« Previous ·
Home
· Next »
Filed under: Russia
It's very difficult to explain how anyone could ever have thought that Russia would simply "give up" its hostility towards the West and its values and institutions just because it "lost" the Cold War, and could therefore "never go back" to Soviet values. Where did this insane idea come from? Is it just frenzied Western arrogance? If the West had lost the Cold War, would we have simply repudiated democracy and adopted a communist dictatorship?
The latest confirmation that Russians never abandoned their hatred of the West came in Vladimir Putin's eighth (possibly last) state-of-the-nation message. In it, as Reuters reports, he announced the unilateral suspension of Russia's implementation of the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty, essentially challenging Europe to a new cold war. As if that were not bad enough, Russia's parliament called for breaking diplomatic relations with Estonia, a NATO and EU member, when Estonia dared to move a memorial to Soviet soldiers whom Estonia views as occupiers and rapists.
At a NATO meeting in Oslo, Reuters reports:
NATO expressed grave concern. NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer stated: "That message was met by concern, grave concern, disappointment and regret," de Hoop Scheffer told a news conference. "The allies are of the opinion that the CFE is one of the cornerstones of European security."
So Russia has violated a "cornerstone of European security." Putin says the reason is that "[NATO countries] are ... building up military bases on our borders and, more than that, they are also planning to station elements of anti-missile defence systems in Poland and the Czech Republic." Does Russia plan to fire missiles at Poland and Czech Republic? Is that why it's annoyed? Does Russia believe these defensive systems violate the CFE? Putin certainly does not say so. Putin said it was "an anachronism that Russia should be restricted in how it can deploy its armed forces within its own borders, while NATO countries used pretexts to bend the terms of the treaty." Yet he's not bending, but breaking the document, unilaterally, after Russia ratified it, with no formalities.
In a classic bit of Soviet-style propaganda, Putin stated: "It is hard to imagine that anyone would restrict the United States, for example, in moving its troops around its own territory." But this treaty doesn't apply to the U.S., it applies to Europe, and it restricts movement of troops in Western Europe exactly the same way it does in Russia.
During the Cold War, Russia behaved as if it was the West's equal when it wasn't. It behaved as if Western nations were populated by hopeless idiots Russians could easily flim-flam, bamboozle and outwit. This behavior destroyed the Soviet Union, yet apparently Russia has learned nothing from that experience. Apparently, it will allow its obtuse pride to drive it once again into a direct confrontation with a whole host of countries whose economies and military forces dwarf those of Russia. The USSR only lasted 75 years. Will Russia, its successor, last even that long, if it continues these wild-eyed, unrealistic policies?
Russian hypocrisy and willingness to provoke cold war is truly breathtaking. As if all this provocation was not enough, just moments after complaining in his state-of-the-nation speech that foreigners were supporting the "Other Russia" protest movement, Putin sent the Nashi youth cult into Estonia in an effort to block that country's removal of a memorial to Soviet soliders from a main public square in the capital city of Tallinn. Estonians, of course, view the Red Army which occupied and enslaved them in much the same way as Russians view the Nazis. Nashi provoked a riot, the Estonian government ended it, and now Russian politicians, referring to Estonians as "inhuman," are calling for Russia to break diplomatic relations with Estonia, a NATO and EU member. An Estonian blogger wrote (posting a photo of a wild-eyed looter/rioter): "Just a friendly reminder here, the Estonian government moved a monument from a central square to a cemetery. And the Russians consider that grounds for severing diplomatic ties. Will they take off their shoes and bang them on their desks when the vote is taken?" He reminds us that Estonia is enaged in an even-handed effort to deal with issues of this kind. Thus: "Three years ago, in a small Estonian town called Lihula, the Estonian government removed another monument, this time one to Estonians who had fought in the 20th Waffen SS to -- as they say -- keep the Red Army out of Estonia long enough to restore Estonian independence."
When Chechnya is at issue, Russia says it's a "domestic" Russian affair and foreigners have no business "interfering." When Iraq is at issue, Russia demands talk rather than confrontation. But when Estonia is at issue, Russians have the "right" to intervene by any means they choose. Russia doesn't ask: "What if Estonia (or America) tried to tell Russia what to do with its war dead?" If "Other Russia" protests peacefully in Russia's streets, the Kremlin has the right to crush them; but if Nashi riots in Estonia, the Estonians are supposed to ignore it. Exactly this sort of mindboggling hypocrisy brought down the USSR, and now Russia is doing the same thing all over again!
Social Bookmarking:
 del.icio.us |  digg |  technorati |  stumble upon |  furl |  reddit
Comments
Aris Katsaris says:
"Speaking of Nazi's, I am pretty certain that they were preoccupied with judeo-bolshevik conspiracies, rather than villifying the anglos."
Then you've not studied the propaganda of the times that well. The Anglo-American were depicted as the tools of the Jews and the Jews were likewise depicted as the agents and spies of the Anglo-Americans. The Nazi hatred of the "Jewish money" and the dollar is reminiscent of Putin vilifying foreign money being donated to NGOs in Russia.
You say:
"Litvinenko was a tin-foil-brigade ass-clown.
After Russia murders, it also tries to murder the memory of the people it killed through its agents like you.
Litvinenko's photo was used as *target-practice* in Russia!
And State Duma member Sergei Abeltsev said regarding Litvinenko "The deserved punishment reached the traitor. I am sure his terrible death will be a warning to all the traitors that in Russia the treason is not to be forgiven. I would recommend to citizen Berezovsky to avoid any food at the commemoration for his crime accomplice Litvinenko"
You are defending shameless murderers, who kill them in the open and then spit on the memory of the people they've just killed.
He had no credibility in the West, even less in Russia. "
And also employ others to spit on the memory they've just killed, yes, you're living example of that.
For some reason Yushchenko does not appear to be too interested in finding out who poisoned him.
We know who decided the poisoning of Yushchenko, nothing to "find out here", anymore about Litvinenko's case. Only the self-deluded still think the Kremlin and its lackeys are innocent.
Many more journalists were killed during Yeltsin's boozy reign than under Putin.
Well that's what I said, wasn't it? That Putin's reign is a mere continuation of Yeltsin's. Yeltsin *chose* Putin after all.
Russia supports the various tinpot dictators no more no less than America supports the Saudi family
No, Russia supports tinpot dictators far *far* more than America does. America's primary circle of allies (NATO) is a group of democracies. Russia's primary circle of allies (most of the former CIS, the Shanghai Cooperation) Organization) are all dictatorships.
The Serbs in Bosnia were practicing the same kind of separatism that is about to be so richly rewarded in Kosovo.
The West's support for the Kosovar separatists was wrongheaded, but it was founded on their unwillingness to permit another round of Serb ethnic cleansing, as they commited in Bosnia. They didn't recognize Kosovar imperialism for what it was.
But since Serb's round of genocide came first, what's the excuse for Russia's support for them?
Bombing Chechnya was ugly but necessary, and it was separatist state, not a foreign country.
Russia bombed its own countrymen then, and you see that as somehow *more* justified and excusable than bombing a foreign country?
Interesting.
The separatist statelets in Georgia and Moldova would not have happened had it not been for the extreme nationalism (make it chauvinism) of the governments of said states at the time.
LOL!! Yeah, 500.000 Georgians ethnically cleansed, and it was the *Georgians* fault I guess, that they had to flee their homes.
Inside Georgia the Abkhazians atleast had the right to vote, now their vote is meaningless, same as it's meaningless in all other Russian protectorates, like Belarus.
Had Russia been such a fascist imperialist state, it would have stirred up secessionist trouble in all the many places where a lot of ethic Russians live: Eastern Ukraine
Not as long they still hope to have the *whole* of Ukraine to be theirs under Yanukovich. If they fail in devouring it whole, then they'll start with the piecemeal consumption. (same way they don't need to separate eastern Kazakhstan, it's *all* theirs)
Don't you remember how soon after the Orange revolution, the governors of eastern and southern regions of Ukraine met with Yanukovych and Moscow Mayor Yuriy Luzhkov to discuss autonomy or independence for the Russian-speaking parts of Ukraine?
Because I do.
That's the sort of tactics we're gonna see again. We don't see them yet, because they're still attempting to have Ukraine whole under Yanukovich. If Yanukovich fails again, then we'll see them again, as we saw them before.
Aris Katsaris says:
If I am on Kremlin's payroll, then where are my checks?
In your mailbox, I'm guessing.
Just because Kazakhstan is run by an autocrat who is not eager to kiss US/EU ass, doesn't mean he is a Russian puppet.
No, it just all coincidentally happened, I'm quite sure, that e.g. Belarus and Kazakhstan's statements regarding Yanukovych in the days of the Orange revolution were exactly parallel with those of Russia, praising Yanukovych corrupt election.
Here's what Nazarbayev said back then: "Your victory shows that the Ukrainian people have made a choice in favour of the unity of the nation, of democratic development and economic progress."
Except for Livinenko's incoherent ramblings there's been no proof that apartment were carried out by the FSB.
LOL! What nonsense. The FSB were caught by local police and citizens in the city of Ryazan planting a bomb with a detonator in the basement of an apartment building at the address of 14/16 Novosyelov on the night of September 22, 1999.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/03/13/wruss13.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/03/13/ixnewstop.html
The FSB were caught in the *act* of planting such bombs, bombs that tested positive for hexogene. No proof? The FSB was caught *red-handed*.
And it wasn't only Litvinenko that rambled about that, it was also Sergei Yushenkov, another one of the dissidents you murdered. It was Veniamin Ioffe, a human rights activist that you killed. How many more people "rambled" about that, and were later killed?
And I still haven't heard you comment on the target-practice photos of Litvinenko used by the Russian forces, showing how unimportant he was felt by them, this so-called "delusional loser". HERE THEY ARE AGAIN, IN CASE YOU MISSED THEM.
No comments on that? Are you still gonna claim that nobody cared in Russia about Litvinenko enough to kill him?
Transdniestria never belonged to Moldova before the Soviet Union.
So what? Transdniestria was given to Moldova, in exchange for other lands that were taken from Romania and given to Ukraine instead.
I am sure some kind of compromise will be found, but not with the current Georgian president.
Of course, once a Russian lackey takes the position of Georgia's president, I'm sure a "compromise" will be found, that will declare the whole region a Russian protectorate. It'll be a horrible day for the whole region.
Abkhazia is less free than ever it was under Georgian rule. Transnistria is less free than ever it was under Moldovan rule. That's the fate that expects every people and every minority that's stupid to prefer to be Russian protectorate status rather than struggle for advancement in the democracies they live in.
Separatism from Russia is in the natural order of things, but separatism anywhere else is Russian imperialism? I think it's a double standard.
I'm not talking about "natural order of things", am not at all interested in such metaphysics. I'm talking about the concept of national independence, and those huge imperialists next door that pretend their motivations are of a similar bent, but don't convince anyone really.
Transnistria doesn't even *want* to be nationally independent, they've practically applied for membership in the Russian federation. There's no Transnistrian nation, it's just that the 30% of Russians there are using the Russian military's force to grab pieces of the Moldovan state.
Same thing you're gonna use all the Russian minorities everywhere.
Post a comment
TrackBack
TrackBack URL: http://publiuspundit.com/mt/contages.cgi/142
|
