Irresponsibly Blaming Russia for US-Led Western Crimes
by Stephen Lendman
Washington is public enemy No. 1. It’s the real evil empire. It’s a longstanding serial aggressor. Rogue Western partners share blame.
Southeastern Ukraine’s conflict is Obama’s war. Behind the scenes US manipulation controls things.
Kiev is infested with CIA and FBI operatives. Blackwater USA (now Academi) type mercenaries operate in Southeastern Ukraine. Perhaps alongside covert US special forces.
Since conflict erupted in April, Russia went all-out for diplomatic resolution. It has no ongoing military campaign.
It didn’t invade Ukraine. It’s not shelling cross-border. Or from inside Ukrainian territory.
Its troops aren’t involved in fighting. It’s not out to seize Ukrainian territory. Western sources lie claiming otherwise.
In mid-July, NATO supreme commander General Philip Breedlove headlined his Wall Street Journal op-ed “The Meaning of Russia’s Military Campaign Against Ukraine.”
He lied claiming “Moscow has broken the trust that many worked long to build. Now NATO must adapt to this new security threat.”
None whatever exists. Claiming otherwise is false. In contrast, Western belligerence threatens Russian security.
Breedlove’s claims featured a litany of Big Lies. He outrageously accused Russia of “us(ing) military, political and economic forces to fundamentally destabilize a European nation and change internationally recognized borders by illegally annexing Crimea.”
He claimed “Russia’s military actions in and around Ukraine have not been, and are not now, defensive in nature.”
He ludicrously accused Moscow of conducting a “military operation against Crimea relied on pre-deployed regular and covert forces and unbadged ‘little green men’ conducting unconventional warfare as well as cyberattacks and significant information-warfare activity, using conventional media and the Internet to spread its propaganda.”
He claimed Moscow uses “strategic deception” to achieve its “political goals.”
He turned truth on its head accusing Russia of conducting “military actions inside and along Ukraine’s border.”
He ludicrously called Russia’s “new military model” destabilizing. He claimed it threatens Europe’s security.
NATO must adopt “long-term changes in its posture and responsiveness,” he said.
He barely stopped short from urging direct confrontation. Rogue US-led NATO policies seem headed in this direction.
On September 2, Wall Street Journal editors echoed the same narrative. They headlined “Deterring a European War.”
They called this week’s NATO summit meeting “one of the most important in its 65-year history.”
“(It) needs to prove it is serious about deterring the no longer unthinkable prospect of another major war in Europe.”
They hyped the misinterpretation and distortion of Putin telling European Commission president Jose Manual Barroso that he “can take Kiev in two weeks.”
They lied claiming he aims to annex “Kharkiv, Luhansk and Donetsk in eastern Ukraine as well as Odessa on the Black Sea.”
They called Crimeans’ near unanimous choice to join Russia Moscow’s “stealthy seizure.”
They lied claiming Russia “invad(ed) eastern Ukraine last month.” They accused Moscow of planned aggression. They did so despite no corroborating proof whatever.
They ignored multiple examples of post-9/11 US-led, instigated, and/or supported Western aggression.
From Afghanistan to Iraq to Libya to Syria to Ukraine, again Iraq, and perhaps planned confrontation with Russia.
Journal editors want NATO “to respond forcefully.” They praised NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen urging members spend more on so-called “defense,” saying:
“We must shift the argument from the cost of defense to the cost of no defense.”
It bears repeating what other articles stressed. NATO is a global killing machine. It exists for offense, not defense.
It’s a rogue monster. It threatens humanity’s survival. It wants to expand to a global military force.
It currently includes one-third of the world’s nations as members or partners on five continents.
It actively operates on four. It wants unlimited expansion. It’s a virtual extension of Pentagon power.
It’s part of Washington quest for unchallenged dominance. It’s willing to risk global war to achieve its goals.
Journal editors hyped the Big Lie about Russia threatening Europe’s security. They urged confronting Moscow forcefully.
“Far from clear,” they said, “is whether Western political leaders share (a) sense of urgency…Social media aren’t sending those Russian tanks toward Donetsk.”
“The only way to deter (Russian) aggression is with a show of comparable military and political resolve.”
NATO’s idea of a brigade-sized rapid-reaction force able to be deployed on two days notice is a “useful…way to counter Mr. Putin’s infiltration tactics…”
“But it isn’t enough.” Journal editors urge permanently stationing large numbers of troops in Eastern Europe close to Russia’s border.
The 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act prohibits doing so. It doesn’t matter. Journal editors irresponsibly called Russian democracy “an autocracy seeking to dominate its neighbors.”
MSM call Putin a “Russian strongman,” an “autocrat,” a “despot,” “Europe’s new Bonaparte, and other pejoratives.
“His goal is to break NATO,” say Journal editors. “(H)e’ll succeed unless the alliance’s leaders respond forcefully to his threat.”
Other MSM editors, correspondents and contributors repeat similar Big Lies. So do Republicans and Democrats.
Anyone suggesting a different narrative risks McCarthyite ostracism.
His ideological airs infest media boardrooms, editorial staffs, the halls of Congress, the administration, academia, well-known think tanks and other centers of influence.
Edmund Burke once said “(t)he only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
He also said “(a)ll tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”
The official Ukraine narrative proliferates. It features Big Lies. John Mearsheimer in part challenged it in Foreign Affairs’ September/October issue.
He headlined “Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault.” The official narrative wrongfully blames Putin.
America and its European allies share blame. At issue “is NATO enlargement…(T)o move Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit.” To “integrate it into the West.”
Russia “adamantly oppose(s) NATO enlargement” for good reason. Doing so encroaches on its border. It threatens its security.
“For Putin,” forcibly ousting democratically elected Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych “was the final straw.”
He calls incorporating Georgia and Ukraine into NATO a “direct threat” to Russia’s security.
“When Russian leaders look at” what happened in Ukraine, “they worry that their country might be next.” Their fears are “hardly groundless.”
The combination of NATO enlargement, EU expansion, and democracy promotion in name only promises potential East/West confrontation.
Former US diplomat George Kennan predicted that NATO expansion would provoke a crisis. Putin is wrongfully blamed for irresponsible Western policies.
Mearsheimer calls him “a first-class strategist…” A leader to “be feared and respected by anyone challenging him on foreign policy.”
He’s no revanchist. “If Putin was committed to creating a greater Russia, signs of his intentions would almost certainly have arisen (long) before” Washington’s orchestrated coup ousted Yanukovych on February 22.
He has no designs on incorporating Ukrainian territory within the Russian Federation. Claims otherwise are false.
He knows “trying to subdue Ukraine would be like swallowing a porcupine. His response to events there has been defensive, not offensive.”
Mearsheimer’s solution to the Ukrainian crisis requires fundamental new thinking, he says.
Washington and EU allies should abandon plans to Westernize Ukraine. Instead it should aim for “a neutral buffer between NATO and Russia…”
“T)he goal should be a sovereign (independent) Ukraine.” Plans to incorporate it into NATO should be abandoned.
An economic rescue plan is needed to rescue its crumbling economy. Western interference in Ukrainian internal affairs should end.
Washington and its EU allies can either continue current reckless policies or “switch gears” for a neutral independent Ukraine and continental peace.
Mearsheimer’s analysis leaves vital issues unaddressed or not as fully as they should be.
Who gave Washington the right to oust its democratically elected government?
To replace it with unelected neo-Nazi infested fascists? Their rogue state status. Their police state practices.
Why didn’t Mearsheimer denounce their war without mercy on their Southeastern citizens? Their murdering civilians in cold blood.
Their appalling human rights record. Their war on freedom. Their anti-Semitism.
Their crackdown on dissent. Their silencing opposition media and independent voices.
Washington’s support and encouragement. Big Lies blaming Russia for US-led Western crimes.
Risking possible global war. World peace depends on multi-world polarity replacing America’s quest for hegemonic dominance.
It requires challenging US-led NATO’s killing machine responsibly. Its war on humanity. Mearsheimer didn’t explain.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at email@example.com.
His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.
Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.
It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.