THE STALINIST LEFT
Russia Bad America Good
The demonization of Russia among Western journalists has gotten so perverse, if Vladimir Putin were to jump in an erupting volcano and rescue a family of four Americans, carrying them on his back hobbling along on the melted stumps of his legs to a hospital 50 miles away, the mainstream media in the U.S. would report that Vlad the Impaler in some disconnected attempt to reconstruct the Soviet Empire had personally kidnapped four defenseless U.S. citizens and was holding them in a labor camp in the Siberian tundra.
Nothing good about Russia ever makes the cut these days, only the bad, much of it fabricated by the U.S. government itself. Even indisputable facts of history take a back seat to vilifying everything Russian. With appalling disrespect, Western leaders snubbed Russia by refusing to take part in the 70th anniversary celebrations of victory over Germany held in Moscow in 2015. Likewise with the recent 80th anniversary victory day celebrations, attended by many top leaders from all over the world. Then at equivalent ceremonies in Europe, scant mention was even made of the Russian campaigns, which resulted in the deaths of over 10 million Russian soldiers. If you bother to check the record, you will discover it was not France, England, and the U.S. which defeated Hitler. It was Russia.
I don’t say this because I’m a Russia lover or a Putin apologist. This is a matter of historical record. Maybe to the propagandists in the West with their highly focused, patently obtuse agenda, facts don’t matter. But to you and I, if we are to have any shot at embracing harmony in the world, facts are vital to a greater appreciation of a nation of 146 million people whose government is armed with over 5,000 nuclear warheads.
Here are some more facts. Feel free to check the historical record:
1) Joseph Stalin proposed in 1952 that Germany be reunited as a single neutral country with free elections. A central condition was that Germany not be part of a NATO alliance, which it viewed as a military threat. Russia was under enormous pressure economically after being ravaged by World War II and wanted to reduce the growing tensions between the East and the West.
Of course, by ignoring and ultimately rejecting this proposal, it would take another forty years of Cold War hostility and posturing to reunite Germany, then as an loyal ally and military stronghold of the U.S., though ironically, Germany for decades — until fairly recently — has been one of Russia’s most important European trading partners.
2) Prior to the 1963 Cuban missile crisis, Nikita Khrushchev for almost a decade proposed substantial reductions in offensive weapons. While America was implementing the largest peace time military build-up in history, Russia was in fact reducing its military capability.
Khrushchev finally became convinced, especially after the U.S. placed in nearby Turkey nuclear-tipped Jupiter missiles which could easily reach Russia, that America was bent on attacking the Soviet Union. This was the underlying reason for deploying nuclear missiles in Cuba, precipitating one of the most dangerous crises in history. Perhaps not the wisest thing to do, given the level of tensions the U.S. maintained with its constant “better dead than Red” fear mongering, nevertheless the missiles in Cuba were basically the Soviet’s attempt to achieve some sort of parity, at least a minimal acceptable level of mutually assured destruction with America.
3) In 1983, the U.S. risked starting World War III with provocative and unnecessary probing of Soviet air defenses, a military exercise called Able Archer. This was purely a strategic and psychological maneuver intended to bolster support Reagan was soliciting from Congress and U.S. allies for his Star Wars missile defense system. Because at this same time the U.S. was deploying nuclear-tipped Pershing II missiles in Europe which only had a 5-minute flight time to key targets in Russia, Soviet leadership understandably viewed Star Wars not as a defensive system but as the means for establishing a first-strike capability. And it suspected the probing of its air space and testing of its defense systems via Able Archer, was a prelude to an attack. Speculation about a first-strike nuclear attack on Russia continues to this day. Extremely dangerous!
4) Reagan and Gorbachev in the end were quite sincere about totally eliminating nuclear weapons by the end of the 20th Century, thus their verbal agreement during a summit in Reykjavik, Iceland to work toward eliminating the nuclear arsenals of both Russia and the U.S. was quite authentic. It was not posturing. Moreover, the whole idea for eliminating the entire nuclear arsenals of both countries was initiated by Soviet Premier Gorbachev in a letter sent to President Reagan January 14, 1986. It was actually his idea.
5) Russia only has nine foreign military bases. This is in contrast to what many estimate to be 700-800 in at minimum 80 countries by the U.S. A cursory glance at a world map shows that a substantial number of these bases form a ring around Russia. Even the most impartial observer would not view this as a coincidence and would at least appreciate why Putin and company see much of what America does as provocative, if not blatantly confrontational — why some analysts on both sides conjecture that America is preparing to launch a “preemptive” nuclear attack on Russia, begging the question what such an attack would preempt other than the continuation of the human species.
6) Contrary to headlines which screamed foul in the American media, Russia never invaded Crimea. The simple fact is that there were 16,000 troops already stationed there, as per a standing treaty with the Ukrainian government. When the elected President of the Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych — certainly corrupt and questionable in his own right, like most Ukrainian politician — was driven out of the country by street thugs, these troops were instructed to protect key physical assets in the region, as well as make sure that the many native Russians who were living there remained safe. There was no firefight, no resistance. After 97% of voters demanded in an internationally-monitored referendum to rejoin Russia, the region which had been part of Russia going back to 1786, returned to Russian authority — hardly an invasion by any stretch of the imagination. No troops stormed over the border. No shots were fired.
7) Far from being the instigator of the current crisis in the Ukraine, Putin has consistently played peacemaker and attempted to defuse the situation, even as native Russians came under threat from the new government in Kiev, and now Russian civilians are still being attacked daily with drones. Battalions of neo-Nazi fighters now comprise key sectors of Ukraine’s military forces. These were among the shock troops which originally rampaged through the eastern regions, attacking Donetsk and Lugansk, two strongholds of pro-Russian separatists and home to a majority of Russians, after the Maidan uprising.
8) Contrary to the narrative being pushed by the White House — obviously the creation of neocon ideologues swarming like locusts at all levels of the bureaucracy, especially in the State Department and think tanks within the beltway — the evidence is quite clear that the entire coup was engineered and directed by the U.S., using agent provocateur NGOs, funded by National Endowment for Democracy. Senator John McCain and Asst. U.S. Secretary of State Victoria Nuland were even on the front lines during the demonstrations. This is, of course, not what you were being told by the American press, which still leads the charge in continuing to pin all blame on Russia and Putin.
Now am I making a one-sided case here? Of course not. For over six decades, extending right up till the present, there have been gross deceptions and blunders on both sides. I bring up the above examples because the collective memory of the American public seems to be very short. Or more likely, many well-meaning Americans may not even be familiar with these particular facts in the first place. Anything good about the Soviets — and now the Russians — tends to be overwhelmed and replaced by the fiercely promoted and much easier to embrace “black hat” characterization we hear regurgitated over and over.
What I am saying is there has already been so much misunderstanding, miscalculation, and missed opportunities, that to compound our bleak and tendentious relationship with Russia with yet more misunderstanding, miscalculation, and missed opportunities, is courting disaster. It’s that simple. What’s been going on is not working. Time for a new approach.
And I am also saying that America lately bears more than its share of responsibility for the distortions, the slander, the disinformation, which has aggravated hostility toward Russia both by American and European leaders in their official capacities, and by American citizens, who never seem to run out of foreign peoples to fear, mistrust, even hate.
Let me throw something else into the mix here. This is probably the most important factor whenever we look at Russia and try to gauge her motives and intents.
The Soviet Union lost more than 27,000,000 people in World War II. Most were killed in the Russian homeland itself as a result of the overwhelming German Nazi blitz. Over a half million died in the Battle of Stalingrad alone.
That is why they are fearful of having troops and/or ballistic missiles on their borders — as in the Ukraine or Georgia. They have been gritting their teeth as NATO has edged its way closer and closer to Russia — contrary, by the way, to reassurances given right after the fall of the Berlin wall and the reunification of Germany. America lost 420,000 soldiers during all of World War II, fighting on two fronts, in Europe and the Far East. If we had seen 27,000,000 Americans killed, the blood of the majority spilled right here on our own soil, how would we feel about having troops, nuclear-tipped tactical missiles, and ballistic missile defense radars and interceptors arrayed along the Canadian or Mexican borders? How would we read the intention of any nation insisting on putting these on our borders?
As they say, this is not rocket science.
What might require the intellectual aptitude of a rocket scientist is trying to understand what America’s strategic planners have in mind in promoting this agenda. It undermines any possibility of peace between the two great powers and risks thermonuclear war.
Am I a Russia lover?
An America hater?
Neither.
I just think that before we kill a few more million people or destroy the world, we might want to look at both sides of each issue, maybe mentally trade places, try to be fair and reasonable, give our all to try to understand exactly what is going on.
And a big part of understanding issues is knowing history, taking into consideration what has been occurring for decades, sometimes even centuries. To paraphrase George Santayana: “Those who do not remember their past are condemned to repeat their mistakes.”
Yet, the drama continues and intensifies. Confrontation and intimidation of Russia is ongoing. Massive military exercises on Russia’s borders have become frequent: Griffin Lightning, Operation Hedgehog, Nordic Response, Dynamic Front 25. These follow numerous previously held on Russia’s borders in Poland and substantial increases in troops and equipment in Poland and the Baltic states. A new ABM system was deployed in Romania back in 2016. Romania is now in the final stages of constructing the largest NATO military base in Europe. In 2024, NATO opened a new missile defense base in Redzikowo, Poland. Military war games are also held in the Black Sea, like Sea Breeze 2015 and Sea Breeze 2021, sailing war ships and aircraft carriers into the “Russian lake”, surveilling and testing Russia’s littoral defenses.
While all of this display of firepower is allegedly to prepare for a Russian offensive, it only serves to provoke Russia and test its patience. Propaganda from the West would have it that Russia is aggressively re-building the Soviet Empire and is preparing to attack Europe. Looking at what comes out of U.S. think tanks would suggest the opposite, that it is the US/UK/EU/NATO which is preparing to attack and dismember Russia, then plunder its vast resources.
Russia does not want war with Ukraine, the US, or any country in Europe. Recognize, no one can point at any actual aggression on Russia’s part, other than the trumped up and discredited accusations of fighting in eastern Ukraine and having invaded and seized control of Crimea and four oblasts. Russia’s coming to the defense of the people there is completely understandable. The people in these five regions are mostly Russian. Ukraine has systematically targeted them for elimination. Even before the 2022 Special Military Operation began, over 14,000 were killed in Donbas alone. These five zones have been actively wanting to leave Ukraine and join Russia since 2014. They each held referendums and by huge majorities — 97% in Crimea! — voted to do just that.
Now the rhetoric from the U.S. and NATO is becoming even more skewed and provocative. At the July 2016 NATO meeting in Warsaw, Russia was declared the major threat to peace and stability in Europe. Nothing has changed except to get worse. Great Britain is talking about sending its troops to Ukraine. Germany, the Baltic and Scandinavia nations, and the UK open talk about having a war with Russia. These people are relentless. And apparently merciless. They are willing to sacrifice the lives of their citizens in a major war that need not happen. All Russia wants is a neutral Ukraine — free of US/EU/NATO troops, no missiles and other lethal weaponry pointed at Russia — and a Ukrainian government which is free of Russia-hating neo-Nazis.
Russia has made clear its position over and over. Putin, forcefully and frankly, expressed his concerns about NATO expansion in 2007 in his historical address at the Munich Conference. The West was then and still is unable to listen. Or simply refuses.
The reality is, facts don’t discourage western politicians and U.S. media from beating the drums of war, increasing tensions, and risking a major military confrontation. When you wear a white hat, you alone get to decide who the black hats are.
Frankly, it’s shocking what comes out of the mouths of the spokespersons for the U.S. government. There is no equivalent that I can see coming from the Russian side. Russians tend to be restrained, diplomatic, and at least on the public side very respectful and statesmanlike. Trump, and Biden and Obama before him have, for example, in a number of high-visibility public forums made it their personal mission to insult Vladimir Putin and propagate what are proven lies about Russia. If our political leaders believe any of this stuff, then instead of attending foreign policy and intelligence briefings, they must have been reading comic books or getting their information from Garry Kasparov’s website. But to be honest, I’ve concluded they know the truth and these endless propaganda assaults are quite intentional. The big plan is still to destroy Russia, break it up into little pieces, a loot its rich national resources and treasures.
Back to Russia …
Despite the barrage of vituperation and insults from the West, you cannot find one instance of Putin, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, former Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, current Defense Minister Andrei Belousov, Director of Information and Press Department Maria Zakharova, Presidential Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov, or any other high official in the ranks of power in Russia, conducting themselves with anything other than extreme courtesy and professionalism.
Frankly, it’s often embarrassing to see the way U.S. diplomats swagger around like they’re on their way to a barroom brawl in America’s Old West. The contrast with Russia’s spokespersons is stark and revealing.
Final thoughts …
It would be one thing if the feud between the U.S. and Russia were just some schoolyard scrap between two pubescent boys. But these two major countries armed to the teeth with nuclear missiles, burdened with almost seven decades of bad blood between them, much of the bad blood alarmingly the product of gross misunderstanding.
The price of more of the same aggravation and contentiousness is at best wasting valuable resources and energy which could be devoted to other mounting crises — climate change, the rapid destruction of the oceans, the spread of antibiotic-resistant disease, desertification of farmland, depletion of water resources throughout the world, increasing risk of widespread famine, the urgent need to secure vast stockpiles of nuclear weapons from access by terrorists — at worst an epic nuclear holocaust which puts the human race in a giant coffin.
Isn’t it time to stop the name-calling?
Isn’t it time to put away the gang colors?
The black hats and the white hats?
Russia Bad! America Good!
Nothing is that simple.
