Cold War 2.0
By William Blum
April 03, 2015 "ICH"
- In last month’s
Anti-Empire Report
I brought you the latest adventure of US State
Department Spokesperson Jen Psaki trying to defend the indefensible. She said
then: “As a matter of longstanding policy, the United States does not support
political transitions by non-constitutional means,” which prompted me to inform
my readers: “If you know how to contact Ms. Psaki, tell her to have a look at my
list of more than 50 governments the United States has attempted to overthrow
since the end of the Second World War.”On March 13 her
regular attack on all things Russian included this exchange with Associated
Press writer Matthew Lee:
Lee: On this issue,
did you get any more about this request to the Vietnamese on Cam Ranh Bay
and not allowing the Russians to – and not wanting them to allow – you not
wanting them to refuel Russian planes there?
Psaki: Well, just
to be clear – and maybe I wasn’t as clear yesterday, so let me try to do
this again – it’s – our concern is about activities they might conduct in
the region, and the question is: Why are they in the region? It’s not about
specifically refueling or telling the Vietnamese not to allow them to
refuel. [emphasis added]
Lee: So there
hasn’t been a request to stop refueling them, or there has?
Psaki: It’s more
about concerns. It’s not as much about Vietnam as much as it – as it is
about concerns about what activities they would be in the region for.
Lee: Okay. Well,
you – I mean, there are U.S. planes flying over there all the time.
Psaki: Sure, there
are.
Lee: So you don’t
want Russian planes flying there, but it’s okay for U.S. planes to fly
there? I mean, I just – it gets to the point where you – the suggestion is
that everything the Russians are doing all the time everywhere is somehow
nefarious and designed to provoke. But you can’t – but you don’t seem to be
able to understand or accept that American planes flying all over the place,
including in that area, is annoying to the Chinese, for one, but also for
the Russians. But the suggestion is always that the American flights are
good and beneficial and don’t cause tension, and that other people’s flights
do cause tension. So can you explain what the basis is for your concern that
the Russian flights there in the Southeast Asia area are – raise tensions?
Psaki: There just
aren’t more details I can go into.
Cold War 2.0, part II
On Saturday, the Obama administration released a series of
satellite images that it said showed the Russian army had joined the rebels
in a full-scale assault to surround troops in the area around the city.
Russia has denied that it is a party to the conflict, and it was impossible
to verify the three grainy black-and-white satellite images posted to
Twitter by the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt.
According to the United States, the images, commissioned from the private
Digital Globe satellite company, showed artillery systems and
multiple-rocket launchers Thursday in the area near Debaltseve.
“We are confident these are Russian military, not separatist, systems,”
Pyatt tweeted. (Washington Post, February 15, 2015) (1)
When the time comes to list the ways in which the United
States gradually sunk into the quicksand, slowly metamorphosing into a
Third-World state, Washington’s campaign of 2014-15 to convince the world that
Russia had repeatedly invaded Ukraine will deserve to be near the top of the
list. Numerous examples like the above can be given. If I were still the
jingoistic nationalist I was raised to be I think I would feel somewhat
embarrassed now by the blatant obviousness of it all.
For a short visual history of the decline and fall of the
American Empire, see the video
“Imperial Decay” by Class War Films
(8:50 minutes).
During Cold War 1.0 the American media loved to poke fun at
the Soviet media for failing to match the glorious standards of the Western
press. One of the most common putdowns was about the two main Russian newspapers
– Pravda (meaning “truth” in Russian) and Izvestia (meaning
“news”). We were told, endlessly, that there was “no truth in Pravda
and no news in Izvestia.”
As cynical as I’ve been for years about the American
mainstream media’s treatment of ODE (Officially Designated Enemies), current
news coverage of Russia exceeds my worst expectations. I’m astonished every day
at the obvious disregard of any kind of objectivity or fairness concerning
Russia. Perhaps the most important example of this bias is the failure to remind
their audience that the US and NATO have surrounded Russia – with Washington’s
coup in Ukraine as the latest example – and that Moscow, for some odd reason,
feels threatened by this. (Look
for the map online of NATO bases and Russia, with a
caption like: “Why did you place your country in the middle of our bases?”)
Cold War 2.0, part III
Following the murder of Russian opposition leader, and former
Deputy Prime Minister, Boris Nemtsov in Moscow on February 27, the West had a
field day. Ranging from strong innuendo to outright accusation of murder, the
Western media and politicians did not miss an opportunity to treat Vladimir
Putin as a football practice dummy.
The European Parliament adopted a resolution urging an
international investigation into Nemtsov’s death and suggested that the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the European Council, and
the United Nations could play a role in the probe. (2)
US Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham introduced a Senate
Resolution condemning the Nemtsov murder. The Resolution also called on
President Obama and the international community to pursue an independent
investigation into the murder and redouble efforts to advance free speech, human
rights, and the rule of law in Russia. In addition, it urged Obama to continue
to sanction human rights violators in the Russian Federation and to increase US
support to human rights activists in Russia. (3)
So it went … all over the West.
Meanwhile, in the same time period in Ukraine, outside of the
pro-Russian area in the southeast, the following was reported:
- January 29: Former
Chairman of the local government of the Kharkov region, Alexey Kolesnik,
hanged himself.
- February 24: Stanislav
Melnik, a member of the opposition party (Partia Regionov), shot himself.
- February 25: The Mayor of
Melitopol, Sergey Valter, hanged himself a few hours before his trial.
- February 26: Alexander
Bordiuga, deputy director of the Melitopol police, was found dead in his
garage.
- February 26: Alexander
Peklushenko, former member of the Ukrainian parliament, and former mayor of
Zaporizhi, was found shot to death.
- February 28: Mikhail
Chechetov, former member of parliament, member of the opposition party (Partia
Regionov), “fell” from the window of his 17th floor apartment in Kiev.
- March 14: The 32-year-old
prosecutor in Odessa, Sergey Melnichuk, “fell” to his death from the 9th
floor.
The Partia Regionov directly accused the Ukrainian government
in the deaths of their party members and appealed to the West to react to these
events. “We appeal to the European Union, PACE [Parliamentary Assembly of the
Council of Europe], and European and international human rights organizations to
immediately react to the situation in Ukraine, and give a legal assessment of
the criminal actions of the Ukrainian government, which cynically murders its
political opponents.”
We cannot conclude from the above that the Ukrainian
government was responsible for all, or even any, of these deaths. But neither
can we conclude that the Russian government was responsible for the death of
Boris Nemtsov, the American media and politicians notwithstanding. A search of
the mammoth Nexus news database found no mention of any of the Ukrainian
deceased except for the last one above, Sergey Melnichuk, but this clearly is
not the same person. It thus appears that none of the deaths on the above list
was ascribed to the Western-allied Ukrainian government. (4)
Where are the demands for international investigations of any
of the deaths? In the United States or in Europe? Where is Senator McCain?
Torture via sanctions
Discussions on constraining Iran’s nuclear program have been
going on for well over a year between Iran and the P5+1 (the five nuclear powers
of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany), led by the United States.
Throughout this period a significant stumbling block to reaching an agreement
has been the pronouncements of Yukiya Amano, director general of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The IAEA is the United Nations’
nuclear watchdog, and its inspections are considered a key safeguard against
countries using civilian nuclear energy technology to produce weapons. Amano has
consistently accused Iran of failing to reply fully and substantially to queries
about “possible military dimensions” of present and past nuclear activities, or
failing to provide sufficient access to nuclear facilities.
Failure by Iran to comply fully with IAEA demands undermine
Tehran’s efforts to win the lifting of crippling UN, US and other sanctions,
which currently prohibit foreign companies from doing business with Iran and
deny access to the global financial system. Media coverage of the negotiations
regularly emphasize Amano’s claims of Iran’s insufficient responses to IAEA’s
demands. It is thus worth inquiring just who is this man Amano.
In 2009 Japanese diplomat Yukiya Amano became the head of the
IAEA. What the Western media routinely fail to remind its audience is that a US
embassy cable of October 2009 (released by Wikileaks in 2010) said Amano “took
pains to emphasize his support for U.S. strategic objectives for the Agency.
Amano reminded the [American] ambassador on several occasions that … he was
solidly in the U.S. court on every key strategic decision, from high-level
personnel appointments to the handling of Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons
program.”
Even if Iran makes a superior effort to satisfy IAEA and
Washington’s demands on all issues, it would remain questionable to what extent
and how rapidly the sanctions would be removed, particularly under a
Republican-controlled Congress. Iran specialist and author Gareth Porter
recently wrote that “the United States and its allies have made no effort to
hide the fact that they intend to maintain the ‘sanctions architecture’ in place
for many years after the implementation of the agreement has begun. Last
November, administration officials explained that US sanctions would only be
removed after the International Atomic Energy Agency had verified that ‘Tehran
is abiding by the terms of a deal over an extended period of time’ in order to
‘maintain leverage on Iran to honour the accord’.” (5)
To appreciate the extraordinary degree of pressure and
extortion the United States can impose upon another country we should consider
the case of Libya in the decade-plus following the destruction of PanAm Flight
103 in 1988 over Scotland. To force Libya to “accept responsibility” for the
crime, Washington imposed heavy sanctions on the Gaddafi regime, including a ban
on international flights to Libya and payment of billions of dollars to the
families of the victims. Libya eventually did “accept responsibility” for the
crime, although it was innocent. As difficult as this may be to believe, it’s
true.
Read my account of it here.
Even after Libya accepted responsibility it still took years
for the US to wipe out the sanctions, and it’s not clear that at the time of
Gaddafi’s death in 2011 all of them had been removed. Once a nation becomes an
Officially Designated Enemy of the empire the methods of torture can be
exquisite and endless. Cuba is presently negotiating the end of US sanctions
against Havana. They will need to be extremely careful.
I’ve never been too impressed by what college a person went
to, or even if they attended college at all. Gore Vidal did not attend any
college; neither did H. L. Mencken; nor did Edward Snowden, who has demonstrated
a highly articulate and educated mind. Among the many other notables who skipped
a college education are George Bernard Shaw, Ernest Hemingway, and Johann
Wolfgang von Goethe.
Then we have graduates from Ivy League colleges like George W.
Bush, Barack Obama, and Tom Cotton. I don’t have to present the case for Bush’s
less-than educated mind; we’re all only too familiar with its beauty. But Obama
has matched Georgie Boy for stupidity and inanity time and time again. My
favorite, which he’s used on at least five occasions, is his reply to questions
about why his administration has not prosecuted Bush, Cheney, et al for torture
and other war crimes: “I prefer to look forward rather than backwards”. Picture
a defendant before a judge asking to be found innocent on such grounds. It
simply makes laws, law enforcement, crime, justice, and facts irrelevant.
Picture Chelsea Manning and other whistle blowers using this argument. Picture
the reaction to this by Barack Obama, who has become the leading persecutor of
whistleblowers in American history.
Is there anyone left who still thinks that Barack Obama is
some kind of improvement intellectually over George W. Bush? Probably two types
still think so: (1) Those to whom color matters a lot; (2) Those who are very
impressed by the ability to put together grammatically correct sentences.
And now we have Mr. Cotton, Senator from Arkansas and graduate
of Harvard undergraduate and law schools. He’ll be entertaining us for years to
come with gems like his remark on “Face the Nation” (March 15): “Moreover, we
have to stand up to Iran’s attempts to drive for regional dominance. They
already control Tehran and, increasingly, they control Damascus and Beirut and
Baghdad. And now, Sana’a as well.”
Heavens, Iran controls Tehran! Who knew? Next thing we’ll hear
is that Russia controls Moscow! Sarah Palin, move over. Our boy Cotton is ready
for Saturday Night Live.
Notes
http://williamblum.org