net Debt on 31/12/21 was £2,340 billion pounds. So to come up with his figure it's pretty clear that Simon Clarke multiplied this by 1%. That's how complicated his fag pocket calculation was. But that number is wrong.
First, according to the Debt Management Office of HM Treasury at least 33% of all UK government debt is owned by the Bank of England on behalf of HM Treasury - so the government owes this money to itself. That cancels one-third of the debt and so the interest cost.
Read 12 tweets
Jan 29
We witnessed an attempted coup this week. A prime minister who has very obviously broken the law on many occasions and who holds the people of this country in contempt sought to stay in power aided and abetted by his party and the police. A thread….
The charge sheet against Johnson is enormous. He broke the law on Covid parties, many times. He permitted the corrupt PPE fast lane to enrich his supporters. He has taken or failed to take action resulting in tens of thousands of excess Covid deaths.
As PM he has lied to parliament, successively. He secured illicit funding for the decoration of his flat and tried to gain personally from doing so. He has threatened to break international law and denies responsibility for the Brexit deal he negotiated.
Read 35 tweets
Jan 28
So let's be clear. The Met is asking that a report into Downing Street parties should not refer to Downing Street parties because the Met thinks it might have some issues to investigate about them now, even though until this moment it's denied that. This feels like corruption.
I stress the ‘feels like’. In the context of past Met refusal to investigate which meant there was no option but set up a civil service inquiry to now suggest that the inquiry in question should not be published in full because the Met now realise there is evidence feels wrong.
By ‘feels wrong’ I mean that it looks like the Met are obstructing the process of justice we were promised in the face of their persistent and adamant refusal that they would not act. In other words, their intervention now feels like an obstruction of justice in itself.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

:(