…in February 2014, Putin’s ‘little green men’ … seized control of Ukraine’s Crimea. Consistent with Putin’s information warfare doctrine, several days prior to the invasion, Russian intelligence services … leaked a private telephone call between Assistant Secretary of State for Russian and European Affairs Victoria Nuland and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt. The two U.S. diplomats in the intercepted phone call discussed who would be the best candidate among the top opposition figures, to replace the ousted pro-Russia president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovich.Rebekah Koffler, DIA officer[i]
Nothing in the Nuland-Pyatt conversation proves that American officials orchestrated the Euromaidan Revolution. In fact, with all the resources available to Russian intelligence you would think Moscow could have come up with something more substantial than a diplomatic non sequitur. Yet many Americans, convinced of the wickedness of their own country, have treated the Nuland-Pyatt conversation as proof that America stole Ukraine from Russia (as if Ukraine is an easy country to take over).
In 2014, when Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych was overthrown, Barack Obama, a.k.a. Barry Soetero, a.k.a. Barack Soebarkah, was President of the United States. We have to ask ourselves: Why would Obama want to overthrow Yanukovych? Given Obama’s friendly policies toward Russia during his first term, it makes no sense. Obama was not interested in military competition with Russia. He did not build up the U.S. military and he was not interested in renewing America’s nuclear arsenal. Why, then, would he have bothered to take over Ukraine?
It is important to remember that Obama and Putin had both been Marxists. Obama was mentored by a communist party member named Frank Marshall Davis, who was suspected by the FBI of being a KGB agent.[ii] Putin had been a member of the Communist Party and worked for the KGB. (We also know that Obama was a Marxist when he attended Occidental College.)[iii] And yet, none of Obama’s autobiographical books explain why or even when he abandoned his Marxist faith. And this is true for Putin as well. In fact, Putin has said that he still likes communist ideas. He has even said that Christianity and Leninism are basically the same, that communism comes from the Bible.[iv] So when the Russian special services present the private conversation of Obama’s underlings as a plot to take Ukraine away from Russia, what do they suppose Obama’s motive was? Why would he do this? Barack Obama was not Putin’s enemy. And yet, this is somehow what we are supposed to believe.
And now that a war has broken out, with Russia invading Ukraine, it is disconcerting to hear people say that the West is looking for an excuse to attack Russia. But the West does not want war with Russia. This would be madness and everybody knows it. In fact, the side that wants war is the side that is prepared to win. That side is only found in Moscow and Beijing.
NATO is not ready for war. America is not ready for war. How can anyone believe that the West is trying to start a war they are not ready for? It makes no sense. And look at our internal divisions? We are in no shape to be fighting a war when we are so divided at home. And so, looking back on Victoria Nuland in 2014, we do not find an international mastermind. We find a sorry excuse for a public servant making nasty remarks that are being taped by Russian intelligence. I submit that America’s diplomats lacked the basic competence required to organize a coup in Ukraine. And so, the masterminds of this present war are not in Washington or Brussels or Davos. The masterminds are in Moscow and Beijing.
It is sad to say, however, that many otherwise intelligent Americans mistake Russian pre-war propaganda for proof of American wickedness. Consider Ted Galen Carpenter’s 2017 piece at the CATO Institute, titled “America’s Ukraine Hypocrisy.”[v] Here, Carpenter suggests that two diplomatic blunderers, blabbing to each other over an open phone line for all the world to hear, inspired and directed a revolution in Ukraine. That really is an extraordinary thesis. Carpenter accepts Moscow’s interpretation of this call on its face and pours it through the sieve of his distorted political imagination. Carpenter’s final product confuses the antics of Senator John McCain with a vast revolutionary conspiracy even as he ascribes omnicompetence to Obama’s political boobies. What does Carpenter think our diplomats chatter about in private? Does he think they talk about the weather? A diplomat on foreign soil represents his government’s views and interests. Demonizing those interests is, of course, in the interest of America’s enemies. Carpenter, thus, does not know on what side his own bread is buttered. And he is not alone.
Regarding our country’s blameworthiness, let me clarify, so that nobody mistakes the message or the nuance. Are America’s leaders honest? Not entirely. It does not follow, however, that America’s leaders are the authors of all the mischief in the world, or all the evil, or that they have caused the war in Ukraine. And here is a word to the wise: if you want to talk about wicked rulers, talk about the leaders in Moscow and Beijing. Think of Russia’s gulag with its political prisoners. Think of China’s laogai and the killing of innocent people to harvest their organs. Did you know that the police in Russia and China use torture? Their citizens have no real rights. Look at the way in which China has crushed Tibet and Ukraine is being Crushed by Russia. Think of what has been done to the Uyghurs and the Chechens. Those who have no sense of history might pontificate on the corruption of America, but our worst politicians are tearful little girls when compared to Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin. The embezzlements, the muzzling of countless millions, the wholesale looting of countries, the killing of journalists and freethinkers, the poisoning of the human mind, and now the destruction of Ukraine.
Americans who embrace Russian propaganda seem to think that if American politicians lie, then Russian politicians must be truthful. The corollary of this error follows: That if America is led by bad men, then Vladimir Putin is a good man. The correct syllogism, however, is found in Swiss historian Jacob Burckhardt’s statement “that power is in itself evil.”[vi] Putin is possessed of more unchecked power than any American politician. That is why Putin is more evil and more dangerous than the President of the United States. The corollary to this is that the Russian government has more power over Russians than the American government has over Americans.
“Every power,” noted Jacob Burckhardt, “as long as its period of growth lasts … has no regard for the rights of the weaker.”[vii] Burkhardt’s associate, Friedrich Nietzsche, wrote that a state “is called the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly lieth it also; and this lie creepeth from its mouth: ‘I, the state, am the people.’”[viii]
The state is a fearful master and must be crafted with many checks and balances in mind. And the biggest check on state power is the people. It is shameful, in this context, that so many conservatives are condemning Ukraine as a corrupt country when, in truth, the Ukrainian people have put us to shame. Please note: In December 2004 there was a crooked election in Ukraine; but the Ukrainian people did not accept it. They began what was called “the Orange Revolution,” which forced a revote. And then, after mistakenly electing a Russian stooge in 2010, the Ukrainian people drove him out of office with the Maidan uprising of 2013-2014. Meanwhile, the Americans have failed to correct a fraudulent election and to drive their Russian (and Chinese) stooge from office. Therefore, it hardly seems fair that Americans should be passing judgment on Ukraine as a corrupt country.
Furthermore, Ukraine has been bombed and invaded by Russia – the world’s premier nuclear power. Look how the Ukrainian people have risen to the occasion. When America is bombed and invaded, I hope and pray that Americans show the same spirit of resistance.
Diana West recently wrote a column in which she quoted my remark about feeding Ukraine to the Russian crocodile so that we might be eaten last. She then suggested that America may have already been fed to the crocodile. But this cannot be the case. There is no gulag here, as yet. Our freedom of speech remains. If invaded, our troops would resist even as the Ukrainians are resisting. Perhaps my use of the crocodile metaphor was imprecise. Perhaps we have been stung by a snake whose venom serves as a kind of digestive juice; for America is too large a meal for swallowing without careful preparation. The communists behind the Russian and Chinese regimes have, indeed, injected America with poison; and this poison is tenderizing and dissolving us from within. No doubt! Yet there may be an antidote; and, as long we are not inside the reptile’s stomach there is hope.
For those who think the leaders of the Democratic Party are genuinely opposed to Moscow and Beijing, please review the following linked videos. The first one shows Obama talking about his communist mentor, Frank.
Then there is this “hot mic” exchange between President Obama and Russian President Medvedev in March 2012:
Next watch Obama sharing a joke with Vladimir Putin, now returned to office as Russian president, during a June 2012 G-20 meeting.
Links and Notes
[i] Rebekah Koffler, Putin’s Playbook: Russia’s Secret Plan to Defeat America (Kindle edition), pp. 158-159.
[iii] Interview: Obama Had Marxist Vision For US At Occidental College – Freedom Outpost (investortimes.com). Obama reportedly told one of his classmates, “There’s going to be a revolution, we need to be organized and grow the movement.” According to Dr. John Drew, “I know Stanley Kurtz’s book, Radical in Chief, that Obama had ties with the Midwest Academy. Kind of like the socialist training ground for America. I think that most Americans don’t understand that Obama has a longstanding tie to Marxism, that is even longer than his ties to Reverend Wright.”
[vi] Jacob Burckhardt, Reflections on History (Indianapolis: Liberty Classics, 1979), pp. 67.
[vii] Ibid, p. 66.
[viii] Friedrich Nietzsche trans. Thomas Common, Thus Spake Zarathustra (New York: The Modern Library), p. 49.
Quarterly Subscription (to support the site)