Cracks in the mainstream narrative on the Ukraine war wide enough to drive a tank through

Today’s New York Times “Morning Briefing” distributed by email opens with:

Mariupol refuses to surrender
Residents of Mariupol, Ukraine, braced for renewed attacks after the Ukrainian government rejected Russia’s ultimatum to surrender the besieged and ravaged southern port city. Efforts to reach hundreds of thousands of people trapped there remained fraught with danger

Let us note the contradiction between the headline and the body of the report. It was not the city that refused to surrender but the government of Zelensky in Kiev that did so, even knowing the consequence will be continued suffering and death of the civilian population in the time it takes the Russian forces to “neutralize” the kamikaze Ukrainian militants entrenched in secure hide-outs they have built up over the past eight years. These include underground passages in the city’s many heavy industry manufacturing sites. The militants are still holding more than 100,000 residents hostage and shooting anyone trying to use the humanitarian corridors opened to them by the Russians. This we know from Russian television interviews with arriving refugees from Mariupol who managed to evade their Ukrainian captors by car or on foot. The mopping-up operation is likely to go on for more than a week to come, according to the Donbas military command, which is in charge of the task.

Further down the “Morning Briefing” we find the following:

Kyiv: A missile strike — one of the most powerful explosions to hit the Ukrainian capital since the invasion began — turned a once-bustling shopping mall into a smoldering ruin. Russian forces are aiming artillery, rockets and bombs at civilian as well as military targets, after failing to quickly seize control of Ukraine’s major cities.

Note:  “once bustling shopping mall”.  Here the attentive reader can smell a rat. The propagandist author is speaking about the complex’s function as a commercial hub in the past tense, because he/she knows that it had ceased to be commercial and became a military operations center in time present, and was therefore perfectly acceptable as a target for Russian attack.  All of this is confirmed by the death toll that other mainstream media attribute to the Russian strike:  8 dead.

It is most interesting that this morning’s broadcast of BBC World News presents footage of the proofs from the Russian military command which the official spokesman General Igor Konashenkov showed yesterday on Russian state television:  a reconnaissance drone capturing the arrival and departure of a Ukrainian military vehicle at the shopping center. Today’s BBC report directly acknowledges sotto voce that the center was being used for military purposes.

Lest the reader think that the BBC news writers have just become “agents of Putin,” the fact remains that BBC and other Western reporting retains its absolute blackout on a major feature of current Russian news reporting: the daily devastation and deaths in the Donbas republics of Donetsk and Lugansk caused by Ukrainian artillery and missile strikes from across the line of demarcation. The scenes of artillery strikes on hospitals and residential buildings in Donbas are a mirror image of what we are shown on the BBC and similar in Kiev and other major Ukrainian cities.  Just as in Mariupol, the Ukrainian combatants adjacent to the Donbas are in well fortified positions that they have created over the past eight years in anticipation of this show-down and it may take carpet bombing to destroy them. But that is the subject of another essay I will issue later today.

Nor, to my knowledge, has the BBC or any other mainstream media outlet shown other proofs on Russian television that the supposed bombing damage of the theater in downtown Mariupol was a ‘false flag’ operation prepared by Ukrainian propagandists who had herded the civilians into the bomb shelter basement before blowing up the superstructure and laying the blame at the Russian attackers.

****

 We see the same kind of miniscule death toll from destruction of multistory apartment buildings in Ukrainian cities. In those cases, too, it attests to the fact that the civilian functions of the structures had been replaced by purely military use, meaning for embedding artillery and other strike weapons to attack Russian forces.  All of this belies President Biden’s characterization of Russian military conduct as amounting to “war crimes” by its indiscriminate attack on civilian targets. Indeed, to my knowledge, such use of civilian structures to embed combatant units is itself an egregious war crime under the rubric ‘use of human shields.’

Finally, I note that the American ambassador in Moscow was yesterday called to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs to receive written warning that Russia will sever diplomatic relations with the United States if Biden does not retract his words.  The threat is very likely to be implemented, though only after the President’s visit to Brussels ends later this week.  Surely the Russians do not want their cutting diplomatic ties with the United States to result in simultaneous, knee-jerk reaction of European leaders, resulting in severance of ties with all of Europe.  However, that cannot be excluded at this point, when Europe is plotting to stop taking delivery of all Russian hydrocarbons, suicidal as this may be for the economies of the Old Continent.

The old saying that “those whom the Gods would destroy they first make mad” is coming to pass in the capitals of Europe. Anyone who questions my judgment would be wise to watch the video of a high quality analysis of the economic disaster to come as a result of the incompetence of European decision makers with regard to the sanctions they are imposing: “Charles Gave magistral sur les sanctions contre la Russie : ‘C’est l’Europe qui va s’effondrer!’”    –

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4fvsFnzg4A&feature=youtu.be

 (received courtesy of Eric Dissy on my LinkedIn account).

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2022

Good news: not everyone in the Western music world has lost courage and humanistic values

The other day I read a remarkable article detailing the cowardly and despicable actions taken by many of the world’s leading houses of symphonic music and opera to remove Russian artists and even Russian composers from their repertoire as indignant protest to the Russian military action in Ukraine.

We all have heard how Peter Gelb at The Metropolitan Opera fired soprano Anna Netrebko for refusing to sign a denunciation of Putin and the war.  We all have heard how the Munich Philharmonic fired its principal guest conductor Valery Gergiev on the same grounds. However, few among us have heard or read about the widespread exclusion of Russian musicians, including great talents who have newly arrived on the concert circuit. This blight is especially common in the USA and Canada, though it appears elsewhere as far afield as Australia.  Moreover, concert programs are being modified to suppress Tchaikowsky and substitute for him works by Mussorgsky which for some trivial reason would seem to pass the political correctness test. In fact, as the author of this article explains in a master stroke of musicology, the substitutions only reveal the music-historical ignorance of the given philharmonic society administrators.

To understand the current Russophobia in the music world in its full dimensions, I enthusiastically recommend “Denounce Putin, or Be Blacklisted” by Heather Mac Donald. See https://www.city-journal.org/classical-music-cancels-russians

Against this grim background, I am delighted to share some good news:  not everyone in the cultural world has lost his way morally. In some places, values hold the line against mass hysteria.  I am still more pleased to say that little Belgium leads the way in this happy development.

I direct your attention to the “Statement – Ukraine” page on the website of the Queen Elisabeth Musical Competition:   https://concoursreineelisabeth.be/fr/actualites/statement-ukraine/

In the middle of the screen are two paragraphs which merit translation in full:

“From its origins, the statutes of the Competition state clearly that ‘no ideological, linguistic, political, religious or racial motive can justify the rejection of a candidacy.’ All young artists will thus be welcome, whatever their nationality.

“In these troubled times, when some people do not hesitate to use the arts and culture for nationalist and warlike purposes, we believe on the contrary that the arts must continue to rally humanity around universal values such as peace, justice and liberty.”

I cannot think of a more eloquent tribute to the humane legacy of the Queen Elisabeth competition, in keeping with the character of its royal founder Elisabeth of Bavaria, Queen of the Belgians. Apart from her lifelong devotion to music, which I will elaborate on in a moment, Queen Elisabeth is remembered for using her German connections to rescue hundreds of Jewish children from deportation by the Nazis. In this regard, she was later awarded the title Righteous Among the Nations by the Israeli government (Wikipedia entry).

Regarding music, the Queen began as an amateur performer, but principally found expression of her artistic inclinations in promoting Belgium’s virtuoso violinist of the day, composer and conductor Eugène-Auguste Ysaye. Following his death, in 1936 she founded what was initially called a memorial competition in his honor; this later was renamed and given the name by which we know the competition today.

From its very founding, the Queen Elisabeth Musical Competition has had a close relationship with the Russian school of music making.  In 1937, the first year of the violin competition, the top prize went to David Oistrakh.  Later first prize winners in violin from the Soviet Union/Russia who made worldwide careers include Leonid Kogan (1951), Philippe Hirschhorn (1967) and Vadim Repin (1989). 

In piano, the top prize went to Emil Gilels during the first year of the competition (1938). Later Russian winners include Vladimir Ashkenazy (1956), Evgeny Mogilevsky (1964) and Andrei Nikolsky (1987).

Of course, with the passage of time, and especially since the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of 1991, deep depression in Russia during the 1990s and globalization of music studies and concertizing ever since, the Russian school is now just one of several major currents that we see on the stage of the Competition.

I wish to stress that the royal patronage of the Competition has been continued from the death of Queen Elisabeth in 1965 up to the present day, when Queen Mathilde is the lead personality from the monarchy whom we see in the royal box during performances in the final rounds, often accompanied by her children. More to the point, as we consider why and how the Competition’s administration could make the remarkable statement I cited above, the royal family has been involved in this Competition in an intensely personal manner, not just in a formal, protocol sense.

For several decades, King Baudouin’s spouse and then widow Fabiola brought her personality and commitment to the Competition.  She was especially moved by the genius of the Russian-Latvian-Jewish laureate of 1967, Philippe Hirschhorn, and remained a family friend until his untimely death at age 50, then continued to invite his widow to the palace from time to time until her own passing. I know of her generosity and solicitude first hand, since Philippe was also a close friend of our family in the 1990s.

My point in sharing these details is the following:  royal patronage sets the Queen Elisabeth Musical Competition apart from the likes of the Metropolitan Opera or the Munich Philharmonic. It is much better insulated from day to day politics than other cultural institutions in Belgium as well, dependent as they are on state funds to survive.

As a born American, I was till my arrival in Belgium instinctively unsympathetic to hereditary aristocracies and to monarchs. However, when the cause of the anciens régimes was set against bourgeois democracies in the 18th century, defenders of monarchies argued the case of the hereditary head of state standing above day to day politics and not swayed by mob rule, not subject to the venality of the money changers in the temple.  Regrettably, those arguments comes back to haunt us today.

As one further remark on the enduring value of this monarchy in contemporary life of Belgium, I point to another institution which has the designation “royal” in its name:  Le Cercle Royal Gaulois Artistique & Littéraire of which I am proudly a member. I say “proudly” not so much because of the social prestige of this 175 year old establishment, but because this gentlemen’s club is an oasis of tolerance, free speech and free thinking in our modern age of polarization and dumbing-down. Surely it is not beside the point that so many of the members are in fact loyal monarchists, while a good many are actually in the service of the ruling house.  The Cercle may be situated just across the street from the Belgian parliament, and the deputies may be lunchtime guests of the club’s restaurant, but in terms of tolerance and broad thinking these institutions are worlds apart.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2022

Expand your horizons: English language news broadcasters from India and Iran

In the past several weeks, I have been a guest panelist on television debates devoted to the war in Ukraine produced by what I would have considered in the past to be “exotic” broadcasters, including Iran, Turkey, India and Belarus. The technical level of these English language services addressing the world community are generally high. The style of these shows varies, from the very serious (Iran, Turkey) to the overdramatized and fever pitch (India). But these programs all have in common a commitment to delivering to their audiences a variety of opinions on the Russia-Ukraine war coming from experts based on several continents. In this regard they are a very welcome counterpoint to the cheerleading, fully consensual anti-Russian panels presented on British, American and other pioneers of the global news genre.

India  –  17 March 2022 – India Today TV

“Russia-Ukraine War: Is Putin A War Criminal?  Rajdeep Sardesai Speaks To Foreign Experts To Find Out”

 “Rajdeep Sardesai is joined by several experts from across the world to discuss the current situation of the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine. They also discuss if Russian President Vladimir Putin is a War criminal? “

“India Today TV is India’s leading English News Channel.” – 5.8 million subscribers

Note: as of yesterday evening, the show had 12,758 views.  One might conclude that the war is not at the top of interest for domestic subscribers and foreign visitors.

Although this video is interesting from start to finish, my turn at the microphone is at minute 17.26 – 21.30  and 24.06 – 25.03

Iran – 19 March 2022 – Press TV

“Russia, China demand answer from US on Ukraine’s biolabs”

www.urmedium.com/c/presstv/1066584

Notwithstanding the title of the program, the 10 minutes of discussion went in various directions. My virtual ‘partner’ as expert panelist was Vladimir Golstein, professor of Russian literature at Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.

The Coming Partition of Ukraine

Those of you who followed the link on my essay of yesterday and watched the 10 minute interview with Kiev mayor Vitali Klitschko on TRT World’s “Newsmakers” program will surely agree that this high visibility Ukrainian politician is leading the remaining residents of the country’s capital and the broader population of Ukraine straight to disaster in the name of patriotic self-defense.

 I will not waste time here on Klitschko’s vicious lies about the Russian invaders, about their intentions, their deeds and so forth. In my own time at the microphone in the show, I argued that Klitschko’s rejection of any imposed return to the Soviet empire under Russian diktat is total nonsense. Russia has had enough of empire and control of Ukraine would only be an interminable drag on the Russian economy and political focus. The Russian motivation is just to rid Ukraine of NATO formations presently embedded, of NATO membership still projected by the Alliance, and of the neo-Nazi radicals who since 2014 have been the force behind the throne in the Kiev regime.

 My point here is to highlight the consequences of the determination of Klitschko and others in the Ukrainian government not to seek any compromises to end the fighting and to save what is left of their country at this point, before the Russians pursue their demolition work to its logical conclusion. If Kiev fails to raise the white flag, fails to negotiate a peace in good faith, the war will end with the civil and military infrastructure of Ukraine totally shattered, with the permanent mass emigration of millions, including the most able-bodied segments of the population, and with a decade or more of destitution for those unfortunate enough to remain.

Last night I received a note from one reader of my essays, who said that the war will not end with a treaty on Russia’s terms. Instead, aided and abetted by the United States and Europe, the Kiev leadership will launch an insurgency against the ‘occupiers’ and this will grow and become as painful and costly for Russia as anything the United States experienced in Afghanistan.

I do not deny that a Ukrainian insurgency is a plausible next phase to the war, especially given the irrational position on ‘compromises’ that we see in Klitschko’s interview. However, there are obvious ways for the Kremlin to respond so as to contain the risks to themselves.  To begin with, they can realize the threat Putin issued before the war began: to deprive Ukraine of its statehood.  Not entirely, but to deprive them of the state in the configuration that has existed since 1991.  This means to partition Ukraine, to hive off the territories west of Kiev and the Dnieper River, forming a land-locked rump state with its capital logically in Lviv, near the Polish frontier.

To use the language of the banking community, Russia would thereby create a ‘bad bank,’ containing the poisonous assets of Ukrainian radicalism, very few industrial or other major economic assets, and removed to a distance no longer threatening to Russia.   The ‘good bank’ would be central Ukraine, the territories east of the Dniepr River, which have a considerably larger population of Russian speakers, who should respond to Russia’s call to defend their own interests in the public life of the country and come out from the bullying they were subjected to by the nationalists over the past 8 years. This central Ukraine would receive back the Black Sea coast now occupied by the Russians and would enjoy the agricultural and other major economic assets that always defined Ukrainian prosperity. Presumably the Donbas republics would remain independent as the third part of a divided Ukraine. However, if central Ukraine is properly reconstituted with all due protection for minorities and with properly working federalism, there is no reason to exclude the possibility of the Donbas returning to the fold in the Ukraine east of the Dniepr. Their inclusion would greatly assist the balancing of language communities in the entire recombined state.

The aforementioned denouement is, of course, only one of many that may be floated in the weeks ahead as the Russians close their stranglehold on Ukraine’s main cities and bring closer the moment of truth, when the Ukrainian leadership has to decide whether or not to sue for peace on the victor’s terms.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2022

Another TRT World panel discussion of Ukraine well worth a look


I am very pleased with today’s “Newsmakers” show. Though my time at the microphone was  compressed since the first half of the 25 minute video was devoted to an interview with Kiev mayor Klitschko, in the second half I did land some punches. I took the debate away from the usual contest over blame for the war and exchange of insults about who is spreading propaganda. I sent the conversation in a wholly different direction: namely showing the patent absurdity of Klitschko’s allegation that Russia seeks to occupy Ukraine or to recreate the Soviet Union via annexation of Ukraine. No, Russia will not remain in Ukraine one minute longer than necessary to demilitarize the country and ensure its permanent neutral status.

 My argument that the very unusual way that the USSR broke up, namely by secession of the lead nationality in a multinational empire, has great importance for the present and future of Russia:  Russia had its fill of supporting the parasitical habits of the other Union Republics and was glad to be free of them. Moscow will be happy to let Brussels feed, clothe and provide lodging for the population of its neighbor to the southwest.  The war over Ukraine is solely about pushing back NATO and securing Russia’s borders.

Take a look. The best is last

I use this opportunity also to offer for your consideration an interview with me that Tom Mullen Talks Freedom (USA) released yesterday.  The subject, of course, is the war in Ukraine and what lies ahead.

https://tommullen.net/podcast/51/.

 ©Gilbert Doctorow, 2022

This is how the world ends

Will the ongoing military conflict in Ukraine lead to a World War that quickly escalates to an end of the world scenario in nuclear exchanges?  That remains unlikely, but we are clearly well on our way. It is long past debate whether the conflict is merely between two neighboring countries at the eastern fringe of the European Union. It is a full-blown proxy war between the United States of America and the Russian Federation, and it is about ending or perpetuating American global hegemony.

The latest approval in Washington of $800 million in further urgent military assistance to Ukraine, including the Pentagon’s most advanced attack drones and powerful Soviet era S300 ground to air missile systems makes it perfectly clear that U.S. is sabotaging the ongoing peace talks between Moscow and Kiev for the sake of prolonging a war that can only result on the Ukrainian side in the utter shattering of civil as well as military infrastructure, mass emigration and ubiquitous, calamitous poverty for those remaining; and on the Russian side in wholesale and painful reorganization of the economy away from the West as well as civil discord amid deep disagreements over the war and crackdown on dissent. The centuries-long debates and hair-pulling in Russia between “Westernizers” and “Slavophiles” is breaking out into the open yet again, as we saw in Vladimir Putin’s remarks yesterday during a speech otherwise devoted to increasing social benefits at home. I will direct attention to that speech in a moment. 

So far the West has been spared the pain arising from pending economic distortions on a global scale. However, as the conflict progresses in the direction of total war, which is happening before our eyes now that the United States President and Senate have designed Vladimir Putin as a ‘war criminal,’ the share of misery borne by the broad public in the West may rise dramatically.  The Russians have yet to unleash their own “nuclear option” of economic sanctions against the West, meaning immediate halt in export to “hostile nations” (the USA, the EU in particular) of hydrocarbons, strategic metals, grains and other agricultural commodities. That may come in the days immediately ahead.

Whatever the outcome of the still virtual negotiations between Moscow and Kiev over a cease fire and implementation of a 15-point peace agreement, Moscow’s move on to its Plan C, namely direct nuclear confrontation with Washington remains ‘on the table,’ as they like to say in the American capital. Peak-a-boo surfacing of Russian nuclear submarines just outside U.S. territorial waters on the East and West coasts, daily patrols of Russian strategic bombers in the Caribbean – these threats have clearly been held in reserve by the Russians for their possible Plan C scenario.

Meanwhile, the American-led Information War has been proceeding apace, presenting to Western media for instant, unquestioning dissemination a stream of fake news that is intended to raise the public mood of hatred for Russia and things Russian to fever pitch. Our television newscasts are filled with scenes of destroyed apartment buildings in Kiev and other Ukrainian cities. Yesterday’s biggest news item was the destruction of a theater in downtown Mariupol said to have housed up to a thousand people seeking refuge from Russian air strikes.

The production of fake war videos became a big industry among American and British propaganda organs during the Syrian War, when Western audiences were shown utterly fraudulent films of alleged chemical attacks by the Assad regime.  Many featured the supposedly heroic and selfless work of  ‘white helmet’ humanitarian volunteers operating in the Syrian war zones. Now these talents and experience are being unleashed to whip up popular outrage over the conduct of the Russian campaign in Ukraine.

This morning’s Russian state television featured an expose of the latest fake news exploits being served up to world media by the Kiev regime. A half dozen such videos and photographic montages were analyzed by Russian experts who tracked down the original footage and on split screen show how what the Ukrainians are claiming to be Russian attacks on the civilian population in Kiev are, for example, footage taken from the SS-21 (Tochka-U) missile blast in downtown Donetsk city this past Monday which killed 21 people outright and injured critically 30 more. That attack was launched by the Ukrainian army from a distance of perhaps 30 miles. Other videos showing alleged destruction of civil buildings are taken from cities, mostly in the Donbas, several years ago, where the aggressor was Ukrainian militias, not Russians or their Donbas allies today. 

Of course, none of the Russian proofs of fraud perpetrated by Ukrainian propagandists with the help and guidance of their American curators will be shown on Western media.  However, we the people can for ourselves determine who is telling the truth and who is lying just by putting on our thinking caps when we look at what is shown on the BBC News, for example. 

I think in particular of an evening news BBC front line reporter in Kiev who stood before a heavily damaged 15 story residential building a couple of days ago in which all windows were blown out by some explosion. The lady journalist was well coiffed and dressed immaculately in what can only be described as a surreal setting. Pointing to the building, she told us indignantly that four people had been killed in this latest Russian attack.  Here, unnoticed evidently by her producers back in London, there is the kind of discrepancy between what we are shown and what we are being told that should set off alarm bells in anyone who has his head screwed on properly. The building itself and the kind of destruction we saw on our television screens should have yielded 400 fatalities, not 4 if this were anything but bogus information.  Instead, what the BBC was presenting aligns perfectly with the Russian narrative that in Mariupol, in Kharkiv, in Kiev and other Russian cities the Ukrainian army and militias of irregular radical nationalists fighting by its side are using the civilian population as ‘human shields.’ What this means is that residential buildings and civilian infrastructure are taken over by the army, who chase out the civilians and move artillery and other weaponry into the buildings from which they attack Russian troops and attempt to attract counter fire into genuinely civilian homes for the sake of atrocities to publicize on the internet.

Note:  we do not have any body counts relating to the destruction of that theater in Mariupol.  During the course of last evening, the BBC report shifted imperceptibly from claims that hundreds were sheltering there during the attack to claims that hundreds had been sheltering there in recent weeks. Meanwhile the Russians flatly denied that they were responsible for the destruction of the theater and laid the blame entirely at the Ukrainian army and its special propaganda mission.

Given the near total jamming by Europe, by the USA of Russia-based internet resources, the Russian counter charges do not reach the eyes or ears of Western audiences.  My own access to this information is chiefly coming from satellite channels that are not yet prohibited in Western Europe.

                                                                             *****

As the USA and Europe have each day piled on new sanctions against Russia, the awareness of a ‘total war’ situation has penetrated the consciousness of Russia’s leadership and the tone of public discourse about the war has hardened noticeably in recent days. Talk shows which I follow regularly have changed course yet again from what I reported a week ago.  On the Vladimir Solovyov evening programs, the bearer of grim expectations about war prospects, Mosfilm general director Karen Shakhnazarov, has disappeared, his place taken by others who take the conversation in a wholly different direction, including fierce denunciations of unpatriotic personalities within Russia. Still other newcomers are presenting their own half-baked speculations on how the entire Russian economy and society has to be reorganized to respond to the new realities of a total permanent break with the West. While the Putin government remains resolutely pro-business and pro-entrepreneurship, though with a heavy dose of state direction of the economy, the new panelists in talk shows denounce free markets as just one more manifestation of the West’s hijacking in the 1990s Russia’s domestic political economy.  Still other panelists on the Russian talk shows are talking about purging the government and all public institutions of Liberals, who are synonymous with Fifth Column traitors and have no place in Russian society under conditions of a war for the country’s survival.

As BBC and other Western journalists have remarked, Vladimir Putin addressed the issue of the Fifth Column in a televised speech yesterday that was otherwise dedicated to the increases in pensions and social benefits that he just announced to counteract negative results of the newly imposed Western sanctions. In the BBC interpretation, the scum and traitors denounced by Putin are the oligarchs. These are the people who live there, meaning in the West, either physically or just mentally, while earning their money in Russia.

However, this identification with the oligarchs only shows how little Western news organizations, Western think tanks and Western government leaders know about Russia and about what makes it tick. No, oligarchs were not in the sights of Vladimir Putin yesterday: it was the multitude of little traitors to the country and its people who have in recent weeks come out of the woodwork and taken flight in an attempt to avoid having to publicly take sides in the conflict and so lose their fortunes and/or their social standing.

The broad Russian public has been utterly shocked at the departure of a good many stars in the entertainment industry, the kind of folks who in the West are images on the covers of People magazine and of the yellow press more generally. Veteran singer Alla Pugacheva and her husband Galkin have been darlings of Russian television and music halls across the country for decades.  They are known to have quietly flown to Israel, where so many of their friends from show business and from high society have already found refuge earlier still.  Then there is one of the two leading television news presenters, Sergey Briullov, host of The News of the Week on Saturday nights. Sergey carries a British as well as Russian passport; his family is based in their home in England and his children study there.  About a week ago, Briullov disappeared from Russia and eventually surfaced in Brazil, where he says he is doing a film project about the Brazilian attitude to the Ukraine-Russia War.  No one is fooled for a moment about the fact that Briullov is just one more traitor to his homeland, and comments on the Russian portals bear this out daily.

No, Messrs BBC News, it is not oligarchs whose behavior if not their very existence has embittered the middle and lower class Russians during the current war. Those middle and lower classes constitute the 70% of the population which backs Putin through thick and thin. It is the smaller fish of Fifth Column populations who exist in much greater numbers: as, for example, Russian  lawyers who have homes near the Champs Elysees and split their time between France and their law offices in Moscow, whence the money from their servicing oligarchs comes. Then there is the intelligentsia, the university dons, the occupants of often important offices in government and private public institutions who loathed Putin from his first election to the presidency in 2000 and have never relented. Their contempt for the broad Russian public, which they see as the great unwashed, as a herd of animals, was never well hidden, and this contempt is now being reciprocated on Russian state television and on the internet.

All of these fissures in Russian society are being deepened and discussed on Russian media as a result of the ongoing war for survival.  If Russia is becoming a much less free society, that is a direct result of Western pressure. But there is nothing new under the sun.  This was precisely one of the key arguments in favor of détente as opposed to confrontation during the 1990s.

****

The accusation that Putin is a ‘war criminal’ coming from the top U.S. leadership has far greater importance than Western media have given to it. For them, it is just one more joke in a long line of adjectives vilifying the Russian leader.  For Biden as Vice President, Putin was ‘a thug.’  For Biden one month into his presidency, Putin was ‘a killer.’  Now the words ‘war criminal’ are actionable, not merely descriptive.  In this regard, Vladimir Putin is no longer a man with whom you can negotiate a peace deal in Ukraine  Instead, he is a dangerous man who you can justifiably assassinate.

A call for Putin’s assassination was made by Republican Senator Lindsey Graham on 4 March. That utterly outrageous and vile statement was never properly rebuked by the President, by the Secretary of State. 

If there are officials in the Biden administration who are actually seeking to have the Russian President assassinated, then it is one more example of their total ignorance of the ‘enemy,’ an ignorance that is possible only because anyone who knows something worth knowing is denounced in American universities and on air as a Putin stooge.

The murder of Vladimir Putin in the present context of the ongoing war to the death over global overlordship would surely precipitate the launch of Russia’s nuclear arsenal against the United States.  As I have said in the past, the Russian political elite is much more aggressive and much readier to push the button than Vladimir Vladimirovich.  I have also said and here repeat, that the Russian Federation likely has First Strike Capability, meaning that it can launch a nuclear attack first, destroy nearly all of America’s arsenals and most important population centers, disorganize or frustrate any counter attack, and rely on its well developed anti-ballistic missile defenses to ward off any of the residual U.S. capability. That was the clear objective of Putin back in 2007 when Russia was humiliated and impotent before the American hegemon.  He reached that objective in 2018.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2022

Parallel Worlds or Parabolic Mirror Images: Media Coverage of the Russia-Ukraine War

My Russia-Ukraine war essays published on my website and reposted on many alternative news portals in Europe and the United States express personal observations of the author. They are “primary sources” and are not represented as academic works. Hence, no footnotes and only very rare critiques of what others are writing or saying. Their added value to the reader comes from the fact that the author is watching with equal concentration both what is being reported in mainstream Western media and what is being reported on Russian print and electronic media produced for the domestic Russian audience.  What I see daily might be best described as parallel worlds or parabolic mirror images, meaning freakish distortions of similar events occurring on this or that side of the line of demarcation in Ukraine.

I offer here several examples from the past few days.

On the morning of 13 March, all Western news agencies reported on the devastating Russian attack on facilities at two locations west of the Ukrainian city of Lviv and in close proximity to the Polish border. We were told that 35 people died and many more were hospitalized with serious injuries.

Who were these people?  It appears to me that Western media said not a word. “People” could mean civilians or soldiers or something still different. What was the sense of the attack?  Major Western media noted that this attack seemed to follow the warning a day earlier from Major General Igor Konashenkov of the Russian military command that flows of armaments into Ukraine would henceforth be considered ‘legitimate targets’ by the Russian forces.

Meanwhile, Russian media reported that one of the bases was a training facility used by NATO in its work with the Ukrainian military and also used to receive Western ‘mercenaries’ arriving in Ukraine. The other facility was used as a logistical center to receive and pass along incoming military equipment and supplies from the West. Konashenkov later said that the whereabouts of all inbound Western volunteer fighters was known and they would be shown no mercy. Russian sources also gave a much higher number of deaths, namely 100 more. We are left to conclude that the fatalities were such fighters and possibly their NATO handlers.

The U.S. response to this event de facto was an urgent warning coming from the White House that Russia was about to implement a chemical weapons attack in Ukraine. The Ukrainian response came yesterday when a powerful (Tochka-U) * missile packed with a hundred ‘cartridges’ of explosives was fired at the city center of Donetsk. The missile was partly destroyed by Donetsk air defenses, but one cartridge landed in a downtown street where it instantly killed 20 civilians including children and pensioners waiting outside an ATM to withdraw funds; dozens more were injured.  Had all 100 cartridges exploded over Donetsk as had been planned from Kiev, the fatalities would have been 100 times greater.  The Russians denounced this missile firing as a war crime.

Since approval for such a missile strike could only have come from the highest levels of the professional Ukrainian army, not by or from the irregular militias, Russia is now reevaluating how it should deal with the Ukrainian forces, in the sense of no longer distinguishing between regulars and militias and “neutralizing” both with equal measure of devastation.

Did you read or see anything about this missile attack on Donetsk yesterday in your daily newspaper or television news?  I believe not.

Let us take a look at one other set of recent linked events, action and reaction, that captured the news headlines on both sides mainly with one hand clapping. I have in mind the alleged Russian artillery attack on a maternity and children’s hospital in Mariupol on 9 March. At least 17 people were said to be injured and headlines in the West spoke of ‘global horror, outrage.’  In particular, there were videos provided by Ukrainian sources showing a wounded heavily pregnant woman who was yesterday reported to have died.

The official Russian response to these allegations of a war crime were total denial and counter-accusation that the entire incident was a ‘false flag’ operation stage directed by Kiev authorities. They said the hospital in question had been taken over by nationalist militiamen and the patients were sent elsewhere so that the facility could be used as a military center. The ‘wounded’ pregnant woman was an actress and all pictures of her were fake.  We do not know if her reported death has any substance to it.

The mirror image attack occurred two days ago when the Ukrainian army and irregulars evacuated the Donbas town of Volnovakhi, which they had occupied for the past eight years, destroying all civilian infrastructure and much residential housing as they departed. As part of the devastation, their tanks fired on a functioning hospital filled with patients. Fortunately no one was killed, though video coverage on Russian state television showed a gaping blackened hole a couple of meters wide on the third floor and extensive damage elsewhere to the building.  Have you read about this atrocity in your morning newspaper in New York or London?  Of course, not.

Finally, yesterday afternoon Russian news agencies reported on and Russian television later showed video coverage of the evacuation of hundreds of civilians from the besieged city of Mariupol, where some 400,000 residents have been held hostage by the neo-Nazi Azov battalion and by regular Ukrainian army units that have moved their weaponry into residential buildings and infrastructure and have not allowed anyone to avail themselves of the escape corridors to the East opened by Russian forces encircling the city. The same reportage spoke of 450 tons of humanitarian aid, mainly foodstuffs, which were delivered to the city by a Russian convoy.  All of this was made possible by the Russians’ precision missile attack on most, but not all of the artillery placements held by the Ukrainian nationalist forces.  Russian press briefings are silent about how their soldiers entered Mariupol, where they are and what resistance they still have to overcome on the ground. Did you hear about any of this yesterday on your news sources?

Today’s Western newspapers and television are carrying uncritically the story put out by Zelensky’s office that several hundred civilians left Mariupol and humanitarian aid arrived thanks to his Ukrainian forces!  One look at the map makes clear that this is a bare-faced lie. The whole issue of stalled evacuation of civilians from Mariupol was about the direction they should take, East to Russia or West to Ukraine.  Opening corridors to the West would have meant breaking the siege which the Russians imposed precisely to crush the radical forces within the city. The Russians had indeed not allowed this.

                                                                        *****

Let us be perfectly frank: the Russians have lost the Information War over their ‘special military operation’ in Ukraine in Western media, meaning especially in the United States and Europe.  The situation globally is, of course, more nuanced, with nearly half of humanity, meaning India and China, on the sidelines or predisposed to side with Russia.

Let us remember that the Russians never did well in the Information War in the West.  They lacked the skills, and the ‘market’ was virtually closed to them by tight U.S. government control over all major media and patriotic self-censorship in editorial and production offices.  The shutdown of RT and Sputnik has been an insignificant factor working against dissemination of the Russian narrative.

Let us also be clear-eyed: the loss of the Information War in the lands of their enemies changes absolutely nothing for Russia. They never were liked.  The ongoing war, and the greater threat of its escalation to a more generalized Third World War that quickly becomes nuclear has put into the equation an element of fear, which may sway some minds in the West towards greater realism. Or perhaps it won’t.  But all of this changes nothing as regards the outcome if the Russians can complete their mission in the coming weeks and not face growing domestic discontent that compels them to change their negotiating terms at the end. If completed quickly, the Russian military operation will be decided by two things only: Blut und Eisen, or ‘blood and iron,’ as Bismarck would have observed.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2022

*The Tochka-U is known in NATO parlance as the SS-21. Their deployment by the USSR within the Warsaw Pact in the late 1970s-early 1980s led the United States to threaten introduction of its Pershings in Europe and ended in the conclusion of the INF Treaty. The missile is nuclear capable and has a range of up to 180 km. This was the missile which Vladimir Putin mentioned in his remarks denouncing the Ukrainian nuclear program discovered at the Zaporozhye atomic stations.

For visuals of the destruciton in Donetsk city from the missile strike, see https://ria.ru/20220314/donetsk-1778051454.html

‘False flag’ chemical attack in Ukraine: a coming attraction

Warning:  it is “highly likely” the United States is now about to carry out a ‘false flag’ operation in Ukraine in which it will accuse the Russians of using chemical weapons

Unfortunately, it appears the Biden Administration does not listen closely to the President, or simply ignores him at times.

Joe Biden, or “Slow Joe,” has been much more sensible than all of his civilian cabinet members and assistants about avoiding anything which might precipitate a direct military clash with Russia in and around Ukraine, and opening the risk of escalation to nuclear war. I pointedly exclude the Pentagon here from the list of fools, because, on the contrary, they appear to be most sensitive to Russian capabilities and intentions.

Biden personally vetoed the madcap idea of transferring 29 MIGs from Poland to the Ukrainian air force notwithstanding the support it had from his Secretary of State. He personally vetoed declaring a ‘no flight zone’ over Ukraine which would be enforced by the United States and its NATO allies notwithstanding strong petitions to that effect from his own Democratic Party within Congress.  In both cases, Biden seems to have taken with utmost seriousness the threat from the Russian military authorities to not merely shoot down warplanes entering the Ukraine theater but to missile attack the air bases from which they took off.

 But now, ‘late breaking news’ from USA Today, if true, suggests that somehow people in his Administration are outflanking the President and preparing the way for global war by unleashing yet another ‘false flag’ incident that will raise the temperature in the US-Russian confrontation by many degrees.

The caption which yahoo.com is now carrying reads as follows:

USA Today: Russia could be preparing for chemical weapons attack; 35 killed in strike on base near Lviv: Live updates

Now why would Russia stage a chemical weapons attack in Ukraine?  The idea defies all reason. Russia has vast possibilities of destroying Ukraine that it has not deployed to date precisely to avoid civilian casualties. These include cyber attack, electromagnetic pulse (EMP) and more intense use of its airpower which has been restrained due to shortage of smart bombs and reluctance to use munitions that might cause greater collateral damage.   Given these manifest signs of Russian caution in staging the war, even at the cost of greater casualties among its own troops and slower progress in a campaign that is very time sensitive, one would have to be utterly mad to consider using universally banned chemical weapons.  I rest my case: any so-called chemical attack which may be staged in Ukraine in coming days can only be the dirty work of the United States and its agents.

I call readers’ attention to the second half of the lead sentence in USA Today: the remark about the results of the Russian attack this morning on a U.S. and NATO training and logistical center outside of Lviv and close to the Polish border.  The Russian attack was closely linked to the statement of the Russian military a day ago that it would consider all incoming foreign arms as ‘legitimate targets’.  Stores of such arms were in the base.  The USA Today article mentions that the given base was occupied by U.S. military from Florida as recently as two weeks ago.  It does not take a stretch of imagination to realize that among the 35 killed in the attack were Americans and/or NATO personnel.  The threat of a false flag chemical attack is the U.S. response.

However, that need not be the driver of the possible new dirty trick from the USA. News about a chemical attack in Ukraine would divert attention away from the growing scandal over U.S. supervised and financed biological weapons laboratories in Ukraine, and possible U.S. curatorship over the Ukrainian efforts to develop a dirty nuclear bomb.

If the chemical attack proceeds, it will take us all one step closer to Armageddon. 

High time for Biden to put his house in order.

©Gilbert Doctorow,  2022

The Americans Want a Long War

In my report on “Day Sixteen” of the Ukraine-Russia war a couple of days ago, I provided a brief summary of the opening segment of the 9 March edition of the Russian political talk show “Evening with Vladimir Solovyov.” I directed special attention to the words of Mosfilm Director Karen Shakhnazarov, who set the tone for an unusually grave discussion of war prospects and political stability within Russia.

However, I saved for separate discussion and did not mention one key point made by Shakhnazarov that was picked up by other panelists and became a general topic for discussion:  that the Americans are doing everything in their power for this to be a long war and Russia must avoid at all costs following their playbook.

 For the Americans, the longer the war drags on, the easier it is to impose ever more punishing sanctions to which European and other allies will also adhere given the negative impact on public opinion about Russia from the scenes of destruction in Ukraine that are shown daily on television. The prolongation of war is supported by the never ending messages of support to the valiant Ukrainian fighters coming in from the United States and the Collective West, from the $13 billion in aid just approved by Congress, from the weaponry and munitions that NATO Member States are now sending in to Ukraine.  No one in the West is telling Zelensky to save  his country, to save  his people by just giving up and submitting to Russia’s demands, though there are reports that Israeli Prime Minister Bennett did just that a day or so ago in a telephone conversation with the Ukrainian leader.

Of course, a separate issue is whether Zelensky could raise the white flag and live to see another day. Russian social media which reported the story of Bennett’s call also posted comments to the effect that Zelensky counts for nothing, that the army and radical nationalists will not follow any orders he may give.

Perhaps for these reasons, the Russian military command through its spokesman Major General Igor Konoshenkov today declared that any convoys carrying foreign weaponry into Ukraine will be considered to be ‘legitimate targets’ and will be destroyed. When the military materiel is exhausted, the Ukrainian forces will have no choice but to surrender.

Meanwhile there are questions about how the Russians will impose demilitarization and denazification in case of victory.  Yes, they will have destroyed the military assets of Ukraine by their bombing campaign. However, if the Russians simply get up and leave Ukraine upon signing a peace agreement on recognition of the independence of the Donbas republics and on recognition that Crimea is now Russian, it is entirely foreseeable that the West would rearm Ukraine very quickly, possibly within one year by simple drawdown of the surplus tanks and other gear now in storage in EU countries.

As former Soviet-Russian diplomat, political scientist and activist Nikolay Platoshkin argues, denazification means more than arrest of Nazi radicals in the army, which is by itself beyond the capabilities of the 150,000 Russian troops now at work on Ukrainian territory. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVp_AONS2BY -in Russian)   It means bringing into play Ukrainian Russian-speaking civil society, which has been cowed into submission by eight years of terror inflicted by radical bully boys across the country, so that identification and court proceedings against neo-Nazis and nationalist gangsters proceed without Russian participation. The whole educational system in Ukraine must be reformed to replace the hate literature that currently fills the classrooms and libraries in the guise of textbooks is purged. All of this requires a more comprehensive and effective outreach to the Ukrainian public than the Russian leadership has demonstrated in its conduct of the war till now.

As I mentioned in my last essay, a long, drawn out war may destabilize the Russian government as war protesters rise in numbers and effectiveness. It would also put in jeopardy the support Russia receives from its close friends abroad, China and India.  Already now Chinese international broadcaster CGTN is broadcasting news on the Ukraine conflict that is almost undistinguishable from CNN or the BBC in its one-sidedness in favor of the Ukrainian ‘victims’ of Russian aggression.  The notion that the Russian-Chinese relationship is ‘greater than an alliance’ will come into question if the war goes on more than one month.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2022

Newsmakers: Russia’s Attack on Ukraine is Resetting the Global Order

I am pleased to share with readers the link to today’s panel discussion on TRT Turkish public broadcasting in which I participated along with a professor of international relations in Australia and an analyst in London focused on energy markets.

I commend the producers of Newsmakers for the well-balanced selection of experts, for a highly professional preparation of introductory information for the audience and for posing very relevant questions to the panelists.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEBUgOLVVJQ