Here:
A neoconservative British lobby group literally wants to blacklist
people for talking to what they consider to be undesirable media. McCarthyism
has gone trans-Atlantic.
If the Henry Jackson Society (HJS)
was on a solo run, their campaign to smear anybody remotely sympathetic to, or
even open to engaging with, Russia as “Putin’s
useful idiot” might have
been easily dismissed as an absurd, paranoid throwback.
After all, the organization
is of questionable provenance and is named for a hawkish US senator who rarely
saw a war he didn’t like.
From Vietnam to Cambodia and Iraq, ‘Scoop’
Jackson’s pursuit of
foreign misadventures was legendary.
However, this new narrative is
anything but a fluke.
Because in the past month, both The Times of London and
NATO’s Atlantic Council adjunct have pushed much
the same message.
And all three entities are interconnected when it comes to
evaluating Moscow.
Indeed, the “blame
Russia” crowd seems to move
around with great haste on this think-tank fellow/journalist/expert commentator
merry-go-round.
A cold front
This autumn, The Times kicked off
the current campaign with a series of articles smearing British
personalities who have appeared on Russian stations.
Interestingly, the
apparent driving force behind the coverage, and leader writer at the paper, is Oliver Kamm, who was a founder member
of the HJS and a signator to
the statement of principles.
And that proclamation is some piece
of work.
In it, we learn how the HJS does not regard a large number of states
as “truly
legitimate.”
Amazingly, they include two of the world’s top three
military powers, namely Russia and China.
Their sin? Not being American style “liberal democracies,” which in itself is ironic at a time
when the US appears to be questioning its own fealty to unbridled liberalism.
For its part, NATO’s Atlantic
Council prefers the
term “Trojan Horses” rather than “useful idiots,” and it used its November
report to slam a particular subset of European public figures, those who do not
give unconditional support to the military bloc and its aims.
They seemingly
include French presidential front-runner François Fillon, German
Vice-Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel, and British opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn.
The simplicity of the defamation is astounding, as the
authors refuse to countenance any domestic or moral reasons for why these politicians
may not support the further militarization of Europe.
Instead, the only explanation entertained is that they are
doing it to suit Moscow.
The introduction to the Atlantic
Council’s diatribe is written by Radoslaw Sikorski, the controversial former Polish
foreign minister.
He happens to be married to Anne Applebaum, who works as a
lobbyist for American defense contractors at a Washington and
Warsaw-based advocacy named
CEPA.
She’s joined there by Peter Pomerantsev, who is slated to launch the
HJS communique at
Westminster on Wednesday.
Also, another person who links the
Atlantic Council to HJS is their colleague Michael Weiss.
While the activist is
now employed to campaign for
the former’s interests, he was previously the communication’s director at
the latter.
Not to mention the fact that he also edits The Interpreter,
a blog dedicated to denigrating Russia, which is a special project of the US
government broadcaster RFE/RL.
Yes. It really is a small world.
New sensation
The HJS report is penned by Andrew Foxall, a former climate
change ‘expert’ who has jumped onto the anti-Russia bandwagon in recent years.
Foxall’s crude pitch is that somehow the Kremlin is manipulating both Britain’s
right and left to control events in the country.
Which begs the question of
where, exactly, are you allowed to be on the UK political spectrum?
Is no one
allowed a critical thought that falls outside the bounds of the Foxall-approved
centrist establishment?
The title “Putin’s Useful Idiots” is also interesting.
Because it’s well known how this phrase is used in the UK
to describe people who work in the mainstream media and can be relied on to
peddle a certain line when it comes to particular stories, for instance to spin
a tale to the benefit of the government or the intelligence agencies.
Given
that Richard Dearlove, the head of MI6 from 1999 to 2005, was a founder signatory of the HJS, it’s probably fair to say
they are fully aware of this association.
Foxall’s advice for how to counter
his mythical Russian management of the UK processes certainly seeks to exude
the spirit of McCarthyism.
He proposes that “activists,
journalists, and politicians should point out the pro-Russian connections of
individuals and parties across the political spectrum” and “the
personal and organizational connections of left- and right-wing politicians and
parties and their Russian counterparts should be mapped across Europe.”
Plus, “Parliaments across Europe should
amend current legislation or pass new legislation that forces politicians to
declare all media appearances they make, whether they receive money for them or
not.”
It homes in on people like Nigel
Farage, currently the UK establishment’s bĂȘte noire, and insinuates how Arron
Banks, UKIP’s primary donor, has “colorful
links” to Russia.
Corbyn and
his chief adviser, Seumas Milne, are also harangued for having appeared on RT.
As is Ken Livingstone, a two-term mayor of London.
Meanwhile, Milne is further
attacked for having attended the Valdai Club in Sochi, an international
discussion group designed to promote understanding across borders.
The
gathering has hosted many influential world figures, not to mention academics
from places like Harvard, Stanford, LSE and the Sorbonne.
Here it is
misrepresented as “an annual
propaganda and ego-boosting event.”
Winter campaign
The rather unexpected outcome of
the US presidential election had distracted Russia’s ‘fan club’ for a short
while, but the team is now back on the circuit, with gusto.
And the same names
just keep popping up all the time, repeating their usual dirge of “Kremlin bad; anything west of St
Petersburg – good.”
No wonder many Western establishment politicians love these guys.
Because with their imprimatur, they don’t have to accept responsibility for
their own failings or inadequacies.
Instead, they are presented with a
ready-made boogeyman on which everything undesirable can pin.
Why should the establishment analyze
its own failings when considering why Brexit passed, or Donald Trump is US
President-elect, despite their best efforts to ensure the opposite outcome?
Why
take a sober, internally focused look at the rise of Marine Le Pen in France or
increasingly popular alternative political movements in Austria, Italy or the
Netherlands?
Instead, the anti-Russia lobby groups offer an easier option: “Blame
the Kremlin, for everything.”
While musing on ‘useful idiots’ or ‘Trojan Horses,’ another expression
comes to mind: burying one's head in the sand.
While ostriches get the bum
rap for the practice, really it is the humans of the media-political
establishment variety who have perfected it in recent times.
And reports like
these are only perpetuating this self-destructive practice.
This is dreadful. The neocons really are leftwing and true to their Marxist roots in every way, right down to censuring free speech.
ReplyDeleteThe liberal Left has blacklisted anyone who does disagrees with it on anything as "fascist," racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic" etc for years and is now suffering the consequences at the ballot box.
About time, too.
Come back when you've read more than one book.
DeleteBoth of the Hitchens brothers inspire these male fangirls who think if they've read the idol then there's nothing else to read.
DeleteThe antiwar movement is the Left now, there is no other. And the war movement is the Right. Watch out for Trump's foreign policy appointments. There'd have been none of that from Sanders.