Amidst the usual shrill Western corporate media seeking to toe the US Government line that it is Russia that is to blame for a majority of Russian speaking Ukranians rejecting Kiev’s nationalistic rule, there seems to be a subtle shift in terminology in the latest missive from Reuters in West renews Russia sanctions threat as Ukraine ceasefire crumbles
Western powers warned Russia on Wednesday that they could impose new sanctions if it did not do more to defuse the conflict in eastern Ukraine, where a ceasefire between Russian-speaking rebels and government forces appeared to be crumbling.
What’s intriguing is that the standard terminology used till I noticed it today is “pro-Russian separatists” and “Ukrainian forces” thus imputing this as a battle between Ukraine and Russia.
Not that the propaganda is still not there. Consider this para
Putin had said in combative remarks on Tuesday that Ukraine must follow up the ceasefire with substantive talks to address the rights of Russian speakers. Many of them have been alienated by a wave of Ukrainian nationalism since Moscow-backed president Viktor Yanukovich was toppled in February.
Why is it “combative” to suggest that there be actual dialogue? Isn’t by definition that be NOT combative? Bit of course what the reporter meant was that “Putin instead of shutting up and doing the bidding of his powerful adversaries had the temerity to actual call for dialogue”.
What’s ironic is that Putin is doing no more than the US government is telling Iraqi PM Maliki that he should be more inclusive and talk to other ethnic groups and take into account their sentiments. Of course the difference is that anything the US Government pronounces is to be evangelized as gospel while anything Putin says is to be condemned as blasphemy.
And Yanukovych being “Moscow-backed”? Russia worked with Timoshenko, Yuschencko and every other corrupt leader before Yanukovuch. Indeed the present quislings now in power beholden to the US Government had worked with their counterparts in Russia for the past 10-15 years – they are part of the rotating cast of characters that infect Ukranian politics. Why is Yanukovych – whose sin apart from being as corrupt as the others was to try and strike the best deal he could with Ukraine- “Moscow backed”?
And then there is this quote from Rasmussen’s NATO’s supremo
But during a meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Brussels, Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen told reporters: “I regret to say that we see no signs that Russia is respecting its international commitments.”
This is the same warmonger who lied about what NATO’s actual mission was in Libya. Who denied – to even the exasperation of Scott Shane from the New York Times – that any civilians were killed in NATO’s “humanitarian” mission over Libya despite clear evidence on the ground to the contrary.
The article concludes with this gem:
“Why provoke fire if a ceasefire has been declared? We are sick and tired of this – no water, no electricity, food is running short. No TV, no radio, no information,” he said.
“We were so happy when they announced a ceasefire; we hoped for some respite. We never sought nor asked for help from Russia. What is Russia’s business here anyway?”
The straightforward read of this is that it’s Russia that’s to blame for formenting unrest. A more careful perusal of the above para should force the reader to ask: “Who shut off the water? The electricity?”
The answer is: the Kievian authorities. In what can only be described as collective punishment and a War Crime.
What Reuters is urging is that Putin and the Russian speaking east just accept that they are weaker and surrender already. The US Government juggernaut will not be stopped!
As one has seen in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria…it hasn’t really worked out that way.