- For the West, everything changed but stayed the same,
hard-wired and in place. Things just lay dormant in the shadows during
the Yeltsin years, certain to reemerge once a more resolute Russian leader
took over. If not Vladimir Putin, someone else little different.
-
- Russia is back, proud and reassertive, and not about
to roll over for America. Especially in Eurasia. For Washington, it's back
to the future, the new Cold War, and reinventing the Evil Empire, but this
time for greater stakes and with much larger threats to world peace. Conservatives
lost their influence. Neocons are weakened but still dominant. The Israeli
Lobby and Christian Right drive them. Conflict is preferred over diplomacy,
and most Democrats go along to look tough on "terrorism." Notably
their standard-bearer, vying with McCain to be toughest.
-
- Ten former Warsaw Pact and Soviet Republics are part
of NATO: the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Albania,
Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. In addition, Georgia and Ukraine
seek membership. Russia is strongly opposed. And now for greater reason
after Poland (on August 20) formally agreed to allow offensive US "interceptor
missiles" on its soil. A reported 96 short-range Patriot ones also
plus a permanent garrison of US troops - 110 transfered from Germany, according
to some accounts. Likely more to follow. In addition, Washington agreed
to defend Poland whether or not it joins NATO, so that heightens tensions
further.
-
- The Warsaw signing followed the Czech Republic's April
willingness to install "advanced tracking missile defense radar"
by 2012. In both instances, Russia strongly objected, and on August 20
said it will "react (and) not only through diplomatic protests."
Both former Warsaw Pact countries are now targets. The threat of nuclear
war is heightened. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Doomsday Clock
heads closer to midnight - meaning "catastrophic destruction."
It's no joking matter.
-
- The US media downplays the threat and hails a pact Zbigniew
Brzezinski (a Polish national, former Carter National Security Advisor,
and key Obama foreign policy strategist) calls a watershed in the two countries'
relationship - "This changes the strategic relationship between the
US and Poland. There is a clear and explicit understanding that if there
are negative consequences of stationing the missile shield, the US will
come to Poland's defense."
-
- On the one hand, a surprising statement from a man critical
of Bush administration policies, its failure in Iraq, and the dangers of
a widened Middle East war. He fully understands the heightened potential
for world conflict but sounds dismissive of the threat. On the other hand,
he has bigger fish to fry and apparently willing to wage big stakes on
winning. The Iraq war and Iran are distractions by his calculus. The real
Great Game embraces all Eurasia and assuring America comes out dominant
- not Russia, not China, nor any rival US alliance.
-
- The major media also downplay the dangers and explain
nothing about the high stakes. Instead they beat up on Russia and highlight
comments from Secretary Rice that missiles aren't "aimed in any way
at Russia," or White House spokesperson Dana Perino saying: "In
no way is the president's plan for missile defense aimed at Russia. (It's
to) protect our European allies from any rogue threats" that suggests
Iran, but, clearly means Russia, according to Hauke Ritz's recent analysis
in Germany's influential Leaves for German and International Politics journal.
-
- He explained that Iran's missiles can't reach Europe,
and that Washington rejected Russia's proposed Azerbaijan-based joint US-Russian
anti-missile system - to intercept and destroy Iranian missiles on launch.
He thus concluded that Washington's scheme is for offense, not defense.
That it targets Russia, not Iran, with Alaskan and other installations
close to Russia as further proof. He wrote: "The strategic significance
of the system consists of intercepting those few dozen missiles Moscow
(can launch) following a first strike. (It's) a crucial element....to develop
a nuclear first strike capacity against Russia. The original plan is for....ten
interceptor missiles in Poland. But once....established, their number could
be easily increased."
-
- According to Ritz, Washington wants a missile system
that "guarantee(s a) US (edge) to carry out nuclear war without (risking
a) counter-strike." It can then be used for geopolitical advantage
"to implement national interests," but it highlights the dangers
of possible nuclear confrontation and the catastrophic fallout if it happens.
-
- In an August 20 Veterans of Foreign Wars convention address,
Bush was essentially on this theme in focusing on "terrorism"
and saying: "We're at war against determined enemies, and we must
not rest until that war is won." Georgia "stands for freedom
around the world, now the world must stand for freedom in Georgia"
- clearly linking Russia's response with "terrorism" and suggesting
from his September 2001 address to a joint session of Congress and the
America people that: "Every nation, in every region, now has a decision
to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
Any that are "will be regarded....as a hostile state." Clearly,
Russia is on his mind just as Moscow is carefully evaluating his threat.
-
- The BBC echoed the US media, covers all the bases, mentioned
the Iranian threat, singles out Russia, obfuscates facts about the conflict,
sides with Washington and Poland on the new missile deal, and quoted Polish
President Lech Kaczynski saying: "no one (with) good intentions towards
us and (the West) should" fear the missiles. It also cited a miraculous
turnaround in sentiment saying two-thirds of Poles now favor them. Astonishing
since overwhelming opposition was recently evident, so it's hard imagining
it shifted so fast.
-
- High-Octane Russia Bashing - The Dominant US Media
-
- The Wall Street Journal asserted that Poles "see
the US as their strongest ally" given "two centuries of invasions
and partitioning by Russia" and other European powers. It also highlighted
Russia's "nuclear threat" (not Iran's) in a Gabriel Schoenfeld
article painting Russia as an aggressor and America aiding its European
allies.
-
- Schoenfeld (a senior editor of the hawkish, pro-Israeli
Commentary magazine) cites "Moscow's willingness to crush Georgia
with overwhelming force (and claims) the Kremlin has 10 times as many tactical
(short-range) warheads as the US." The "shift in the nuclear
imbalance....helped embolden the bear." He ignores America's overall
nuclear superiority, but it hardly matters as both countries combined have
around 97% of these weapons (an estimated 27,000 world total) according
to experts like Helen Caldicott - more than enough to destroy the planet
many times over.
-
- Nonetheless, Schoenfeld supports the Polish agreement
in the face of a "pugnacious Russia (determined to acquire) economic
and military power (and) not afraid to use threats and force to get (its)
way (with) nuclear weapons central to the Russian geopolitical calculus."
It's reminiscent of "the dark days of communist yore (and captures
the threat of what) we and Russia's neighbors are up against."
-
- For the moment, anti-Iranian rhetoric has subsided with
Russia the new dominant villian. En route to the NATO Brussels August 18
meeting, Secretary Rice called Russia's action against Georgia a "very
dangerous game and perhaps one the Russians want to reconsider." Russian
"aggression" is the buzzword, and the media dutifully trumpet
it.
-
- So do the presidential candidates. John McCain was especially
belligerent in denouncing "Russian aggression" and calling on
Moscow to "immediately and unconditionally cease its military operations
and withdraw all forces from sovereign Georgian territory." He called
for emergency Security Council and NATO meetings in hopes condemnation
would follow and "NATO (can act) to stabiliz(e) this very dangerous
situation." He also wants Russia expelled from the G-8 nations and
an end to 10 years of partnership and cooperation.
-
- Barak Obama first said that Russia's "aggression"
must not stand and denounced "Russian atrocities." He then softened
his tone somewhat with: "Now is the time for action - not just words....Russia
must halt its violation of Georgian airspace and withdraw its ground forces
from Georgia, with international monitors to verify that these obligations
are met." But expect those comments to harden as Democrats meet in
Denver, and the party's nominee will likely match his opponent's tough
stance. Or at least try under a slogan of "Securing America's Future"
to advance the nation's interests in the world. Beating up on Russia is
now fair game and made easier with lockstep media support.
-
- The Wall Street Journal is more hostile than most, and
practically frothed in its August 16 - 17 weekend edition. It called for
"Making Putin Pay (and) Turning Russia's Georgian rout into a political
defeat." It cited Russian aggression "to remove President Saakasvili
from the office to which he was elected in 2004 (and to) overthrow a democratic
government."
-
- It called on "western authorities (to) explore the
vulnerability of Russian assets abroad (or) at least make life difficult
for the holders of those assets." The Journal might remember the billions
of US fixed income and other investments Russia holds - although the country's
Central Bank reported late July that it pared its $100 billion in US "mortgage
bonds" to $50 billion early in the year. The US Treasury reports that
Russia holds around $36 billion of Treasury securities with considerably
more in private hands.
-
- The Journal then compared Russia to China and managed
a slap at both. It said: "In the world of global commerce....China
calculated that....staging an Olympic extravaganza (could enhance its)
ambivalent reputation....By contrast, the Putin government....seems to
believe its power grows in sync with its reputation as an international
pariah, an outsider state," and George Bush added that "Russia
has damaged its credibility and its relations with the nations of the free
world" - with the Journal writer hardly blinking at such brazen hypocrisy.
-
- Nor did Journal editorial board member Matthew Kaminski
in his headlined piece: "Russia Is Still a Hungry Empire" without
a hint about the Soviet Union's bloodless 1991 dissolution now down the
memory hole in light of today's inflammatory headlines.
-
- Kaminski highlights "Russian tanks rolling through
Georgia (with) images of Chechnya in 1994 and '99, Vilnius '91, Afghanistan
'79, Prague '68, Hungary '56" and before that Poland, the Baltics
and other Eastern European states. "The war in Georgia marks an easy
return to territorial expansion and attempted regional dominance."
-
- Boris Yeltsin "tried to give Russians an alternative
narrative. (He) put forward democracy as a unifying and legitimizing idea
for the new Russian state." But that was swept away when "Putin
took over." He's unresponsive to the idea of "partnership with
the West and freedom at home." He aims to force "young democracies
around Russia....back into Moscow's sphere of influence....The worldview
of a Russian nationalist is hard for outsiders to comprehend," and
for Kaminski one that mustn't be allowed to stand.
-
- Nor for other Journal contributors daily (in op-eds and
editorials) with some of the most outlandish attack journalism heard since
before Gorbachev. Claims that "Kremlin capitalism is a threat to the
West....by using its market strength in oil and gas resources to strong-arm
its neighbors and outmaneuver the US and EU." And that Russia's real
aim "is to replace a pro-western government with a new Russian satellite....reminiscent
of the Brezhnev doctrine. (It's) part of a broader campaign (to annex new
territory, expand the Russian empire, conduct) cyber attacks against the
Baltic states, (assassinate enemies, and use) economic intimidation (through)
cutoffs of Russian oil and gas shipments to Ukraine and the Czech Republic....It
is important that Moscow pays a concrete and tangible price for its latest
aggression, at least comparable to (what) it paid for the 1979 invasion
of Afghanistan."
-
- The New York Times is more measured but, on August 19,
highlighted "Survivors in Georgia Tell of Ethnic Killings" with
suggestions of "ethnic cleansing" - a practice that "haunted
the borderlands of the old Soviet bloc." Villages were "burned
and houses broken; unburied bodies lay rotting; fresh graves were dug in
gardens and basements....most victims interviewed (were) ethnic Georgians....(In
central Georgian) villages, some killings were carried out for revenge....some
(involved) theft (and still others) seemed to be that the power balance
was shifting, away from ethnic Georgians to the Ossetian separatists and
their Russian backers."
-
- Independent reporters on the ground contradicted The
Times and similar US media accounts. One wrote: "Georgians living
in several of the villages said the Russians occupying their land had treated
them well, done nothing to encourage them to leave and offered the only
protection available from the South Ossestian militias they feared most"
and perhaps their own army in an effort to inflict harm and blame it on
Russia.
-
- On August 21, The Times headlined: "US Sees Much
to Fear in a Hostile Russia (by) usher(ing) in a sustained period of renewed
animosity with the West....problems extend(ing) far beyond (arms deals
with) Syria and the mountains of Georgia." Others with "anti-American
states like Iran and Venezuela." Pressuring US "military bases
in Central Asia....counterterrorism, Hamas" and numerous other issues.
Obama's chief Russia advisor, Stanford University professor Michael McFaul,
was quoted saying Russia appears intent on "disrupt(ing) the international
order" and can do it. They're "the hegemon in that region and
we are not and that's a fact."
-
- "Russia has all the leverage," according to
Carnegie Moscow Center's Masha Lipman (with) potential for causing headaches"
if it chooses - in the region, the UN, on Iran, Zimbabwe, and to halt "any
kind of coercive actions, like economic sanctions or anything else,"
according to former National Security Council advisor Peter Feaver. An
old post-Cold War concern is now arisen. Russia is now "a spoiler."
-
- An August 21 AP report cites an example in its headlined
piece" "Russia blocks Georgia's main (oil) port city" of
Poti and continues to hold positions around Gori and Igoeti....30 miles
west of....Tbilisi."
-
- Reports from Other Sources
-
- On August 21, Russia Today reported that "Abkhazia
rallie(d) for independence (and) the Abkhazian Parliament has approved
an official appeal to Russia to recognize its independence." Tens
of thousands rallied in support, and on August 23, Reuters reported that
South Ossetia did as well and its president, Eduard Kokoity, plans to ask
Russia and the international community for recognition. Russia's Deputy
Federation Council Speaker, Svetlana Orlova, told the rally that "Russia
is always with you and will never leave you in the lurch."
-
- On August 23, The New York Times reported that "the
Kremlin is nearing formal recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, possibly
as early as next week." Apparently likely according to Russian Regional
Development Minister, Dmitry Kozak, who told Itar-Tass "support is
likely (and) that after all the events that have occurred, one should not
expect otherwise."
-
- On August 21, Abkhazian President Sergey Bagapsh "appealed
to Russia and to governments of other countries to recognize Abkhazia's
independence," for both his province and South Ossetia. On August
20, Interfax reported that the Russian Federation Council (Russia's upper
House of parliament) is prepared to recognize both provinces' independence
if their people "express such a will....and if the Russian president
makes a relevant decision on this score," according to Federation
Council Chairman Sergei Mironov.
-
- On August 25, Russia Today reported that (in emergency
session) the Federation Council unanimously voted to ask President Medvedev
to recognize Abkhazian and South Ossetian independence. Both province presidents
addressed the chamber and "again said they will never agree to remain
within Georgia" and are more entitled to independence than Kosovo.
Konstantin Zatulin, deputy head of the Duma Committee for International
Affairs in Russia's State Duma, its lower chamber, stated that his body
"most probably" will go along.
-
- At the same time, tensions remain high. Both sides continue
hostile accusations. Russia maintains it's conducting an orderly withdrawal
"in accordance with the international agreements (to their) previous
(places) of deployment," according to Col. Gen. Anatoly Nogovitsyn,
deputy chief of Russia's General Staff. US military officials at first
said they saw no significant pullback. On August 22 with a clear withdrawal
underway, the International Herald Tribune reported that the "US and
France say Russia is not complying" with the cease fire.
-
- Russia is observing a 1999 joint Russian-S. Ossetian-N.
Ossetian-Georgian agreement prepared by the Joint Control Commission, an
international South Ossetian monitoring body. It lets Russian troops secure
a corridor five miles beyond either side of South Ossetia's border that
extends into Georgia. It also allows Russian peacekeepers to operate under
the auspices of the Commonwealth of Independent States.
-
- On August 23, RIA Novosti reported that Nogovitsyn said
Russian forces will patrol Georgia's Black Sea Poti port as "envisaged
in the international agreement. Poti is outside of the security zone,"
he said, "but that does not mean we will sit behind a fence watching
them riding around in Hummers." Nor allow Georgia to rearm for more
aggression as Russia suspects, and that Georgia's deputy defense minister,
Batu Kutelia, admitted doing initially. On August 22, he told the Financial
Times that his government attacked the S. Ossetian capital, Tskhinvali,
and attempted to seize it.
-
- On August 22, Nogovitsyn heightened tensions by claiming
Georgia is now preparing for new military action against Abkhazia and South
Ossetia. "We have registered an increase in (Georgian) reconnaissance
activities and preparations for armed actions in the Georgian-South Ossetian
conflict zone." As a result, he said that Russia reserves the right
to maintain peacekeepers in both provinces. For its part, RIA Novosti reports
that America now refuses to participate with Russia in "NATO's Operation
Active Endeavour naval antiterrorism exercise," according to a Russian
Black Sea Fleet source. The announcement came after Russia's NATO envoy,
Dmitry Rogozin, said his country was "temporarily suspending military
cooperation with NATO until a political decision on relations" between
the two nations had been resolved.
-
- Also on August 22, the Israeli Ynetnews.com published
a Russian daily Kommersant interview with Washington's new Moscow ambassador,
John Beyrle, sure to embarrass his superiors. He called Russia's response
justified after its troops came under attack. "Now we see Russian
forces which responded to attacks on Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia,
legitimately...." He went on to criticize Russia's over-reaction and
warned about its impact on US - Russia relations as well as investor confidence.
Nonetheless, his first comment is telling and quite contrary to everything
from Washington and biting anti-Russian media responses.
-
- Finally on August 23, Russia Today reported that the
"local (S. Ossetian and Abkhazian) population (said) they fear Georgia
might repeat its regional aggression. They also (want) Russian troops to
stay in the area to shield them from any possible attacks." Russia
has set up 18 S. Ossetia peacekeeping posts and plans a similar number
in Abkhazia "to deter looters and the transportation of arms and ammunition."
-
- All the News Not Fit to Print
-
- Not a major media hint that Georgia is a US vassal state.
That its military is an extension of the Pentagon. That its aggression
was manufactured in Washington. That it's well-supplied and trained by
America and Israel. That pipeline geopolitics is central. Beating up on
Russia as well. Diverting Moscow from any planned intervention against
Iran. Even enlisting Russia's cooperation - not to sell Iran sophisticated
S-300 air defense missile systems and agreeing to tougher sanctions in
return for perhaps Washington deferring on Georgian and Ukrainian NATO
admission and recognizing S. Ossetian and Abkhazian independence. Perhaps
more as well to put off greater confrontation for later under a new administration.
-
- Clearly, however, the fuse is lit. It has been for some
time. It relates to everything strategic about this vital area with its
immense energy and other resources as well neutralizing Russia's power
as America's top rival and key Eurasian competitor.
-
- Controlling the region's oil and gas is crucial and what
Michel Chossudovsky explains in his August 22 article titled: "The
Eurasian Corridor: Pipeline Geopolitics and the New Cold War." He
calls the Caucasus crisis "intimately related to the control over
energy pipeline and transportation corridors (and cites) evidence that
the Georgian (August 7) attack....was carefully planned (in) High level
consultations (between) US and NATO officials" months in advance.
On August 23, RIA Novosti said a Russian security source accused Georgia
of involvement a year ago in "coordinat(ion) with NATO's plans to
strengthen its (Black Sea) naval presence."
-
- Chossudovsky discusses America's (1999) "Silk Road
Strategy: The Trans-Eurasian Security System (as) an essential building
block of (post-Cold War) US foreign policy." Proposed in House legislation
but never enacted, it was for "an energy and transport corridor network
linking Western Europe to Central Asia and eventually to the Far East."
It aims to integrate South Caucasus and Central Asian nations "into
the US sphere of influence." It involves "militariz(ing) the
Eurasian corridor," much like Security and Prosperity Partnership
plans are for North America.
-
- Efforts are largely directed against Russia, China and
Iran as well as other Eastern-allied states. It's to turn all Eurasia into
a "free market" paradise, secure it for capital, assure US dominance,
control its resources, exploit its people, transform all its nations into
American vassals, and likely aim to dismantle Russia's huge landmass if
that idea ever comes to fruition.
-
- Russia, however, isn't standing idle and is partnered
in two strategic alliances:
-
- -- the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) since
June 2001 along with China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan
with Iran in observer status. It defines its goals as: "good neighborly
relations;" promoting "effective cooperation in politics, trade
and economy, science and technology" and more as well as "ensur(ing)
peace, security and stability in the region." Given NATO's potential
threat, its main purpose is military; and
-
- -- the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO)
since 2003 "in close liaison with the SCO" with a heavy emphasis
on security against NATO Eurasian expansionism; its members include: Russia,
Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan.
-
- The stakes are huge as both sides prepare to confront
them. All part of the new Cold War and Great Game. Reinventing the Evil
Empire and beating up on Russia as part of it. Risking a potential nuclear
confrontation as well and what a new US president will inherit with no
assurance a Democrat will be any more able than a Republican. And with
a global economic crisis unresolved, either one may resort to the age old
strategy of stoking fear, going to war, hoping it will stimulate the economy,
and be able to divert public concerns away from lost jobs, home foreclosures,
and a whole array of other unaddressed issues.
-
- In early 2003, it worked. Will 2009 be a repeat? Will
it deepen what author Kevin Phillips calls "the global crisis of American
capitalism?" Will the Doomsday Clock strike midnight? It moved two
minutes closer on January 17, 2007 to five minutes to the hour. It cited
27,000 nuclear weapons, 2000 ready to launch in minutes. It said: "We
stand at the brink of a second nuclear age. Not since....Hiroshima and
Nagasaki has the world faced such perilous choices." It said the situation
is "dire." It called for immediate preventive action. Its message
went unheeded, and conditions today have worsened. The high Eurasian stakes
up things further, and neither side so far is blinking.
-
- Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre
for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at
lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
-
- Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com
|