Putin Walks Into a Trap
By Mike Whitney
ICH, August 20, 2008
The American-armed and trained Georgian army swarmed into South
Ossetia last Thursday, killing an estimated 2,000 civilians, sending
40,000 South Ossetians fleeing over the Russian border, and
destroying much of the capital, Tskhinvali. The attack was
unprovoked and took place a full 24 hours before even ONE Russian
soldier set foot in South Ossetia. Nevertheless, the vast majority
of Americans still believe that the Russian army invaded Georgian
territory first. The BBC, AP, NPR, the New York Times and the rest
of the establishment media has consistently and deliberately misled
their audiences into believing that the violence in South
Ossetia was initiated by the Kremlin. Let's be clear, it wasn't. In
truth, there is NO dispute about the facts except among the people
who rely on the western press for their information. Despite its
steady loss of credibility, the corporate media continues to operate
as the propaganda-arm of the Pentagon.
Former Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev gave a good summary of
events in an op-ed in Monday's Washington Post:
"For some time, relative calm was maintained in South Ossetia. The
peacekeeping force composed of Russians, Georgians and Ossetians
fulfilled its mission, and ordinary Ossetians and Georgians, who
live close to each other, found at least some common ground....What
happened on the night of Aug. 7 is beyond comprehension. The
Georgian military attacked the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali
with multiple rocket launchers designed to devastate large
areas....Mounting a military assault against innocents was a
reckless decision whose tragic consequences, for thousands of people
of different nationalities, are now clear. The Georgian leadership
could do this only with the perceived support and encouragement of a
much more powerful force. Georgian armed forces were trained by
hundreds of U.S. instructors, and its sophisticated military
equipment was bought in a number of countries. This, coupled with
the promise of NATO membership, emboldened Georgian leaders into
thinking that they could get away with a "blitzkrieg" in South
Ossetia...Russia had to respond. To accuse it of aggression against
"small, defenseless Georgia" is not just hypocritical but shows a
lack of humanity." ("A Path to Peace in the Caucasus", Mikhail
Gorbachev, Washington Post)
The question for Americans is whether they trust Mikhail Gorbachev
more than the corporate media?
Russia deployed its tanks and troops to South Ossetia to save the
lives of civilians and to reestablish the peace. Period. It has no
interest in annexing the former-Soviet country or in expanding its
present borders. Now that the Georgian army has been routed, Russian
president Medvedev and Prime Minister Put in have expressed a
willingness to settle the dispute through normal diplomatic channels
at the United Nations. Neither leader is under any illusions about
Washington's involvement in the hostilities. They know that Georgian
President Mikail Saakashvili is an American stooge who came to power
in a CIA-backed coup, the so-called "Rose Revolution", and would
never order a major military operation without explicit instructions
from his White House puppetmasters. Most likely, the orders to
invade came directly from the office of the Vice President, Dick
Cheney.
The Georgian army had no chance of winning a war with Russia or any
intention of occupying the territory they captured. The real aim was
to lure the Russian army into a trap. US planners hope to do what
they did so skillfully in Afghanistan; lure their Russian prey into
a long and bloody Chechnya-type fiasco that will pit their Russia
troops against guerrilla forces armed and trained by US military and
intelligence agencies. The war will be waged in the name of
liberating Georgia from Russian imperialism and stopping Putin from
achieving his alleged ambition to control critical western-owned
pipelines around the Caspian Basin. Much of this "think tank"
generated narrative has already appeared in the mainstream media or
been articulated by American political elites. Meanwhile, the
fighting in the Caucasus has diverted attention from the massive US
naval armada that is presently sailing towards the Persian Gulf for
the long-anticipated confrontation with Iran.
Operatio n Brimstone, the joint US, UK and French naval war games in
the Atlantic Ocean preparing for a naval blockade of Iran, ended
just last week. The war games were designed to simulate a naval
blockade of Iran and the probable Iranian response.
According to Earl of Stirling on the Global Research web site:
"The war games included a US Navy supercarrier battle group, an US
Navy expeditionary carrier battle group, a Royal Navy carrier battle
group, a French nuclear hunter-killer submarine plus a large number
of US Navy cruisers, destroyers and frigates playing the "enemy
force. The lead American ship in these war games, the USS Theodore
Roosevelt (CVN71) and its Carrier Strike Group Two (CCSG-2) are now
headed towards Iran along with the USS Ronald Reagen (CVN76) and its
Carrier Strike Group Seven (CCSG-7) coming from Japan."
Stirling adds: "A strategic diversion has been created for Russia.
The South Ossetia capital has been shelled and a large Georgian tank
force has been heading towards the border....American Marines, a
thousand of them, have recently been in Georgia training the
Georgian military forces... Russia has stated that it will not sit
by and allow the Georgians to attack South Ossetia...This could get
bad, and remember it is just a strategic diversion....but one that
could have horrific effects." ("Massive US Naval Armada Heads for
Iran", Earl of Stirling, Global Research)
In June, former foreign policy adviser to President Jimmy Carter,
Zbigniew Brzezinski, presented the basic stor yline that would be
used against Russia two full months before the Georgian invasion of
South Ossetia. The article appeared on the Kavkazcenter web site.
Brzezinski said the United States witnessed "cases of possible
threats by Russia, directed at Georgia with the intention of taking
control over the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline".
Brzezinski: "Russia actively tends to isolate the Central Asian
region from direct access to world economy, especially to energy
supplies..If Georgia government is destabilized, western access to
Baku, Caspian Sea and further will be limited".
http://www.kavkazcenter.com/eng/content/2008/06/13/9798.shtml
Nonsense. Neither Putin nor newly-elected president Dmitry Medvedev
have any such intention. It is absurd to think that Russia, having
extracted itself from two pointless wars in Chechnya and
Afghanistan, and after years of grinding poverty and social unrest
following the fall of the Soviet state, would choose to wage an
energy war with the nuclear-armed US military. That would be
complete madness. Brzezinski's speculation is part of broader
narrative that's been crafted for the western media to provide a
rationale for upcoming aggression against Russia. Brzezinski is not
only the architect of the mujahadin-led campaign against Russia in
Afghanistan in the 1980s, but also, the author of "The Grand
Chessboard--American Primacy and it's Geostrategic Imperatives", the
operating theory behind the war on terror which involves=2 0massive
US intervention in Central Asia to control vital resources, fragment
Russia, and surround manufacturing giant, China.
"The Grand Chessboard" it is the 21st century's version of the Great
Game. The book begins with this revealing statement:
"Ever since the continents started interacting politically, some
five hundred years ago, Eurasia has been the center of world
power.....The key to controlling Eurasia, says Brzezinski, is
controlling the Central Asian Republics."
This is the heart-and-soul of the war on terror. The real braintrust
behind "neverending conflict" was actually focussed on Central Asia.
It was the pro-Israeli crowd in the Republican Party that pulled the
old switcheroo and refocussed on the Middle East rather than
Eurasia. Now, powerful members of the US foreign policy
establishment (Brzezinski, Albright, Holbrooke) have regrouped
behind the populist "cardboard" presidential candidate Barak Obama
and are preparing to redirect America's war efforts to the Asian
theater. Obama offers voters a choice of wars not a choice against
war.
On Sunday, Brzezinski accused Russia of imperial ambitions comparing
Putin to "Stalin and Hitler" in an interview with Nathan Gardels.
Gardels: What is the world to make of Russia's invasion of Georgia?
Zbigniew Brzezinski: Fundamentally at stake is what kind of role
Russia will play in the new international system.(aka: New World
Order) Unfortunately, Putin is putting Russia on a course that is
ominously similar to Stalin's and Hitler's in th e late 1930s.
Swedish foreign minister Carl Bildt has correctly drawn an analogy
between Putin's "justification" for dismembering Georgia -- because
of the Russians in South Ossetia -- to Hitler's tactics vis a vis
Czechoslovakia to "free" the Sudeten Deutsch. Even more ominous is
the analogy of what Putin is doing vis-a-vis Georgia to what Stalin
did vis-a-vis Finland: subverting by use of force the sovereignty of
a small democratic neighbor. In effect, morally and strategically,
Georgia is the Finland of our day.
The question the international community now confronts is how to
respond to a Russia that engages in the blatant use of force with
larger imperial designs in mind: to reintegrate the former Soviet
space under the Kremlin's control and to cut Western access to the
Caspian Sea and Central Asia by gaining control over the Baku/Ceyhan
pipeline that runs through Georgia.
In brief, the stakes are very significant. At stake is access to oil
as that resource grows ever more scarce and expensive and how a
major power conducts itself in our newly interdependent world,
conduct that should be based on accommodation and consensus, not on
brute force.
If Georgia is subverted, not only will the West be cut off from the
Caspian Sea and Central Asia. We can logically anticipate that
Putin, if not resisted, will use the same tactics toward the
Ukraine. Putin has already made public threats against Ukraine."
("Brzezinski: Russia's invasion of Georgia is Reminiscent of
Stalin's attack on Finland"; Huffin gton Post)
Brzezinski takes great pride in being a disciplined and rational
spokesman for US imperial projects. It is unlike him to use such
hysterical rhetoric. Perhaps, the present situation is more tenuous
than we know. Could it be that the financial system is closer to
meltdown-phase than anyone realizes?
It should be clear by Brzezinski's comments that Georgia's invasion
of South Ossetia was not another incoherent exercise in neocon
chest-thumping, but part of a larger strategy to drag Russia into an
endless conflict that will sap its resources, decrease its prestige
on the global stage, weaken its grip on regional power, strengthen
frayed alliances between Europe and America, and divert attention
from a larger campaign in the Gulf. It is particularly worrisome
that Brzezinski appears to be involved in the planning. Brzezinski,
Holbrooke and Albright form the "Imperialist A-Team"; these are not
the bungling "Keystone Cops" neocons like Feith and Rumsfeld who
trip over themselves getting out of bed in the morning. These are
cold-blooded Machiavellian imperialists who know how to work the
media and the diplomatic channels to conceal their genocidal
operations behind a smokescreen of humanitarian mumbo-jumbo. They
know what they are doing and they are good at it. They're not fools.
They have aligned themselves with the Obama camp and are preparing
for the next big outbreak of global trouble-making. This should
serve as a sobering wake-up call for voters who still think Obama
represents "Change We Can Believe In" .
Richard Holbrooke appeared on Tuesday's Jim Lerher News Hour with
resident neocon Margaret Warner. Typical of Warner's "even-handed"
approach, both of the interviewees were ultra-conservatives from
right-wing think tanks: Richard Holbrooke, from the Council on
Foreign Relations and Dmiti Simes from the Nixon Center.
According to Holbrooke, "The Russians deliberately provoked (the
fighting in South Ossetia) and timed it for the Olympics. This is a
long-standing Russian effort to get rid of President Saakashvili."
Right. Is that why Putin was so shocked when he heard the news
(while he was in Beijing) that he quickly boarded a plane and headed
for Moscow? (after shaking his finger angrily at Bush!)
Holbrooke: "And I want to stress, I'm not a warmonger, and I don't
want a new Cold War any more than Dimitri does....The Russians wish
to re-establish a historic area of hegemony that includes Ukraine.
And it is no accident that the other former Soviet republics are
watching this and extraordinarily upset, as Putin progresses with an
attempt to re-create a kind of a hegemonic space."
It is impossible to go over all of Holbrooke's distortions,
half-truths and lies in one article but, what is important is to
recognize that a false narrative is being constructed to demonize
Putin and to justify future hostilities against Russia. Holbrooke's
bogus assertions are identical to Brzezinski's, and yet, these same
lies are already appearing in the mainstream media. The propaganda
"bullet points" have al ready been determined; "Putin is a
menace","Putin wants to rebuild the Soviet empire", "Putin is an
autocrat". (Unlike our "freedom loving" allies in Saudi Arabia,
Jordan and Egypt!?!) In truth, Putin is simply enjoying Russia's
newly acquired energy-wealth and would like to be left alone. But it
is impossible to be left alone when the US spends 24 hours a day
pestering people. The world deserves a break from an extremely
irritating USA.
So why are Brzezinski and his backers in the foreign policy
establishment demonizing Putin and threatening Russia with
"ostracism, isolation and economic penalties?" What is Putin's
crime?
Putin's problems can be traced back to a speech he made in Munich
nearly two years ago when he declared unequivocally that he rejected
the basic tenets of the Bush Doctrine and US global hegemony. His
speech amounted to a Russian Declaration of Independence. That's
when western elites, particularly at the Council on Foreign
Relations and the American Enterprise Institute put Putin on their
"enemies list" along with Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Castro, Morales,
Mugabe and anyone else who refuses to take orders from the
Washington Mafia.
Here's what Putin said in Munich:
"The unipolar world refers to a world in which there is one master,
one sovereign---- one center of authority, one center of force, one
center of decision-making. At the end of the day this is pernicious
not only for all those within this system, but also for the
sovereign itself because it destroys=2 0itself from within.… What is
even more important is that the model itself is flawed because at
its basis there is and can be no moral foundations for modern
civilization.”
“Unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not resolved
any problems. Moreover, they have caused new human tragedies and
created new centers of tension. Judge for yourselves---wars as well
as local and regional conflicts have not diminished. More are dying
than before. Significantly more, significantly more!
Today we are witnessing an almost uncontained hyper-use of force –
military force – in international relations, force that is plunging
the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts.
We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles
of international law. And independent legal norms are, as a matter
of fact, coming increasingly closer to one state’s legal system. One
state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has
overstepped its national borders in every way. This is visible in
the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it
imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about
this?
In international relations we increasingly see the desire to resolve
a given question according to so-called issues of political
expediency, based on the current political climate. And of course
this is extremely dangerous. It results in the fact that no one
feels safe. I want to emphasize this – no one feels safe! Because no
o ne can feel that international law is like a stone wall that will
protect them. Of course such a policy stimulates an arms race.
I am convinced that we have reached that decisive moment when we
must seriously think about the architecture of global security.”
Every word Putin spoke was true which is why it was not reprinted in
the western media.
“Unilateral and illegitimate military actions”, the “uncontained
hyper-use of force”, the “disdain for the basic principles of
international law”, and most importantly; “No one feels safe!”
Putin's claims are all indisputable, that is why he has entered the
neocons crosshairs. He poses a direct challenge to---what Brzezinski
calls---the "international system", which is shorthand for the
corporate/banking cartel that is controlled by the western oligarchy
of racketeers.
South Ossetia was a trap and Putin took the bait. Unfortunately for
Bush, the wily Russian prime minister is considerably brighter than
anyone in the current administration. Bush's plan will undoubtedly
backfire and disrupt the geopolitical balance of power. The world
might get that breather from the US after all.
|