War Pigs - The US Press and Ukraine
Table Talk - Vol. 27 - 2.21.22
Hey Everyone,
I hope everyone had a great Valentine’s Day and is enjoying Black History Month. I got a head start on the latter with celebrating MLK Day by watching the really moving film Selma with my kids. But I am not alone. Everybody is celebrating MLK Day now:
See? Even the people who relentlessly surveilled him, called him the “most dangerous Negro in the country,” tried to destroy his marriage, and sent him letters encouraging him to kill himself is all about Dr. King. Of course, the FBI has now moved on to identifying the most dangerous Muslim in the country.
No pod this past week. We just couldn’t get our schedules aligned (please use the British pronunciation of “schedules” when reading that last sentence).
However, we are still getting messages from people about our 100th episode show! Thanks, people! If you haven’t heard it, be sure to check it out:
Also, SUBSCRIBE to the podcast on Apple:
Ok, glad you’re here. Now, dig in…
War Pigs
So, there has been so much going on in the past few weeks, and…Wait. Hold on. Shhhh. Quiet. Did you hear that? Listen closely. It’s a faint thump that appears to be getting louder every day. Do you hear it?
It’s the American press beating their war drums: “Russian invasion of Ukraine Could Happen at Anytime,” “The US is Naive about Russia,” and “Russia Willing to go to War” are just some of the softer taps. After the Iraq War, the US and its mainstream press is champing at the bit for a “good war” to re-establish US “credibility.”
Now, Putin is basically an anti-democratic dictator who is obviously megalomaniacal (he’s basically been president of Russia since 1999!). But he’s also wily, rational, and not a nihilist. He’s a self-interested Great Russian chauvinist who cares about money and power. I mean, he and P-Diddy have been making a bundle off of their own liquor brands for decades.
So, he’s not a madman trying to start WWIII. P-Diddski’s beef is and has always been the continued existence and eastward creep of NATO. And this is the one thing that basically goes unquestioned in the press.
There is acknowledgement that this is his grievance, but it is viewed as either irrational, classically Russian paranoia, or a rouse to divert attention from his desire to reestablish an eastern European security buffer à la Stalin.
Now, this is not apologia for Putin. He’s a brutal dictator who kills journalists, imprisons political opponents, rules with a coterie of oligarchs, and has essentially made Russia a petro-state, which is obviously terrible for the global fight against climate change. So, he’s pretty bad for his people, and he’s pretty bad for his neighbors and much of the world. Let this be crystal clear: the people of Ukraine have the right to self-determination.
All this being said, it does not follow that the US and its NATO allies should be on the doorstep of Russia and not expect a former KGB boss to feel encircled. In 2008, NATO promised membership to Georgia and Ukraine, but without a definitive timeline or plan. In response, Putin backed rebels in a breakaway region in Georgia called South Ossetia killing 800. This is a pretty good indicator of how he feels about the idea.
It is also important to remember that in 1990 and 1991 both Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin proposed first the Soviet Union and then Russia join NATO. They were rebuffed by US officials. Yeltsin and then Putin demanded that should NATO continue to exist, it should not expand to Russia’s borders. It did; it added Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania in 2004.
I think we can easily imagine the American reaction if Russia expanded a military alliance that added Mexico, Canada, and much of Central America. Why is it, then, so hard for the American press and American officials to see how their own actions might be viewed as aggressive?
It is largely due to the halcyon view of American power as good by definition. Check out these official views fro the past 70 years:
“In essence, the fundamental purpose is to assure the integrity and vitality of our free society, which is founded upon the dignity and worth of the individual.”
-NSC-68 (1950)
This comes from a section entitled, “The fundamental purpose of the United States.” Now, who could be against that? Freedom? Individual dignity? Well, this is the justification for the global expansion of US military power, which is detailed in this infamous National Security Council document of the early Cold War. Half a century later we have this:
“Today, the United States enjoys a position of unparalleled military strength and great economic and political influence. In keeping with our heritage and principles, we do not use our strength to press for unilateral advantage. We seek instead to create a balance of power that favors human freedom: conditions in which all nations and all societies can choose for themselves the rewards and challenges of political and economic liberty.”
-National Security Strategy of the USA (2002)
You see? We won the Cold War! What are the spoils? The world itself! But remember that this is not about unilateral advantage, says the US one year before unilaterally invading Iraq. American power is really just freedom spreading its wings (and dropping bombs from those wings when necessary). Lastly, we’ve got Nobel Peace Prize Winning security strategy:
“Any successful strategy to ensure the safety of the American people and advance our national security interests must begin with an undeniable truth—America must lead. Strong and sustained American leadership is essential to a rules-based international order that promotes global security and prosperity as well as the dignity and human rights of all peoples. The question is never whether America should lead, but how we lead.”
National Security Strategy of the USA (2015)
Here, the supposed dovish Obama administration repeats what has become an article of faith for American politicians and their mostly fawning press: US global supremacy is an unqualified global political and social good.
So, while there is a lot of speculation on “What Putin is actually thinking,” it might behoove us to pause for a minute to reflect on what the US thinks about itself and whether or not that matches up with the views of the rest of the world.
In the mean time, plug your ears from those bleating war drums from the US press and listen to this instead.
-Amit
Friends of the Pod in the News
Our last guest, Roosevelt Montas was just extensively interviewed on the great Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. But…we got there first!
Here’s the ep:
Thanks for reading! Until next time…