In his latest column, Boris Kagarlitsky casts his critical eye on the forces of right-wing populism in Russia today and its leading figures Igor Strelkov and Yevgeny Prigozhin. They may rail against corrupt elites, Kagarlitsky explains, but the change they seek is superficial, a mere changing of the guard; above all they fear the social transformation to which disorder is liable to give rise.

South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol is rushing South Korea headlong into the middle of the new Cold War that the United States is waging against China. Yoon’s aspiration to position South Korea as a “global pivotal state” is turning the country into a bigger cog in the US war machine and stakes its security and economic future on a declining US-led global order.

The US is using what remains of its strength to try to restore its global position. This aggressive drive is fueled by its long history of wars which helped to recast American society into one managed by corporations and the state. What is paradoxical is that its imperial ideology happens to be not fascism but a form of liberalism refitted for rationalizing military and political expansion.

The attacks on Belgorod provide some tactical advantages to Ukraine. On the other hand, they enable the Russian authorities to paint Ukraine as a “terrorist state” and strengthen Moscow’s propaganda narrative that Kyiv is in league with neo-Nazis. Rather than weakening support in Russia for the war, these attacks may therefore have the opposite effect.

In Latin America, the desire to expand relationships with Russia and China, and to remain neutral on the war in Ukraine, is partly rooted in the violent history of imperialism in the region. If Ottawa and Washington fail to realize this, they will continue to isolate themselves in the hemisphere while enabling the growing influence of the geopolitical rivals they are supposedly trying to obstruct.

The war state harbors within it the seeds of its own destruction. It will cannibalize the nation until it collapses. Before then, it will lash out, like a blinded cyclops, seeking to restore its diminishing power through indiscriminate violence. The tragedy is not that the US war state will self-destruct. The tragedy is that we will take down so many innocents with us.

China’s recent pledge to send a peace delegation to Ukraine in the hope of resolving the country’s ongoing war with Russia is a hopeful sign the bloody conflict may soon come to an end. But the US’s general hostility to Chinese peace initiatives suggests there may be serious limitations to Ukrainian sovereignty. The choice between continuing the conflict, or suing for peace, may not be Kyiv’s to make.

Neither the anti-NATO nor the anti-Putin faction is long on nuance or empathy. It’s as if each is fighting its own version of a proxy war, both invoking the claim of anti-imperialism. If these groups cannot reach agreement on a thoughtful and even-handed proposal for peace, the chances of the actual combatants doing so are slim indeed.

Lula’s position on Ukraine and his opposition to military aid is not some aberration motivated by narrow personal or national interests. Left parties and movements across the Global South have articulated similar perspectives. The Canadian left ought to echo Lula’s principled stance. It is time to end the horrors in Ukraine and push for peace.

A case could be made that what is wrong with much of contemporary Western foreign policy is that it’s so concerned about deontology that it’s lost all track of consequences. Full of good intent, determined to do what it is “right” by promoting democracy and human rights, we embark on policies that fail utterly to do any good and more generally do a lot of harm.