Image is of a large protest in the Ivory Coast, sourced from this article in People’s Dispatch.

This week’s megathread is based largely on a detailed article from People’s Dispatch, featuring statements and analysis from Achy Ekessi, the General Secretary of the Revolutionary Communist Party of Ivory Coast (PCRCI), brought to my attention by @jack@hexbear.net’s comment in the last megathread.

The president of Ivory Coast, the 83 year old Alassane Ouattara, is aiming for a fourth term in power while barring out much of the opposition. I can’t really do the all the history of how the situation wound up this way justice in a preamble as it’s fairly complicated (read the article if you are interested), but to summarize, Ouattara is currently the only coherent candidate for the French to support. Back in 2011, the French helped Ouattara overthrow the previous (pan-Africanist) president, Laurent Gbagbo, and then arrested him and sent him to the ICC, and he was then acquitted and released in 2021.

Gbagbo is now running against Ouattara, but his base, the working class, has large swathes that are not present on the voting rolls and so it would be unlikely for him to win. On the opposite side of the spectrum is Tidjane Thiam, a former CEO of the Swiss Bank Credit Suisse, whose base is in the richer strata of the Ivory Coast, which overlaps with Ouattara’s base. He would be more likely to win, but would certainly maintain many Western imperialist relationships. Ouattara, however, has simplified the electoral situation by simply barring both of them from running in the election at all.

Ouattara has, on paper, delivered some amount of economic development to the Ivory Coast. But as expected, most of it is funnelled to the bourgeois, as well as to foreign corporations and governments, while the working class are swallowed by the cost of living crisis. There has been significant infrastructure projects, but these have not only generated massive debt, they also have only really addressed the damage caused by the 2011 civil war and intervention by the French.

The rest of Western Africa has either entirely exited the orbit of France (Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso), are wavering/unstable (Senegal, Benin, Guinea), are beginning to show doubts (Nigeria, Ghana), or are economically weak enough to not be a major blow for the French to lose (Togo, Guinea-Bissau). The loss of the Ivory Coast would be a major setback for French neocolonialism, and be a potent example to nearby countries.

Last week’s thread is here.
The Imperialism Reading Group is here.

Please check out the RedAtlas!

The bulletins site is here. Currently not used.
The RSS feed is here. Also currently not used.

Israel's Genocide of Palestine

If you have evidence of Zionist crimes and atrocities that you wish to preserve, there is a thread here in which to do so.

Sources on the fighting in Palestine against the temporary Zionist entity. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:

UNRWA reports on Israel’s destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.

English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news.
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.

English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.

Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict

Sources:

Defense Politics Asia’s youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don’t want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it’s just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists’ side.

Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.

Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:

Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.

https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR’s former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR’s forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster’s telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a ‘propaganda tax’, if you don’t believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.

Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:

Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.

  • xiaohongshu [none/use name]@hexbear.netEnglish
    481·
    3 days ago

    From Russian telegram:

    It is still too early to guess what the future of Ukraine and our entire region will be, because there are no fixed agreements on peace yet. But we can already guess its contours. Those that were marked on the map in Trump’s office.

    The territories that are under the de facto control of Russia will remain there. Kiev and the Europeans will resist the exchange of territories in every possible way in order to prevent the loss of the remaining part of the Donetsk region. Perhaps they will bargain for it for themselves at the expense of preventing the introduction of troops from European countries. There will be tough bargaining for this issue.

    But in general, the border configuration is clear. Kharkov, Kherson, Dnepropetrovsk, Zaporozhye, Nikolaev, Odessa will remain part of Ukraine. At this stage, Russia has no opportunity to fight for these cities, for which this would most likely mean turning into ruins.

    Thus, Ukrainian statehood in the form it has become in recent years - with a strong nationalist, pro-Western and anti-Russian core will remain. Let’s add to this the manifold increase in revanchism, reinforced by territorial and human losses.

    Western security guarantees will certainly include strengthening the Ukrainian army, pumping it with weapons. That is, in fact, denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine will not happen. It is unlikely that even after the presidential elections in Ukraine, political influence will be gained by forces that are at least neutral towards Russia and Belarus. The EU, Britain, and the USA will continue to keep the Ukrainian political and information space under complete control.

    Ukraine will turn into a springboard for an acute geopolitical and ideological struggle with Russia and its allies for many years. The tools of our influence on Ukraine are unlikely to be subject to serious revision and change, which means that it will be extremely limited. The incorporation of new territories into Russia, their restoration, will certainly have a positive strategic and economic effect, which, however, will be limited by the ongoing confrontation.

    We will be dealing with a delayed conflict, for which Ukraine and Europe will prepare with the utmost seriousness. Its start will most likely be timed to coincide with the transition of power in Russia and Belarus in 10-15 years. By that time, Europe’s military industry will have gained the momentum necessary for a new phase of the conflict. And in the US, other politicians may come to power.

    Beyond what’s written above, also a reminder that the EU just signed a deal with Trump to purchase $750 billion worth of energy products and another $600 billion investment in the US until 2028. There is no way the EU can pay for all these promises, and that can only mean one thing: the subjugation of Russia into a colony from which they can extract the wealth from.

    This reminds me of the post-WWI geopolitical configuration where the US was demanding the European states to pay back their debt, for which they simply did not have the economic capacity to repay. And thus, they squeezed the defeated Germany even harder, and directly led to the rise of Hitler and Nazism.

    The war propaganda is already in place to paint Russia as an existential threat to the European nations. Militarization is occurring at increasingly rapid pace. The rise of fascism is now inevitable in Europe.

    • companero [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
      35·
      3 days ago

      I do believe that’s the US foreign policy blob’s desired outcome, but I don’t think it’s going to actually play out that way. Russian leadership can see it coming, and it’s a clear existential threat to the Russian state.

      You need only look at Trump’s sudden aggressive stance toward Russia, in the past two days or so. They aren’t planning on giving him what he wants.

      On the other hand, I fully agree with you about the impending rise of fascism in Europe.

      • xiaohongshu [none/use name]@hexbear.netEnglish
        27·
        3 days ago

        That’s not exactly how it was perceived by some Russian commentators:

        spoiler

        It is already clear that the Anchorage compromise has turned into a Washington offer for Russia to capitulate and accept the European conditions for settling the conflict in Ukraine, which are also backed by the United States. In Alaska, the Russian side played a gambit in the form of territorial concessions in the hope that they would meet it halfway on issues of demilitarization and the neutral status of Ukraine.

        At the same time, Moscow really hoped for confidentiality, because it would be difficult to explain to citizens the leaving of parts of new regions of Russia under foreign occupation . After all, they are already spelled out in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. But what kind of confidentiality is there in modern world politics? Are you kidding?

        Only a few days passed and all Russian concessions were immediately voiced by Western politicians and the media, as well as Zelensky. So, Moscow agreed to give Kiev the parts of the Sumy and Kharkiv regions occupied by the Russian army, as well as the Kinburn Spit , which belongs to the Nikolaev region and is of strategic importance (it “blocks” the exit from Nikolaev), in exchange for the withdrawal of the Ukrainian Armed Forces from Donbass.

        Having received such decent territorial concessions, the Trump administration did not even think to make serious efforts to convince Ukraine and its European partners to make a countermove in the direction Moscow needs: neutralization, demilitarization and protection of the Russian language. On the contrary, a completely different and expected logic was activated: the Russians made such concessions, which means they are weak and can demand more . This is exactly what we are seeing right now.

        The Russian side, represented by Lavrov, is already rolling back and saying that European demands for the deployment of NATO troops on Ukrainian territory are unacceptable, as is the large Ukrainian army . And Zelensky is openly rude in response, declaring that Ukraine has only one official language - Ukrainian. In general, instead of a compromise, they demonstrated uncertainty and nothing more .

        In general, reaching a compromise agreement with the Trump administration is no longer possible in principle. Because Europe hired it for big money, by concluding a trade agreement between the United States and the European Union that was unilaterally beneficial for the American side . From now on, it will be necessary to act only against the united front of the United States and the EU, although Trump will imitate peacekeeping activities and say that he has done everything possible for peace.

        But in fact, “bribed” by the trade agreement with the EU, he has already become a European landsknecht. And therefore, it is better for Russia now not to engage in a diplomatic circus and run in circles, but to bet on victory in a new bipolar conflict between the global East and the collective West… That is why the SCO summit in China, which is starting very soon, the September talks between Putin and Xi Jinping, and the Russian president’s visit to India (planned for the end of this year) are the most important events.

        If we succeed in creating a large Eurasian triangle Moscow-Beijing-Delhi and “pull” the largest Latin American country, Brazil, which has been drifting increasingly away from the US, to it , then the combination will be quite decent. This is what we need to bet on, and not on a senseless haggling with the United States in the current conditions. Compromises are impossible in the current situation: someone must win and someone must lose. A zero-sum game. Classic.

        Short version is that Putin’s compromise is being seen by Trump as a weakness and decided to squeeze the Russians even more.

        Maybe the Russians are just doomers lol (classic) but from personally combing through these spaces over the past few years, I find the analyses from certain Russians and Chinese themselves to be far more grounded than the English speaking “anti-imperialist” alt media spaces, many of whom are prone to making fantastical speculations that are often divorced from the experience of the people “on the ground” i.e. these alt media people seem more interested in cultivating an audience and giving them what they want to hear, rather than providing objective assessments about the situation at hand.

        • FortifiedAttack [any]@hexbear.netEnglish
          15·
          3 days ago

          At the same time, Moscow really hoped for confidentiality, because it would be difficult to explain to citizens the leaving of parts of new regions of Russia under foreign occupation . After all, they are already spelled out in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. But what kind of confidentiality is there in modern world politics? Are you kidding?

          I find this incredibly hard to believe and I’m calling bullshit.

        • starkillerfish [she/her]@hexbear.netEnglish
          6·
          2 days ago

          seem more interested in cultivating an audience and giving them what they want to hear

          it is the same in russian spaces. in nationalist circles, there is a big interest in painting putin as a traitor to russian interests, not being harsh enough / completely flattening kyiv etc. + they have this weird conflict of civilizations narrative

    • jackmaoist [none/use name]@hexbear.netEnglish
      26·
      3 days ago

      I’m pretty sure that they will try to restart this war unless Russia somehow manages to get the demilitarization of Ukraine in effect. Putin’s cowardice in 2014 has led to decades of instability and a continous existential threat for the Russian people.

    • MarmiteLover123 [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.netEnglish
      191·
      3 days ago

      But in general, the border configuration is clear. Kharkov, Kherson, Dnepropetrovsk, Zaporozhye, Nikolaev, Odessa will remain part of Ukraine. At this stage, Russia has no opportunity to fight for these cities, for which this would most likely mean turning into ruins.

      That is, in fact, denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine will not happen.

      I don’t want to be a downer, but hasn’t this been the reality since Russia was driven out of Kiev and Kherson in 2022? The only way to achieve demilitirisation and occupation of those territories would be for Russia to be in the military position on the battlefield to do so, and the only way that happens is a complete Ukrainian collapse. Now the argument is that Russia can just grind away at Ukraine in an attritional situation, and eventually Russia will win and the front will buckle because Russia has more people, natural resources, is more independent, etc. But that’s a hell of a gamble to rest the future of the Russian Federation on. Russian gains of territory are currently linear, not exponential.

      I also don’t think Ukraine will give away Donetsk without a fight, because the main new Ukrainian defensive lines are there, and there’s still 6000+km² of Donetsk for Russia to capture, since the war has been in the current attritional state Russia has captured around 5000+km². So if the attritional state continues and Ukraine does not collapse, that’s years more fighting. Ukraine will only give up Donetsk in exchange for something big, like say more concrete security guarantees from NATO (NATO membership won’t happen, but there are other options here).

      • FortifiedAttack [any]@hexbear.netEnglish
        15·
        3 days ago

        Russian gains of territory are currently linear, not exponential.

        Only when viewed over the last few months, but compared to 2023 and 2024 the amount of territory being captured per day has increased significantly, ever since Ukraine’s Kursk incursion at least. Maybe not to exponential levels, but certainly not linear either.

        and there’s still 6000+km² of Donetsk for Russia to capture

        And at a conservative estimate of 20 km² per day (which the Russians have often exceeded in the past year), that still takes less than a year to fully capture.

        Most of this territory in the back is lacking industrial areas and fortifications, so it does not represent as much of a hurdle as the cities that Russia is currently surrounding. Russia currently has pockets developing around Pokrovsk and Kostyantinivka, and there are continual advances all across the front in the region. Despite the overhyped reports of Ukrainian counterattacks, they rarely manage to regain much territory, and most of this territory is recaptured a few weeks later. For example, they couldn’t fully revert the breakthrough north of Pokrovsk either.

        When Avdiivka and Ugledar fell, we saw a significant increase in the rate at which territory was being gained. I believe we’ll see similar developments once Pokrovsk and Kostyantinivka are taken.

        I see it as entirely feasible for Russia to fully capture the Donetsk region by the end of 2026 – which is why Russia has demanded Ukraine withdraw from it.

        • TechnoAnomie [he/him, any]@hexbear.netEnglish
          2·
          2 days ago

          Despite the overhyped reports of Ukrainian counterattacks, they rarely manage to regain much territory, and most of this territory is recaptured a few weeks later.

          And an unknown, but important, part of the claims are videos of raised flags from months before.

    • BynarsAreOk [none/use name]@hexbear.netEnglish
      10·
      3 days ago

      We will be dealing with a delayed conflict, for which Ukraine and Europe will prepare with the utmost seriousness. Its start will most likely be timed to coincide with the transition of power in Russia and Belarus in 10-15 years. By that time, Europe’s military industry will have gained the momentum necessary for a new phase of the conflict. And in the US, other politicians may come to power.

      Meh I do not care for this type of up in your own ass analysis from these chuds, none of these chuds were sitting here in 2008 saying there would be a war in 15 years, specialy given just how invested Russia and Putin were in the west in the 2000s, fuck sakes Putin literaly shaking hands with Bush after 9/11.

      These people are clueless and they only see the nationalist angle. Who cares about the next Russian “leadership” when a significant(more than half?) of their shit oligarchs are still very much pro-western or pro-neoliberal pro whatever it takes to keep things the same i.e them making money, perpetual anti-“liberal” shit perpetual nationalist shit. Putin didn’t change this neither will his successor either way.

      Its amazing how nationalists still believe they’re at the center of the world. It should be obvious the next few wars will be elsewhere, yet they sit here pandering some great buildup plan for some great war between EU and Russia. Just silly, like how can then not see Ukraine just simply isn’t important, wasn’t the vastly different level of support to Israel already proof enough?