Cold War II to McCarthyism II
With Cold War II in full swing, the New York Times is dusting off what might be
called McCarthyism II, the suggestion that anyone who doesn’t get in line with
U.S. propaganda must be working for Moscow, reports Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry
June 09, 2015 "Information
Clearing House" - "Consortium
News" -
Perhaps it’s no surprise that the U.S. government’s plunge into Cold War II
would bring back the one-sided propaganda themes that dominated Cold War I, but
it’s still unsettling to see how quickly the major U.S. news media has returned
to the old ways, especially the New York Times, which has emerged as Official
Washington’s propaganda vehicle of choice.What has been
most striking in the behavior of the Times and most other U.S. mainstream media
outlets is their utter lack of self-awareness, for instance, accusing Russia of
engaging in propaganda and alliance-building that are a pale shadow of what the
U.S. government routinely does. Yet, the Times and the rest of the MSM act as if
these actions are unique to Moscow.
A case in point is Monday’s front-page story in the Times
entitled “Russia Wields Aid and Ideology Against West to Fight Sanctions,” which
warns: “Moscow has brought to bear different kinds of weapons, according to
American and European officials: money, ideology and disinformation.”
The
article by Peter Baker and Steven Erlanger portrays the U.S.
government as largely defenseless in the face of this unprincipled Russian
onslaught: “Even as the Obama administration and its European allies try to
counter Russia’s military intervention across its border, they have found
themselves struggling at home against what they see as a concerted drive by
Moscow to leverage its economic power, finance European political parties and
movements, and spread alternative accounts of the conflict.”
Like many of the Times’
recent articles, this one relies on one-sided accusations from U.S. and
European officials and is short on both hard evidence of actual Russian payments
– and a response from the Russian government to the charges. At the end of the
long story, the writers do include one comment from Brookings Institution
scholar, Fiona Hill, a former U.S. national intelligence officer on Russia,
noting the shortage of proof.
“The question is how much hard evidence does anyone have?” she
asked. But that’s about all a Times’ reader will get if he or she is looking for
some balanced reporting.
Missing the Obvious
Still, the more remarkable aspect of the article is how it
ignores the much more substantial evidence of the U.S. government and its allies
themselves financing propaganda operations and supporting “non-governmental
organizations” that promote the favored U.S. policies in countries around the
world.
Plus, there’s the failure to recognize that many of Official
Washington’s own accounts of global problems have been riddled with propaganda
and outright disinformation.
For instance, much of the State Department’s account of the
Aug. 21, 2013 sarin attack in Syria turned out to be false or misleading. United
Nations inspectors discovered only one rocket carrying sarin – not the barrage
that U.S. officials had originally alleged – and the rocket had a much shorter
range than the U.S. government (and the New York Times) claimed. [See
Consortiumnews.com’s “NYT
Backs Off Its Syria-Sarin Analysis.”]
Then, after the Feb. 22, 2014 U.S.-backed coup in Ukraine, the
U.S. government and the Times became veritable founts of propaganda and
disinformation. Beyond refusing to acknowledge the key role played by neo-Nazi
and other right-wing militias in the coup and subsequent violence, the State
Department disseminated information to the Times that later was acknowledged to
be false.
In April 2014, the Times published a lead story based on
photographs of purported Russian soldiers in Ukraine but had to retract it two
days later because it turned out that the State Department had misrepresented
where a key photo was taken, destroying the premise of the article. [See
Consortiumnews.com’s “NYT
Retracts Ukraine Photo Scoop.”]
And sometimes the propaganda came directly from senior U.S.
government officials. For instance, on April 29, 2014, Richard Stengel, under
secretary of state for public diplomacy, issued a “Dipnote”
that leveled accusations that the Russian network RT was painting “a dangerous
and false picture of Ukraine’s legitimate government,” i.e., the post-coup
regime that took power after elected President Viktor Yanukovych was driven from
office. In this context, Stengel denounced RT as “a distortion machine, not a
news organization.”
Though he offered no specific dates and times for the
offending RT programs, Stengel did complain about “the unquestioning repetition
of the ludicrous assertion … that the United States has invested $5 billion in
regime change in Ukraine. These are not facts, and they are not opinions. They
are false claims, and when propaganda poses as news it creates real dangers and
gives a green light to violence.”
However, RT’s “ludicrous assertion” about the U.S. investing
$5 billion was a clear reference to a public speech by Assistant Secretary of
State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland to U.S. and Ukrainian business
leaders on Dec. 13, 2013, in which she
told them that “we have invested more than $5 billion” in what was
needed for Ukraine to achieve its “European aspirations.” [See
Consortiumnews.com’s “Who’s
the Propagandist: US or RT?”]
One could go on and on about the U.S. government making false
or misleading claims about these and other international crises. But it should
be clear that Official Washington doesn’t have clean hands when it comes to
propaganda mud-slinging, though you wouldn’t know that from the Times’ article
on Monday.
Funding Cut-outs
And, beyond the U.S. government’s direct dissemination of
disinformation, the U.S. government also has spread around hundreds of millions
of dollars to finance “journalism” organizations, political activists and
“non-governmental organizations” that promote U.S. policy goals inside targeted
countries. Before the Feb. 22, 2014 coup in Ukraine, there were scores of such
operations in the country financed by the National Endowment for Democracy.
NED’s budget from Congress exceeds $100 million a year.
But NED, which has been run by neocon Carl Gershman since its
founding in 1983, is only part of the picture. You have many other propaganda
fronts operating under the umbrella of the U.S. State Department and its U.S.
Agency for International Development. Last May 1, USAID issued
a fact sheet
summarizing its work financing friendly journalists around the world, including
“journalism education, media business development, capacity building for
supportive institutions, and strengthening legal-regulatory environments for
free media.”
USAID estimated its budget for “media strengthening programs
in over 30 countries” at $40 million annually, including aiding “independent
media organizations and bloggers in over a dozen countries,” In Ukraine before
the coup, USAID offered training in “mobile phone and website security.”
USAID, working with billionaire George Soros’s Open Society,
also funds the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, which engages
in “investigative journalism” that usually goes after governments that have
fallen into disfavor with the United States and then are singled out for
accusations of corruption. The USAID-funded OCCRP also
collaborates with Bellingcat, an online investigative website founded
by blogger Eliot Higgins.
Higgins has spread misinformation on the Internet, including
discredited claims
implicating the Syrian government in the sarin attack in 2013 and
directing an Australian TV news crew to what appeared to be
the wrong location for a video of a BUK anti-aircraft battery as it
supposedly made its getaway to Russia after the shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines
Flight 17 in 2014.
Despite his dubious record of accuracy, Higgins has gained
mainstream acclaim, in part, because his “findings” always match up with the
propaganda theme that the U.S. government and its Western allies are peddling.
Though most genuinely independent bloggers are ignored by the mainstream media,
Higgins has found his work touted.
In other words, whatever Russia is doing to promote its side
of the story in Europe and elsewhere is more than matched by the U.S. government
through its direct and indirect agents of influence. Indeed, during the original
Cold War, the CIA and the old U.S. Information Agency
refined the art of “information warfare,” including pioneering some of its
current features like having ostensibly “independent” entities and cut-outs
present the propaganda to a cynical public that rejects much of what it hears
from government but may trust “citizen journalists” and “bloggers.”
To top off this modern propaganda structure, we now have the
paper-of-record New York Times coming along to suggest that anyone who isn’t
disseminating U.S. propaganda must be in Moscow’s pocket. The implication is
that now that we have Cold War II, we can expect to have McCarthyism II as well.
Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for
The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book,
America’s
Stolen Narrative, either in print
here or as an e-book (from
Amazon
and
barnesandnoble.com).
You also can order Robert Parry’s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections
to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes
America’s Stolen Narrative.
For details on this offer,
click here.