US President Barack Obama will soon arrive in Moscow, marking his first visit to Russia while in office. However, in the days and weeks leading up to this occasion, with the aim of “resetting” Russia-US relations, there has been a concerted effort on a number of fronts to derail this enterprise. On the domestic front, some prominent Russian liberals have urged Obama not to engage closely with the Kremlin because of Russia’s claimed “values deficit.” On the foreign front, the issue of Georgia is again being used as a wedge to divide Moscow and Washington.
Since taking office, Obama has been provided with an enormous amount of advice on how to repair the Russia-US relationship, which was left on the barest of life-support by the Bush administration. The good news is that Obama appears willing to rebuild this bilateral relationship primarily on shared security interests. Indeed, until there is strong evidence to the contrary, it would seem Obama is embracing a realistic approach to foreign policy in general, and this includes Washington’s Russia foreign policy in particular. While I am cautiously optimistic that America will attempt to learn from its past foreign policy mistakes, there are those who demand that ideology, and the so-called “values agenda”, should remain paramount. In other words, it would seem that some believe there was nothing really wrong with Bush’s neocon agenda – it was good theory, but its implementation never reached expectations.
Many of Russia’s well-known liberals are not neocons, but they appear to suggest that the US should be party to solving Russia’s problems, as they understand their own country. In a Washington Post op-ed piece, “False Choices for Russia”, published on June 9 by Lev Gudkov, Igor Klyamkin, Georgy Satarov, and Lilia Shevtsov, we are told that “America has ignored the problems of democracy and civil society in Russia, but even turning a blind eye did not prevent the breakdown in the U.S.-Russian relationship -- and now Obama is essentially being asked to treat Russia as though it is incapable of democratic transformation.” Russia’s democracy project – with all its problems, successes, and challenges – is the sole affair of the Russian people. Now it is an obvious truism that, the more Washington meddles in the affairs of another, the more that state is seen as less than legitimate in the eyes of society and its liberals of all stripes.
The authors of “False Choices for Russia” continue the long and failed tradition of Russia’s liberal intelligentsia when looking to the West to remedy their country’s problems. I would advise Obama to ignore completely Russia’s liberals, up until the time Russian liberalism matures and accepts that it must work as a partner in Russian politics. To date, liberals in Russia only lecture and demean their own people, as well as criticize the current political elite without offering a coherent alternative. Russian voters have no interest in a liberal agenda and this is the reason Obama should have no interest in Russian liberals.
No one should be surprised that there are many liberal and neocon elements in the US and Russia who hope to influence Obama on how to engage Russia – after all, many make a living off supporting Washington’s policies and its various instruments of soft power. Truly improved relations Russia and the US would make them irrelevant and obviously redundant. This is where the foreign front comes to the fore – playing the Georgia card.
Washington’s “Georgia project” went into complete disarray when Mikhail Saakashvili attacked South Ossetia last August. It was supposed to be a quick war that would show the world “democratic Georgia”, after which America’s ally could continue the advance of western influence in the post-Soviet space at Russia’s expense. The result of that conflict was the emergence of two new states, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and there is nothing that will change this reality on the ground.
Today, things are very different. Saakashvili is fighting the political struggle of his life – he may not be made to flee his country, but it is clear he rules as a very unpopular leader. This state of affairs has not deterred many in the US and some in Russia from using Georgia a flashpoint to warn Obama that Russia cannot be truly a strategic partner of the US.
Saakashvili is no longer the showcase of the neocon agenda. But this does not matter – Georgia can be used in a different way. In the past few weeks, the message coming out of western media and governments is support for Georgia – which in Georgia is deemed no longer important. However, mainstream media rarely points out that Georgia’s opposition is really no different from Saakashvili when it comes to foreign policy, which of course is pro-American and anti-Russian. Thus, nothing has really changed – Georgia, with its erratic leadership and political elite, continues to be used to undermine a Russia-US rapprochement. How Georgia actually enhances American foreign policy interests are never really explained, particularly in reference to Russia.
It is my hope that Obama comes to Moscow like he did to Cairo – with an open mind. Moscow and Washington do have their differences, but the commonalities are even greater. Russia’s democracy project has a long way to go, but its course can only be determined by the Russian people and not by ideologically-driven Americans and self-denying Russian liberals. Georgia has become a failed state because of foreign meddling. Obama can turn a new page with Russia if he is determined to adhere to the value of mutual cooperation and leave the Georgians to figure out their own affairs among themselves in their geopolitical neighborhood.
Soon it will be a year since the South Ossetian conflict. To remind all of us of this tragic event there are a number of opportunists hoping to ignite another “media war” like the one that ensued after Saakashvili’s reckless adventurism. One such person is Svante Cornell of Johns Hopkins University and co-editor of the recently released “The Guns of August 2009: Russia’s War in Georgia.”
After having a look at the list of contributors to this book, I strongly suggest you avoid this tome. There is nothing new in it: just the same old prejudices and ideologically-driven affection for the “Mugabe of the Caucasus.” However, I do suggest you read Cornell’s ‘please buy book’ article “Russia shuts out the international community” printed by the Daily Telegraph. It is a wonderful example of how the neocon agenda never dies and never fades away.
I think Cornell should have been a poet or a fiction writer. In the first paragraph he exhorts us to be aware of evil in the world, and the greatest evil is of course Russia. This week Russia vetoed a UN Security Council resolution extending the 16-year-old UN mission monitoring Abkhazia. Russia’s veto was correct in every way. The resolution simply did not reflect new realities – Abkhazia and South Ossetia are finally free of the ethnic cleansing maniacs located in Tbilisi. These two new countries will never again be menaced by the descendents of Zviad Gamsakhurdia.
Cornell then goes on to repeat falsehoods at the start of the second paragraph – “Last August, Russia invaded Georgia and effectively annexed two of its provinces, Abkhazia and South Ossetia.” This sentence alone is the best reason to avoid Cornell’s book. This sentence is the premise on which the entire article is based, and thus invalidates the entire article (and book I would assume).
Allow me to rewrite Cornell’s sentence: “Last August, Saakashvili launched a pre-emptive attack on South Ossetia which targeted civilians – primarily women and children – and recognized peacekeepers. Later, and because of Tbilisi’s aggression, Russia with great reluctance recognized South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states.” I have to assume that Cornell either lives under a rock or is willfully ignorant. Saakashvili has already publicly admitted he started the war. On top of this, leaks from an upcoming EU-related report support Saakashvili’s admission. What other evidence is needed for Cornell and his cabal of “blame Russia first” supporters to accept that the American-supported, -funded, and -trained Saakashvili regime is in the wrong?
I would comment on the rest of the Daily Telegraph article, but it is the same bluster and closed-mindedness we have heard and read in western mainstream media and from ideological diehards when it comes to Georgia’s so-called “western orientation.” Cornell and his ilk simply cannot admit that Washington’s Georgia project failed – thankfully it did and will continue to.
But I am not finished. There is something I think we all need to remember when reflecting on a conflict that should never have happened. People like Cornell like to think big and feel big, but what about the issue that really matters? He appears to have no interest in the fate and trials of the South Ossetians and Abkhazians. However, this is what the August conflict was all about – the status of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Russia was willing to live with the status quo before the aggression. Later, that stance changed. To avoid more ethnic cleansing of people who wanted to be free of Tbilisi, Russia agreed to their recognition as independent states for humanitarian reasons.
Please give the following a thought: South Ossetia and Abkhazia have since the early 90s wanted to be free of Tbilisi’s influence - neither wanted to be part of Georgia (let alone NATO). South Ossetia and Abkhazia have, since the end of the Soviet Union, looked to Russia for assistance and security from intensely hostile Georgian nationalism. But then again, that tragic story doesn’t fit into Cornell’s ideologically-driven narrative. That narrative avoids considering the hopes of oppressed people.
The neocon project is only about geopolitical ambitions - everything and everyone must conform to this thesis in advance. Any evidence that denies this thesis is discarded and so should Cornell’s book.
30 June, 2009, 14:47
I am sure FakesNews and the Counterfeit News Network are trying to drive us into the US bank dictators arms, luckily wih a good news outlet like RT, people can avoid the pull. Bad policies of warcrimes, torture and rape, I suppose good ones in relative terms are beatings and Gitmo concentration camps and worst ones are yet to be defined and implemented, we wait in dreadful anticipation! Sorry about the rape and torture, just bad ploicy, nothing I could do about it!
30 June, 2009, 14:28
During the abovementioned conflict we; like many others watched the developments daily, one observation that I would like to have an answer to is the fact that whenever Shakasvili was interviewed in his office he always had the idiotic EU flag to the left of him; now we know that Georgia is not a member of that unholy alliancen so why did he surround himself with those colours, surely the EU did not prompt him into fighting Russia or did they encourage him; would like to know
29 June, 2009, 19:04
Pauline,
As people, we can critique the actions of any country. You can critique American policies and Russian policies. Just because the US has embarked on bad policies, shouldn't lead us into the arms of foreign dictators for the sake a "multipolar world." The world is multipolar anyway., it doesn't need to be sold to use by this website, which is the Russian equivalent of FOX News.
29 June, 2009, 12:31
Haha, lolo, you made me laugh. South Ossetia never existed as entity before the Russians occupied Georgia in 1921. The majority of the population in Tskhinvali by that time were Georgians... etc. etc. Moreover, according to the Soviet Constitution Abkhazia and S.Ossetia are integral parts of Georgia.
29 June, 2009, 07:28
What's the difference between Chechnya and South Ossetia?
Well, Russia did not decide one day that O, let's go shoot the Chechens while they're sleeping. This is what Georgia did, the people in Tskhinval were sleeping when Georgia just opened fire on them. Secondly, South Ossetia has never been part of Georgia, never. When Georgia declared independence from the Soviets, S Ossetia and Abkhazia tried to do the same, but Georgia wouldn't let them. And in contrast, Chechnya was part of the Soviet Union so Russia, as the heir to the USSR, has the legal right to fight for Chechnya. And if you listen to the president of Chechnya, Mr Kadyrov, he says very clearly that many of these 'freedom fighters' in Chechnya are foreigners: Georgians, Azeris, British, Americans.
28 June, 2009, 15:14
@johnx, thanks for the info. I found an article about Rothschild and Khodorkovsky but it was by that guy who denies the Holocaust. However, he seems to have quoted a Washington Times article, so I'll stay open minded for now. If Rothschild really had his fingers in the Yukos pie, then I don't wonder why the Russian gov't shut down that operation so fast. AND why the western press is still fulminating about Putin. He pinched a lot of wallets in the west.
28 June, 2009, 00:37
Guistino,
What is the solution? As in ALL historic conflicts, compromise is the solution...Constantine, for instance, changed, and accepted Christianity, but a modified form. In my opinion, now Social Democracy is the answer...a synthesis between the extreme left and right that began back during World War I might work! The current economic crisis certainly shows that US Republican Party style unregulated capitalism is NOT the answer. Furthermore, you cannot have a global economic base and some Roman Empire superstructure...there MUST be a multi-polar world and a multi-power superstructure...and I say that as someone who loves my country, my own home, my own relatives, and I want justice, peace and prosperity. And by the way, get over your pontifical churchy attitude about the Soviet Union...they made some mistakes, but so have we, the USA! I grew up under APARTIED in the USA, called Jim Crow, and if you think people can be invaded for such things, or endlessly ordered about, then we sure as heck deserved to be invaded back then. This arrogant attitude as if the USA never did anything wrong is sickening to me, because my grandpa fought agianst slavery in the Union Army and I fought during the US Civil Rights movement! Don't tell me the USA is la la land, we have our problems!
26 June, 2009, 13:59
@MEJanssen
Sorry MEJanssen I posted the link to the Rothschild/Khodorkovsky article but RT didn’t post it.
Google focal point khodorkovsky and it is the forth result down.
@giustino
Good points as well as the issue of Chechen independence which is interlinked with Soviet and post soviet era organised crime, the oligarchs, western oil and gas control as describe in Brezinski’s Grand Chessboard and geo-politics which I will comment on latter.
26 June, 2009, 09:13
@ lolo. What has your current president done to solve problems between Russia and the U.S.? I admit MYpresident hasnt done much because he has to solve many problems and is judged by the whole world for trying to solve its problems. Its true he hasnt spoken much of Russia because he needs to stop America from bleeding. I am pretty sure YOUR president hasnt said much either. And Thank You! Look we can keep going on like this but something needs to be done between these two great countries. Agree?
26 June, 2009, 07:07
@ LB9806. Will you please mention 1 thing, just 1 thing, that YOUR president has DONE, that shows CHANGE towards Russia? Please do not mention the speeches, I'm looking for actual deeds, like stopping AMDs in Eastern Europe, stopping NATO expansion into post-soviet space, lifting sanctions against Iran, imposing sanctions against Israel for the illegal occupation and wars against Palestinians, etc. Thank you.
26 June, 2009, 07:01
Here are some questions: How were Georgian actions in Abkhazia and South Ossetia different from Russian actions in Chechnya in the early 1990s? Why are South Ossetians and Abkhazians worthy of independence and Chechens are not? And, finally, why has only Nicaragua recognized the independence of these two places?
Discuss.
26 June, 2009, 06:55
John,
I don't believe there is a way in which the Russian people could remove Putin from power peacefully. Actually, I am unsure of what the remaining levers of influence the Russian people have over him or Medvedev are. Opinion polls?
Since I live on the border with Russia, I would like to go to sleep at night knowing that if, God forbid, something happens to Superman, he has a legitimate successor in place to take over. But I am not convinced that once Putin is gone, Russia won't descend into the same anarchic infighting that accompanies most changes of power. And, as a diplomat recently said, we should be afraid of Russia when it is strong, but even more afraid of Russia when it is weak.
If Putin truly was a patriot, he would have left public office last year. By perpetuating his seemingly unending rule, he only sets up Russia for an eventual leadership crisis. The only argument for Putin to remain in power is that he is somehow smarter or stronger or a better strategic thinker than all other 140 million Russians. Which does harken back to the days of Communist leadership, if you think about it. I have no respect for this line of thinking. I don't do cult of personality.
26 June, 2009, 02:53
To Peter, even if CNN or FOX start a "media war" no one in the U.S. would pay attention because no media reaports about international subjects. Come to the U.S. I invite you to my house and you will see no one cares! We Americans are too busy with our lives! Accuse the Americans for "raping and torturing" but I did no such thing! Yes the U.S. isn't perfect it has many flaws towards its people and towards the world but hopefully with MY president things will change for the better and if not then hopefully in the future, but things will not get any better if Russians and Americans dont forget the past! Leave the past behind and look at the future, Our future.
25 June, 2009, 18:33
@MEJanssen
First Russian International Corporate Philanthropic Foundation (of Khodorkovsky and Rothschild): "I am launching the Foundation [First Russian International Corporate Philanthropic Foundation] in London to highlight the international nature of the Foundation's aims and to create an infrastructure from which the next generation of Russia's leaders will emerge."
There was also an article somewhere that mentioned that the Rothschild/Khodorkovsky Yukos oil company avoided paying taxes during the 90’s through there Menatep bank to an off shore bank account in the Isle of Man in Britain.
@LorenzoGhilardi
Abkhazia and South Ossetia didn’t claim independence straight after the break up of the USSR.
Abkhazia and South Ossetia were incorporated into Georgia under Stalin and given autonomous status with in Georgia.
With the break-up of the USSR the post Georgian ultra-nationalist president abolished there autonomous status and regional representation to bring it under central control of Georgia by sending in troops to occupy the regions sparking civil war. It was only when Abkhazian and Ossetian forces drove them out did them claim independence.
Putin said in an unpublished interview with a German reporter that he recognised the post USSR agreement that Crimea belongs to Ukraine so it is not an issue.
25 June, 2009, 17:15
To understand what is happening to Russia you need to know what happened to the Serbs in Yugoslavia which I think is the model they are using against Russia even MPRI troops were discovered training Georgian forces in sabotage techniques.
Thankfully clever Serbs and there expat community overseas (which Russia does not have) have created a series of website with full info and evidence chronicling the use of NGO’s, foreign intelligence, media, PR and lobbyist groups, terrorism, organised crime, etc
@Dirk Diggler
I'll clear up the confusion for you Russia is the big country Georgia is the small one you know the country that has the largest international terrorist base in the world were the militants transferred there operations to the Panski Gorge in 2003 right under the US nose which I’m sure they had no involvement with.
25 June, 2009, 15:22
LOL Count Cash, thanks for my laugh this morning. Progress is wonderful! @johnx, I knew Khordokovsky was up to something smelly, but I didn't know the Rothschilds were behind him. Got another link for that? I'm up for some reading. Thx.
25 June, 2009, 15:00
Thank you for the facts John X and Pauline. Giustino, please stop watching CNN, they do not report the news from both sides, only the side that suits greedy Wall Street capitalists. Pauline: you forgot to add that most of those jailed are black and brown people, who are a huge minority in the States. And I should add that the former Soviet states see America and the EU as a cash cow. Compare that to the ties they have with Russia, which are based on family, history, language and culture, a far more lasting bond than one based on dollars.
25 June, 2009, 09:33
giustino you funny!
Ha Ha Ha!
Live in Ukraine with no heat and gas all the time. We Europe are so you want to say when it helps you.
25 June, 2009, 09:26
Johnx - Perfect!
24 June, 2009, 19:53
The thing is that the collapse of USSR took place too quickly and left many unsorted issues. Many boundaries should be re-drawn. South Ossetians and Abkhazians declared themselves independent soon after the disgregation, therefore Georgia did have no right to claim those countries. Crimea should follow the same path and return back to Russia, every land or cities like Narva where the vast majority of population is Russian should passed over to Russia. That's the only means to avoid future tensions between states. The only alternative in order to get future stability would be the ethnic cleansing of Russians inside those countries, which would mean a second Holocaust. I know any revisionism would be very dangerous if not managed by the international community without bias against Russia or its neighbors, but as long as those problems are not sorted, there will be always tension between them.
Freedom House calls itself something of an unbiased and well intentioned NGO looking after and protecting freedom (whatever that means today) around the world. It likes to judge and rank countries. It claims it has the ability to “objectively” criticize governments based on its own very subjective worldview and primarily funded by the US government. This is for all to see in its latest report, "Authoritarianism 2.0."
The fact is, Freedom House is an outfit with an agenda – a neocon agenda at that. It seeks out any person who will provide an opinion that will perpetuate and defend its very misplaced sense of what democracy means. It claims that its methodology is sound and apolitical, but in fact it sources information designed to fit its political tastes and appetite (and probably a sense of revenge).
Freedom House claims that five “authoritarian governments”-- China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and Pakistan-- are undermining democracy and international development. Well, all of this is quite curious. All of these countries are part of Barack Obama’s new foreign policy to reach out to so-called enemies the neocon subjectively singled out during the Bush years. It appears that Freedom House is really targeting Obama and not the alleged violators of democracy and freedom in the world.
Let’s have look at the basic findings of the Freedom House report.
“Authoritarian Foreign Aid: By doling out billions of dollars in no-strings-attached foreign aid, these regimes are hobbling international efforts to improve governance and reduce corruption. China, for example, is now the largest lender to Africa, according to the World Bank.”
Well, that is some kind of bizarre thank you to Beijing for its efforts. The Western world competes with itself to feel sorry for Africa, but it is the Chinese who are actually doing something. The West always attaches preconditions on African and other poor countries when it lends money. The Chinese, on the other hand, want to make a profit. This is how the market system works and is reinforced by globalization. Interestingly, because the Chinese are interested in a profit, that is the acknowledgment for that aid and investment to continue, the African government in question usually has to clean up its act on many issues, including corruption, in particular. Why should Freedom House have a problem with this? Are they afraid the “Chinese model” is better than the “Western model” when it comes to creating positive change in Africa?
“International Organizations under Siege: These regimes are actively disrupting the human rights and democracy work of international bodies such as the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the Organization of American States. They have also created new institutions to counter organizations that promote human rights and accountable governance.”
This takes the ham off the hog. Western institutions were designed to serve Western interests. When Western institutions can’t do this, the same institutions call foul play. The UN votes on resolutions and the powerful Western countries and their allies can ignore them with impunity.
There is undeniable evidence that the OSCE was negligent moments before the conflict in South Ossetia last August when civilians and peacekeepers were killed. Why should anyone expect Russia to have trust in this institution now?
As an organization, the OAS, does not have a single problem with Cuba, though one member does and that member is the US. Washington’s approach towards Cuba is a complete and embarrassing failure. It is a pity that Freedom House cannot admit this.
Democracy Redefined: Authoritarian regimes are tarnishing the public understanding of democracy by distorting its meaning at home in state-dominated media and abroad through well-financed international media ventures.
Who says the West owns the concept of democracy? Freedom House shows its hubris with such a ridiculous statement. The mention of “state-dominated media” is simply misleading. All the major television networks in the US (and majors in print media) followed and supported Bush’s preemptive wars. Using the term “state-dominated media” is grossly misleading. The meaning of democracy is no longer found in Western capitals. Democracy finds its fit depending on the circumstances on the ground. And it is up to each polity to find consensus of what democracy should mean and, importantly, produce.
“Internet under Growing Threat: Authoritarians are using sophisticated and well-funded techniques to subvert legitimate online discourse, especially in China, Iran and Russia.”
I cannot claim to know the condition of the Internet in China and Iran. However, in Russia there are stinging characterizations of its politicians and policies. The Internet in Russia is vibrant and exciting. Those who abuse it, often to incite racist and religious hatred and promote obvious “black PR,” find the law in quick pursuit. This is as it should be.
Illiberal Education: “By either actively promoting or enabling the distortion of history through a nationalistic or extremist lens, authoritarian regimes are creating a new generation that is hostile toward democracy and suspicious of the outside world.”
This statement is truly disappointing. I don’t see any intentional hostility to distort what democracy means in the countries that Freedom House wants to isolate. What I see is an alternative narrative in play. Why should historical narratives always be in line with promoting Western interests? Freedom Houses' enemies have their own historical narratives. And they are by-and-large because of the very real hostility experiences with their contact with the West.
This Freedom House report is a parody of itself. In its top line findings Pakistan was not mentioned in any detail. This is for a reason. Recent US policy is to blame. Freedom House and other hack NGOs have a bad habit of overlooking the deficient of democracy and rights in countries aligned or controlled by Washington. But as Freedom House has an agenda, Pakistan is given attention. But is not because of any interest in Pakistan’s democracy – it is a undisguised attack on the Obama administration.
Obama has made some overtures toward China, Russia, Iran, and Venezuela. Also, there have been some harsh words about Pakistan. In all, Freedom House shows itself to be very much out of step with the times. It seems to me it only wants to remain relevant and be funded.
It is time for Freedom House to fold its tent. Its mission has nothing to with ideals anymore (if it ever did). It only wants to keep a backward-looking few employed. Freedom House is worried about its very existence and will tell you anything to stay in business. A truly pathetic lot when everything is said and done (and thought-out).
16 June, 2009, 18:54
Great news that Wayne Madsen is writing for RT http://www.russiatoday.ru/Top_News/2009-06-16/Billionaire_Madoff_tied_to_intelligence_agencies.html .
It would be great if he had a regular daily report column on RT and a Video report.
15 June, 2009, 10:17
To Johnx: please see my response to E. Your statement that “Labelling that’s what western pundits, think tanks, politicians and media do all the time in regards to Russia” consists of judgments based on inferences, and is not a report. The remainder of your post does not remedy this, but merely projects it further.
15 June, 2009, 10:03
To E: Statements can broadly be divided into three overall categories, namely reports, inferences and judgments. A bystander stating that “The car was weaving from one side of the road to another” is a report – it is a verifiable statement of fact. If on the basis of observing the vehicle’s motion a bystander were to say, “The driver was drunk,” he is making an inference – he is venturing a statement about the unknown based on the known. The erratic driving was a “known”, but it might have had many causes, from mechanical to emotional to psychological to medical to drunkeneness. If the bystander were to further say, “The driver is an alcoholic,” he is making a judgment on top of the inference – not only is he claiming that the driver was drunk today, but that he will be drunk tomorrow and the next day and the next, because that’s just the way the driver supposedly is; the bystander is now judging the driver. While there is obviously place for inferences and judgment, most people and their audience don’t seem to know the difference between the three, and that’s where problems arise. The speaker and his audience are likely to assume that all three of the above statements are reports; they are not. Only the first is a report, and says something that is verifiable. The other two statements may seem like they’re saying something about the driver, but they tell us nothing at all about him. The only tell us something about the state of mind of the speaker, revealing his inference and his judgment, both of which are made on the basis of lacking evidence. When “Nazi” or “Communist” are used of people who are who were or are members of those political parties, they are reports. But when “Nazi” or “Communist” is used simply as a lazy epithet, all this indicates is the inferential disapproval and judgmentalism of the speaker, and reveal nothing at all about the object of their displeasure. Peter’s article is a combination of reports, inferences and judgments which are tightly intertwined. All that the article really conveys is, that what its writer dislikes, he dislikes very, very much. And what he dislikes is Freedom House.
14 June, 2009, 15:12
Marzipan6:
The propoganda terms like NAZI, NEOCON, COMMIE, have negative and positive identifying components to them. E.g. a NAZI is a person who believes in nationalism and socialism for their people. In that sense, almost the entire world are comprised of NAZIs, myself included. But, you know that when we use these terms, we are not just talking generically but specifically as well as a label to identify a class of peoople. More importantly, the use of these terms imparts the most hateful atroticities or implied atrocities of that group. With the NAZIs, it was their wars and world view as well as the crimes that were photographed to show their enemies. these are all taken out of context but, it paints a picture of fear dread into the non-german people who are on the sidelines. It is up to the audience to separate out the garbage from the truth but most of all to consider the Source. Oftentimes, the Source operates covertly to cover up their role. In Iran, for Example, the riots are more likely the work of black operations working the youth to make their own government look like monsters and crooks; but most of all, they convince enough people that they crookedly intervened in the electoral process to rob the people of their legitimate voice. As for the Commies, everyone in America is convinced that Stalin is a monster and that communism has no redeeming value. Once again, we know that the commies are the Russian people and that all things associated with Russia are bad. The source of those that promote these views lie hidden but their effectiveness permeates all avenues of American life. The audience on the sidelines has to be able to discriminate and if he does not know how Joseph Stalin or Lenin or Karl Marx was, how is he to be objective. In lieu of the contamination of the news media by those hidden sources of black operations, what can you expect of people when terms like NAZI, COMMIE, NEOCON, etc. are employed. It is up to us to be able to separate out the wheat from the chaf, the good from the evil. We have to be able to identify what it is that we are talking about when we use a term like CAPITALIST OR GOOK. Still, I am a nationalist and somewhat of a socialist so don't go spreading rumors about me that I am a NAZI.
14 June, 2009, 12:09
@Marzipan6
Labelling that’s what western pundits, think tanks, politicians and media do all the time especially in regards to Russia.
I don't think it's unfair to label a groups of people who belong to the same ethnic and political movement who advocate a foreign policy and control the media, academia, political finance, government, etc which benefit there brethren like the Yukos oil company whose major shareholders are Lord Rothschild of London who actually controlled the majority stake in Yukos and Henry Kissinger and where the like of and mafia figures like Berezovsky, Guisinky, etc are labelled "dissidents".
As I mentioned before Freedom house is not an a political organisation its research is based on organisations like the OSCE, ICJ, Reporters without Borders, Transparency International which are financed by George Soros and a history of running organisation and covert actions with the CIA like in the former Yugoslavia and these “coloured revolutions” .
Google media control in Scandinavia and click on the 1sr link and the 9th link which also lists media control in other western and European countries. When a group of people dominates the media, academia political finance government positions, banking, political movements Communism, Feminism, Civil Rights groups, Gay Rights, Immigration, Gun control, etc. Plus media and organisations they don’t control that challenges them directly they have groups like SPLC, Searchlight (here in Britain) ADL, FSWC they smear in an orchestrated media campaign or harass web hosting companies to shut down websites . Then your only getting things from there perspective.
14 June, 2009, 01:46
(1) To Johnx: I have also brought up the paragraph formatting problem on the Forum, and the response which RT published under my post is, that they are working on it to fix the matter. That was more than six months ago. Until they do, the effect of the present situation is that more or less all posts that are detailed and might have an intelligent contribution to make remain quite difficult to read, and their contents, whether good, bad or indifferent, remain an ineffectual commentary on the issues being discussed. Perhaps that is not the intent of RT, but it is the consequence of their failure to fix what can’t be all that difficult an issue to solve. (2) To E: The great beauty of labelling, which Peter (amongst others) resort to very frequently, is that it effectively stops analytical thinking, and allows allegations to be made for which no proof need ever be offered. “So-and-so is a ‘neocon’? Ah, well that settles it then – what do you expect of a mere ‘neocon’ anyway?” Some other popular labels equally as hostile to analytical thought are Jew, Nazi, Fascist and Capitalist. None of their meanings are defined, none of their relevance to arguments to which they are inserted is detailed, none of the accuracy of assertions that their use implies is analysed – but hey, they all sound a bit negative, so they’re great to trot out when one doesn’t have a logical argument to make. (3) To Howard Dobalis: I have attempted to logically and factually demonstrate in previous contributions to this topic that far from doing “a remarkable job of presenting the truth about matters that are avoided here”, Peter’s current article and its defenders have presented sweeping conclusions about Freedom House while at the same time vigorously and point-blank refusing to analyse factual material which underpin Freedom House’s World Freedom Index. Because Howard says he “comes from a personal background that has little patience with propaganda until the truth is known,” it is remarkable that he nevertheless praises something resembling propaganda and seems not to notice missing factual analysis.
13 June, 2009, 23:00
How come when you post comments on RT blogs they are not formatted into paragraphs but one big block of text but when you post a comment on news articles they are?
This makes it difficult to read lengthily comments especially my ones which are great and filled with vital info.
13 June, 2009, 14:57
Peter:
I have a problem with labels. To begin with, what exactly is a NEOCON? In my own opinion, it is not a democrat...not a republican...not of the independent parties that flourish in anonymity throughout America. A Neocon and a Neocon Agenda gets more press in this country than Ralph Nader, other presidential candidates, or the Libertarian Party. Neocons and their Party seems to me to be a visible but invisible Party operating side by side with the worst elements of the American Power Grid. For me, neocons are those that support World Jewery and the Neocon Agenda is the Israeli Agenda closely welded to the fusion reactor of American Politics. The Wars that GW Bush outlined against the Axis of Evil was really a crusade against the Middle East for the siezure of their lands for the new Babylonian Empire, a future vision of world Jewery. The Neocons run the American media and remind us daily that Iran is our enemy. The neocons waged the war against Islam. The Neocons have behaved just like Hitler. They are the vanguard, the flag wavers, etc.
They are not us...the American people. Like the Germans of WWII, the American people are just the vehicle that carries out the program of the leadership. As Jimmy Carter said in his book, Palestine, that leadership does not care about international law; does not care about people. They treat the Palestinians just like hitler treated Jews or russians[slavs]. They do it in our name and those that are the neocons are calling the shots.If they serve our Presidents, if they serve Freedom, than you have an overview of what they mean by the way they have behaved In Israel, Gaza, the West Bank, Syria, Lebanon...You have their keen sense of the Rule of Law in the way Israel abides by 242. The Neocons are an alien race to American agenda...
As for Democracy, we have but to look at Greece in 300 BC where the first Democracy enslaved the known world under Pericles. Democracy gives us the illusion that people have a say. In truth, the people have no say. When Obama and George Bush said he was going to spend 1 Trillion to bail out the banks, I had no say. When he said he was going to spend another 900 billion to support war, I had no say. The people who made the calls were the neocons behind the scenes...the lobbyist who work for the world banks, the Investment Banks, and the local banks. These people don't care what I say or think. I am a slave to their will just as if I were a greek farmer of 350BC being taken over by Atheninian Bankers. That is the heart and soul of Western Democracy...Slavery by another name. Just like in Athens. The people have no say in anything. The lobbyists are the ones who call the shots. That is democracy.
Freedom House Democracy is a white propogana vehicle of the thieves that want to rape the world. They are the vanguard who rape the Amazonians in Peru; who use death squads and military dictators to terrorize their own people. They should spend this money in the US on our health care system.
13 June, 2009, 02:36
Mr Lavelle and company.You've done a remarkable job of presenting the truth about matters that are avoided here. You and your colleagues make powerful arguments for facing these truths and that there are usually more than one valid viewpoints on a given subject. Because I come from a personal background that has little patience with propaganda until the truth is known, I seek it, hear everybody out and am often left wondering where that vaunted free western press is.
I wish more Americans took the time to tune in to Russia Today, and a few other international broadcast news shows. It was luck that we got O'bama into office, but I don't trust the right wing in the west who will try to destroy what he is trying to do and so frustrate it. We are all passengers on a tiny ship in space. I just wish more of us acted like we knew it. Crosscultural shows such as your own bridge the gaps between widely scattered people in a polycutural world. Looking forward to hearing more of your commentary.
Howard Dobel
13 June, 2009, 01:08
Hi Peter,yes the NGO's like USAIDE are just serving the interests for the US and some western countries,they give you the money but if you do what they want you to do that's the way they work just take an example just this week in Nicaragua the State Department cut 62 million dollars in aide just because they don't think the way Washintong does and that's why so many countries around the world specially in Latin America and Africa and the Middle East dont trust any more the NGO's and USAIDE because our agenda is different our goals are going in other direction,example free trade if one of our countries try to do business with countries that are not to friendly to the US or does not have the same views of the US they inmidiatly cut of the funds or start making some threats to the country so what kind of help is this,for me my thinking is that as always, the US doesn't want the third world countries to develop BUT we are getting out of poverty slowly but firm and the US doesn't want us to be in that road to recovery but we are the future becuase our natural resources that some day the US will need thats why I like the way Russia is heading and is the counter balance to the US like China so I don't trust this agencies any more.
Best regards
from Guatemala
12 June, 2009, 08:17
Peter,
I have no fear for my own life. If I see fascism or worse, take hold of my country.....I will speak up LOUDLY. I will not have it. We are only on this planet for a short time. Trust.
Gene H., SF, USA
12 June, 2009, 07:55
Peter
I am all about peace. johnx may disagree. I have given my all to oppose my government when I see injustice. I will not back down. NEVER.
12 June, 2009, 01:40
I can't get the links published but it is simply staggering the absolute supremacy of a certain ethnic minority group has over the media, political finance, banking business, everything and website they don't like, like Frank Weltner, Scott Roberts or Brother Nathanael there videos are removed from YouTube, accounts suspended or the ADL or FSWC pressure the web hosting company to remove the website from thee hosting company.
Is this the reason why Obama (Brezinski's front man) wants nuclear arms reduction?
http://en.rian.ru/infographics/20090417/121174792.html
11 June, 2009, 22:41
Peter,
I love the way Mr. Putin gave the legislature a tongue lashing. I don't know how much Mr. Putin is good for democracy or world peace, but I get the sense that he is standing up for the everyday Russian, the powerless. In no way do I want to undermine President Medvedev (he is genuine). Our two presidents will meet soon. I think mutual respect has already happened. Peace.
Gene H., SF, USA
11 June, 2009, 21:32
In response to Mr. Gill, No one hand picked Barack Obama. He raised more money for his campaign than any candidate in U.S. history. The secret, several million Americans making donations of $50 or less. Viva Obama. He is for the little guy, or gal.
10 June, 2009, 14:26
PeterL as always the only American with a `true brain' on Amero-Russian co-interests in Moscow. Keep up the good work on exposing Soros and his NGOs and other NeoconNGOs who have managed to kill a 100s of 1000s of innocent civs with anti-communism talkie with their neo-fascist-substitutism. Soros should have stayed in Hungary like a man and made his stand like a `true patriot that he isn't!'
09 June, 2009, 00:33
Paul is probably right...I'm a secretary in Brooklyn, NY and I never see an NGO! They do not operate internally here that I am aware of so they must be for foreign consumption only??
08 June, 2009, 20:01
Marzipan6, to put it simply, I’m neither buying your stuff, nor the cause you put forward. How off-the-track and far from common sense you are just shows your proposterous desire to see me provide you with „verifiable evidence of this in terms of specific and examinable instances, complete with objective proof“, „hard facts“… I just hope that with such a scientific approach of yours and vast amount of volunteer time and research ability you will soon corroborate your own enthusiastically proclaimed ideological conclusions. It’s your labour of love by the way. So, please, keep me entertained!
08 June, 2009, 12:01
JayCee, I’d love to have a drink with my Forum friends anyway. Life is short, and I find most company is enjoyable if you’re prepared to live and let live. However, no one pays me for my posts – think of it as a labour of love! Since right now we’re not enjoying a drink – if you make an extremely broad allegation to the effect that Freedom House (and indeed other NGO institutions to boot!) do not serve their proclaimed goals, I would absolutely love to see some verifiable evidence of this in terms of specific and examinable instances, complete with objective proof, to the effect that Freedom House does not live up to its proclaimed methodology of evaluating evidence on which their World Freedom Index is based. Perhaps you could examine one or two constituent points of evidence underlying a country report in the Index, detail how that evidence is misapplied, explain to us what a conclusion based on the correct evaluation of the evidence would instead look like, and provide hard facts to back up your reasoning. I am fascinated by the endless supply of enthusiastically proclaimed and ideology-driven criticism that we find on this forum topic, and by the sudden universal attack of reticence when relevant subject matter evidence is requested. Who went to bed with whom is not relevant subject matter evidence, yet this is all we get.
08 June, 2009, 09:35
Freedom House and other NGO institutions serve The Agenda rather than their proclaimed goals. It is enough if people know. People, keep telling the truth. Marzipan 6: I hope you invite all of us for a drink when your first payday comes.
03 July, 2009, 07:32
Peter,
Let's remain cautiously optimistic regarding the upcoming Medvedev-Obama summit.
Gene Hopkins,
SF, CA, USA
G
03 July, 2009, 04:57
I was going to refrain from commenting until I heard a quote from Pres. Obama today that just made my jaw drop. He said Putin should understand that the Cold War is outdated, and that Putin needs convincing that the US wants cooperation rather than an antagonistic relationship, and that he has one foot in the old way of doing business and one foot in the new. Wow. This is either the most hypocritical thing I have heard in the past 5 or 6 administrations, OR, Obama won first prize in the contest of, "Just Does Not Get It." Wow, where to begin and how to keep this short . . . How about, Mr. President, you could look at your own cabinet and consider replacing some of those old Cold War-horses. Maybe stuff a sock in Biden's mouth before he says something that sounds like it could have come from 1963. Or, how about, weed through your advisors and get rid of those C.F.R. guys who still want to dismantle Russia and sell the pieces to big capitalists. Or, um, cut back on funding those crazy "freedom fighters" in the North Caucasus. How about cancelling the contract for that missile installation planned for Poland (to protect against Iran, but "coincidentally" pointed toward the east?). THEN we can talk about whether or not Russia seems to have 'tude. OK?
Peter Lavelle:
488167
02 July, 2009, 10:36
I'm afriad I agree with Astraea and Meslin on this one. America is clearly, clearly behind the Honduras coup, just look at the facts. I recommend Al-Jazeera as well as an alternative news source as well for those who want to see what role America has and is currently playing in Honduras.
02 July, 2009, 02:07
You are right Peter. Again. As always
It is painful to watch how much resources and even more lives are being wasted on and by politics of confrontation.
Wouldn't it be nice, if we could have a minimum of 1,000 years of global peace. Just think how much we could build, just think how far we could really go - all the way to the stars one hopes.
We have the dreams. So what or who is really stopping us?
Maybe those who are stopping us should pose themselves the old question: "How many Angels can dance on the tip of a needle?"
If they cannot answer that question then I bet they cannot even begin to know how much damage they are doing to humanity and its dreams and future.
JK
01 July, 2009, 21:04
Obama’s challenge is yet to be created - in Russia! This is the duty of the Russian host: to load only as much of expectancy to re-trigger Obama’s own creativity successfully expressed before entering White House.
Let the expansion face the resurrection. Otherwise all remains “just another brick in the wall”.
01 July, 2009, 20:25
Mr Lavelle.
It seems to me that like certain russian decisions'makers, you confuse wishfull thinking and realistic politics.
In Honduras, Iran, Georgia, Ukraine etc.american dirty tricks have not stopped. The AMD has not been scrapped and none of the 700 military and spy installations set-up all over the World (mostly around Russia) has not been closed.
Mr Obama' sincerity and willingness to change US global priorities need to be proved by actions not just by talks. So far nothing concret has been done, because, like his predecessors, Obama is a pawn
whose election costed 3 billions $. That is all ! Sincerely.
Jean-Claude Meslin
01 July, 2009, 17:19
Any country that looks to the west for guidance and help will end up exploited. No country should put too much faith in any foreign mentor because it will cost them.
Those in Russia that want the US to show them the way are not trustworthy. Only Russia can work out its own problems.
01 July, 2009, 09:17
Peter, this Obama person does not have a mind of his own and he is remarkable for being to say exactly what he does not mean! It is amazing.
01 July, 2009, 06:51
I'm not sure what you mean when you say Moscow and Washington have more commonalities than differences? Even the one thing I can think of that they truly have in common, which is to end terrorism, their approaches are very different, with Russia preferring regional solutions to America's unilateral cowboy antics.