Which Propaganda to Believe? By Erick San Juan

Which Propaganda to Believe? By Erick San Juan

Veteran strategic analyst George Friedman of Stratfor wrote at the Businessmirror(6/29/14) about the US unfinished business in Ukraine and Iraq. He said that some of the international systems unfinished business has revealed itself. He believes that Ukraine's fate is not yet settled. Neither is Russia's relationship with the European peninsula. I agree. Friedman explained that geopolitical situation rarely resolve themselves neatly or permanently.

Among the written analysis about Ukraine that I've read, it was the Counter Punch's in depth report written by Diana Johnstone that i realize was the most balanced and accurate reading of what really transpired in Ukraine entitled, "Tightening the US Grip on Western Europe: Washington's Iron Curtain in Ukraine." To quote:"NATO leaders are  currently acting out a deliberate charade in Europe, designed to reconstruct an Iron Curtain between Russia and the West. Planned in advance, events that they deliberately triggered are being misrepresented as sudden, astonishing, unjustified Russian aggression.

The US and the European Union reportedly undertook an aggressive provocation in Ukraine to force Russia to react defensively. The US was allegedly manipulating political conflict in Ukraine to install a pro-Western government intent on joining NATO. It is a matter of life and death to the Russian navy and allegedly a grave national security threat on Russia's border.

Johnstone said that it is a trap for Putin, allowing NATO to advance its hostile forces to an ideal attack position. She added that the West was ready for this, prepared to tell that Putin was the 'New Hitler', poised to overrun helpless Europe which could only be saved like the 'Normandy' by the Americans. But the overwhelming majority of Crimeans are Russian, having been Russian citizens since Khrushchev bestowed the territory on Ukraine in 1954.

The take over of Ukraine was allegedly planned at Yalta in September 2013 when Ukraine's richest oligarch, Viktor Pinchuk paid for an elite strategic conference on Ukraine's future that was held in Yalta, Crimea. This was the same place where Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill met to decide the future of Europe in 1945. Both President Viktor Yanukovych, which was ousted after five months and the recently elected successor Petro Poroshenko were present. Former US energy secretary Bill Richardson was there to talk about the shale gas revolution which the US hopes to use to weaken Russia by substituting fracking for Russia's natural gas reserves. The prospect of Ukraine's integration with the West was discussed and the possible break of Ukraine with Russia.

Sergei Glazyev,Putin's adviser noted that Ukraine was running an enormous foreign accounts deficit, funded with foreign borrowing and the increase in Western imports could only swell the deficit.

Planning to incorporate Ukraine into the sphere of the west would entail serious problems with Russian speaking Ukrainians and to Russia. Instead of working for a compromise, Western leaders allegedly decided to forge ahead and blame Russia for whatever would go wrong. Yanukovych faced an economic collapse, outraged protests ensued which were rapidly exploited by the west.

During the time of Yanukovych, Ukraine was playing a double game, telling the EU that it was interested in signing a trade agreement DCFTA while telling the Russians that it was interested in joining the union. He could not make up his mind and trying to get the best deal out of both sides. He was reportedly not a 'Moscow's man' and his downfall owes a lot to his role in playing the best of both worlds. It was perceived as a dangerous game of pitting big powers against each other.

According to Johnstone, the Russian position is not to split Ukraine because it could be a bridge between  East and West. But the arrangement calls for Western readiness to cooperate with Russia which the US vetoed preferring to exploit the crisis.

A blatant provocation, using Ukraine political confusion against Russia has astonishingly succeeded in producing a total change. We are told that the 'freedom-loving West' is faced with the threat of Russian expansionism. The US allegedly needs an enemy to save the world and Europe. Washington policy makers seemed to be worried that President Barack Obama's swing to Asia and neglect of Europe might weaken US control of it's NATO allies. The May 25 European Parliament elections revealed a large measure of disaffection with the European Union.

Washington is even able to exploit the anti-communist, anti-Russian and even pro-Nazi nostalgia of Northeastern Europe in order to obstruct the growing economic partnership between the old EU, notably Germany and Russia.

To tighten the grip of US on Europe, the United States is using the artificial crisis to demand that its indebted allies spend more on defense, by purchasing weapons system. The situation in Ukraine  is not only a chess game but chess combined with poker combined with Russian roulette., Johnstone concluded.

Pundits believe that the planting of the western values in Ukraine was carried out by NGO's and non-profit organizations like  the NED(National Endowment for democracy) founded in 1983 on the initiative of then US President  Ronald Reagan which had been successful in dismantling the USSR. The official website of NED contains information about the organizations close ties with CIA. NED reportedly allocates $2.8 million dollars to implement  around 50 projects in Ukraine aimed at the development of democracy and civil society. It also provide support to several youth associations, activists and journalists. This was the reason i wrote about the NGO's in my previous article so that we will be aware of such lobby groups especially those funded by foreign governments. Most of it's trained leaders are expert in propaganda and in destabilizing governments.