This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Backstory to the Russia-Ukraine Confrontation: The U.S. and NATO Encirclement of Russia
The American press portrays Putin as being the bad guy and the aggressor in the Ukraine crisis.
Putin is certainly no saint. A former KGB agent, Putin's net worth is estimated at some $40 billion dollars ... as he has squeezed money out of the Russian economy by treating the country as his own personal fiefdom. And all sides appear to have dirt on their hands in the Russia-Ukraine crisis.
But we can only see the bigger picture if we take a step back and gain a little understanding of the history underlying the current tensions.
Indeed, the fact that the U.S. has allegedly paid billions of dollars to anti-Russian forces in Ukraine - and even purportedly picked the Ukrainian president - has to be seen in context.
Veteran New York Times reporter Steven Kinzer notes at the Boston Globe:
From the moment the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the United States has relentlessly pursued a strategy of encircling Russia, just as it has with other perceived enemies like China and Iran. [Background here, here and here.] It has brought 12 countries in central Europe, all of them formerly allied with Moscow, into the NATO alliance. US military power is now directly on Russia’s borders.
“I think it is the beginning of a new cold war,” warned George Kennan, the renowned diplomat and Russia-watcher, as NATO began expanding eastward. “I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely, and it will affect their policies.”
Stephen Cohen - professor emeritus at New York University and Princeton University who has long focused on Russia - explained this weekend on CNN:
We are witnessing as we talk the making possibly of the worst history of our lifetime. We are watching the descending of a new cold war divide between west and east, only this time, it is not in far away Berlin, it's right on Russia's borders through the historical civilization in Ukraine. It's a crisis of historic magnitude. If you ask how we got in it, how we got into the crisis, and how therefore do we get out, it is time to stop asking why Putin - why Putin is doing this or that, but ask about the American policy, and the European Union policy that led to this moment.
***
I don't know if you your listeners or views remember George Kennan. He was considered [a] great strategic thinker about Russia among American diplomats but he warned when we expanded NATO [under Bill Clinton], that this was the most fateful mistake of American foreign policy and that it would lead to a new Cold War. George lived to his hundreds, died a few years ago, but his truth goes marching on. The decision to move NATO beginning in the 90's continuing under Bush and continuing under Obama, is right now on Russia's borders.
And if you want to know for sure, and I have spent a lot of time in Moscow, if you want to know what the Russian power elite thinks Ukraine is about, it is about bringing it into NATO. One last point, that so-called economic partnership that Yanukovych, the elected president of Ukraine did not sign, and that set off the streets - the protests in the streets in November, which led to this violence in and confrontation today, that so-called economic agreement included military clauses which said that Ukraine by signing this so called civilization agreement had to abide by NATO military policy. This is what this is about from the Russian point of view, the ongoing western march towards post Soviet Russia.
Jonathan Steele writes at the Guardian
Both John Kerry's threats to expel Russia from the G8 and the Ukrainian government's plea for Nato aid mark a dangerous escalation of a crisis that can easily be contained if cool heads prevail. Hysteria seems to be the mood in Washington and Kiev, with the new Ukrainian prime minister claiming, "We are on the brink of disaster" as he calls up army reserves in response to Russian military movements in Crimea.
Were he talking about the country's economic plight he would have a point. Instead, along with much of the US and European media, he was over-dramatising developments in the east, where Russian speakers are understandably alarmed after the new Kiev authorities scrapped a law allowing Russian as an official language in their areas. They see it as proof that the anti-Russian ultra-nationalists from western Ukraine who were the dominant force in last month's insurrection still control it. Eastern Ukrainians fear similar tactics of storming public buildings could be used against their elected officials.
Kerry's rush to punish Russia and Nato's decision to respond to Kiev's call by holding a meeting of member states' ambassadors in Brussels today were mistakes. Ukraine is not part of the alliance, so none of the obligations of common defence come into play. Nato should refrain from interfering in Ukraine by word or deed. The fact that it insists on getting engaged reveals the elephant in the room: underlying the crisis in Crimea and Russia's fierce resistance to potential changes is Nato's undisguised ambition to continue two decades of expansion into what used to be called "post-Soviet space", led by Bill Clinton and taken up by successive administrations in Washington. At the back of Pentagon minds, no doubt, is the dream that a US navy will one day replace the Russian Black Sea fleet in the Crimean ports of Sevastopol and Balaclava.
***
Vladimir Putin's troop movements in Crimea, which are supported by most Russians, are of questionable legality under the terms of the peace and friendship treaty that Russia signed with Ukraine in 1997. But their illegality is considerably less clear-cut than that of the US-led invasion of Iraq, or of Afghanistan, where the UN security council only authorised the intervention several weeks after it had happened. [Indeed, top American leaders admit that the Iraq war was for reasons different than publicly stated. And the U.S. military sticks its nose in other countries' business all over the world. And see this.] And Russia's troop movements can be reversed if the crisis abates. That would require the restoration of the language law in eastern Ukraine and firm action to prevent armed groups of anti-Russian nationalists threatening public buildings there.
Again, we don't believe that there are angels on any side. But we do believe that everyone has to take a step back, look at the bigger picture, calm down and reach a negotiated diplomatic resolution.
And see this, this, this and this (interview with a 27-year CIA veteran, who chaired National Intelligence Estimates and personally delivered intelligence briefings to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and the Joint Chiefs of Staff).
»
- advertisements -
" It's an incredible load of crap and ignorance, or else a flat-out lie, to suggest the aggression was all coming from the West. "
Possible, I'm not in a position to discuss the point. But, may I remind you that a great part of the world has been under the domination of western powers ? And if you think this is only the deed of some european monarchies, think again :
1846 mexican-american war.
1898 spanish-american war
1899 philippine-american war.
The Americans also competed with other nations for "sphere of influences" in China.
All of this happened before the advent of USSR.
Generally speaking, I'm not sure Westerners have ever tried to develop anything resembling "live and let live" philosophy.
I was aware of those conflicts. I'd add that the gulag archipelago is a pretty good indication of the morality of the system and which limits and tactics it was happy to employ. Pretty much everything. They were aggressive, plenty of evidence of that.
Live-n-let-live is reserved for white people, rarely, not for long. Iraq told the truth. I guess the best that can be said is we're not as bad as we once were (but please don't hold us to that as we like a bit of wriggle-room for some ad-lib hypocrisy).
Element, you're a person whose intelligence I respect. Up until recently I could not have found fault with your Korean War example. The older I get, though, the more I learn of things which were swept under the rug regarding US history.
For example, up until about ten years ago, I never knew that the US, on behalf of British Petroleum, overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran. Up until about twenty years ago,
I never knew that Ho Chi Minh had initially appealed to the US government for help in establishing an independent Vietnam based on the US declaration of independence and constitution (apart from the slavery stuff, of course). Had the US government not ignored his appeal, many lives would not have been needlessly snuffed out.
Up until a year ago, I never knew of the events which led to the Korean War. My impression is that you are someone who would rather embrace the truth than shrink away from it, which is why I respectfully suggest you examine the following two articles.
http://antiwar.com/blog/2013/03/05/north-korea-and-the-united-states-wil...
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/World/WOR-03-130214.html
I freely admit I was wrong in my beliefs regarding the Korean War, because there is no shame in being wrong for those who genuinely seek the truth. I hope you will find something of worth in what I've said.
Thanks 4Sing, much appreciated, I not only appreciate your commentary in general, I think you're a seriously funny bastard and that rates you pretty highly.
I read a book about the Ho-Chi-Minh proposal(s) and diplomatic approach(s) to the US prior to the war to try and form an alliance with the US. Most people have no idea about that, so I'm glad you do.
I guess it's much harder to be aware in real-time, rather than in retrospect, to avoid such conflicts to begin with. I just wish the US would actually try. I'm pretty convinced it doesn't. OK then, rip them to bits instead. ;-)
I'll read those with links with relish, cheers.
btw, I can't see a reason why someone would want other than the truth, it's a weird concept.
"btw, I can't see a reason why someone would want other than the truth, it's a weird concept."
To placate their ego - confirmation bias of their fragile Rube Goldberg construct of reality.
Kerry preaching about invading other countries without having sufficient "justification" ? Wow ! What special talent it takes to talk out of both sides of your mouth at the same time.
Putin is a brutal dictator but he has every justification to protect Russia's soft underbelly.
As to GW's point- Russia has been encircled and is indeed fighting back. What choice do they have ?
I agree but I consider ALL rulers as brutal dictators.
Putin is nowhere as bad as some US presidents or US installed puppets.
I'm not an expert on the Soviet Union, but I assume you have to take individual periods one at a time.
For example, Stalin was a really, really, really, really nasty son-of-a-b!tc@h ...
He killed how many people, and locked how many dissidents in insane asylums?
Under his Soviet Union, mf evil empire.
Paul Robeson had a great voice, but was one of the useful idiots who supported the Soviets.
Just my opinion...
Completely agree, would also add that Hitler came to notoriety combating communists, during 1920s and early 1930s. Without the commie infiltration and attempts to start a German and general European revolution, Hitler would have drove a tram for a living.
I think with Brezhnev they settled down a bit, and began to decompose from there.
But remember all those wretched leftist insurgencies in South and Central America in the 1970s and 1980s? Soviet backed Cuba in Angola from 1975, and other parts of Africa. PKK in Indonesia. Soviet proxy clients used aggressive and violent tactics and armed insurgency was their #1 favorite trick.
"But remember all those wretched leftist insurgencies in South and Central America in the 1970s and 1980s?"
Oh man, I don't even know where to begin to deconstruct that.
Long before the Soviet Union existed the USA was installing puppet regimes throughout Latin America, some of them as brutal as anything you'd find in Medieval Europe.
If indigenous and civil society fought back with Soviet help (when it finally arrived, after a century of US directed oppression) then it merely illustrates their level of desperation.
Forget the theoretics, I'm talking about the people communism speaks directly to: peasants and workers under feudal conditions. Fact is, the only manual of arms available to fight that level of oppression is The Communist Manifesto, which is why it succeeds so well in those conditions.
So then, who created those conditions?
Thanks ebear, appreciated that.
GW is in good company, including Retired CIA Analyst Ray McGovern.
US ‘plotted, abetted’ ouster of Ukraine’s president: Retired CIA Analyst Ray McGovern: Click here: http://thenewsdoctors.com/?p=120080
And Paul Craig Roberts: http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/03/03/washingtons-arrogance-hubris-evil-set-stage-war/
And Professor James Petras: http://thenewsdoctors.com/?p=119584
Excellent summary George.
However, keep in mind, in the last cold war, the Soviets were right in the center of Europe.
Now Russia gets a small hint of how that feels.
Last cold war we had a popular president that believed in the stength of the military. There was also a clear enemy that the US population feared.
And the US was right in Europe.
So?
If you can't grasp the point then you maybe need to ask some West Germans and East Germans what the implications of that were for ~45 years.
Eastern Bloc emigration and defection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Bloc_emigration_and_defection
This piece of garbage is either an infantile psudoanalysis by someone who has no clue about geopolitics, or a stealth propaganda from Kremlin.
You are the one who is clueless. Sad !
As in opposite to State Department propaganda.
Let me put it in a way that you addled brain will understand.
Putin's Russia is the ONLY thing currently standing agains a Jewish Reich.
Now eat your peas.
Here's another interesting twist to this whole thing with Mr Putin. It explains a lot...meaning the good old USA will walk over anybody or any country if it's in the interest of big oil and big banks.
http://youtu.be/qCU4C6ajgBI
"percieved enemies"
I stopped reading at that point. Russia, China and Iran would burn Ameica to the ground, piss on the ashes and then dance a jig if they thought they could get away with it.
There is a difference between the US and those three coutries. And it is not just percieved.
Did you stop reading when US drones kill innocnet bystanders ?
yes they would, but not because of the people, but because of the "leaders"
whats the old saying?...."you made your bed, now your gonna lie in it"
"There is a difference between the US and those three coutries. And it is not just percieved."
Sure as hell is a difference.
The US is killing people in about a dozen or so countries.
Nice demonization effort!
George, I would love to see an expose regarding the dervatives hinging on EU countries that may be affected by Ukrainian imbalances. It is my understanding that the tottering nations (actually and truly bankrupt) that seem to be "miraculously" returning to health (although little has actually changed in such a short period of time) have been papered over using these various, off-balance-sheet devices.
I also understand that these towers of theoretical paper have reached as high as 600 trillion USD and are often backed by collateral already pledged to backing other instruments. As they have resorted to this "last ditch effort" repeatedly, it would appear that TPTB are likely to recycle the technique to bail-out Ukraine. Leaving me with two questions:
It seems possible, to me at least, that all this banging on shields and clashing of swords is a sideshow compared to the real issues: The derivatives (both for temporary good - Ukraine gets bailed - and ill - Ukraine plunges into darkness) and natural gas as a weapon.
I would love to see more exploration of this subject - especially along with the IMF's plans for SDRs and how they may become involved.
Thanks for all you do,
i.
I am attaching an article that I consider to be the most important I have read in years:http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/514449-james-rickards-china-planning-to-displace-dollar/3/?photo=2
I was pointed to this article by Jim Sinclair's site, probably through Greg Hunter or Eric King. Naturally the China connection means much more when the analysis in this article is taken into account.
I don't think its a secret that HSBC is actively acting as a conduit for the Chicoms by advertizing and exchanging Renminbi into other currencies, bypassing the USD/FRN.
NO DEFAULTS!!!! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! AND NO!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't think so George, between our banks, the CIA and the arrogance of our politicians I don't think there's many countries, particulary in the east, that wouldn't steam roll us given half a chance.
"percieved enemies"
I stopped reading at that point. Russia, China and Iran would burn Ameica to the ground, piss on the ashes and then dance a jig if they thought they could get away with it.
There is a difference between the US and those three coutries. And it is not just percieved.
Sic!
Remember how freaked out the Wilson Administration got over the Zimmerman Telegram? This is like that, but a billion times bigger deal.
Remember how freaked out the Wilson Administration got over the Zimmerman Telegram? This is like that, but a billion times bigger deal.
You're throwing pearls to swine. I've been mentioning H.E. Barnes but nobody has a clue.
Cap'n Kink.
Thanks man, I'm a big fan of sarcasm and that was pretty good.
Please add your support to this petition at Whitehouse.gov, to Keep the U.S. Out of Ukraine. Please also forward the link, or add it to your social media outlets. Once the petition has 150 endorsements, it will be posted on the Whitehouse.gov website for others to endorse.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/stay-out-ukraine/ZBPTKbtb
Link Here
Maybe Nuland will sign it.
Incredible that she's part of liberal Obama's team when she's married to one of the neo-cons that led us into the Iraq War, one of the signers of the Project for a New American Century that outlines going to war there back in the '90's.
That lizard freak Nuland was 1st hired by Bush Sr - given her 1st big promotions under Bill Clinton - received multiple promotions by shrub bush including right hand advisor to Dick Skeletor Cheney - then given multiple promotions by the Oilybomber regime including spokesperson for H Clinton while she was Sec of State - then another promotion to East Europe affairs - I might add both H Clinton and Skeletor dickhead Cheney are both famous for only hiring those perceived as extremely loyal -
Notice she didnt get reprimanded for her FU EU leak - instead she's shadowing Kerry as we speak -
The scam of the duopoly exposed for those that give a shit -
Seamless bipartisanship at its finest -
Fascist bastards
Lots of things are incredible about Obama's administration, including the people who work for him. Somehow I don't think that it would be any different under any other president. The names might change somewhat but the types and intents would remain the same...
These guys are full of shit, acting like this is all new and critical thinking. This was all very predictable, and the outcome is widely known: We squeeze "Russia" after the collapse of the USSR, they push back. by 2020 "Russia" will be a a pack of dogs that don't even like each other and have lost significant ground in technological develpment. They will rest on the laurels of their resource rich lands and continue to exploit them and their population for the gain of their ruling class. They will not improve productivity or per capita gdp to the extent required to keep pace. Russia is worthy only of ridicule. This is their moment...they should enjoy it. There may be conflict, but it will not be a major conflict. They just dont have the juice. Period. China is also no threat. We are our own worst enemy, true, but no other nation can compete in economic or military power, probably not for 50 to 100 years.
This is what it is all about:
http://www.amazon.com/Grand-Chessboard-American-Geostrategic-Imperatives-ebook/dp/B005OSFX0A/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1393965543&sr=8-3&keywords=zbigniew+brzezinski
Some brit wrote a thesis 100 + years ago describing how control of central asia leads to world domination.
Fucks like brzezinski and the one world order people and their ilk, take it as gospel.
They want to control this part of the world, so they can control the world.
Fuckers...
Wait....er....are you talking about Russia? Or the US? Or perhaps both?
;-P
You're full of shit.
+1 Completely full of shit.
He is not full of shit. he is simply an 'american' who snapped. Usually, 'americans' wait for a point of no return before making that kind of revealing statements.
He is way too early. That 'american' snapped out and broke character. It happens sometimes.
.
Or they wait until their re-election is a done deal.
Expect to see more of this kind of thing. This guy is confronted strongly with the evil of the US government to the point that his denial now begins to lose its kick. His bag of tricks is nearly empty. All he has left is projecting the future of the US, which he can not face, onto Russia and China.
His self delusion will now shift into overdrive.