If in the spring the Western media competed in the outpouring of filth against a large eastern neighbor around the globe, in the summer their general tune, very similar to that monotonous and boring motive that is not blown by a professional musician, but extracted from a toy tune by a child, began to subside. Moreover, closer to the fall and in September, articles began appearing in the Western press, the authors of which, by no means friends of the Kremlin, began to speak out quite positively towards Russia, while often rejecting the official position of their home country (for example, France or the United States) regarding , say, the Syrian question or the verdict that has already been pessimized by the punches from “Pussy Riot”.
In foreign newspapers they blame Russia for corruption, for autocracy, for merging the branches of power into one thick bough on which Putin sits, for the fact that there is no freedom of speech in Moscow - just like in the jungles of Africa, finally, because the Internet is Russia is totally suffocated, and freedom-loving journalists and bloggers in company with defenders of the Khimki forests, Voronezh chernozem, Siberian peatlands and Mr. Khodorkovsky are harassed, searched and placed in cells, from which it is not so convenient for them to ask for financial support from McFaul or Japan
In general, they criticize Russia for the fact that it does not seem to resemble the advanced democracies of the West. Because somewhere in Germany or overseas America, all of the above is there and works perfectly, but in Russia it is either not there, or it will not get involved in bear conditions there. In Moscow, even gasoline in tanks freezes in winter, what to say about the thermophilous sprouts of democracy, which can fully develop only in the south of France or in California (at least in Texas, from where the enlightened Bush family came out).
Let us see what is being written on the ideally separate democratized West about Russia, both in the press and in blogs.
* * *
I. The Syrian Question: The West has gone mad, and Russia may be right
Pascal Loro in the article “What if Putin was right?” (Le Nouvel Economiste, France; source of translation - "InoSMI") expresses a thought about Putin’s possible rightness with respect to the Syrian conflict.
This journalist is not a supporter of Bashar Assad; Moreover, he, like many Westerners, believes that the president of Syria is “unconditionally” responsible for the tragedy in Syria.
However, the Frenchman, who was apparently tired of the one-sided coverage of the situation around Syria under the American slogan “Assad Must Leave” (© H. Clinton), suddenly asked himself and his readers a direct question: what will happen if Assad is taken and overthrown? .. Perhaps, Comrade Loro asks, is it not in vain in the Kremlin that the fall of Assad will result in the creation of a huge Islamist anti-Western space in Syria?
Russians, according to Loro, know the Muslim world well and understand it perfectly. Moreover, after the revolutions in the framework of the “Arab spring” no democracies arose in the Arab countries. In Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, Islamist regimes now rule, trying to stifle the shoots of true freedom. “Ethnic and religious minorities and women first will have to pay for the actual approval of Islamic laws and regressive moral order,” writes a French journalist. The author adds that the main destabilizing factors in the region are, as Moscow, Qatar and Saudi Arabia believes. These two countries can not be called specimens of democracy. They finance the Salafi, Wahhabi and terrorist movements. But the task of these movements is to undermine the influence of Western values and the formation of a vast Islamist space.
No, this is no longer the political vision of the Kremlin, it is the thoughts of P. Loro himself.
Considering geopolitical solitaire, decomposed in Moscow, the French journalist concludes: “In the end, it turns out that Russia's position has nothing to do with the principled obstinacy or reflexes of the Cold War, which were voiced in recent statements by several French political leaders. The position of Moscow is thoughtful and rational. So maybe Putin was right? ”
Another Frenchman, Alain Shue, a man of the older generation, an expert on Syria with almost 45 years of experience, a former high-ranking representative of French intelligence, echoed Pascal Loro from journalistic oblivion. In the article by Alain Shue and Georges Mallbrune, "The West is naive or just does not know much about Syria?" ("Le Figaro", France; source of translation - "InoSMI") the opinion of Shue, which runs counter to the demagogic rhetoric of Western European politicians, including the bitter statements of the French President F. Hollande, is cited. Not speaking directly about the correctness of Moscow, he nevertheless brings the reader to the idea that the position of the West regarding the Syrian conflict, at least, should be characterized as “naive”, and even “hysterical” and even “schizophrenic”. The expert does not see the “Arab Spring”, but writes about the “Islamist winter”. We are talking simply about the power of religious fundamentalists, “experienced hypocrites”, who have won posts in the government and presidential seats.
But how did it happen, Comrade Shue asks, that Europe supported movements that act not only against the interests of nations, but also against its interests?
Alain Shue recalls that the Syrian National Council demonstrated the true intentions and aspirations in Syria by repainting the national flag. The red color on the flag of Syria embodies the socialist aspirations of the regime, the author writes. But the SNA - immediately after its creation - replaced the red stripe with the green color of Islamism. “You yourself could be convinced of this,” says Shue, “during opposition demonstrations, in which frenzied cries of“ Allah Akbar! ”Are heard more often than democratic slogans.
The West, led by France, the author believes, offered the vulnerable Syrian minorities nothing but “peremptory condemnation and often hysterical anathema, ensuring everywhere (political and sometimes military) the rise to power of Islamists and the dominance of theocratic states that support political Salafism” .
Where is the logic, where is the common sense? The author writes about the "incomprehensible schizophrenia of our politicians and the media," and says that "the massive investments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia into our economy" serve to raise barbarism, which, whatever the Europeans might think about it, can harm them.
The other day, the French understood what other valiant French-speaking guys in Syria are fighting for. The next sight of the French, who will never say bad things about Russia and its “Syrian” position, turned Jacques Beres, one of the founders of the Doctors Without Borders organization. This comrade recently returned to his homeland from Aleppo, where he treated the wounded militants.
The doctor did not remain silent. With indignation, he told reporters that most of the militants fighting in Syria are radical Islamists, people from other countries. These rebels seek not to build democracy in Syria, but to create a Shariah state.
Among the patients of the surgeon there were also citizens of France. Many of these fanatically-minded young "fighters" called their idol Mohammed Merah, a terrorist who, by the way, in March 2012, committed massacres in Toulouse and Montauban.
Columnist Philip Giraldi (Veterans News Nowsource of translation - Mixednews.ru) speaks directly about the role of Moscow in solving the Syrian issue: “Russia can offer a lot to the West. She has good connections with traditional friends in the Middle East, Asia and Africa, and the governments of many countries, and she is still regarded as an anti-colonial power. This means that it has every opportunity to mediate in crisis situations with countries such as Syria and Iran that no longer trust Washington or European countries. ”
As we can see, speaking directly or indirectly (even so timidly as Pascal Loro) speaking of the possible correctness of Russia in vetoing Western political scenarios for solving the Syrian problem, Western journalists and analysts have completely moved away from the clichés and familiar schemes for installing the Syrian theme. In the articles reviewed here, there is no word about democratic rebels, about constitutional freedoms, about infringement of the rights of Syrian citizens and about the Kremlin’s aggressive aspirations to confront the peace-loving West. One gets the impression that the European press - at least its most reasonable part - began to see clearly in the Syrian issue.
Ii. The Internet in Russia is, and it is more than in Germany
Who said there that in Russia the power squeezed the Internet? Some Germans even envy the rapid spread of the Internet in Russia and agree that it has gained “political power”.
Julian Hans from «Süddeutsche Zeitung» (translation source - "Inopressa") believes that the winter opposition protests have proved: the Internet has gained political power in Russia.
According to data provided by Hans, at the end of 2011, Russia pressed Germany out of first place in the ranking of European countries in terms of the number of users of the world wide web. In Russia, he writes, 53 million people use the Internet, and their number grows by 14% per year (with a simultaneous drop in the number of viewers). On average, a Russian user spends hours per month reading 10 blogs, which is twice as much as the average global user.
The development of the Runet, the author of the article believes, was promoted by the need for a communication tool that would overcome the space and difference in time zones. Also played a role and the presence of Soviet specialists who helped the electronic means of communication reach its heyday. Hans speaks of high-class Russian engineers, programmers, authors, and designers.
If there are “boring” state television channels in Russia, then the Internet, according to the journalist, is free from Putin’s power.
Hans also writes that the stronger the state ideological control, the more important the irony in the network. He illustrates his words with the slogan “Thank you grandfather for the victory,” placed under a photo of Vladimir Churov, the head of the CEC, who, according to opposition members, provided the majority of the votes of United Russia.
Well, what is the dominance of power and the suppression of freedom of speech?
However, the author reports on the aspirations of the authorities to adopt the relevant laws, “ostensibly to protect against child pornography,” but he calls them only “attempts”, which is in itself a great achievement for Western journalism, which at the very least mastered only one Russian tonality - minor
Iii. Mirror for criticism
It turns out that not all media in the West believe that the “punk prayer” of the “Pussy Riot” in the temple has the typical tyrannical cruelty of the “Putin regime”, the suppression of the freedoms of citizens who have the right to such an opinion, and the complete fusion of the judicial branch with the executive with the formalities of the legislative. In late August "Inorpessa" made a digest of European media on the process of participating in the punk band Pussy Riot, which also included G. Fetter's article.
Austrian lawyer and president of the Club of Independent Liberals Georg Fetter writes on the website Die Presse.that the process of “PR” would end in Austria in the same way as in Moscow. The author notes with bilious irony that, “despite the wave of indignation in the democratic world, one should be glad that Pussy Riot did not perform its“ artistic action ”in Austria. Here, with no less agility, they prosecute members of the opposition who come into conflict with religious institutions. ” The author proves his words by saying that the statements about the sexual passions of the Prophet Muhammad did not go unpunished.
The journalist writes: "In the West, they often deliberately do not want to see that the Russians, including the president, are a believing nation." An Austrian lawyer finds it logical that the people stood up to defend their faith after 70 years of state atheism.
According to Fetter, Western criticism of the PR verdict is politically inconsistent. After all, it is very difficult to imagine V. Putin criticizing the sentences handed down by the Austrian justice system. If the Russian president allowed himself this, then “such statements would rightfully be perceived as interfering in the internal affairs of a sovereign state and called unacceptable.”
Irish newspaper blog "Daily Mail" Mary Ellen Sainon drew a precise parallel between the European and the generally “human rights” (including Amnesty International) attitude towards the Pussy Riot act in Russia and the possible punishment for similar actions in Europe.
Imagine, the journalist writes, a similar act committed by three young Irish women. Imagine that they opposed the policies of the current government, which allows for large-scale immigration of Muslims.
These active girls would declare themselves to be a “group” and would, for example, rush into the mosque in Klonsky. They would bellow a song against government leaders, insult Islam and believers. Imam, the journalist writes, would have called the police.
What's next? And then the very people who recently condemned the persecution of Pussy Riot for their protest at the altar of Christ the Savior Cathedral in Moscow will demand the prosecution of three women in Klonsky.
Under Irish law, Pussy Riot from Klonsky may face criminal charges for "inciting hatred." Under this article, the defendants will appear before the district court, where they will not have a jury. The punishment may be imprisonment for up to two years - the same, by the way, what punk girls from Moscow got.
Nevertheless, Mary Ellen Sainon, politicians of the European Union, such as Angela Merkel, hastened to declare that the Russian judicial decision is incompatible with European values of democracy and the rule of law priority, continues.
The facts, however, prove the opposite. The decision of Moscow is in line with the potential solution of Irish legislation, as well as the laws of several other EU countries.
Therefore, the fact that Vladimir Putin is under attack because of a trial against “PR”, according to the journalist, is something out of the ordinary.
What really makes Putin an odious loner, the journalist notes, is his famous support for Orthodoxy in Russia and his love for the Motherland. He speaks of himself as a believer and a patriot, and says that he wants to restore the place of the church in Russian life and culture. Behind him are millions of Russian believers who have been infuriated by the blasphemy of “Pussy Riot” in the temple.
Putin also wants Russia to regain its status and become an influential international force. In his opinion, Russia must return to the first row of countries for its own protection.
Columnist Philip Giraldi (Veterans News Nowsource of translation - Mixednews.ru) writes in the same vein: “Had protest" Pussy Riot "in the cathedral or synagogue in Washington, many Americans would have called for the same significant punishment as the one that was imposed by the Russian court."
Got "puskam" and from the wonderful and incomparable Mireille Mathieu. About her opinion about the church hooligans told the newspaper "Le Huffington Post", France (translation source - "InoSMI").
In an interview published Wednesday last week, the French singer said bluntly that girls from the anti-Putin punk band Pussy Riot committed blasphemy.
“It seems to me that they are insane, I condemn their actions. The church is not a place for such actions, ”Mireille Mathieu said on the Moscow TV channel“ TV Center ”, while in Moscow.
Mireille Mathieu undoubtedly went against the general western current.
Here it is appropriate to quote the lines of Nikolai Glazkov: “But could you comprehend the saying: only a dead fish goes with the flow?”
Iv. Friendly force
All attacks on Putin and Russia are the work of those who want to reanimate the Cold War. Thinks so Philip Giraldi (Veterans News Nowsource of translation - Mixednews.ru).
According to the columnist VNN, "Russia has become a developed democracy, it has a relatively free press, there is a judicial system that, at least sometimes, functions, it is rich in natural resources, and its economy is connected with the rest of the world, and it is feeling quite well." Yes, there is corruption, there is authoritarianism, but “the average resident of Russia enjoys unprecedented freedoms in Soviet times, and besides, his standard of living is steadily increasing.” As for Putin, the majority of Russians support him, the journalist believes.
But the West, instead of making friends with a growing Russia, sees it as an obstacle. Well, yes, because she does not want to approve "humanitarian intervention" and the change of regimes carried out by the United States and its allies. Moscow’s cautious approach in Syria, the journalist writes, “is almost certainly the best option.”
Giraldi also recalls that Russia is still a serious military force. "This is the only country in the world," he writes bluntly, "that could destroy the United States, which in itself could be a sufficient reason to establish friendly relations." In addition, Moscow is ready to reduce nuclear and chemical arsenals and cooperate with Washington in the framework of the bilateral Cooperative Threat Reduction Program.
“Thus,” the author continues, “there are many reasons for establishing a modus vivendi with Moscow and there are no substantial reasons for doing the opposite, but mutual accusations continue. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is a frequent critic of events in Russia, and presidential candidate Mitt Romney has dubbed Russia "the enemy of state number one." The prominent neocon Robert Kaplan attributes to Vladimir Putin cynicism and “pure banditry” ... ”
All these ridiculous accusations create artificial hostility between the United States and Russia.
For example, American observers portrayed Khodorkovsky as an honest businessman and reformer, but all of them, and at the same time H. Clinton, “should have wondered how Khodorkovsky managed to become one of the richest people in the world in just 10 years. Perhaps she should have taken an interest in the extensive dossier on Khodorkovsky, collected by the FBI and stored just down the street from the White House. ”
In the 2008 year, the author recalls, when Georgia attacked Russia and was defeated, Washington supported the aggressor. Many remember the phrase said by Senator McCain: "Now we are all Georgians."
The author doesn’t like the way the National Fund for the Development of Democracy (NED) spoils relations with Russia, whose workers direct color revolutions and cooperate with “opposition” parties. The journalist explains that the NED has offices both Republicans and Democrats, and is largely funded by Congress, even if it calls itself a “non-governmental organization.” This Fund aims to bring democracy to other countries. First of all, he works with opposition parties and movements, "and he does it so openly that opposition politicians are often seen entering and leaving the US embassy in Moscow." Recently, Washington “became angry at Putin’s attitude to the NED - because among both parties (American: Republican and Democratic. - O. Ch.) There is a feeling that the United States should be able to tell other countries how to conduct their business.”
In conclusion, the columnist notes the similarities between the United States and Russia: “Russia is openly corrupt, while the legal system in the United States was created in order to bring profit to the elites that govern the country, so corruption is hidden. And with regard to its allies, if there is corruption, the United States at this time prefers to look the other way. Afghanistan is the most corrupt country in the world, but it continues to receive approval from Washington ... <...> The elections in Russia really could not offer an alternative, but the elections in the USA could not provide it either, albeit for different reasons. Courts in Russia often deliver government-approved verdicts, but so do US courts when the government invokes state secrets. Washington sends the Endowment for Democracy to many countries to explain how to govern the country, but it gets angry when the Russians or Iranians do the same. If Washington really believes that the cases against Khodorkovsky, Magnitsky and Pussy Riot were unfair, then it should probably remember Jose Padilla, Bradley Manning and Julian Assange ... "
Thus, Comrade Giraldi tried to approach the issue as impartially as possible - and this approach, whatever one may say, turned out to be in favor of Russia. We will supplement his words with just one sentence: all the governments of the world are alike, but not all are eager to rule the world.
Author, hidden under the nickname dunkie56, on the resource news24.com (translation source - Mixednews.ru) reminds residents of the West about who won the Second World War. His note is called "Russia - the moral leader of mankind."
“I have already spoken about this before,” he does not write, he shouts, “but I consider it necessary to mention more!”
He continues: “This is a sacrifice made by almost 30 by millions of Russian men, women and children who fought Nazi Germany attacked 22 on June 1941 on June 10 until the death of Hitler in 1945. If the Russians were not attacked then, Western Europe today could well have turned out to be National Socialist Germany. ” And it would, quite possibly, be the only superpower in the world.
Accordingly, the United States "would not have experienced an economic boom that followed the end of hostilities, and their economy today would depend on the economic relations that Europe under German rule would have maintained." The blogger continues: “Today there would be no Israel, and perhaps all Jews living in Europe would be massacred, and the only representatives of the Jewish people would remain in Russia and the United States, plus maybe a small community where Israel is now!” And “the USA would not have Werner von Braun to develop its own rocket technologies.”
North Africa would be under Nazi occupation, like the Suez Canal, Great Britain would face the threat of invasion of the Germans and their allies, America would tremble before a possible attack by the aggressors, and its economy would partly be in the blockade. China would fall under Japanese annexation, and South America would host German naval forces and bases whose tasks would be to keep the United States under constant threat and control.
“So let's be honest with ourselves in that,” the author says, “with regard to Russia's enormous contribution to the current world order, in which, despite all our problems, the Earth’s population exceeds 6 billions and more than doubled from 1945 year due to the relative the peace and security that the world has known since then ... And to be honest, life on planet Earth, as it is, now exists thanks to the Russian sacrifice made during World War II ... Why wasn’t this given a proper assessment? The reason is simple: we, the human race, prefer to quickly forget our recent past! ”
V. Why Barack Obama has grown wiser, and Mitt Romney - has become stupid.
The enterprising US President Barack Obama has recently managed to extract political benefits from the “whitewash” of Russia. Speaking at the congress of his own Democratic Party, Comrade Obama explained that the Russians are not the same thing as Al-Qaida. This thought the American president tried to convey to his constituents, and at the same time to the dull Republicans, including Mitt Romney. If US presidential candidate Mitt Romney calls Vladimir Putin is a "tyrant" and a "threat to national security," Russia considers "the number one geopolitical enemy" and reiterates his desire to "curb Moscow", then his rival Barack Obama wants to be friends with the Russians.
Comrade Obama thoroughly printed a politically poorly-trained candidate and competitor, explaining to him who the enemy of America really was. "My opponent, - сказал Barack Obama is a new man in foreign policy. He wants to bring us back to an era of drastic actions and blunders that cost America so dearly. In the end, you can not call Russia the number one enemy. Russia, not al-Qaeda, if you don’t think in terms of the Cold War. ”
Democratic senator John Carrie joined the president and also ridiculed Romney, a little knowledgeable in geopolitics. Comrade carrie said: “Guys, Sarah Palin said she can see Russia from Alaska. Mitt Romney speaks as if he saw Russia only in the movie “Rocky 4”.
After such poisonous statements, which were broadcast by many American channels and went on blogs, Comrade Obama’s rating soared almost to heaven, but his rival Mr. Romney’s rating, on the contrary, drew to the ground. This is indicated by published data from a public opinion poll conducted by Reuters and the sociological service Ipsos (1457 people participated). If Presidential elections were held this weekend, then the order of 47% of respondents would cast their votes for Obama. Romney could only count on 43%. Moreover, Obama was considered “smart enough” to do work at the White House 46% of Americans, while Romney gave this quality only 37% of respondents.
Summing up: declaring Russia a friend, Obama has cleared his way to the presidential throne. And the second conclusion: ordinary Americans, at least among those who were interviewed, do not want to see Russia as their enemy.
* * *
So, in the West, the voices of those who are not indifferent to the truth and do not eschew objectivity are louder and louder. It should be noted that not all authors who have been included in this review are admired by Russia and are inclined to extol Putin. Quite the contrary. And the more valuable is their opinion, which sounds in a different tone than B-minor minor.
Observed and translated by Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
- especially for topwar.ru