At The Financial Times: Rachman,Stephens, Barker and others on Putin, a comment by Political Observer

Mr Rachman’s essay is the culmination of a continuation of Anti-Putin propaganda that was begun with the Philip Stephens essay titled ‘Conflicts will become the new norm’ link here:

A catalogue of the risks facing the thoughtful Capitalist rhetorically framed by the construct  ‘ Vladimir Putin’s revanchist designs on Ukraine’. Of course no mention of the EU/American political adventurism of Victoria Nuland and her many co-conspirators, mostly American and EU based NGO’s.

Followed by this ‘report’ by Alex Barker titled ‘The key moments in Russia’s shift from pariah to player’ :

Alex Barker presents this under the rubric of the political self-rehabilitation of Mr. Putin, yet it reads like a rather clumsy indictment, as a potted history of the Crimes of Putin, to frame it as vulgar political melodrama.

Ashton Carter, US defence secretary, said the Russian strikes appeared to have hit areas where there was no Isis presence.

“It does appear that they were in areas where there probably were not Isil [Isis] forces and that is precisely one of the problems with this whole [Russian] approach,” Mr Carter said at the Pentagon.

The startling revelation that Putin has the means and the power to act unilaterally, just like President Obama and his precursors, comes as a revelation to the FT and its ‘reporters’ and editorialists ?

Mr. Rachman adds to the continuing political/propaganda conversation with the invidious comparison of Putin with George W Bush:

George W Bush famously said that he had looked into Vladimir Putin’s eyes and “got a sense of his soul”. Maybe he did – for the former US and current Russian presidents are beginning to look like soulmates, when it comes to the idea of a “war on terror”. Like President Bush, President Putin has decided to deploy his country’s military in the Middle East, as part of a war on terrorism. And like President Bush, the Russian leader has argued that he is engaged in a struggle on behalf of the whole civilised world, while appealing for global support.

Is the fact that both Putin and Obama can act unilaterally, that there is a parity of sorts, such a disturbing reality to the apologists for America’s unilateral actions? What are the results of America’s interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, it’s drone attacks conducted with absolute impunity? The exercise of honesty might just demand the thought that the current Refugee Crisis is the product of the exercise of  American hegemony. But consider the thought that Putin can also be a spoiler, as he might just be engaging in retribution for ‘Western’ meddling in his own backyard, Ukraine? Or might he just be a peacemaker in the mold of Nobel laureate President Obama?

Political Observer

Please support my blog here, if you can:

About stephenkmacksd

Rootless cosmopolitan,down at heels intellectual;would be writer. 'Polemic is a discourse of conflict, whose effect depends on a delicate balance between the requirements of truth and the enticements of anger, the duty to argue and the zest to inflame. Its rhetoric allows, even enforces, a certain figurative licence. Like epitaphs in Johnson’s adage, it is not under oath.'
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.