Anti-Spin Check: The “Little Spin” On Helicopters and the Big Lie on the “Arab Spring”

This is no spin. This is what the American-sponsored rebels are doing in Syria. Nice folks, eh? Want ‘em to move next door to YOU?

______________________________

Events in the Middle East are gradually forming a pattern that less and less suits the vision of the “Arab spring” propagated by American and EU media. Attacks against police, and the headquarters of trade unions and political parties in Tunisia; a parliamentary crisis in Egypt, where the Supreme Constitutional Court dissolved the Islamist-dominated People’s Assembly; continuing ugly violence in Libya and, now, Syria… these events don’t fit the “democratisation” pattern suggested by the mainstream Western media since the start of the Arab spring in early 2011.

However, the problem is that Western leaders refuse to recognise their own mistakes, continuing to present the developments in the region as “momentous change” for the better and urging Russia “to find its place on the right side of history”, i.e. on the side of Arab “revolutionaries”. It was supremely ironic that the pro-Western organisers of The Spring of Arts named their art exhibition in a clear evocation of the “Arab spring”. One saw that it provoked the recent Islamist riots in Tunisia. There was also supreme irony in the fact that, having destroyed the exhibition, Tunisian Islamists now plan to further constrain artistic freedom by a special law on protection of sanctity; thus, putting the ABSENCE of freedom in a legal framework, trampling on a freedom so much cherished in the West. Again, ironically, in their attempt to quell the anti-art riots, the police used a law adopted by the former “dictator” Zine el Abidine Ben Ali, who’s now denounced in the West in the same way as Egypt’s Mubarak and Libya’s Gaddafi. Meanwhile, the primary enemies of a tolerant attitude to the arts were “the people on the right side of history”, i.e. the “revolutionary” Minister of Culture and the Ennahda Movement, the Islamist party that dominated the Tunisian Chamber of Deputies since the first post-Ben Ali elections, applauded by the West. Both the minister and parliament denounced the artists, putting the main responsibility for violence on them.

Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Mikhail Bogdanov said in an interview with RIA-Novosti, “We often hear from our Western partners that we should put ourselves on the right side of history, but when we hear that, one often gets an impression that this kind of advice comes from the people who have fallen out of history, who simply forgot what they said a few months ago. Today, these Western partners of ours are on one side of history, tomorrow… on another. They change affiliations on a daily basis. I think that our Arab friends and partners are getting more and more conscious of the fact that we simply don’t betray our old partners with whom we’ve built relations for years”. It’s enough to remember the U-turn in American policy in re supporting Egypt’s Mubarak to illustrate Bogdanov’s point. After decades of open support for the Egyptian strongman, the US State Department suddenly became his staunchest critic; it shows absolutely no compassion for the ailing Mubarak at present, he’s serving a life sentence in prison and slowly dying in custody. All of this plays out against a background of troubling political developments in Egypt, which proves that real democratisation is a much more complicated process than the simplified American vision of it, usually reduced to a Hollywood-style conflict of “everything bad” (a dictator) against “everything good” (freethinking people).

Again, ironically, the latest spat between the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov over presumed Russian military supplies to the Syrian régime fits the same pattern. As it transpired, Ms Clinton preferred simplification (some would say a blatant lie) when talking about supplies of Russian helicopter gunships to the Syrian regime. In fact, the USA had to correct its diplomat number one, acknowledging that these weren’t new supplies, but repairs to older units, and added interesting details to Ms Clinton’s imprudent statement. The New York Times quoted “a senior US Defence Department official” as saying, “She put a little spin on it to put the Russians in a difficult position”. “Spin” in plain language is a half-truth; in modern media usage it has a tendency to become a lie, since, once put in context, it distorts the bigger picture. In the case of the current US policy on the Middle East, the “little spin” about helicopters was just a little detail of a bigger lie… that of “the democratic USA supporting the democratic Arab spring”.

15 June 2012

Dmitri Babich

Voice of Russia World Service

http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_06_15/78223033/

15 June 2012. A Point to Ponder… Why Does America Bully Small States?

______________________________

The last time that the USA faced a peer force was in the Korean War of 1950-53, where the conflict ended in a stalemate between the USA on one side, and the VVS (USSR) and the PLA (PRC) on the other. The PLA soldiers proved themselves the best infantry in the conflict (the Americans could only counter them with massive firepower from artillery and air strikes). The fighter regiments were led by VOV heroes such as Ivan Kozhedub (the leading ace in the Anti-Hitler Coalition in WWII)  and Aleksandr Pokryshkin; they flew the MiG-15… that is, they had better aircraft than the USAF did (the MiG wasn’t known as the “Sabre Killer” for nothing) and were led by more experienced leaders than the Americans had. No wonder that they won local air superiority over North Korea (they were forbidden to fly below the 38th Parallel). Since then, the USA has scrupulously avoided any opponent that might come close to it in power, as the PLA and the VVS gave the USA a real run for its money and bloodied its nose badly (in fact, the USA changed the armament on its fighters as it found out that MiGs could open fire outside of the range of the outmoded equipment on American planes). Would I be unkind in stating that the leading Sov aces outscored the leading American aces (the USAF racked up victories against the PLAAF and KPAAF that was balanced by the VVS knocking down the USAF)?

The USA provoked Russia through its proxy war in South Ossetia in ’08. I translated the news dispatches then (they’re posted on this site), and the posts told the story of an unprovoked surprise attack that started with a rocket bombardment of sleeping civilians at 22.00. The USA smiled at this… GWB smiled at this… Condi Rice smiled at this… the Republican Party smiled at this. This is  a pattern, kids… so, mark that ballot for Barack Obama on 6 November. He ain’t perfect, but he’s kept us out of that sort of mess. The next time the GOP provokes the Russians, they might not be so lucky. God do preserve us all.

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Friday 15 June 2012

Albany NY

Moscow 12 June Rally: An Ideal Model of Protest?

______________________________

The second March of Millions held by opposition activists in Moscow on Tuesday remains one of the most widely discussed topics in Russia. The march and the rally were peaceful, although many had expected new clashes and violations to take place. Not a single police officer was attacked; not one activist was detained. Perhaps, this was the result of the new law on rallies imposing high fines for violations. Leading Russian political analysts discussed the topic during a special meeting in Moscow.

Maksim Grigoryev, the director of the Democratic Research Foundation, was a public observer during the campaign and had positive impressions of what he saw there, saying, “That was almost an ideal rally from the point of view of public order with all participants behaving in a proper way. We saw how people marched and how the police watched the event. I was there myself. Some protesters came up to police officers to ask them what would be the best way to organise the march and at the same time create no obstacles to anybody. It means that there’s already a culture of protesting. I liked very much the way the police worked. They treated all protesters with respect. It’s worth mentioning that the march and the rally attracted people with very different political views. I think that amendments to the law on rallies have had a positive effect on society, forcing the most aggressive protesters to change their minds”.

The new law on rallies came into force on 9 June and caused loud debates, with many fearing that higher fines would just provoke more violence. The fears were in vain. Irina Yarovaya, the chairman of the RF Gosduma Security and Anti-Corruption Committee, described the new law as an “air cushion” for society, noting, “Opposition activists have probably understood that behaving properly won’t cost them anything. Actually, the opposition itself caused the amendments to the law on rallies after its activists incited aggression during previous rallies. Then, the police suppressed the provocations. After that, the parliament analysed the European legislation on rallies and approved adequate measures in Russia to ensure more security during upcoming rallies. I want to believe that those who organise the rallies have understood the level of their responsibility”.

Most analysts agree that the new law meets European norms… it doesn’t deprive people of their right to protest, whilst the fines are quite comparable to those used in the majority of developed countries. Latest opinion polls show most Russians approve the new law on rallies. In a survey conducted by the Public Opinion Foundation in 43 regions of Russia, 50 percent of respondents welcomed higher fines for violations during rallies. 38 percent of respondents think that higher fines would result in fewer violations during protest campaigns. More than 50 percent of Russians approve of the ban of wearing masks during rallies… if people want to express their views, they should do this openly.

15 June 2012

Lada Korotun

Voice of Russia World Service

http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_06_15/78230818/

When Will The USA Put An End To Gun Violence?

______________________________

The man suspected of killing three people at a party in Alabama surrendered to the police. When he opened fire, 22-year-old Desmonte Leonard also injured three more people. The quarrel about a girl could’ve had a much less tragic end if Leonard hadn’t had a gun handy. This incident discredits US gun laws, which make firearms easily available to every citizen of the country. According to witnesses and one of the victims, the shooting began after a tiff between two groups of guests at a student party at the Auburn University campus turned into a fight. Desmonte Leonard, who was one of the fighters, opened fire, killing three people on the spot and injuring another three. One of the injured is still in hospital in critical condition. Leonard hid for three days; then, he voluntarily turned himself in at the end.

Such tragedies regularly shake American society, vividly proving that unstable elements, such as teenagers, people with mental disorders, and even ex-criminals, often have access to firearms. One only has to bring to mind the massacre carried out by a student of the Virginia Technical Institute, who killed 32 people in 2007, or, the attempt on the life of US Representative Gabrielle Giffords, carried out by a psychopath who shot to death 19 people at a voters’ meeting with the politician. Incidentally, it’s noteworthy that Giffords, who sustained a severe head wound, was a supporter of the current gun laws. In spite of the efforts of a large number of human rights activists, lawyers, politicians, and public figures, it isn’t easy to modify the US gun laws. Gun manufacturers don’t want to lose their profits, so, they continue to praise the advantages of easy access to firearms. To prove their point, those in favour of universal firearms ownership, the majority of whom are Republicans, usually emphasise that the right to carry arms is one of the fundamental rights of in the US Constitution.

On the one hand, this is true. However, the frontier times and the Civil War are in the past; today’s society lives according to different laws. Declarations made by the National Rifle Association or the Gun Owners of America to the effect that citizens’ right to self-defence with firearms helps prevent crime don’t hold water. They pump up the rare occasions when people manage to defend themselves with their own guns on a vast scale, whilst they deliberately ignore nationwide tragedies, which occur all too often. It’s unwise to expect ordinary people to feel comfortable in the use of firearms, when even police officers find themselves the focus of scandal with growing frequency due to the unwarranted use of firearms. Speaking about outmoded ideas, we should mention George Zimmerman, a neighbourhood watch member, who shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin to death. Although the neighbourhood watch only has the right to warn the cops about suspicious activities, Zimmerman must’ve imagined himself a deputy sheriff in the Wild West, for he killed a teenager who only had a mobile phone, a packet of sweets, and a bottle of iced tea on him. Incidentally, Zimmerman, who legally owned a gun, had been arrested for assaulting a police officer in the past.

The uncontrolled activity of US gun manufacturers is threatening the country with diplomatic scandals as well. The Mexican President repeatedly expressed displeasure with US gun policies because a considerable proportion of the firearms manufactured in the US happen to get into the hands of Mexican drug cartels. When the market is flooded with firearms, anyone can get them, either legally or with the help of underground dealers. The authorities developed large-scale programmes to struggle against illegal gun ownership, for example, street searches, which gave rise to charges of racism against New York City officials. However, the real world shows that the interests of Big Business are more important to the US government than the country’s international reputation or its citizens’ safety.

13 June 2012

Vladimir Gladkov

Voice of Russia World Service

http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_06_13/78004608/