The vast bulk of the commentary issuing from American commentators about the Russian military action in Ukraine involves condemning exactly that which they routinely advocate and which the U.S. itself routinely does.
TOBRUK, Libya (Reuters) - If anyone understands the deep divisions over how to resolve the blockade of Libya's eastern Hariga oil port, it is the family of local mayor Faraj Yassin.Protesters shuttered (Blockade of eastern Libya's oil ports is dividing...
Here's the US's exceptionalist promotion of "democracy" in action; Washington has recognized a coup d'etat in Ukraine that regime-changed a - for all its glaring faults - democratically elected government.
And here is Russian President Vladimir Putin, already last year,talking about how Russia and China decided to trade in roubles and yuan, and stressing how Russia needs to quit the "excessive monopoly" of the US dollar. He had to be aware the Empire would strike back.
Now there's more; Russian presidential adviser Sergey Glazyev
told RIA Novosti, "Russia will abandon the US dollar as a reserve currency if the United States initiates sanctions against theRussian Federation."
So the Empire struck back by giving "a little help" to regime change in the Ukraine. And Moscow counter-punched by takingcontrol of Crimea in less than a day without firing a shot - with or without crack Spetsnaz brigades (UK-based think tanks say they are; Putin says they are not).
Putin's assessment of what happened in Ukraine is factually correct; "an anti-constitutional takeover and armed seizure of power". It's open to endless, mostly nasty debate whether the Kremlin overreacted or not. Considering the record of outright demonization of both Russia and Putin going on for years - and now reaching fever pitch - the Kremlin's swift reaction was quite measured.
Putin applied Sun Tzu to the letter, and now plays the US against the EU. He has made it clear Moscow does not need to "invade" Ukraine. The 1997 Ukraine-Russia partition treaty specifically allows Russian troops in Crimea. And Russia after all is an active proponent of state sovereignty; it's under this principle that Moscow refuses a Western "intervention" in Syria.
Filtran un supuesto diálogo entre el ministro de Asuntos Exteriores de Estonia, Urmas Paet, y la jefa de la diplomacia de la Unión Europea, Catherine Ashton , que confirma que los francotiradores de Kiev fueron contratados por la oposición.
Russia will not go to war with the people of Ukraine, but will use its troops to protect citizens, if radicals with clout in Kiev now try to use violence against Ukrainian civilians, particularly ethnic Russians, Putin told the media.
The Economist is the high priest of Anglo-Saxon hypocrisy – it preaches afree market for all, but backed “socialism for the banks” when the City needed a bailout. It is no more consistent on world politics – international law for all, except for Britain and the USA. In response to the recent article written by Stop the War Convenor Lindsey German (10 things to remember about the crisis in Ukraine and Crimea), an Economist blogger identified only as “JC”, decided to “Fisk” Stop the War (Britain and Ukraine: Fisking Stop the War). It was quite revealing. Here are ten things JC got wrong:
“Neither Mr Cameron nor Mr Kerry ‘invaded’ Afghanistan or Iraq,” JC begins. No, but Britain and the USA did – and it was an invasion, noquotation marks are necessary. The Iraq war, like the Yugoslav one in 1999, was undertaken clearly in violation of international law, against countries making no threats to the USA or Britain, and without any UN sanction. The Economist may take a view that these bloody violations of international law are acceptable, while Putin’s so-far bloodless occupation of the Crimea is an outrage, but not many outside the snug circles of the Anglosphere elite will be found to agree. If the magazine genuinely wants a law-based world with all disputes resolved through negotiation and the United Nations, then it cannot continue to make exceptions for the likes ofBush and Blair – at least not if it wants to be taken seriously.
JC’s description of Yeltsin as a “modernising” premier (he was in fact President not premier) is perhaps the most absurd contention. Under the stewardship of the inebriated Yeltsin, Russia’s economy shrank by half, its state assets were handed over to the emerging oligarchy in a corrupt privatisation process, no functioning party-political system was created and in the end Yeltsin could only be persuaded to leave office under cover of an amnesty for himself and his family for his venal crimes. His foreign policy choices also stored up immense trouble for his successors, as is being seen today. If this is modernisation, it sure makes the case for tradition.
The Sugar coated story that the U.S. media has been feeding the public is completely out of sync with the events unfolding on the ground in Ukraine. Here are six videos that you'll never see aired on the mainstream news.
The Daily Star Tripoli's Salafist community fears being stereotyped, persecuted The Daily Star TRIPOLI, Lebanon: The northern city of Tripoli has become a metropolis of fear, with its residents drowning in anxiety and weighed down with concern for...
When JFK looked weak to Nikita Khrushchev, we got the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1963. When Jimmy Carter bear-hugged Brezhnev, we got the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. When Bill Clinton failed to stop Bin Laden for seven whole years, we got 9/11/01 in New York City.
And when Obama clowned it up for the world, alienating our allies and bowing down to our deadly enemies, we got this week’s Russian invasion of the Ukraine.
And that’s only the beginning. Just you watch.
Putin is establishing a naval presence in Venezuela and Cuba. He already has a major naval base in Syria. He wants to control Middle Eastern oil, and by making Iran and Saudi Arabia dependent on him, he might be able to do it.
Obama has systematically dismantled Western and U.S. defenses, stabbed allies like Egypt’s Mubarak in the back, invaded Libya without a shred of justification, and backed murderous reactionary gangsters in Syria, Libya, Iran, and Egypt. Our president betrayed U.S. personnel in Benghazi, and purged our top military leaders. Soon he will turn over Iraq to Iran, andAfghanistan to the Taliban. When, through our bottomless folly, Iran gets the bomb, it will control both sides of the Persian Gulf, and run the Middle East through Turkey, Syria, and Lebanon.
The day after Putin predictably invaded the Ukraine, SecState John Kerry assured us that the new Tsar of all Russia would build up the Ukrainian economy --- after stealing its resources, as usual. In the White House Obama said several tough words out loud. But nobody now believes that the West will defend Eastern Europe, because America is led by a wet sock puppet and Europe has cannibalized its defenses to buy welfare votes from millions of radicalized Muslims. Russia is run by a KGB colonel, a seriously expansionist ruler, and nobody in the West is the least bit prepared. Germany curries favor with Moscow by paying extra-high prices for Russia’s natural gas. We’ve lost the plot -- but Putin hasn’t.
Someone recorded a phone call between the Estonian foreign minister Paet and the EU high representative Ashton.
Paet reports from his talks with somewhat neutral people on the Maidan, including some Olga that Ashton also knows, during a recent visit in Kiev:
there is no trust of the people in the new government (2:35)all of them in the new government have a dirty past (2:50)the trust level (towards the new government) is absolutely low (3:20)enormous pressure against (party of the region) members of parliament (3:40)"uninvited visitors" enter in the night on party members (3:50)journalists who were with me saw during the day that one member of parliament was just beaten in front of the parliament (4:00)people will not leave the street before *real* reforms start, it is not enough that there is just change of government (4:20)the same Olga (from a civil society group) told me that people killed by snipers on both sides, among policemen and people on the street, that they were the same sniperskilling people from both sides, she showed me some photos and said she has a medical doctor and that it is the same handwriting and the same type of bullets and it is disturbing that the new coalition now don't want to investigate (8:25)There is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind snipers it was not Yanukovich but it was somebody from the new coalition. (8:55)it discredited itself from the very beginning this new coalition (9:20)
Ashton says "gosh" to the sniper revelation but then plays over it.
Note: This call does not prove that the snipers came from the new coalition site. But it is a hint that this must be investigated.
Using snipers in such fashion is not uncommon. Snipers shooting at both sides in a civil conflicthave been documented during the coup attempt against Chavez as well as during the red-shirt vs. yellow-shirt conflicts in Thailand.
The snipers who shot at protesters and police in Kiev were allegedly hired by Maidan leaders, according to a leaked phone conversation between the EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton and Estonian foreign affairs minister, which has emerged online.
Exclusive: Official Washington is in deep umbrage over Russia’s intervention in Ukraine after a U.S.-backed coup overthrew the democratically elected president. Some top neocons want a new Cold War, but they don’t want anyone to note their staggering hypocrisy, writes Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry
Since World War II – and extending well into the Twenty-first Century – the United States has invaded or otherwise intervened in so many countries that it would be challenging to compile a complete list. Just last decade, there were full-scale U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, plus American bombing operations from Pakistan to Yemen to Libya.
So, what is one to make of Secretary of State John Kerry’s pronouncement that Russia’s military intervention in the Crimea section of Ukraine – at the behest of the country’s deposed president – is a violation of international law that the United States would never countenance?
Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland, a leading figure in supporting the coup against Ukraine’s President Vicktor Yanukovych. (U.S. State Department photo)
Kerry decried the Russian intervention as “aNineteenth Century act in the Twenty-first Century.” However, if memory serves, Sen. Kerry in 2002 voted along with most other members of the U.S. Congress to authorize President George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraqin 2003, which was also part of the Twenty-first Century. And, Kerry is a member of the Obama administration, which like its Bush predecessor, has been sending drones into the national territory of other nations to blow up various “enemy combatants.”
Are Kerry and pretty much everyone else in Official Washington so lacking in self-awareness that they don’t realize that they are condemning actions by Russian President Vladimir Putin that are far less egregious than what they themselves have done?