Miroslav Antić


Brzezinski endorses arming Ukrainian junta, to no avail

leave a comment »

Brzezinski endorses arming Ukrainian junta, to no avail

© Collage: Voice of Russia

The situation in Ukraine is on the verge of spiralling out of complete control, especially now that the junta’s military and Pravy Sector irregulars are deployed against the citizens of the Southeast. The US is bunkering down in its support of the coup-imposed Ukrainian authorities with a renewed round of sanctions against Russia and Congressional chatter about arming the Ukrainian forces.

Among the strongest advocates of American aggression is former National Security Advisor and influential policy activist Zbigniew Brzezinski (incidentally, the strategic founder of the Mujahedeen), who in a recent article argues that the US needs to step up its military commitment to Ukraine. What is most striking, however, is that Brzezinski’s attempts to paint Russia in a negative light betray a self-conscious guilt on the part of the American ruling establishment. As such, Brzezinski’s latest blather into public diplomacy should be seen as nothing more than the thinly disguised psy-op that it is.

Most news reports on Brzezinski’s piece focus on his suggestion to arm the Ukrainian military (and by implicit understanding, the Neo-Nazi Pravy Sector forces now aligned with them) in order to create a type of guerrilla insurgency to sabotage any Russian peace and stabilization intervention in the beleaguered Southeast. This plan for proxy warfare reeks of the stench of 1980s Afghanistan, when the US (guided by Brzezinski) worked to trick the Soviets into a quagmire. A simple substitution shows that the US has a simple plan for copying this template into 2014 Ukraine. Whereas the Afghans had Stinger missiles, rural battlegrounds, and CIA-trained organization, the Ukrainians are envisioned to have hand-held rockets and anti-tank missiles, an urban battleground, and, like the Afghans, CIA organization as well. It’s the same trick being played on the same audience, but this time the trickster himself is the fool.

Nowhere is this seen more explicitly than in Brzezinski’s plea for Obama to present a "comprehensive statement of what is really at stake". A point for point response as viewed by the Rest (non-West) follows:

Brzezinski: Why we are facing this problem?

Rest: There has been an explosion of Western-organized covert activity all across the world (Color Revolutions, "Arab Spring"), dangerously culminating on Russia’s doorstep. Brzezinski’s Arc of Crisis and Eurasian Balkans policy have leaped from the Mideast to Eastern Europe in order to separate Russia from Ukraine. Brzezinski wrote in his 1997 book "The Grand Chessboard" that keeping Ukraine away from Russia is absolutely necessary to prevent Russia from restoring an "empire". This line of thinking fulfils Hillary Clinton’s threat of "figure[ing] out effective ways to slow down or prevent [the Eurasian Union]".

Brzezinski: Why it is in our common interest to resolve it?

Rest: Nobody in Eurasia wants to see the Eurasian Balkans project succeed, because if it does, then a bloody divide and rule policy will conquer the supercontinent.

Brzezinski: Why, if negotiation does not work out, (do) we have an obligation to help Ukraine?

Rest: The entire world has an obligation to help the people of Ukraine, just not the junta. Color Revolutions and their spawn must be eradicated at the root, otherwise their non-state actor infrastructure will spread like weeds throughout the Eurasian lawn and choke out other Resistant and Defiant (R&D) States.

Brzezinski: Above all, the president must clarify why we cannot tolerate an international system in which countries are invaded by thugs and destabilized from abroad.

Rest: This is exactly what President Putin and the Russian Federation have been doing for years, and Putin most recently referred to the threat of Color Revolutions in his speech announcing the reunification of Crimea with Russia. Thugs have turned Libya into a "scumbag Woodstock", and they have been fighting for over three years to overthrow the popular secular government of Syria and replace it with an extreme Islamic dictatorship. Both are exported from abroad, and the US has now set its shadowy sights on Ukraine.

Brzezinski: And why this is a common responsibility not just for us but for our allies and other friends like the Chinese, whose stake in stability should be as great as ours.

Rest: China most certainly has a stake in Eastern European stability, so much so that it has just announced its cooperation in linking Crimea to mainland Russia.

The Rest understands the trick being played by the West, and they are not falling for the same games anymore. This is why Brzezinski implores Obama to address the American people, not the world, in pushing for an escalation of the crisis by arming the Ukrainian junta. It’s a lost cause to try to sell the same old shtick to a global non-Western audience that is becoming more politically and economically empowered with each passing year. And interestingly enough, it may even be a sign of desperation for Obama to so explicitly address his American subjects on this topic. After all, at the end of March, 46 percent of Americans disapproved of the way Obama was handling the Ukrainian Crisis. Western pundits may spin this as meaning that the public wants Obama to "get tough" on the issue, but the opposite may be true. One needs look no further for evidence of the US population’s weariness for warfare than the extreme unpopularity that a US strike on Syria last year, to say nothing of taking measures that could theoretically push Russia and the US to nuclear brinksmanship.

The ultimate irony behind Brzezinski’s piece is it is he who engineered this entire Ukrainian destabilization strategy through the theories advocated in "The Grand Chessboard". It is not realistic that he, of all people, would suddenly turn into a dove after his policy has seen relative success in disrupting Russia’s foreign policy with its largest Eastern European neighbor. Taken from this obvious perspective, his article and its "peaceful" recommendations (a trilateral economic framework) should be taken with a grain of salt. Cursory research would indicate that it was first Russia, not Brzezinski, who thought of the trilateral idea, although this was flatly rejected at the time.

Additionally, while using Turkey’s 50+ years of trying to join the EU as some type of assurance that Ukraine would not immediately be gobbled up into the Union, Brzezinski conveniently omits the blinding speed that Brussels surged East into relatively poor and politically dysfunctional Bulgaria and Romania, to say nothing of formerly war-torn Croatia’s ascension last year. The ease with which he mentions "vulnerable NATO countries" shows that he takes for granted these countries’ membership in NATO in the first place, which itself clearly violates the agreement not to expand the alliance eastward after the Cold War. With these basic facts in mind, one can rightly (for once!) channel John Kerry and describe Brzezinski as the real "propaganda bullhorn" of the Ukrainian Crisis.

Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/2014_05_09/Brzezinski-endorses-arming-Ukrainian-junta-to-no-avail-3995/




Written by Mika

9. maja 2014. u 13:59

Objavljeno u Uncategorized

Ostavite odgovor

Popunite detalje ispod ili pritisnite na ikonicu da biste se prijavili:

WordPress.com logo

Komentarišet koristeći svoj WordPress.com nalog. Odjavite se /  Promeni )

Google+ photo

Komentarišet koristeći svoj Google+ nalog. Odjavite se /  Promeni )

Slika na Tviteru

Komentarišet koristeći svoj Twitter nalog. Odjavite se /  Promeni )

Fejsbukova fotografija

Komentarišet koristeći svoj Facebook nalog. Odjavite se /  Promeni )


Povezivanje sa %s

%d bloggers like this: