In Memoriam: Andrey Stenin, Russian Photo-Journalist killed in the Ukraine, August 6, 2014.
Remembering Hiroshima, August 6, and Nagasaki, August 9, 1945
Emblem of the Azov Battalion - Ukraine neo-Nazi Group
(Image by (From Wikimedia) MrPenguin20, Author: MrPenguin20) Details Source DMCA
He Who Lies First, Lies Best
Now much has already been written about the specifics of the 2014 Ukraine coup, and space herein limits a blow-by-blow rehash. It is the here and now, and what is likely to transpire in the foreseeable future that is what's important for all stakeholders.
And in any event, whether it's to do with the coup itself, the economic sanctions imposed upon Russia, the on-going controversy arising from the shoot-down of MH-17 in July 2014, the incessant, belligerent NATO saber-rattling and Putin-bashing, the use of extreme right-wing neo-Nazi elements to maintain order and keep the revolution 'alive and well', or any of the myriad pretexts, levers or contrivances used by the West to fuel animosity towards Russia, Natylie Baldwin and Kermit Heartsong's book Ukraine: ZBig's Grand Chessboard & How the West Was Checkmated -- as readable as it is recommended -- provides a meticulously documented account of said "specifics" that all but trashes the generally accepted Washington/Western narrative.
Crucially, by elucidating the Ukraine narrative via the prism of Zbigniew Brzezinski's "Grand Chessboard" theory of global hegemony -- itself an updated riff on the Great Game played by the British Empire throughout much of the nineteenth century which itself evolved into the Great War in 1914 -- they provide the necessary historic backdrop and geopolitical rationale for what took place in February 2014, along with the U.S.'s motivation for such arbitrary, unilateral action.
Indeed, for those folks still inclined to embrace America's self proclaimed stature as a force for good in an increasingly unstable, chaotic and hostile global environment and/or that the imperatives for its ubiquitous presence on the geopolitical landscape are benign or altruistic, an understanding of "ZBig's" worldview will doubtless give them pause for deeper reflection. The very source of most of that instability, chaos and hostility becomes very clear for all but the most ideologically myopic and imperially inclined.
That said, it is however vital to recount some salient points for context and perspective, especially for folks still entertaining any measure of uncertainty regarding events in the Ukraine. Much like Tiananmen before it, since the Washington Ukraine/Russia narrative is so well embedded in the minds of even those who fancy themselves 'discerning' news consumers, it is also imperative to counter the impact of the "he who lies first, lies best" tactic (or as I like to opine, "the bigger the lie, the longer the queue"), so habitually and deftly leveraged by the putsch pirates and their mainstream media (MSM) courtesans. As indicated, it took sixty odd years for the U.S. to reveal its role in the Iranian coup of 1953, and around twenty-two years for a more accurate picture courtesy of Wikileaks of the events of 'T-Square' to see the light of day.
And even when the "lie" doesn't serve its purpose anywhere near as well -- or as in the case of Iraq in 2003, retain its desired impact for as long -- serious damage in blood, treasure, credibility and prestige is perpetrated in the interim. An omelet once made, can't be as they say, unmade! All the more reason to drown the Big Lie at birth if and when possible!
But in Washington, this is not a job for the faint-hearted nor the career-minded, regardless of your gig. To begin, the Ukraine coup was, like 'T-Square' before it, a Washington instigated putsch -- albeit one more 'successful' than that perpetrated in Beijing. And again, as with Tiananmen, it was the other party -- in this case Russia -- that was promptly and righteously condemned by the West for its "aggression" towards, and its "invasion" of, the Ukraine.
To put this observation in perspective, as already suggested, Australia's present Prime Minister Tony Abbott was no less righteous in his response to the "aggression towards" and "invasion of" the Ukraine by Russia than was PM Bob Hawke in 1989 (see Part One) when "thousands" of demonstrators were brutally suppressed after their "organic", "home-grown" pro-democracy movement was stopped in its tracks by the Red Army. The only difference might be that Hawke had the good sense not to threaten to "shirt-front" Deng on his next stopover in Beijing!
Whilst it remains uncertain if Hawke and his Cabinet at the time were aware that our 'trusted' allies the Americans had their fingerprints all over 'T-Square' (if they were aware, for reasons best known to them, they did not share this with the public at large), Mr Abbott and his estimable Foreign Minister Ms Julie Bishop cannot credibly deny any such awareness about events in the Ukraine, despite their best efforts to pretend otherwise.
Moreover, as noted by the authors, it was not the first time the U.S. attempted to foment one of its color revolutions in the Ukraine, the first taking place in 2004. And whilst the outcomes varied widely, there have been of course numerous others (to name a few: Venezuela, 2002; Georgia, 2003; Kyrgystan, 2005; Lebanon, 2005; Kuwait, 2005; Myanmar, 2007; Iran, 2009; Libya, 2011), comprising something of an Uncle Sam's "Greatest Hits" (The New Millennium Collection, Volume One) of color revolutions.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).