Russian vs US foreign policy
by Don Hank
Our thanks to our UK friend Viv for a video link to an excellent exposition by Nikolai Starikov, a brilliant geopolitical analyst. The US has some analysts of this caliber, such as Pat Buchanan but will never give them political power. (I had commented here under the heading “Culture,” on the State Department’s puzzling refusal to hire competent geopolitical analysts).
The “professional” analysts in Washington are for the most part anti-analysts who perceive it as their task to ram through an ideology described as “Western values,” whose main purpose is to destroy traditional Western values throughout the world, particularly Christian values (I had shown here that the US-controlled World Bank imposes values that deny sovereignty to Third World countries). The Starikov talk is well worth watching and reading the subtitles! You will hear a real professional analyst in contrast to the absolute know-nothings who are routinely interviewed on TV. There are rare exceptions such as Stephen Cohen, a true expert on Russia who bucks the current and is not afraid to tell the truth.
I viewed the video twice and 4 things became clear:
1—The US government has fostered wars for more than a half century, for example, by creating Pakistan out of India. Why? Starikov implies it is for control. He says that pattern has always been to create a territory and an anti-territory. Pakistan was the anti-India, created by the West. The Satanists in Washington (he doesn’t use that term but it fits perfectly) created Islamic terror groups there to harass India, just as they have done throughout the Middle East and in Kosovo, for example. They think this will give them control over the world (naturally, they will ultimately fail because they can’t deceive enough of their own people indefinitely to keep up this foul game.) Starikov echoes my commentary “Who is the real bully in the Ukraine crisis?,” showing that in Ukraine, the Washington elites had created an “anti-Russia” by initiating and supporting a violent coup and eventually a war. He says that Russia is unable to counter the US strategy simply by recognizing the Lugansk and Donetsk rebel republics because that could lead to war with Russia and thousands of casualties. Russia, by not recognizing these break-away republics, is actually preserving the peace.
2—Starikov advocates using reason and logic and not emotions when forging foreign policy.
3—However, there are hotheads in Russia (such as Alexander Dugin, whom Starikov does not mention by name) who are guided by emotions, and the implementation of their ideas could sabotage the Putin plan, leading to war. (Obviously, Dugin is Putin’s polar opposite in his position on the Ukraine, even though there are Russia-bashing writers who insist that Dugin is Putin’s “mentor,” as I pointed out here).
4—The current Russian government want peace. This is not to say that its motives are all sterling and altruistic. However, peace would ultimately benefit everyone, even the US, by bringing about prosperity and enabling free trade everywhere.
Ironically, if all countries fostered peace, they would all benefit equally, for a win-win situation. What we have now, thanks to US foreign policy, is a lose-lose situation.
While Starikov does not mention this, the US, by constantly antagonizing Russia, eg, with economic sanctions and with a perpetual barrage of anti-Russian commentaries in the msm, as I have pointed out here, for example, is creating enormous resentment in Russia, even though Putin has kept his cool through it all. Should Putin leave office for whatever reason, a leader of a more excitable temperament may very well lack Putin’s discipline and self control and might easily adopt a belligerent stance, threatening war and perhaps even going there. The results would be unthinkable. I believe this is the main reason that shadow-government figures such as Kissinger, Soros and George Friedman have recently warned against further antagonizing Russia. And you may recall that it was these very men who played the Russia bashing game best. So if they are now afraid, caution is advised.