Who's the Propagandist: US or RT (Russia
Today) ? By Robert Parry, Consortium News
01 May 14 See also:
http://worldtraining.net/Ukraine.htm http://worldtraining.net/Ukraine2.htm
http://worldtraining.net/Ukraine3.htm http://worldtraining.net/Ukraine4.htm
The U.S. State Department, which has
been caught promoting a series of false or dubious stories about
Ukraine, is trying to give some substance to Secretary of State John KerryÕs
counter-complaint that RussiaÕs RT network is a Òpropaganda bullhornÓ promoting
Russian President Vladimir PutinÕs Òfantasy.Ó In a ÒDipnoteÓ of April
29, Richard Stengel, under secretary of state for public diplomacy, made some
broad-brush criticisms of RTÕs content – accusing
the network of painting Òa dangerous and false picture of UkraineÕs legitimate
governmentÓ by citing examples of fascism, anti-Semitism and terrorism
surrounding the Kiev regime.
Stengel
claims he knows the difference between news and propaganda because he spent
seven years as managing editor of Time. He defines propaganda as Òthe
deliberate dissemination of information that you know to be false or misleading
in order to influence an audienceÓ and asserts: ÒRT is a distortion machine,
not a news organization.Ó
But
Stengel offers no specific citations of the supposedly propagandistic stories
done by RT, making it impossible to ascertain the precise wording or context of
the RT content that he is criticizing. One basic rule of journalism is Òshow,
donÕt tell,Ó but Stengel apparently didnÕt learn that during his seven years in
the top echelon of Time magazine.
Nevertheless, Stengel accuses RT of ÒdisinformationÓ ranging from
Òassertions that peaceful protesters hired snipers to repeated allegations that
Kiev is beset by violence, fascism and anti-Semitism, these are lies falsely
presented as news.Ó
Though
itÕs impossible to fully assess StengelÕs complaint because he doesnÕt specify
the offending stories, the first complaint is an apparent reference to the mystery
surrounding the identity of snipers who opened fire on protesters and police
during the Maidan protests in Kiev on Feb. 20. The U.S. government, the U.S. press and
the Maidan protesters were quick to blame President
Viktor Yanukovych although he denied giving an order
to fire on the protests and suggested the shootings may have been a
provocation. That suspicion of Òfalse-flagÓ violence –
as a way to spur on the coup against Yanukovych
– also was expressed by some neutral observers on the ground in Kiev.
Two
European Union officials, EstoniaÕs Foreign Minister Urmas
Paet and European Union foreign affairs chief
Catherine Ashton, were revealed discussing in a phone call their suspicions
that elements of the protesters were responsible for the shootings. ÒSo there is a stronger and stronger
understanding that behind snipers it was not Yanukovych,
it was somebody from the new coalition,Ó Paet told
Ashton, as reported by the UK Guardian. In other words, if Stengel is referring
to RTÕs reporting about the sniper attacks, his
assumption that RT was knowingly lying when it referenced a possible role of
the Maidan protesters in the sniper shootings is
itself false. Further, Stengel must have known that not all the Maidan protesters were Òpeaceful.Ó
Hide
the Neo-Nazis Although the State Department has tried to hide the crucial role of
neo-Nazi militias in overthrowing YanukovychÕs
elected government, it was well known at the time (and acknowledged by the Maidan protesters themselves) that far-right groups had
organized 100-man brigades to carry out the final attacks. There was also
widely broadcast news footage of these Maidan
protesters hurling Molotov cocktails at police, more than a dozen who died in
the clashes. Is Stengel really
unaware of the involvement in the coup by neo-Nazi storm troopers from the
Right Sektor and the Svoboda party, which both
lionize World War II Nazi collaborator Stepan
Bandera? Does Stengel really not know about the prevalence of banners honoring
Bandera, Nazi insignias at rallies and even the appearance of the Confederate
battle flag unfurled at the Kiev City Hall as the universal symbol of white
supremacy? Just because virtually
the entire U.S. press corps has joined in the U.S. governmentÕs propagandized
version of what happened during and after the violent overthrow of Yanukovych doesnÕt mean that RT and other news
organizations have to shut their eyes, too. For instance, the BBC, which is funded by the British
government much as RT is funded by the Russian government, had the courage to
run a
segment on the MaidanÕs neo-Nazis, noting
that the far-right groups were given four ministries in the new government in
recognition of their important contribution. Most significantly, the new chief of national security, Andriy Parubiy, was one of those
neo-Nazis. He founded the Social-National Party of Ukraine in 1991, blending
radical Ukrainian nationalism with neo-Nazi symbols. Parubiy
also formed a paramilitary spinoff, the Patriots of Ukraine, and defended the
awarding of the title, ÒHero of Ukraine,Ó to Bandera, whose paramilitary forces
joined with the Nazis in exterminating Poles and Jews during World War II.
During
the months of protests aimed at overthrowing Yanukovych,
Parubiy became the commandant of ÒEuromaidan,Ó
the name for the Kiev uprising. Then, in mid-April as the new regimeÕs national
security chief and facing growing resistance in eastern Ukraine, Paubiy warned that he was siccing
some of his paramilitary veterans, now incorporated in the National Guard, on
the anti-regime protesters. On Twitter, he wrote, ÒReserve unit of National
Guard formed #Maidan Self-defense volunteers was sent
to the front line this morning.Ó
Some leading neo-Nazis have been brazen in their assertion of Ukrainian
racial superiority over other ethnic groups in Ukraine, including the ethnic
Russians in the east. Like their hero Bandera, these modern-day storm troopers
would prefer an ethnically pure Ukraine.
Though
it is true that most of the Maidan protesters were
there in support of closer European ties and anger over government corruption,
it is also true that the neo-Nazi militias surged to the front of the protests
for the final clashes on Feb. 20-22. [See Consortiumnews.comÕs
ÒUkraine, Though the US ÔLooking Glass.ÕÓ] And, as for StengelÕs insistence that RTÕs reporting that ÒKiev is beset
by violenceÓ is further proof of RTÕs Òpropaganda,Ó
thereÕs the inconvenient reality that far-right forces have been clashing with other Maidan
protesters over the past few days. Some of these ultra-nationalists want more
rewards for their role in YanukovychÕs ouster and
some want a harsher crackdown on the uprising in the ethnic Russian east. WhoÕs
Playing Terrorist Card? In his
unspecified litany of other purported RT offenses, Stengel also cites Òthe
constant reference to any Ukrainian opposed to a Russian takeover of the
country as a Ôterrorist.Õ Or the unquestioning repetition of
the ludicrous assertion last week that the United States has invested $5
billion in regime change in Ukraine. ÒThese are not facts, and they are not opinions. They
are false claims, and when propaganda poses as news it creates real dangers and
gives a green light to violence.Ó
However,
regarding the use of the word Òterrorist,Ó which Stengel finds so offensive, it
has actually been applied promiscuously not by RT but by the Kiev regime and
the U.S. State Department against the anti-regime protesters in eastern Ukraine
though they have not engaged in behavior that is traditionally considered
Òterrorism.Ó The Russian ethnic
protesters in the east have engaged in no indiscriminate killing of civilians
for political purposes, the classic definition of Òterrorism.Ó Yet, the
post-coup regime in Kiev has repeatedly announced plans for an Òanti-terrorismÓ
campaign against the east. In other words, StengelÕs ÒsideÓ is guilty of what
he accuses RT of doing. As
for RTÕs Òludicrous assertionÓ about the U.S.
investing $5 billion, that is a clear reference to a public speech by Assistant
Secretary of State for European Affaris Victoria Nuland to U.S. and Ukrainian business leaders on Dec. 13 in
which she told them that Òwe have invested more than
$5 billionÓ in what was needed for Ukraine to achieve its ÒEuropean
aspirations.Ó Nuland
also was a leading proponent of Òregime changeÓ in Ukraine who personally
cheered on the Maidan demonstrators, even passing out
cookies. In an intercepted, obscenity-laced phone call with U.S. Ambassador to
Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt, Nuland
said her choice to replace Yanukovych was Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who ended up
as Prime Minister after the coup.
If
Stengel wants to quibble about whether NulandÕs $5
billion remark was a reference to Òregime changeÓ or not – although the
European association was a key issue in YanukovychÕs
ouster – the under secretary can make his argument. But to ignore the
obvious context of NulandÕs $5 billion reference is
again either a sign of stunning ignorance or willful deception. As for StengelÕs office of Òpublic
diplomacy,Ó it is a segment of the State Department that I have personally
dealt with since the 1980s during my days covering the Reagan administrationÕs
Central America policies for the Associated Press and Newsweek.
Back
then, some of us referred to the ÒPDÓ office as Òthe office of propaganda and
disinformationÓ because of the endless distortions and lies generated in
support of U.S.-backed Òdeath squadÓ regimes in El Salvador and Guatemala and
for Ronald ReaganÕs beloved Nicaraguan Contra rebels who fairly could be called
ÒterroristÓ given their proclivity for slaughtering and raping Nicaraguan
civilians and for collaborating with cocaine traffickers to make money on the
side. The Earlier Brave Kerry Ironically, in those days, a younger
version of John Kerry was a U.S. senator who bravely investigated these
Reagan-affiliated crimes and faced attacks from the State DepartmentÕs public
diplomacy operatives. Part of
KerryÕs punishment for being early in his investigation of White House
skullduggery in Central America was to be excluded from the Iran-Contra
investigation when some of ReaganÕs crimes and lies surfaced dramatically in
late 1986. Because Kerry had been
ahead of the curve, he was judged ÒbiasedÓ on the issue of ReaganÕs guilt and
thus passed over for the Òselect committeeÓ investigation. Only Democratic
senators who had been fooled by the lies or were asleep at the switch were
deemed ÒobjectiveÓ enough for the high-profile inquiry. [For more on the
contrast between Kerry's past and present, see Consortiumnews.comÕs
ÒWhatÕs the Matter with John Kerry?Ó] Another irony of StengelÕs defense of
KerryÕs anti-RT outburst is that one of the senior Òpublic diplomacyÓ
operatives on Central America back in the 1980s was a young neocon
named Robert Kagan, whose State Department team
developed propaganda themes to undercut Kerry and various journalists, like
myself, who would not toe the line.
At one point when Kagan realized that I would
not play ball with the administrationÕs propaganda, he informed me that I would
have to be Òcontroversialized,Ó that is become the
focus of public attacks from pro-Reagan attack groups and thus have my
journalistic career damaged, a process that was subsequently carried out.
The
irony in this is that Robert Kagan went on to become
a leading light in the neocon movement, a Washington
Post columnist, a co-founder of the Project for the New American Century, a
star proponent of Iraqi Òregime changeÓ – and the husband of Assistant
Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, the recent
cheerleader for Òregime changeÓ in Ukraine. That Stengel, the current master of the State DepartmentÕs
Òpublic diplomacyÓ operation, is now offended by what he considers ÒpropagandaÓ
by RT has to be considered one of the purest expressions of hypocrisy in the
long history of U.S. government hypocrisy. [For more on this topic, see Consortiumnews.comÕs ÒKerryÕs Propaganda War on RussiaÕs RT.Ó]