Exclusive: Liberal interventionist Samantha Power – along
with neocon allies – appears to have prevailed in the struggle over how
President Obama will conduct his foreign policy in his last months in office,
promoting aggressive strategies that will lead to more death and destruction,
writes Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry
Propaganda and genocide almost always go hand in hand, with the would-be
aggressor stirring up resentment often by assuming the pose of a victim simply
acting in self-defense and then righteously inflicting violence on the targeted
group.
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power understands this dynamic
having
written
about the 1994 genocide in Rwanda where talk radio played a key role in getting
Hutus to kill Tutsis. Yet, Power is now leading propaganda campaigns laying the
groundwork for two potential ethnic slaughters: against the Alawites, Shiites,
Christians and other minorities in Syria and against the ethnic Russians of
eastern Ukraine.
Though Power is a big promoter of the “responsibility to protect” – or “R2P”
– she operates with glaring selectivity in deciding who deserves protection as
she advances a neocon/liberal interventionist agenda. She is turning “human
rights” into an excuse not to resolve conflicts but rather to make them
bloodier.
Thus, in Power’s view, the overthrow and punishment of Syria’s President
Bashar al-Assad takes precedence over shielding Alawites and other minorities
from the likely consequence of Sunni-extremist vengeance. And she has sided with
the ethnic Ukrainians in their slaughter of ethnic Russians in eastern
Ukraine.
In both cases, Power spurns pragmatic negotiations that could avert worsening
violence as she asserts a black-and-white depiction of these crises. More
significantly, her strident positions appear to have won the day with President
Barack Obama, who has relied on Power as a foreign policy adviser since his 2008
campaign.
Power’s self-righteous approach to human rights – deciding that her side
wears white hats and the other side wears black hats – is a bracing example of
how “human rights activists” have become purveyors of death and destruction or
what some critics have deemed “
the
weaponization of human rights.”
We saw this pattern in Iraq in 2002-03 when many “liberal humanitarians”
jumped on the pro-war bandwagon in favoring an invasion to overthrow dictator
Saddam Hussein. Power herself didn’t support the invasion although she was
rather
mealy-mouthed in her skepticism and sought to hedge her career bets amid
the rush to war.
For instance, in a March 10, 2003 debate on MSNBC’s “Hardball” show — just
nine days before the invasion — Power said, “An American intervention likely
will improve the lives of the Iraqis. Their lives could not get worse, I think
it’s quite safe to say.”
However, the lives of Iraqis actually did get worse. Indeed, hundreds of
thousands stopped living altogether and a sectarian war continues to tear the
country apart to this day.
Power in Power
Similarly, regarding Libya, Power was one of the instigators of the
U.S.-supported military intervention in 2011 which was disguised as an “R2P”
mission to protect civilians in eastern Libya where dictator Muammar Gaddafi had
identified the infiltration of terrorist groups.
Urged on by then-National Security Council aide Power and Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton, Obama agreed to support a military mission that quickly morphed
into a “regime change” operation. Gaddafi’s troops were bombed from the air and
Gaddafi was eventually hunted down, tortured and murdered.
The result, however, was not a bright new day of peace and freedom for
Libyans but the disintegration of Libya into a failed state with violent
extremists, including elements of the Islamic State, seizing control of swaths
of territory and murdering civilians. It turns out that Gaddafi was not wrong
about some of his enemies.
Today, Power is a leading force opposing meaningful negotiations over Syria
and Ukraine, again staking out “moralistic” positions – rejecting possible
power-sharing with Assad in Syria and blaming the Ukraine crisis entirely on the
Russians. She doesn’t seem all that concerned about impending genocides against
Assad’s supporters in Syria or ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine.
In 2012, at a meeting hosted by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
in Washington, former U.S. Ambassador Peter W. Galbraith
predicted
“the next genocide in the world … will likely be against the Alawites in Syria”
— a key constituency behind Assad’s secular regime. But Power has continued to
insist that the top priority is Assad’s removal.
Similarly, Power has shown little sympathy for members of Ukraine’s ethnic
Russian minority who saw their elected President Viktor Yanukovych overthrown in
a Feb. 22, 2014 coup spearheaded by neo-Nazis and other right-wing nationalists
who had gained effective control of the Maidan protests. Many of these
extremists want an ethnically pure Ukrainian state.
Since then, neo-Nazi units, such as the Azov battalion, have been Kiev’s tip
of the spear in slaughtering thousands of ethnic Russians in the east and
driving millions from their homes, essentially an ethnic-cleansing campaign in
eastern Ukraine.
A Propaganda Speech
Yet, Power traveled to Kiev to deliver
a
one-sided propaganda speech on June 11, portraying the post-coup
Ukrainian regime simply as a victim of “Russian aggression.”
Despite the key role of neo-Nazis –
acknowledged
even by the U.S. House of Representatives – Power uttered not one word
about Ukrainian military abuses which have included reports of death squad
operations targeting ethnic Russians and other Yanukovych supporters.
Skipping over the details of the U.S.-backed and Nazi-driven coup of Feb. 22,
2014, Power traced the conflict instead to “February 2014, when Russia’s little
green men first started appearing in Crimea.” She added that the United Nations’
“focus on Ukraine in the Security Council is important, because it gives me the
chance – on behalf of the United States – to lay out the mounting evidence of
Russia’s aggression, its obfuscation, and its outright lies. … America is
clear-eyed when it comes to seeing the truth about Russia’s destabilizing
actions in your country.”
Power continued: “The message of the United States throughout this
Moscow-manufactured conflict – and
the
message you heard from President Obama and other world leaders at last
week’s meeting of the G7 – has never wavered: if Russia continues to disregard
the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine; and if Russia continues to
violate the rules upon which international peace and security rest – then the
United States will continue to raise the costs on Russia.
“And we will continue to rally other countries to do the same, reminding them
that their silence or inaction in the face of Russian aggression will not
placate Moscow, it will only embolden it.
“But there is something more important that is often lost in the
international discussion about Russia’s efforts to impose its will on Ukraine.
And that is you – the people of Ukraine – and your right to determine the course
of your own country’s future. … Or, as one of the great rallying cries of the
Maidan put it:
Ukraina po-nad u-se! Ukraine above all else!”
[Applause.]
Power went on: “Let me begin with what we know brought people out to the
Maidan in the first place. We’ve all heard a good number of myths about this.
One told by the Yanukovych government and its Russian backers at the time was
that the Maidan protesters were pawns of the West, and did not speak for the
‘real’ Ukraine.
“A more nefarious myth peddled by Moscow after Yanukovych’s fall was that
Euromaidan had been engineered by Western capitals in order to topple a
democratically-elected government.”
Of course, neither of Power’s points was actually a “myth.” For instance, the
U.S.-funded National Endowment for Democracy was sponsoring scores of
anti-government activists and media operations — and NED President Carl Gershman
had deemed Ukraine “the biggest prize,” albeit a stepping stone toward ousting
Russian President Vladimir Putin. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “
A
Shadow US Foreign Policy.”]
Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland was
collaborating with U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt how to “midwife” the change in
government with Nuland picking the future leaders of Ukraine – “Yats is the guy”
referring to Arseniy Yatsenyuk who was installed as prime minister after the
coup. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “
The
Neocons: Masters of Chaos.”]
The coup itself occurred after Yanukovych pulled back the police to prevent
worsening violence.
Armed
neo-Nazi and right-wing militias, organized as “sotins” or 100-man
units, then took the offensive and overran government buildings.
Yanukovych and other officials fled for their lives, with Yanukovych narrowly
avoiding assassination. In the days following the coup, armed thugs essentially
controlled the government and brutally intimidated any political resistance.
Inventing ‘Facts’
But that reality had no place in Power’s propaganda speech. Instead, she
said:
“The facts tell a different story. As you remember well, then-President
Yanukovych abandoned Kyiv of his own accord, only hours after signing an
agreement with opposition leaders that would have led to early elections and
democratic reforms.
“And it was only after Yanukovych fled the capital that 328 of the 447
members of the democratically-elected Rada voted to strip him of his powers –
including 36 of the 38 members of his own party in parliament at the time.
Yanukovych then vanished for several days, only to eventually reappear – little
surprise – in Russia.
“As is often the case, these myths reveal more about the myth makers than
they do about the truth. Moscow’s fable was designed to airbrush the Ukrainian
people – and their genuine aspirations and demands – out of the Maidan, by
claiming the movement was fueled by outsiders.
“Yet, as you all know by living through it – and as was clear even to those
of us watching your courageous stand from afar – the Maidan was made in Ukraine.
A Ukraine of university students and veterans of the Afghan war. Of Ukrainian,
Russian, and Tatar speakers. Of Christians, Muslims, and Jews. …”
Power went on with her rhapsodic version of events: “Given the powerful
interests that benefited from the corrupt system, achieving a full
transformation was always going to be an uphill battle. And that was before
Russian troops occupied Crimea, something the Kremlin denied at the time, but
has since admitted; and it was before Russia began training, arming,
bankrolling, and fighting alongside its separatist proxies in eastern Ukraine,
something the Kremlin continues to deny.
“Suddenly, the Ukrainian people faced a battle on two fronts: combating
corruption and overhauling broken institutions on the inside; while
simultaneously defending against aggression and destabilization from the
outside.
“I don’t have to tell you the immense strain that these battles have placed
upon you. You feel it in the young men and women, including some of your family
members and friends, who have volunteered or been drafted into the military –
people who could be helping build up their nation, but instead are risking their
lives to defend it against Russian aggression. …
“You feel it in the conflict’s impact on your country’s economy – as
instability makes it harder for Ukrainian businesses to attract foreign
investment, deepens inflation, and depresses families’ wages. … It is felt in
the undercurrent of fear in cities like Kharkiv – where citizens have been the
victims of multiple bomb attacks, the most lethal of which killed four people,
including two teenage boys, at a rally celebrating the first anniversary of
Euromaidan.
“And the impact is felt most directly by the people living in the conflict
zone. According to the UN, at least 6,350 people have been killed in the
violence driven by Russia and the separatists – including 625 women and children
– and an additional 1,460 people are missing; 15,775 people have been wounded.
And an estimated 2 million people have been displaced by this conflict. And the
real numbers of killed, missing, wounded, and displaced are likely higher,
according to the UN, due to its limited access to areas controlled by the
separatists.”
One-Sided Account
Pretty much everything in Power’s propaganda speech was blamed on the
Russians – along with the ethnic Russians and other Ukrainians resisting the
imposition of the new U.S.-backed order. She also ignored the will of the people
of Crimea who voted overwhelmingly in a referendum to secede from Ukraine and
rejoin Russia.
The closest she came to criticizing the current regime in Kiev was to note
that “investigations into serious crimes such as the violence in the Maidan and
in Odessa have been sluggish, opaque, and marred by serious errors – suggesting
not only a lack of competence, but also a lack of will to hold the perpetrators
accountable.”
Yet, even there, Power failed to note the growing evidence that the neo-Nazis
were likely behind the crucial sniper attacks on Feb. 20, 2014, that killed both
police and protesters and touched off the chaos that led to the coup two days
later. [A worthwhile documentary on this mystery is “
Maidan
Massacre.”]
Nor, did Power spell out that neo-Nazis from the Maidan set fire to the Trade
Union Building in Odessa on May 2, 2014,
burning
alive scores of ethnic Russians while spray-painting the building with
pro-Nazi graffiti, including hailing the “Galician SS,” the Ukrainian auxiliary
that helped Adolf Hitler’s SS carry out the Holocaust in Ukraine.
Listening to Power’s speech you might not even have picked up that she was
obliquely criticizing the U.S.-backed regime in Kiev.
Also, by citing a few touching stories of pro-coup Ukrainians who had died in
the conflict, Power implicitly dehumanized the far larger number of ethnic
Russians who opposed the overthrow of their elected president and have been
killed by Kiev’s brutal “anti-terrorism operation.”
Use of Propaganda
In my nearly four decades covering Washington, I have listened to and read
many speeches like the one delivered by Samantha Power. In the 1980s, President
Ronald Reagan would give similar propaganda speeches justifying the slaughter of
peasants and workers in Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala, where the
massacres of Mayan Indians were later deemed a “genocide.” [See
Consortiumnews.com’s “
How
Reagan Promoted Genocide.”]
Regardless of the reality on the ground, the speeches always made the
U.S.-backed side the “good guys” and the other side the “bad guys” – even when
“our side” included CIA-affiliated “death squads” and U.S.-equipped military
forces slaughtering tens of thousands of civilians.
During the 1990s, more propaganda speeches were delivered by President George
H.W. Bush regarding Panama and Iraq and by President Bill Clinton regarding
Kosovo and Yugoslavia. Then, last decade, the American people were inundated
with more propaganda rhetoric from President George W. Bush justifying the
invasion of Iraq and the expansion of the endless “war on terror.”
Generally speaking, during much of his first term, Obama was more circumspect
in his rhetoric, but he, too, has slid into propaganda-speak in the latter half
of his presidency as he shed his “realist” foreign policy tendencies in favor of
“tough-guy/gal” rhetoric favored by “liberal interventionists,” such as Power,
and neoconservatives, such as Nuland and her husband Robert Kagan (whom
a
chastened Obama invited to a White House lunch last year).
But the difference between the propaganda of Reagan, Bush-41, Clinton and
Bush-43 was that it focused on conflicts in which the Soviet Union or Russia
might object but would likely not be pushed to the edge of nuclear war, nothing
as provocative as what the Obama administration has done in Ukraine, now
including dispatching U.S. military advisers.
The likes of Power, Nuland and Obama are not just justifying wars that leave
devastation, death and disorder in their wake in disparate countries around the
world, but they are fueling a war on Russia’s border.
That was made clear by the end of Power’s speech in which she declared:
“Ukraine, you may still be bleeding from pain. An aggressive neighbor may be
trying to tear your nation to pieces. Yet you … are strong and defiant. You,
Ukraine, are standing tall for your freedom. And if you stand tall together – no
kleptocrat, no oligarch, and no foreign power can stop you.”
There is possibly nothing more reckless than what has emerged as Obama’s
late-presidential foreign policy, what amounts to a plan to destabilize Russia
and seek “regime change” in the overthrow of Russian President Putin.
Rather than take Putin up on his readiness to cooperate with Obama in trouble
spots, such as the Syrian civil war and Iran’s nuclear program, “liberal
interventionist” hawks like Power and neocons like Nuland – with Obama in tow –
have chosen confrontation and have used extreme propaganda to effectively shut
the door on negotiation and compromise.
Yet, as with previous neocon/liberal-interventionist schemes, this one lacks
on-the-ground realism. Even if it were possible to so severely damage the
Russian economy and to activate U.S.-controlled “non-governmental organizations”
to help drive Putin from office, that doesn’t mean a Washington-friendly puppet
would be installed in the Kremlin.
Another possible outcome would be the emergence of an extreme Russian
nationalist suddenly controlling the nuclear codes and willing to use them. So,
when ambitious ideologues like Power and Nuland get control of U.S. foreign
policy in such a sensitive area, what they’re playing with is the very survival
of life on planet Earth – the ultimate genocide.
~ Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the
Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can
buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in
print
here or as an e-book (from Amazon
and barnesandnoble.com).
You also can order Robert Parry’s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections
to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America’s
Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click
here.
When: Tuesday, June 16, 2015, 3:00 pm to 4:00
pm
Remembering the Vietnam antiwar movement on the 40th anniversary of
the end of the war
