What is the reason for the anti-Russia campaign?

What are the real reasons for the current anti-Russian campaign?

This is the campaign based on the fiction that Russian has suddenly become ‘aggressive’ and needs containing. It is a campaign being waged by the political class of the West, the media class of the West (who operate by and large as propagandists for the financiers who own their newspapers) and of course by NATO – and all its hangers-on in London ‘academia’ and various ‘think’-tanks.

The story is that ‘Russia is aggressive’. Or ‘resurgent’. That it poses a ‘threat’ to the Baltics. And on. But, surprisingly little, in fact virtually no, evidence is presented to support this line. Russia, it is true, has taken back Crimea after a popular vote in favour of this (a vote whose validity has been confirmed by subsequent polling by Western polling organisations). [1] No one was shot. The people of Crimea wanted that by a large majority. Anyone who looks at the Crimea situation objectively can see that Russia cannot have acted differently. It is true that in 2008 Russia fought a brief war with Georgia. This was after Georgia had broken the peace being held in South Ossetia. This version of events was the one put forward by an EU fact-finding report. [2] The report went on to blame Russia for over-retaliating when they attacked Georgian territory. But this is risible. A massive show of force and attacking deep into the opponent’s territory and hitting their supply lines is exactly the kind of response that any military force in the modern world will do if it can. (Most likely the EU report authors were trying to find something to pin on Russia having come to the awkward conclusion that as a matter of fact Georgia had initiated the conflict).

Modern Russia asserts its interests. There is no evidence that it is an aggressive power and a threat to the Baltics or any other country in the world. Modern Russia does not enforce a world-wide economic Empire with a chain of military bases and regular invasions of countries far from its borders.

So. What are the reasons for this campaign about ‘Russian aggression’? Here are some of the obvious possible forces driving this campaign:

  • The Western arms industry will benefit
  • NATO commanders (rendered somewhat obsolete by the end of the Cold War I) will find their prestige enhanced.
  • The think-tanks and anti-Russia ‘academic’ industry in the West will find a new purpose
  • The image of the US as the one overriding global power will be restored after they suffered a loss of face when they grabbed at Ukraine and lost a slice of the pie in the process. It is vital for the US brand (an export brand) that it maintain an aura of supreme power. The US is re-asserting its supremacy. And re-projecting the image of supremacy.
  • The political elites in the West can once again control their populations by fear of a new external enemy
  • A desperate lack of acumen, ability and leadership amongst politicians in the Western world.
  • As always with imperialists they are painting the other as an aggressor to distract attention away from their own aggression; for example, their tolerance of crimes committed against ordinary people by militias associated with the Maidan ‘revolution’ in Ukraine

The US economic Empire aims at encompassing the globe. All natural resources and all production are to be integrated into its system of exploitation by private capital. That is the trajectory America is on. The EU tags along in its wake. Planners in the US cannot or will not (who knows which) accept that, in the words of the Russian foreign ministry, “more than one model of development is possible”. In showing independence. e.g. over Crimea, Russia has disobeyed. She is to be disciplined into line. Sanctions are a disciplinary tool. Not just a punishment they have a real force. By depriving the Russian natural extraction industries of capital America is forcing Russia into the position of a dominion (think 17th and 18th century Empires); Russia can sell, and must sell, its oil and gas but cannot develop them as a national resource under their own political direction. The US is not a nation state trying to dominate other nation states. It is a supra-national machine striving to integrate all the resources and all the production of the world into its maw. From the American point of view this is known as bringing freedom to the world. An extraordinarily violent process. Russia’s crime is that in showing national independence it has demonstrated that it is not planning on being swallowed up if it can help it. A dangerous example which might encourage smaller nations to also disobey. And therefore one which must be crushed.

Finally; the real driver of all this is probably a kind of banal and closed-minded (and heart) anti-Slav imperialism/racism.

Notes

1. See http://thenewobserver.co.uk/a-taste-of-guardian-propaganda/ Note 2

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_for_the_Russo-Georgian_War

 

Go to TOP