Tag Archives: Russia

All hell.

This is a week for the books. Two major conflicts going to hell in a handbasket at the same time; god help us. One at a time …

Re: Israel / Palestine: See all previous commentsPalestine. The IDF ground war has begun. At least “war” is what our media in the U.S. call this, but it’s a very misleading term. This is an attack by one of the most powerful military machines in the world against an impoverished, stateless, poorly armed populace. Our television, radio, and newsprint journalists typically describe it as a conflict between Israel and Hamas, but the attack is on the Palestinian people, and it is they who suffer, with over 200 dead as of this writing. Four boys blown to bits on a beach, and Netanyahu is just getting started.

The act of telling civilians in northern Gaza to flee their homes in itself is a flagrant violation of the U.N. charter. What does our constitutional lawyer, Nobel laureate president have to say? The same three statements he always makes in these circumstances: (1) Israel has the right to defend itself; (2) No nation can tolerate having missiles targeting their cities; (3) Isn’t that “Iron Dome” defense shield we helped them build totally awesome? Here’s how to order yours.

I’m not certain, but I think (2) galls me the most. Couldn’t you say that about Palestine? They get bombs dropped on them all the time, not to mention settlements built on their land, checkpoints everywhere they go, regular killings of its citizens by a vicious foreign army of occupation, etc. What “state” would tolerate that?

Ukraine. I won’t say too much about this; only that the shooting down of the airliner is horrible beyond belief, and it’s just the sort of thing that happens when conflicts spin out of control. This story has sucked all of the air out of the room with regard to the news media. Chris Matthews on MSNBC was practically frothing at the mouth, playing tapes of Reagan excoriating the USSR on national television and saying the “Gipper” spoke for all of us back in 1983. The hell he did. At that time, his minions in Central America were eviscerating more innocents each week than were killed on KAL 007, so he can stow the high moral tone.

Hope to post next week … if our liberal friends don’t get us blown up before then.

luv u,

jp

Boots on the ground.

I won’t waste any breath on much of what’s happened in politics this week … that Hobby Lobby suit before the Supreme Court has got me hopping mad, but I’ll hold that for another week while I take the President to task for his speech to “European youth” about the Crimean crisis. One particular passage is very worthy of attention:

Russia has pointed to America’s decision to go into Iraq as an example of Western hypocrisy. Now, it is true that the Iraq War was a subject of vigorous debate not just around the world, but in the United States as well. I participated in that debate and I opposed our military intervention there. But even in Iraq, America sought to work within the international system. We did not claim or annex Iraq’s territory. We did not grab its resources for our own gain. Instead, we ended our war and left Iraq to its people and a fully sovereign Iraqi state that could make decisions about its own future.

Laugh away.

Here, Barry seems to be saying that it’s all right to ignore the clear will of the UN Security Council (and General Assembly) and invade another country, so long as eight years later you leave what’s left of them to sort out their political future ( this after their refusing to sign off on a status of forces agreement we were pushing for). It’s as if the dubious notion that we had a “vigorous debate” (perhaps in the street, but certainly not in the mass media) prior to starting the Iraq War somehow makes up for the fact that we went into that country on obviously false pretenses, over the objections of major allies and partners, including Russia.

That was bad enough. But just the fact that we are comparing Russia’s incursion into Crimea (death toll: less than ten, to greatly exaggerate the actual number) unfavorably with our attack on Iraq (death toll: hundreds of thousands, with fratricidal violence still killing thousands a year long after our exist) is craven beyond belief. He didn’t even mention the continuing conflict in Afghanistan. Small omission.

Finally, the resource point is a red herring. We didn’t go into Iraq to “grab its resources for our own gain”, though how that fact makes us virtuous is beyond me. Still, if Iraq’s main export was chicken wings, we would never have been there. It isn’t about stealing the oil; it’s about having a say in where it goes and where it doesn’t go. That’s as old as the American empire, and twice as thick.

Russia is a bad actor, no denying it, but we are far worse. Before we start condemning them for mustering their soldiers within their own borders, we might consider pulling ours out of the scores of countries where they are stationed, all around the world.

luv u,

jp

Bad guys.

When I watch news reports about the Ukraine crisis, I’m reminded of that Dave Mason song from back in the seventies, that went something like this:

So let’s leave it alone
Because we can’t see eye to eye
There ain’t no good guys
There ain’t no bad guys
There’s only you and me and
We just disagree

Are you scared? Really scared?Right, well … I was never a big fan of Dave’s, but you get the idea. Part of the problem with our once-over-lightly media culture is that there is an extraordinarily rapid resort to black-and-white, wrong vs. right narratives that are easy to report, easy to digest, easy to repeat again and again. In all that, we lose the sense that it’s possible to have two assholes in a fight – adversaries who are divided by conflicting claims, not by a contrast between absolute good and absolute evil.

I guess what particularly galls me about the current state of play is that when you draw attention to this fact, you are accused of being an apologist for the Putin regime. Fact is, Putin’s regime is the model of governance in Russia that the United States clearly preferred, one we actively encouraged and supported relatively uncritically until the falling out around the Iraq war. What we’re staring in the face right now is the product of two failed American policies: (1) support for a strong executive in Russia from the Yeltsin years forward, and (2) insistence not only on perpetuation of NATO after the end of the Cold War, but expansion of the alliance deep into eastern Europe, over the vehement objections of the Russians.

Russia’s objection to NATO expansion? Well, this is just a guess, but I’m pretty sure they are against any major military alliance on their western flank, probably because they were invaded four times, starting with Napoleon, the last time nearly destroying Russian society. That’s a living memory for some in Russia, and something no doubt written in their DNA at this point. You can say they’re a little sensitive about threats from their west. Just a little.

That doesn’t excuse beastly behavior, but you have to admit … compared to the suppression of Hungary or Czechoslovakia, this invasion and  annexation of Crimea has been pretty tame. I’m just saying, we need to dial it back a little, and remember that we still have thousands of nuclear weapons. Indeed, there can be no military conflict between Russia and the United States that won’t practically guarantee the destruction of all of humankind.

If we fight, no one wins. Take that to the bank.

luv u,

jp

Taking sides.

If anything, the crisis in Ukraine grew hotter this week, and it’s getting kind of scary. Through it all, though, there has been a persistent tendency in the media to support the maximalist position of the U.S. government and our European allies – namely, that the Ukrainian opposition is fully legitimate and essentially beyond any critical scrutiny, that the Russians are engaging in bald aggression of a kind not witnessed in decades (!), and that the violators of human rights in Ukraine are all on the pro-Russian side.

Okay, well … a few points that probably need addressing:

Coup or no coup. Russia calls what happened in Kiev a few weeks ago a coup; Washington does not. In the United States, labeling something a coup triggers legislation designed to impede the delivery of U.S. aid to coup regimes. Our administrations of both Sensitivity training, American style.parties typically do an end-run around this by simply avoiding the word when it’s inconvenient. We’ve done this with Egypt and with Honduras. When it’s someone we don’t like, it’s a coup, plain and simple. In Kiev, the elected leader of the country was ousted without due process, in the midst of a negotiation over rebalancing of political authority and early elections. It’s not outlandish to call that a coup, regardless of how kleptocratic the old regime may have been.

Who killed who? The killing of oppositionists by sniper fire on February 26 has often been cited as a primary rationale for the ouster of the Ukrainian leader. Those killings were chalked up to the regime. However, this past week, The Guardian and others have reported on claims by the Estonian Foreign Minister that the shooters were hired by the opposition. The new Ukrainian government is reluctant to open an investigation into this.

Atypical aggression. Really? This can be reported with a straight face from a country that invaded Iraq ten years ago? In this category, we haven’t a leg to stand on.

My point is, before we rush in to aid this new government, let’s be honest about what our interests are in that region. And let’s not paint one side virtuous and the other evil before we know the facts.

luv u,

jp

Persistent truths.

As I write this post, the parliament in Crimea has just voted to secede from Ukraine and rejoin Russia, to which it belonged until the mid 1950s. The Russian parliament, in turn, is considering legislation to enable it to accept new provinces, an ominous turn to Where's America in this picture?be sure. There is a referendum on Crimean secession scheduled for later this month, and the new Ukrainian government is crying foul. So … are we on the brink of a new Crimean War? Charge of the Light Brigade, anyone?

The “Putin is Crazy” narrative is dominating the news cycle here in the United States. I can hear it right now, on the evening news. Even supposed activist liberal shows like Rachel Maddow are playing this as a crisis for which Russia is solely responsible, and strong evidence of Putin’s departure from reality. He’s living in another world, the German premier suggests, and that claim is being hammered home, day after day, on every network, every news channel, every media outlet. One would think no one had ever occupied a square mile of foreign territory before. (Ummm …. Afghanistan? Guam?)

I hate to be the lone dissenting voice on anything, but this thing is obviously spinning out of control, and the potential consequences are enormous. Despite his autocratic tendencies, Putin is not hard to figure out, friends. He doesn’t want another Syria as his next door neighbor. With the ouster of Yanukovych, he sees the potential for civil conflict, possible failure of the central government, etc. Putin sees the United States and Europe as having stoked the opposition, and in all frankness, it’s probably true that we did. We regularly support political movements in other countries to an extent that we would consider unacceptable should another country attempt the same on us. Now we openly support the revolution in Ukraine.

Is is about supporting democracy? Well, that’s certainly not a prerequisite for U.S. support. See Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, etc., etc. In all honesty, I think it would be a really good idea to work towards a diplomatic solution with greater energy. There is a tendency to fall into old cold war habits – a fact that reveals the bankruptcy of our obsession with communism back in the day. It’s really just about great power competition, and that should be considered illegitimate, particularly when so many lives are at stake.

Between us, we still have thousands of nuclear weapons. This is not something to fool around with.

luv u,

jp

Crapucopea.

Not sure what to concentrate on this week for my rant, so I’ll break it up into bits.

Ukraine drama. I have heard endless reports on NPR and NBC about the Russian flag being raised above the Crimean capital and how much this is becoming like the bad old days of the Cold War. Much, too, has been made of Russian military exercises near the border of Ukraine, termed by the media as “provocative” – a word they no doubt borrowed from McCain or some other favored pol. Just rewind to their last reports about Korea and our planned military exercises there – did they use the same modifier? Didn’t think so. Not provocative in any wayThat potentially catastrophic confrontation-in-waiting apparently can withstand mock-invasions of North Korea and simulated bombing runs without being “provocative”. So, why are the Russian exercises any worse? If there’s a return to Cold War mentality, it’s on the part of our corporate media. (Most of our politicians have never left that particular ideological space.)

Arizona anti-gay bill. This notion of religious freedom, based on the dodgy concept of “who would Jesus refuse to serve,” is obviously based on a very skewed interpretation of Christian values – namely, tolerate no one different from you. That Jan Brewer vetoed it is no surprise. Why did it take her several days? Because the attention of the nation was on her for that stretch of time, and she was happy to bask in it – an art form the senior senator from her state has perfected over his decades in office.

Jobs and health. I’ve heard a number of reports about the CBO estimate of potential job losses related to the Affordable Care Act. These are mainly attributed to people who work specifically for a job related health care benefit choosing to opt out of the workforce. One economist / commentator I heard this morning suggested this might be a drag on the economy. But what, after all, is the economy? Is it metrics on productivity … or is it how well individuals are doing? When someone leaves a job they really don’t want, doesn’t that open a position for someone else? Should we really be chaining people to work and holding them hostage for the sake of health insurance coverage?

I think not.

luv u,

jp

Week that was (again).

I’m not going to focus hard on one topic this week, friends. At least I don’t think I will. I never know until I get down to the third paragraph, so we’ll see.

Snowden. Was asylum for Edward Snowden worth canceling a summit about? The administration says that is not the only reason, but there can be little doubt it was a (if not the) deciding factor. Our own senator in New York, Schumer, used some pretty incendiary language about Russia, saying they had “stabbed us in the back”, which is way over the top for him. This is not a place we want to go.

Our greatest creationBest remind ourselves that the Russia we have today is the one we worked toward building yesterday. Putin is the beneficiary of a strong presidency established by Yeltsin in the 90s with our enthusiastic support (back when we had them privatizing state assets for pennies on the dollar and creating what was then the most dramatic demographic self-implosion in many decades). Remember how he shot the Russian Parliament full of holes? Well, now we’re just staring our own blinkered foreign policy in its beady eyes. The authoritarianism, the anti-gay laws – it’s pretty disgusting. But then, have we broken with Saudi Arabia yet? Their laws are worse.

At the movies. Network biopics are almost invariably stupid and disposable, particularly about political figures. So the proposed NBC mini-series about Hillary Clinton seems like a dumb idea to me, and the right (including rare food disease Reince Priebus) is using this nebulous project as a talisman for all of their fantasies about the liberal bias of Hollywood, network television, etc. It’s always someone else’s fault when you lose, isn’t it, Reince? Last we heard from Republicans on biopics about Hillary was how overjoyed they were about the hatchet job served up by Citizen’s United, the litigation over which had such a happy outcome in the Supreme Court. Then there was the whining about a proposed miniseries about Reagan that wasn’t hagiographic enough for their tastes. Get a life, for chrissake.

Right. Not a lot to say, but I said it.

luv u,

jp