Home > Uncategorized > Interview: Why Does U.S. Provoke Russia?

Interview: Why Does U.S. Provoke Russia?

Voice of Russia
June 20, 2012

Why does US provoke Russia?
John Robles
Recorded on June 16, 2012

AUDIO: Download

Recent statements by Hillary Clinton regarding Syria and the Russian Federation are a provocation or not?

Hello, this is John Robles. You are listening to an interview with Rick Rozoff, the manager and the owner of the Stop NATO website and mailing list and a regular contributor to the Voice of Russia.

I’d like to talk to you about the recent statements by Hillary Clinton regarding Syria and the Russian Federation and the seeming provocation by the U.S.

You are referring of course to the incident earlier this week when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accused Russia of sending helicopter gunships to Syria, more or less in her words for the express and exclusive intent of murdering Syrian civilians. You know an absurd contention but a very dangerous provocation.

Why do you think the U.S. is set on, it seems to me, provoking Russia?

You’re using the right word. These are actions that usually, ordinarily rather, are employed against a nation with which the U.S. is at loggerheads and is considering potential hostile actions against. This is wild rhetoric, it’s reckless, it’s unjustified of course and it’s not even so much evocative of the Cold War period; in many ways it is even worse than some of what we heard during even the most stressful years of the Cold War.

Why is the U.S. taunting Russia, why is it challenging it, why is it attempting to discredit and humiliate it? I think I am using the right verbs. I can only say that Russia, by standing its ground and maintaining its position on the territorial integrity and sovereignty of nations and continuing to oppose unilateral and lawless intervention, military intervention in the first place, into the internal affairs of sovereign nations, is an obstacle to U.S. plans for extending its military and political influence globally and to affect in the specific case of Syria and other nations so-called regime change to bring about a geopolitical configuration more favorable to the United States. Russia is standing on the way of that, then, has to be condemned and excoriated by the United States in an effort to win international support against Russia. And any fabrication, any exaggeration, any outright lie that serves that purpose, will be something that U.S.  government officials will not hesitate to employ.

What kind of things are they saying in the U.S. press about Russia right now?

We are seeing the gutter journalism mill churned up of course. There was an article in the Los Angeles Times yesterday by a regular contributor that has a statement to the effect that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s actions in Syria in supporting tyranny and dictatorship and so forth are in his genes, that is presumably that as a Russian he is genetically programmed to support genocide and dictatorship and so forth.

This was in the U.S. press?

This was in the Los Angeles Times, one of the major dailies in the United States. And the fact that filth like this can be published quite openly, and uncontested evidently, is something that truthfully I don’t recall during the Cold War where the U.S. government and its obedient mass media at least attempted to draw a distinction between, let’s say, the Soviet government and the people of the Soviet Union. Now, evidently the actions of the Russian government are attributed to some genetic deficiency within the Russian people. This is horrific, it’s almost evocative of the Hitler period.

Hillary Clinton, as she decided to make some serious anti-Russian remarks during a press conference at the Brookings Institute, you wrote something about the fact that in the background there was an Israeli flag. Do you think it was done on purpose and how was it played out in the Arab countries?

These are both very penetrating questions, so I’ll attempt to answer them. She was speaking at the Brookings Institution, which has given the Barack Obama administration amongst other personnel, on leave from the Brookings Institution, Dr. Susan Rice, who is the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Ivo Daalder who is the  U.S. ambassador to NATO and other officials, so that is a venue dear to the likes of Hillary Clinton but she was speaking with Israeli President Shimon Peres and that was the occasion presumably for the Israeli flag being in the background, though I didn’t see an American flag.

She was sitting down when she made the wild accusation that Russia was sending helicopter gunships to be used against Syrian civilians, because that’s what she stated, and in the meantime incidentally waving her arm in the air and almost shaking her fist, I guess for rhetorical effect. The irony or the fact that anyone watching that on Youtube throughout the world and particularly in the Arab world watching her make one of her more provocative statements to date in relation to Russia as she is all but draped in the Israeli flag would certainly send a message other than what she intended I suppose, unless it was intended as you imply. And I certainly can’t answer that.

But we do have to recall that her comment is not an isolated one. It was backed up by her spokeswoman Victoria Nuland, spokesman for the State Department, former U.S. ambassador to NATO incidentally. It was backed up by Jay Carney, White House spokesman, and others who have immediately afterwards made comparable statements indicting Russia for an event that as we now know never occurred.

Every few years there seems to be an intensification of the Russia-baiting initiative. It’s generally stirred up the press in the United States and perhaps even more so in Britain. There have been recent articles in the Daily Telegraph, there have been some in recent months in the Guardian, including by Simon Tisdall, who’s their deputy editor, and it’s the worst sort of anti-Russian vitriol that, again, I have seen since the Cold War and perhaps worse than anything I saw during that period, and it is clear that the U.S. wants to complete its transformation of the Middle East as they would perhaps refer to as. That is, the overthrow of secular, non-monarchical governments in Arab countries in favor of the U.S.’s dearest military client in the world right now – Saudi Arabia – with whom it signed a $60 billion arms deal late last year as your listeners will recall, which by my calculations is probably the largest bilateral military weapons package in
 human history, and the fact that the democracy-loving and freedom-promoting and so forth United States (those are all in italics, ironic italics) is siding with the likes of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and other monarchic, theocratic regimes in the Persian Gulf and working hand-in-glove with them, much as the United States and Saudi Arabia did against Afghanistan starting since 1978, when the Saudis provided the funds and not a few fighters for the Mujahideen war and the United States provided weapons and advisers.

And we seem to see a resumption of that bilateral strategic, or geostrategic, alliance between United States and Saudi Arabia. Russia stands in the way. First of all, Russia’s government is very principled is demanding adherence to international law, to particularly non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign nations as we’ve talked about, and the United States is the opposite. They feel emboldened to, feel driven by, I would add, the need to interfere in and topple the governments of any number of countries in the world, and because these two nations, Russia and the United States, are so fundamentally opposed on that key principle of international relations, then the United States has to isolate, has to discredit and has to politically if not otherwise crush Russia in order to have its position become the dominant one, one that is uncontested.

Thank you.

You were listening to the interview with Rick Rozoff, the manager and the owner of the Stop NATO website and mailing list and a regular contributor to the Voice of Russia.

Categories: Uncategorized
  1. Michael
    June 20, 2012 at 11:55 pm

    It is frightening how much power is vested in a few hand picked, appointed, unelected yet very powerful members of every U.S. “ruling administration.”
    They seem to be oblivious to the will, needs and interests of the U.S. Nation as a whole, time and a time again creating crises with no end in sight either directly or indirectly by warmongering, fabricating accusations and instigating tensions leading to WAR.
    Irrespective of their party affiliation they are following the script coming from the same, old, corny source pointing in direction of the secretive benefactors such as Bildenburgers to whom both Mr and Mrs Clinton belong to.
    Russia refuses to be bullied. Chechen terrorists in the past have received foreign financial, military and political support from the “progressive Western democracies led by the U.S. Foreign Relations bureaucrats”. In the past KLA as well as Bosnian Mujaheedins were in the same group of the privileged. Last year Libyan terrorists and these days their Syrian brothers in terror enjoy such support and backing of Mrs Clinton.
    Mrs Clinton is detrimental to the World’s Peace and good WILL between the Nations.
    She needs to be sanctioned, preferably removed from the post of Secretary of State since she acts deliberately in UN-diplomatic manner time and a time again.
    Or sent to early retirement to T’bilisi in rump Georgia, ruled by her equally undemocratic and dictatorial partner Mr. Saakashvili.

    • Kathleen
      June 22, 2012 at 12:02 am

      How to break the “banker cabal” grip of power sure is interesting to think about.

      Here are a few possibilities: 1) Oil sales in euros (Sadaam Husseign/Iraq – site of genocidal proportion sanctions) 2) state owned Central bank of Libya with own currency – the Libyan dinar and “he initiated a movement to refuse the dollar and the euro and called on Arab and African nations to use a new currency instead, the gold dinar” (Mohammar Gadhaffi/Libya) – http://www.businessinsider.com/libya-all-about-oil-or-all-about-banking-2011-4 after Unified Protector now replaced by JP Morgan banking 3) non-aligned social communism with state owned assets which are owned by everyone and no one (Milosevic/former Yugoslavia) – forcibly replaced by “international privatization”. 4) basket currency (China – let us know how that works out…) These plans are or will be in the ash bin of history and more literally in the graveyard!

      Exploring a few other possibilities: pink slip for Kofi, pink slip for BanKi, 20 year moratorium on female secretaries of state, better yet make it an eminent citizens board appointment (not immune to corruption either). right…What crackpot thought these up?! any other creative and peaceful ways to de-couple absolute power from OUR decisions?

      So, practically, we are left with these: massive grass roots call for a return to constitutionality, vote independently, boycott CNN and other lie/suppression packed media, promote independent journalism, call out inconsistencies and hypocrisies of leadership at every turn, call out disregard for international law, promote relocation of UN to a more neutral country, breakage of covert practice of circumventing government approval by hiring mercenary ex military contractors, outlaw civil servant roaming between government and military industrial complex and back to the gov (Cheney/Halliburton) …and..and.

      Step one: life long education. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article31657.htm

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: