Defend Ukraine from "Russian imperialism"? ("CounterPunch", USA)
How Russian bear woke up from hibernation
In "Stories Western philosophy ”Bertrand Russell summarizes the approaches of the Catholic theologian Thomas Aquinas as follows:
“Before Aquinas begins to philosophize, he already knows the truth: she is proclaimed in Catholic dogma. If he succeeds in finding convincing rational arguments for certain parts of a creed, so much the better; fails - Aquinas only needs to return to the revelation. But finding arguments for a conclusion given in advance is not a philosophy, but a system of biased argumentation. ”
American foreign policy is of the same nature. Desired useful goals. Noble excuses are customized for them. The gullible population is deceived. The war spins artificially. Empires on a global scale offer special prayers. For example, the United States and its allies knew exactly how they wanted to present the Ukrainian conflict to the Western population they had fooled. They only need to fabricate the event and finish it, giving the desired shape by dishonest methods - just a few brush strokes - according to the outline of geopolitics.
Both the government and its corporate media vassals conclusions are known in advance. And these conclusions are straightforward: Russia is the aggressor, America is the defender of freedom, and NATO is the security forces that must resist the aggressiveness of Moscow. And the chief solicitor, the interpretation of this fable, the Obama administration, is a long false list of details about the conflict, which almost daily sends to its press agents.
The first lie is that Putin is frantically pursuing an expansionist policy. There is no evidence for this claim, but it is repeated in the West to nausea. The accession of Crimea is hardly an example of such a policy. Crimeans overwhelmingly voted for secession from Ukraine. Russia was fully satisfied with the existing long-term agreements with Kiev on the basing of the Black Sea fleet in the Sevastopol. It was the Kiev putsch that forced her to act.
There are many signs that Putin has sent a stream of volunteer military across the border to fight side by side with the blocked "rebel separatists" in eastern Ukraine. But is it a crime of imperialism to send soldiers to defend the communities of ethnic fellows who were attacked? It seems difficult to find arguments against it.
Moreover, Moscow has long stated that it will not allow developing a NATO base on its border - and this is a purely defensive position. The West understands this, but that’s his plan. He knows for sure that by seizing Kiev and bringing several Western technocrats to power, he would rather provoke Russia to take the Crimea than to donate by the Black Sea outpost. This cynical temptation allowed Washington to present its aggression - self-defense, and the self-defense of Moscow - aggression. In this context, think about how the US would react if China, with the help of drug barons, would suddenly make a coup in Mexico City, intending to deploy hypersonic missiles in Tijuana. At once, Washington's disdain for diplomacy would be justified!
Another lie known to us is that Russia was behind the crash of the MH17 flight. Obama repeated this ridiculous statement from the UN scene, no less. No evidence has been provided, and the mass of circumstantial evidence seriously undermines these allegations - the loss of the air traffic controller’s negotiation records, the lack of satellite evidence of the “Buk” launch, traces of projectiles on the cockpit remnants and the tweet of the Ukrainian air traffic control officer who directly points to Kiev as the culprit , etc. But just a few hours after the crash, Barack Obama told the world that "the separatists supported by Russia are liable," and Moscow must be punished. Still, after all nobody knows the plot better than the USA.
The third lie is that the overthrow of Viktor Yanukovych occurred during the "democratic uprising." Interestingly, they always appear where America’s strategic interests are in danger. Only then the feverish striving for representative rule seizes the minds of the crowd. Let us put aside fantasies, but the most reasonable conclusion, judging not only by the confessions of Victoria Nuland and Obama himself, is that the United States organized this coup using the fascist thugs as the vanguard and organized shooting under a foreign flag to force Yanukovych to hastily leave the country . It is strange that all this happened when Yanukovych, who had been evicting for some time, rejected the association agreement with the EU for the best offer of Russia. (Note that outbreaks of violence occurred immediately in Syria immediately after Bashar al-Assad decided to abandon the western Qatari pipeline supported by Iran. In both cases, inflammatory incidents were examples of the imperial province rejecting the dictates of Rome).
The fourth lie is that Western sanctions against Russia are deserved, as they are based on Russian aggression. However, the State Department, led by his pompous eminence, Secretary of State John Kerry, had never spoken so harshly. Instead, we were informed that Russia was punished for "violating the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine" and, because it "undermined democratic processes and institutions in Ukraine, threatened peace, stability, security, sovereignty and territorial integrity, and participated in the misappropriation of its assets" . Imagine only media press agents, who were inclined in their silent obedience, because this decree was dictated to them from above. Nevertheless, lofty slogans do not negate the fact that the coup was an inappropriate step to move NATO toward the borders of Russia.
Anonymous-sycophants
My God, how the media lemmings were set up under the official rhetoric! Immensely submissive, Western corporate media with aplomb perform their slave lessons for this month. On Thursday, The Times published the headline "The US and Europe are working to end the battles in Ukraine." The Saturday issue read: "The United States is condemning Russia, and fighting in eastern Ukraine is breaking out with a new force." The headline in The Economist sounded more categorical: "Putin's war with the West." Under the title was a collage with the President of Russia, firmly controlling his hand with the threads stretching to each puppet. An editorial in the Washington Post oozed with sarcasm, vaguely trying to present Obama with that new Neville Chamberlain, the triumphant peacemaker, seeing the tyrants through and through. "Concerned about their passivity." The White House should be more concerned with how to "keep Vladimir Putin in check."
This is not sophisticated propaganda. This is not insurance or habitual engagement. This is boundless deceit. Undoubtedly, the authors of these publications have opportunities that none of us have to figure out that the United States, with the spineless lackeys from the EU, is trying to provoke a conflict between the nuclear powers in the east of Ukraine. They want Russia to either stop supporting militias in the east and allow NATO to place bases on its border, or allow them to plunge themselves into the undermining war by proxy. The ultimate goal in the first case is to tear Moscow away from Europe. And the second goal is to significantly reduce the federation’s ability to support the allies of Shiites and Alawites in the Middle East, who stand in the way of the feverish Washington dream of regional hegemony. None of the options leaves hopes to the residents of Donetsk, Luhansk and nearby regions, or provinces.
However, the Times is leading the Western world in spreading in every American Starbucks cafe a senseless refrain that our highly moral handshaking and generous leaders strive for peace. By the way, ignoring the insatiable imperial ambitions of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who will not stop making provocations until he regains the former glory of the Soviet Union, befitting the times of Stalin. How much is left before the term “Khan” starts to unwind? We have already militarist senators make fake photos and avidly declare that Obama is powerless in the face of such a historic threat.
Howitzers for peace
Contrary to the hysterical cries of "Obama - the dove of peace", and the quivering fears of Putin, who will ride across mainland Europe without any opposition, the US Congress approved new sanctions against Russia just before Christmas. An Orwellian-style act of Ukraine’s support and freedom, designed to force Vladimir Putin to “pay for attacks on freedom and security in Europe,” according to co-author Bill Senator Larry Corker, a Republican who will soon head the Senate Committee on International relationship.
But what is a sanction without a little bit of deadly help? The bill guarantees Kiev such assistance in the 350 bag of millions of dollars. This implies "anti-tank and armor-piercing weapons, weapon and ammunition for crews, anti-artillery radars for detecting and aiming artillery batteries, fire control devices, range finders, optical equipment for guiding and controlling, tactical reconnaissance unmanned aerial vehicles and secure command and communications systems. "
Now President Obama, fed up with the appearance of diplomacy, is said to be weighing the recommendations of the ever-helpful Brookings Institution to expedite another $3 billion in military aid to Kyiv, including for missiles, Drones and armored Humvees. Take a look at this gallery of stern faces, bright and righteous, adamant in defending the massacres in eastern Ukraine, where the UN condemns both sides of the conflict - the western-backed Ukrainian government and the Russian-backed Novorossiya army in the east - for indiscriminate shelling that no doubt caused hundreds of deaths civilians only in the last few weeks. A million people have already fled to Russia as shelling by their own national army destroyed energy and medical infrastructure, one of the first steps towards impoverishing the region. Add to this physical torment the economic stress caused by Kyiv's agreement with the European Union.
The United States promised Kiev to help in the development of the energy sector in order to - as the media broadcasts in general - counteract Russian threats to interrupt gas supplies. Few people noticed that Kiev refused to pay even the planned 2 billion dollars in bills for past deliveries. Without a doubt, this is a Western order or a prerequisite for assistance.
We note here a terrific discrepancy. Kiev owes Russia $ 2 billion dollars. Vice President Joe Biden promises $ 50 million to support energy, none of which will go to Moscow. Then the president comes in with $ 350 millions of military aid and ponders a staggering extra $ 3 billion. He also proposes to collect about 46 millions for border security and the like.
It turns out an additional $ 3,35 billion to further destroy the split Ukrainian society, and $ 57 million to help in its restoration. Excuse me for being stupid, but what kind of peacemaking is this? Yet Secretary of State Kerry, Senator John McCain and others in Congress are constantly assigning roles to the conflict, using defensive terms, providing all sorts of fakes to entertain their own vanity. In the following sound snippet, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg stated that the alliance intends to double its response forces to 30 000 people. The French Hollande called for Ukraine to join NATO.
The world before the thaw?
Against the background of all this deliberately bellicose posing under the flashes of cameras Angela Merkel, Francois Hollande, Vladimir Putin and Petro Poroshenko concluded the second Minsk ceasefire agreement, which entered into force on Sunday. It is quite possible that it was the last effort of the European Union trying to gain time to prevent a fierce mediated war, or, more possibly, a hypocritical diplomatic posture designed to provide cover for Western aggression. In any case, the absence of Washington was noticeable, but surely it had a great influence on the meeting. Key points of the agreement include the withdrawal of heavy weapons systems outside a certain buffer zone, amnesty for prisoners, the withdrawal of foreign and disarmament of illegal forces, the decentralization of areas controlled by the armed forces of New Russia, presumably in the form of constitutional reform; but also Ukrainian control over the border with Russia by the end of the year. Despite the agreement, the battle for the city of Debaltseve continued, and the militia — or, in the language of Kiev, the “terrorists” — finally, triumphantly completed it yesterday and forced the Ukrainian army to retreat.
Betting on the world in these circumstances is not smart. Kiev has already exploded with radical opinions, the same happened in the militia circles condemning the agreement. It seems that none of the parties to the events in Minsk has control over these groups. Poroshenko himself said that he agreed to the first Minsk agreement in order to allow his troops to regroup, and, of course, rejects the paragraph on constitutional reform. Washington also did not demonstrate a serious interest in the implementation of the peace plan. In fact, the financial costs of the White House suggest that this is not a symbolic conflict, but part of a broader imperial strategy, which, according to many experts, does not seem to exist.
However, it is. Take a look at the strategic vision of the national security adviser in the administration of Carter Zbigniew Brzezinski, set out in the book "The Great Chessboard." Then look at how the apostles of this plan appeared in the neoconservative movement, as in 1992, it was reformulated by Paul Wolfowitz in the Clinton Administration’s “Defense Planning Planning Guide,” and later replicated in the Bush Administration’s redesigned Middle East project. As always - full-scale domination, idyll or nightmare, depending on which side of the imperial fence you were on.
Information