Showing posts with label Putin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Putin. Show all posts

Thursday, February 20, 2025

Ukraine War Continues As Divisive As Ever

Original collage by James Fangboner (left image), modified by me (right image)

All U.S. presidents campaign on promises of ending whichever quagmire(s) the nation is floundering in. It plays well with voters.

Walking the walk is a lot harder than talking the talk, though.

For one thing, Ukraine represents a propaganda effort by Western corporate media that was so sudden and so comprehensive that I'll admit it smacked me upside of the head in 2022. (Full report here.) It completely split the "peace" or antiwar groups I was part of, with the Democrats of the former vilifying the anti-imperialists of the latter. Among the things I was called: a mouthpiece for Putin, and a parrot of Tucker Carlson (who I literally never watch). Veterans for Peace members locally turned their backs on me for carrying signs like "NO WAR WITH RUSSIA". A statewide coalition that holds monthly protests attracted a diverse list of co-sponsors that included the Libertarian Party of Maine, the Maine Communist Party, and the Party for Socialism & Liberation. But no Democratic Party.

Topsham, Maine February 5, 2023

How many times did President Zelensky travel to the U.S. to be valorized by Biden's crew and Congress? Now Z is in the dog house, and he and 47 are engaged in a flame war on social media. In Riyadh this week, it appears Russia and the U.S. made considerable progress toward a comprehensive agreement that would include a negotiated end to the war in Ukraine. 

This would never have happened under a Harris administration because Biden et al. owned the Ukraine war. Hunter Biden and "the big guy" made millions from its money laundering services, and it's no secret that dad shielded himself while extending a pardon for Hunter that stretches infinitely into the future.

Now 47 threatens to audit Ukraine to see where all the money went. That's got to be making some people nervous.

Among the lies we were told by corporate press throughout the war:

  • It wasn't a proxy war with the West that aimed at weakening Russia using Ukraine as a cat's paw. 
  • Russia blew up the Nord Stream pipeline carrying gas to Germany.
  • Russia tried to blow up the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, in an area under its control. And, more recently, fired a missile into the Chernobyl nuclear power plant entombed in concrete.
  • Russia was losing, barely had any troops or equipment, and would be forced to surrender any day now.
  • Ukraine's government and military were not full of Nazis
  • Ukraine was winning. 

On the eve of the third anniversary of Russia's special military operation, Ukraine has lost much of its eastern flank after referenda in Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions indicated the residents overwhelmingly preferred to be Russian.

Elections Zelensky should have held a year ago would have been a referendum on his conduct of the war with Russia, and he would be expected to lose mightily.

So now the sticking point in negotiations appears to be: should elections be held before or after an agreement is reached? Russia has pointed out that once Zelensky declared martial law which precludes elections, and once March 2024 -- his term's end date -- had passed, they cannot negotiate with him. He's no longer a legitimate president.

47 appears to be holding out for a negotiated end to the war with elections to be held afterwards.

Who will blink first?

I often get feedback from readers who point out mistakes or suggest other interpretations, and I often get warm feedback as well. One I cherish is that after posting about how the vilification of Putin was deliberately morphed into the Russiagate nonsense by Democrats, former CIA analyst Ray McGovern sent me an email that simply said: Good, Lisa.



Whenever and however the Ukraine war ends, it's safe to say that the U.S. will never claw back any of the $119.2 BILLION that went into Zelensky's coffers. Because isn't that the real point of wars these days -- big profits for the weapons industry?

Wednesday, July 10, 2024

Nonstop Demonization Of Russian Government Reported By NATO Summit Attendee

Neal was interviewed but Channel 4's editors included almost nothing that he said about why he traveled from Chicago to oppose NATO.


Readers may recall that I noted two people in the audience had pushed back on Russia bashing at a counter summit held in Washington DC over the weekend. I am now in touch with one of them and, with his permission, am sharing his report about attending the actual summit on July 9.

Nonstop Demonization Of Russian Government And Putin
by Neal Resnikoff, Chicago Antiwar Coalition

This morning I went through the huge security perimeter around the NATO Summit meeting place, without any problem, to get to a "conversation" with Defense Ministers from Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania organized by the POLITICO organization.

The entire time was focused on emphasizing the importance of opposing Russia, including bombing Russia, with nonstop demonization of the Russian government and Putin. There was no mention that the NATO expansionism and other threats and attacks on Russia risks a World War IIII, a possibly nuclear war.

There was maybe a minute of expression of support for Israel and the actions they are taking.

The ministers said their governments would work with whoever is elected in the U.S. One emphasized that the U.S. goveernment is an indispensible partner.

No questions were allowed.

The NATO delegates are obviously worried about opposition. The ministers had body guards, including one in military uniform.

After the program, on my way back down the street, past the entrance for delegates and the convention center, I was interviewed by Channel 4 of Washington. They seemed surprised that I came from Chicago to oppose the NATO Summit, and wanted to know why. I explained that NATO is a war mongering organization using our tax money to risk a possible World War III. The reporter said he was sure my interview would get on the air at 5 or 6 p.m. (Eastern time).

Now to cool off a bit after doing a good amount of walking from and to the Metro station in the 95 degree heat. All the counter NATO protests in the heat we have had on the weekend have been worth it to put the heat on NATO. As one person remarked to me, without our emphasis on NATO, she would not have been aware of it and what it does. Onward with the struggle against the capitalist U.S. ruling class and its NATO seeking to ensure power and profits for their banks and big corporations

----

Prior to traveling to the summit, the author sent the following background information and I am reposting it here for context.

No to NATO. Act against the 75th Anniversary NATO Summit in Washington, D.C. from July 5-10. Join in actions.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was organized by the U.S. government. The U.S. government, in one of its characteristic lies, has described NATO as an organization for defense of its members. The fact is that NATO has been an aggressive war mongering bloc, ruthlessly attacking a number of countries over the years, and threatening others. For example, most of its members have been in support of the U.S. government backed Israeli genocidal massacre of Palestinians, and the provocations against Russia and its national security.

 
NATO members have been threatening a World War III. One way has been by provoking Russia into military action. NATO has used a Ukraine government the U.S. government set up in 2014 as a proxy against Russia. It threatened Russia by aiming to have NATO nuclear bases along the 1200 mile Ukraine-Russia border.

 

In recent weeks the U.S. government and its NATO have enabled the Ukrainian military to attack inside Russia with missiles even though the Russian government said that it will retaliate for such actions as well as against U.S./NATO escalating the sorts of arms it provides to Ukraine. 

For example, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu on April 21 said, “We will increase the intensity of strikes against logistics centers and storage bases for Western weapons [in Ukraine]."

 

On June 5, Russian President Vladimir Putin pointed out that while Ukrainian troops might be pulling the trigger, the U.S. and its allies are providing the intelligence and targeting information. "If someone deems it possible … to strike our territory why shouldn't we supply similar weapons to those regions of the world, where they will be used against sensitive sites of these countries?”

 

The Russian Security Council's Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev warned that NATO’s “military equipment and specialists fighting against us will be destroyed both on the territory of … Ukraine and on the territory of other countries, should strikes be carried out from there against Russian territory." He added that Russia is basing itself on the reality that all long-range weapons supplied to Ukraine are "directly operated by servicemen from NATO countries," which is tantamount to participation in the war against Russia.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that destabilizing actions by the U.S. represent “a direct threat to both our country and China….The implementation of U.S. plans to deploy ground-based INF missiles [ground-based intermediate and shorter-range missiles] will not go unanswered by us.”

As part of efforts of peace and justice loving people to oppose the U.S./NATO provoked threats of a possibly nuclear World War III, and other unjust and illegal wars by the U.S. government and its NATO, don’t we need to oppose NATO, to demand its dismantlement, to declare: NO TO NATO!

NATO is having a 75th anniversary Summit in Washington, D.C. in coming days. One important way to oppose NATO will be an alternative Summit and rallies including outside the NATO Summit. One of the endorsers is Chicago Antiwar Coalition (CAWC). Please join in if you can. Some of the details can be found at NoNATOYesPeace.org

There will be a program in Washington, D.C. on Friday, July 5 6-8 at Busboys; a counter Summit from 9:30-5:30 on Saturday at St. Mark’s Church at 301 A St. SE; a rally at noon on Sunday and then a march to another rally from 2-4 across from the White House; and actions outside of the NATO Summit at the Washington Convention Center on Lew Place NW on Tuesday and Wednesday from 10-6. Some of this will be live streamed; see the web site for up-to-date information on that.

Here is some factual information about the history of NATO and what it has been up to over the years, and why we should demand its elimination:

Since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the disappearance of the Soviet Union, NATO has escalated its moves. Its “out of area” military operation in Afghanistan in 2011 lasted for 20 years. Since 1994 the African counties Algeria, Egypt, Mauretania, Morocco and Tunisia are together with Israel and Jordan in the NATO partnership program Mediterranean Dialog (MD) NATO. Thus began a “Global NATO” project to use the NATO military alliance from the South China Sea to the Caribbean Sea and Colombia in South America, and Australia.

Why the U.S. organized NATO

After World War II, in 1945, when others faced the massive task of rebuilding their devastated nations and struggled to establish their independence, U.S. corporations and their government seized on what they saw as an opportunity to dominate countries that had been occupied by Nazi Germany, Italy and in other countries where fighting took place.

The U.S. government was concerned that people fighting for independence and those opposing the extension of capitalism would disrupt U.S. plans. U.S. corporations needed a free hand to push their way into markets, acquire natural resources cheaply, conduct unequal trade, and make deals for foreign investments that would enrich U.S. bankers while using people as cheap labor.

Evidence that this was a very conscious plan by the U.S. government can be seen in remarks that Secretary of State Cordell Hull gave early in World War II, in 1942, including: “Leadership toward a new system of international relationships in trade and other economic affairs will devolve very largely upon the United States because of our great economic strength. We should assume this leadership, and the responsibility that goes with it, primarily for reasons of pure national self-interest.”

The U.S. ruling class, in addition to economic arrangements favorable to U.S. corporations, needed to try to intimidate the people of the world with a military organization. The U.S. quickly created NATO in 1949.

 

The U.S. used NATO to introduce the first nuclear weapons in Europe, first in Britain, then later into Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey. The U.S. proclaimed its “right to first use,” that is, to employ nuclear weapons even if no one else was attacking with nukes.

 

U.S./NATO nuclear weapons remain in these countries today under the same guidelines-- that they can be used for a so-called pre-emptive attack or in the case of another country using massive amounts of conventional weapons against them.


On NATO and the USSR

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, one of the Allies with the U.S. and Britain during World War II, supported independence struggles of various peoples after the war. And it was outside the U.S. economic orbit. Despite the devastation it had suffered, it still had its experienced military, and its independent economic system. It was able to severely limit U.S./NATO attempts to get access to the vast markets, resources and strategic locations of the constituent Soviet republics that stretched across Europe and Asia.

So the U.S. and other NATO members and their NATO organization demonized and threatened the Soviet Union, which had played a major role in defeating the German Nazis. The U.S. rulers, like the Nazis, viewed the Soviet Union as a threat to capitalist power. It is no wonder, then, that West Germany, which was supposed to be demilitarized after World War II, was made into a member of NATO in 1955.

Later, in 1991, when the USSR along with the Warsaw Pact was dissolved, the U.S., with the help of NATO, organized to recruit the republics which had been members of the USSR, and also aimed to draw its socialist allies in Eastern Europe into NATO. 

 Since 1999, U.S.-led NATO proceeded to wage war on three continents—all outside of the North Atlantic-- against countries not part of NATO. NATO attacked Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Libya.

After this, the U.S. with NATO began to surround Russia and China with additional military bases in some former Soviet federal republics such as Lithuania, Latvia, and Georgia, as well as in former Warsaw Pact members such as Romania, Bulgaria, and Poland.

NATO worked with the U.S. in aggression against Afghanistan and Libya. In 2001, the U.S., with NATO, illegally invaded Afghanistan, killing upwards of a hundred thousand people. They installed at least 400 military bases. NATO forces peaked at about 150,000 in 2011. Troops from over 50 NATO members, partners, and other associated states participated under NATO’s International Security Assistance Force, the largest number of national contingents in any war, much less in one nation.

To conclude, this all comes in a context in which the U.S. capitalist ruling class has been ruthless since 1776 in expanding itself in the world for profits and power for its banks and other businesses. It massacred the Native Americans. It enslaved millions of Africans. It dropped atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. Now it is backing the genocidal massacre of Palestinians, some 40,000 so far. NATO has been an arm of the ruthless barbarity of the U.S. capitalist ruling class.

We need to stop this ruthless U.S. ruling class and its capitalist system and all of its rotten actions. Please join in to do that. One way you can do that is against NATO in Washington, D.C. in coming days. Or you can join in or support any of the plenty of actions for peace and justice around these days. What do you think? –Neal Resnikoff

Wednesday, March 16, 2022

Hating On __________ Is What Gives Life Meaning



I suspect that our own oligarchs put 45 in office to pave the way for this war. 

Hating on 45 is what gave life meaning for many. 

Meanwhile, the false narrative that Putin put him in office took hold and dominated the airwaves for years. Once 45 was gone there was a giant hole in the liberal psyche and guess what conveniently came along to fill it?

Narrative managers were counting on ignorance of the 2014 Maidan coup and the civil war that ensued. Counting on the ignorance of those whom Chomsky has called the most propagandized people in history is usually a safe bet.

And in case it's not safe enough, even more ignorance is served up in the daily deluge of sophisticated advertising,



information management,



 and censorship.



I discussed this and more yesterday with Regis Tremblay on his YouTube channel that now has 8,300 subscribers. Catch it now before it, too, falls to the censor's axe.

Link in case embedded video does not work for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqJQwcdVHcI



Sunday, February 13, 2022

What About Putin?


Recently I noted that an interesting aspect of opposing war with Russia in Europe as compared with opposing U.S.-supported wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, or Yemen is hearing from numerous liberal Democrats that are extremely in favor of this war and irate that I am not.

Yesterday I came under attack by two liberal Democrat-types (both of whom happen to be older female academics) because I am insufficiently moved by warmongering propaganda offered up on NPR, CNN, MSNBC, and other corporate media.

This is a common theme of my days.

In the false binary where if Republicans are bad then Democrats must be good because there are always only two choices, if I'm against NATO I must therefore be in favor of Putin. As the avatar of Catherine the Great's imperial ambitions in one case (what the what?) when I was castigated for sharing a Facebook memory of a talk about Crimea three years ago organized by friends of mine.

I shared this memory with the comment: "Bruce has been paying attention to NATO encroachment on Ukraine for a while now."

Here's the pushback:



For weeks I've been hounded with gotcha questions from a certain Twitter account. "What are your views on WWII?" was one of her more absurd questions. Was I supposed to answer in tweets? 

I suggested that this person could read this blog and search for terms like "WWII" to read my essays on the subject. But I don't think she is actually interested in doing that.

Yesterday's gotcha question:


Since I've been on the receiving end of these gotcha questions for weeks, I'm clear that the subtext is that I appear to be favoring the kind of appeasement that scholars of WWII think led to Hitler's Germany expanding its territory without much opposition.

I'm not going to concede that Putin is the reincarnation of Hitler no matter how many gotcha questions I am asked.

When I was a young history major the essential question in this field was, How did the German people let the Nazis take over their country?

As I've noted in this blog many times, since the unfortunate events of 9/11 it is horrifyingly clear how that happened -- because we're living through it. Information control is an essential part of the military takeover of a society, well along in the case of the U.S. in 2022.

The U.S. imperial project has hundreds (some say 800, depending on how you define "military base") of military installations in other countries. It has invaded and occupied numerous countries, and coup'd or regime changed a long list of others. Its leading space entrepreneur, a man who is deeply embedded in U.S. programs to militarize space, has tweeted "We'll coup anyone we want" in reference to toppling democratically elected governments to gain access to their mineral reserves.

"NATO expansion in Europe"  Source: Counterfire.org

Or just take a look at NATO and how it has been used to expand U.S. imperial ambitions steadily since its inception.

There are some salient facts about the current crisis that those jumping on the bandwagon to demonize Putin either don't know about or tend to forget.

#1 is expressed well here by Nina Beety, an anti-nuclear activist and academic who is able to see past the corporate media narrative of "Putin Bad" that we are all supposed to adhere to:

The 2015 Minsk-2 agreement required dialogue between Donetsk, Lugansk, and Kiev, which Kiev has refused to do, and all foreign actors were to withdraw personnel and equipment from Ukraine, which the U.S., UK, and Poland have refused to do [emphasis mine]. 
Instead, 150,000 Ukrainian soldiers, U.S., UK, and Polish personnel and increasing amounts of weaponry are massing near the communities of eastern Ukraine, reportedly preparing to attack, in violation of Minsk. 

#2 can be found by perusing George Washington University's National Security Archives website. Their 2017 article on this topic begins:

 U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s famous “not one inch eastward” assurance about NATO expansion in his meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, was part of a cascade of assurances about Soviet security given by Western leaders to Gorbachev and other Soviet officials throughout the process of German unification in 1990 and on into 1991, according to declassified U.S., Soviet, German, British and French documents posted today by the National Security Archive at George Washington University (http://nsarchive.gwu.edu). 

The documents show that multiple national leaders were considering and rejecting Central and Eastern European membership in NATO as of early 1990 and through 1991, that discussions of NATO in the context of German unification negotiations in 1990 were not at all narrowly limited to the status of East German territory, and that subsequent Soviet and Russian complaints about being misled about NATO expansion were founded in written contemporaneous memcons and telcons at the highest levels. 

The documents reinforce former CIA Director Robert Gates’s criticism of “pressing ahead with expansion of NATO eastward [in the 1990s], when Gorbachev and others were led to believe that wouldn’t happen.”...

The key phrase, buttressed by the documents, is “led to believe.” 

#3 is a fact that few know about but which I haven't been able to get out of my head since I heard it shared on an antiwar organizing call last week: after the 2014 coup, the U.S. intended to put a naval base in Crimea. This led to a vote on whether or not the people favored annexation by Russia and, in a landslide, they did.

A local resident rescues a dog from a fire in a house destroyed in the Ukrainian armed forces' air attack on the village of Luganskaya on July 2, 2014 (RIA Novosti/Valeriy Melnikov) © RIA Novosti  source: Russia Today video

#4 is an example of so-called "facts on the ground" which are easily documented but which the corporate press in the U.S. steadfastly refuse to report: Ukraine has been shelling civilians in the Donbass region -- i.e. on their border with Russia -- for years and has killed around 14,000 and injured many others.

But, yeah, Putin bad. All you need to know. Get back to work or playing wordle. 

You'll need to look up when WWIII begins with another land war in Europe. At that point, probably the only salient fact left will be that the Russian Federation has pledged no first use of nukes, while the U.S. has adamantly refused to promise the same security measures to preserve life on the planet.

There's an old Russian saying that in really sophisticated propaganda, even its opposite is not true. 

So if "Putin bad" is not true, maybe "Putin good" is not true either. 

That said, I would appreciate it if my critics would stop imposing their false binary on me.