{"id":4465,"date":"2008-08-25T19:36:11","date_gmt":"2008-08-25T18:36:11","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/?p=4465"},"modified":"2008-09-03T10:30:01","modified_gmt":"2008-09-03T09:30:01","slug":"reinventing-the-evil-empire","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/contributions\/reinventing-the-evil-empire\/","title":{"rendered":"Reinventing the Evil Empire"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Stephen Lendman – RINF<\/a> | For the West, everything changed but stayed the same, hard-wired and in place. Things just lay dormant in the shadows during the Yeltsin years, certain to reemerge once a more resolute Russian leader took over. If not Vladimir Putin, someone else little different.<\/p>\n

Russia is back, proud and reassertive, and not about to roll over for America. Especially in Eurasia. For Washington, it’s back to the future, the new Cold War, and reinventing the Evil Empire, but this time for greater stakes and with much larger threats to world peace. Conservatives lost their influence. Neocons are weakened but still dominant. The Israeli Lobby and Christian Right drive them. Conflict is preferred over diplomacy, and most Democrats go along to look tough on “terrorism.” Notably their standard-bearer, vying with McCain to be toughest.<\/p>\n

Ten former Warsaw Pact and Soviet Republics are part of NATO: the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary,
\nPoland, Romania, Albania, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. In addition, Georgia and Ukraine seek
\nmembership. Russia is strongly opposed. And now for greater reason after Poland (on August 20) formally
\nagreed to allow offensive US “interceptor missiles” on its soil. A reported 96 short-range Patriot ones also
\nplus a permanent garrison of US troops – 110 transfered from Germany, according to some accounts.
\nLikely more to follow. In addition, Washington agreed to defend Poland whether or not it joins NATO, so that heightens tensions further.<\/p>\n

The Warsaw signing followed the Czech Republic’s April
\nwillingness to install “advanced tracking missile
\ndefense radar” by 2012. In both instances, Russia
\nstrongly objected, and on August 20 said it will
\n“react (and) not only through diplomatic protests.”
\nBoth former Warsaw Pact countries are now targets. The
\nthreat of nuclear war is heightened. The Bulletin of
\nthe Atomic Scientists Doomsday Clock heads closer to
\nmidnight – meaning “catastrophic destruction.” It’s no
\njoking matter.<\/p>\n

The US media downplays the threat and hails a pact
\nZbigniew Brzezinski (a Polish national, former Carter
\nNational Security Advisor, and key Obama foreign
\npolicy strategist) calls a watershed in the two
\ncountries’ relationship – “This changes the strategic
\nrelationship between the US and Poland. There is a
\nclear and explicit understanding that if there are
\nnegative consequences of stationing the missile
\nshield, the US will come to Poland’s defense.”<\/p>\n

On the one hand, a surprising statement from a man
\ncritical of Bush administration policies, its failure
\nin Iraq, and the dangers of a widened Middle East war.
\nHe fully understands the heightened potential for
\nworld conflict but sounds dismissive of the threat.
\nOn the other hand, he has bigger fish to fry and
\napparently willing to wage big stakes on winning. The
\nIraq war and Iran are distractions by his calculus.
\nThe real Great Game embraces all Eurasia and assuring
\nAmerica comes out dominant – not Russia, not China,
\nnor any rival US alliance.<\/p>\n

The major media also downplay the dangers and explain
\nnothing about the high stakes. Instead they beat up on
\nRussia and highlight comments from Secretary Rice that
\nmissiles aren’t “aimed in any way at Russia,” or White
\nHouse spokesperson Dana Perino saying: “In no way is
\nthe president’s plan for missile defense aimed at
\nRussia. (It’s to) protect our European allies from any
\nrogue threats” that suggests Iran, but, clearly means
\nRussia, according to Hauke Ritz’s recent analysis in
\nGermany’s influential Leaves for German and
\nInternational Politics journal.<\/p>\n

He explained that Iran’s missiles can’t reach Europe,
\nand that Washington rejected Russia’s proposed
\nAzerbaijan-based joint US-Russian anti-missile system
\n– to intercept and destroy Iranian missiles on launch.
\nHe thus concluded that Washington’s scheme is for
\noffense, not defense. That it targets Russia, not
\nIran, with Alaskan and other installations close to
\nRussia as further proof. He wrote: “The strategic
\nsignificance of the system consists of intercepting
\nthose few dozen missiles Moscow (can launch) following
\na first strike. (It’s) a crucial element….to develop
\na nuclear first strike capacity against Russia. The
\noriginal plan is for….ten interceptor missiles in
\nPoland. But once….established, their number could be
\neasily increased.”<\/p>\n

According to Ritz, Washington wants a missile system
\nthat “guarantee(s a) US (edge) to carry out nuclear
\nwar without (risking a) counter-strike.” It can then
\nbe used for geopolitical advantage “to implement
\nnational interests,” but it highlights the dangers of
\npossible nuclear confrontation and the catastrophic
\nfallout if it happens.<\/p>\n

In an August 20 Veterans of Foreign Wars convention
\naddress, Bush was essentially on this theme in
\nfocusing on “terrorism” and saying: “We’re at war
\nagainst determined enemies, and we must not rest until
\nthat war is won.” Georgia “stands for freedom around
\nthe world, now the world must stand for freedom in
\nGeorgia” – clearly linking Russia’s response with
\n“terrorism” and suggesting from his September 2001
\naddress to a joint session of Congress and the America
\npeople that: “Every nation, in every region, now has a
\ndecision to make. Either you are with us, or you are
\nwith the terrorists.” Any that are “will be
\nregarded….as a hostile state.” Clearly, Russia is on
\nhis mind just as Moscow is carefully evaluating his
\nthreat.<\/p>\n

The BBC echoed the US media, covers all the bases,
\nmentioned the Iranian threat, singles out Russia,
\nobfuscates facts about the conflict, sides with
\nWashington and Poland on the new missile deal, and
\nquoted Polish President Lech Kaczynski saying: “no one
\n(with) good intentions towards us and (the West)
\nshould” fear the missiles. It also cited a miraculous
\nturnaround in sentiment saying two-thirds of Poles now
\nfavor them. Astonishing since overwhelming opposition
\nwas recently evident, so it’s hard imagining it
\nshifted so fast.<\/p>\n

High-Octane Russia Bashing – The Dominant US Media<\/p>\n

The Wall Street Journal asserted that Poles “see the
\nUS as their strongest ally” given “two centuries of
\ninvasions and partitioning by Russia” and other
\nEuropean powers. It also highlighted Russia’s “nuclear
\nthreat” (not Iran’s) in a Gabriel Schoenfeld article
\npainting Russia as an aggressor and America aiding its
\nEuropean allies.<\/p>\n

Schoenfeld (a senior editor of the hawkish,
\npro-Israeli Commentary magazine) cites “Moscow’s
\nwillingness to crush Georgia with overwhelming force
\n(and claims) the Kremlin has 10 times as many tactical
\n(short-range) warheads as the US.” The “shift in the
\nnuclear imbalance….helped embolden the bear.” He
\nignores America’s overall nuclear superiority, but it
\nhardly matters as both countries combined have around
\n97% of these weapons (an estimated 27,000 world total)
\naccording to experts like Helen Caldicott – more than
\nenough to destroy the planet many times over.<\/p>\n

Nonetheless, Schoenfeld supports the Polish agreement
\nin the face of a “pugnacious Russia (determined to
\nacquire) economic and military power (and) not afraid
\nto use threats and force to get (its) way (with)
\nnuclear weapons central to the Russian geopolitical
\ncalculus.” It’s reminiscent of “the dark days of
\ncommunist yore (and captures the threat of what) we
\nand Russia’s neighbors are up against.”<\/p>\n

For the moment, anti-Iranian rhetoric has subsided
\nwith Russia the new dominant villian. En route to the
\nNATO Brussels August 18 meeting, Secretary Rice called
\nRussia’s action against Georgia a “very dangerous game
\nand perhaps one the Russians want to reconsider.”
\nRussian “aggression” is the buzzword, and the media
\ndutifully trumpet it.<\/p>\n

So do the presidential candidates. John McCain was
\nespecially belligerent in denouncing “Russian
\naggression” and calling on Moscow to “immediately and
\nunconditionally cease its military operations and
\nwithdraw all forces from sovereign Georgian
\nterritory.” He called for emergency Security Council
\nand NATO meetings in hopes condemnation would follow
\nand “NATO (can act) to stabiliz(e) this very dangerous
\nsituation.” He also wants Russia expelled from the G-8
\nnations and an end to 10 years of partnership and
\ncooperation.<\/p>\n

Barak Obama first said that Russia’s “aggression” must
\nnot stand and denounced “Russian atrocities.” He then
\nsoftened his tone somewhat with: “Now is the time for
\naction – not just words….Russia must halt its
\nviolation of Georgian airspace and withdraw its ground
\nforces from Georgia, with international monitors to
\nverify that these obligations are met.” But expect
\nthose comments to harden as Democrats meet in Denver,
\nand the party’s nominee will likely match his
\nopponent’s tough stance. Or at least try under a
\nslogan of “Securing America’s Future” to advance the
\nnation’s interests in the world. Beating up on Russia
\nis now fair game and made easier with lockstep media
\nsupport.<\/p>\n

The Wall Street Journal is more hostile than most, and
\npractically frothed in its August 16 – 17 weekend
\nedition. It called for “Making Putin Pay (and) Turning
\nRussia’s Georgian rout into a political defeat.” It
\ncited Russian aggression “to remove President
\nSaakasvili from the office to which he was elected in
\n2004 (and to) overthrow a democratic government.”<\/p>\n

It called on “western authorities (to) explore the
\nvulnerability of Russian assets abroad (or) at least
\nmake life difficult for the holders of those assets.”
\nThe Journal might remember the billions of US fixed
\nincome and other investments Russia holds – although
\nthe country’s Central Bank reported late July that it
\npared its $100 billion in US “mortgage bonds” to $50
\nbillion early in the year. The US Treasury reports
\nthat Russia holds around $36 billion of Treasury
\nsecurities with considerably more in private hands.<\/p>\n

The Journal then compared Russia to China and managed
\na slap at both. It said: “In the world of global
\ncommerce….China calculated that….staging an
\nOlympic extravaganza (could enhance its) ambivalent
\nreputation….By contrast, the Putin
\ngovernment….seems to believe its power grows in sync
\nwith its reputation as an international pariah, an
\noutsider state,” and George Bush added that “Russia
\nhas damaged its credibility and its relations with the
\nnations of the free world” – with the Journal writer
\nhardly blinking at such brazen hypocrisy.<\/p>\n

Nor did Journal editorial board member Matthew
\nKaminski in his headlined piece: “Russia Is Still a
\nHungry Empire” without a hint about the Soviet Union’s
\nbloodless 1991 dissolution now down the memory hole in
\nlight of today’s inflammatory headlines.<\/p>\n

Kaminski highlights “Russian tanks rolling through
\nGeorgia (with) images of Chechnya in 1994 and ’99,
\nVilnius ’91, Afghanistan ’79, Prague ’68, Hungary ’56”
\nand before that Poland, the Baltics and other Eastern
\nEuropean states. “The war in Georgia marks an easy
\nreturn to territorial expansion and attempted regional
\ndominance.”<\/p>\n

Boris Yeltsin “tried to give Russians an alternative
\nnarrative. (He) put forward democracy as a unifying
\nand legitimizing idea for the new Russian state.” But
\nthat was swept away when “Putin took over.” He’s
\nunresponsive to the idea of “partnership with the West
\nand freedom at home.” He aims to force “young
\ndemocracies around Russia….back into Moscow’s sphere
\nof influence….The worldview of a Russian nationalist
\nis hard for outsiders to comprehend,” and for Kaminski
\none that mustn’t be allowed to stand.<\/p>\n

Nor for other Journal contributors daily (in op-eds
\nand editorials) with some of the most outlandish
\nattack journalism heard since before Gorbachev. Claims
\nthat “Kremlin capitalism is a threat to the West….by
\nusing its market strength in oil and gas resources to
\nstrong-arm its neighbors and outmaneuver the US and
\nEU.” And that Russia’s real aim “is to replace a
\npro-western government with a new Russian
\nsatellite….reminiscent of the Brezhnev doctrine.
\n(It’s) part of a broader campaign (to annex new
\nterritory, expand the Russian empire, conduct) cyber
\nattacks against the Baltic states, (assassinate
\nenemies, and use) economic intimidation (through)
\ncutoffs of Russian oil and gas shipments to Ukraine
\nand the Czech Republic….It is important that Moscow
\npays a concrete and tangible price for its latest
\naggression, at least comparable to (what) it paid for
\nthe 1979 invasion of Afghanistan.”<\/p>\n

The New York Times is more measured but, on August 19,
\nhighlighted “Survivors in Georgia Tell of Ethnic
\nKillings” with suggestions of “ethnic cleansing” – a
\npractice that “haunted the borderlands of the old
\nSoviet bloc.” Villages were “burned and houses broken;
\nunburied bodies lay rotting; fresh graves were dug in
\ngardens and basements….most victims interviewed
\n(were) ethnic Georgians….(In central Georgian)
\nvillages, some killings were carried out for
\nrevenge….some (involved) theft (and still others)
\nseemed to be that the power balance was shifting, away
\nfrom ethnic Georgians to the Ossetian separatists and
\ntheir Russian backers.”<\/p>\n

Independent reporters on the ground contradicted The
\nTimes and similar US media accounts. One wrote:
\n“Georgians living in several of the villages said the
\nRussians occupying their land had treated them well,
\ndone nothing to encourage them to leave and offered
\nthe only protection available from the South Ossestian
\nmilitias they feared most” and perhaps their own army
\nin an effort to inflict harm and blame it on Russia.<\/p>\n

On August 21, The Times headlined: “US Sees Much to
\nFear in a Hostile Russia (by) usher(ing) in a
\nsustained period of renewed animosity with the
\nWest….problems extend(ing) far beyond (arms deals
\nwith) Syria and the mountains of Georgia.” Others with
\n“anti-American states like Iran and Venezuela.”
\nPressuring US “military bases in Central
\nAsia….counterterrorism, Hamas” and numerous other
\nissues. Obama’s chief Russia advisor, Stanford
\nUniversity professor Michael McFaul, was quoted saying
\nRussia appears intent on “disrupt(ing) the
\ninternational order” and can do it. They’re “the
\nhegemon in that region and we are not and that’s a
\nfact.”<\/p>\n

“Russia has all the leverage,” according to Carnegie
\nMoscow Center’s Masha Lipman (with) potential for
\ncausing headaches” if it chooses – in the region, the
\nUN, on Iran, Zimbabwe, and to halt “any kind of
\ncoercive actions, like economic sanctions or anything
\nelse,” according to former National Security Council
\nadvisor Peter Feaver. An old post-Cold War concern is
\nnow arisen. Russia is now “a spoiler.”<\/p>\n

An August 21 AP report cites an example in its
\nheadlined piece” “Russia blocks Georgia’s main (oil)
\nport city” of Poti and continues to hold positions
\naround Gori and Igoeti….30 miles west
\nof….Tbilisi.”<\/p>\n

Reports from Other Sources<\/p>\n

On August 21, Russia Today reported that “Abkhazia
\nrallie(d) for independence (and) the Abkhazian
\nParliament has approved an official appeal to Russia
\nto recognize its independence.” Tens of thousands
\nrallied in support, and on August 23, Reuters reported
\nthat South Ossetia did as well and its president,
\nEduard Kokoity, plans to ask Russia and the
\ninternational community for recognition. Russia’s
\nDeputy Federation Council Speaker, Svetlana Orlova,
\ntold the rally that “Russia is always with you and
\nwill never leave you in the lurch.”<\/p>\n

On August 23, The New York Times reported that “the
\nKremlin is nearing formal recognition of South Ossetia
\nand Abkhazia, possibly as early as next week.”
\nApparently likely according to Russian Regional
\nDevelopment Minister, Dmitry Kozak, who told Itar-Tass
\n“support is likely (and) that after all the events
\nthat have occurred, one should not expect otherwise.”<\/p>\n

On August 21, Abkhazian President Sergey Bagapsh
\n“appealed to Russia and to governments of other
\ncountries to recognize Abkhazia’s independence,” for
\nboth his province and South Ossetia. On August 20,
\nInterfax reported that the Russian Federation Council
\n(Russia’s upper House of parliament) is prepared to
\nrecognize both provinces’ independence if their people
\n“express such a will….and if the Russian president
\nmakes a relevant decision on this score,” according to
\nFederation Council Chairman Sergei Mironov.<\/p>\n

On August 25, Russia Today reported that (in
\nemergency session) the Federation Council unanimously
\nvoted to ask President Medvedev to recognize Abkhazian
\nand South Ossetian independence. Both province
\npresidents addressed the chamber and “again said they
\nwill never agree to remain within Georgia” and are
\nmore entitled to independence than Kosovo. Konstantin
\nZatulin, deputy head of the Duma Committee for
\nInternational Affairs in Russia’s State Duma, its
\nlower chamber, stated that his body “most probably”
\nwill go along.<\/p>\n

At the same time, tensions remain high. Both sides
\ncontinue hostile accusations. Russia maintains it’s
\nconducting an orderly withdrawal “in accordance with
\nthe international agreements (to their) previous
\n(places) of deployment,” according to Col. Gen.
\nAnatoly Nogovitsyn, deputy chief of Russia’s General
\nStaff. US military officials at first said they saw no
\nsignificant pullback. On August 22 with a clear
\nwithdrawal underway, the International Herald Tribune
\nreported that the “US and France say Russia is not
\ncomplying” with the cease fire.<\/p>\n

Russia is observing a 1999 joint Russian-S.
\nOssetian-N. Ossetian-Georgian agreement prepared by
\nthe Joint Control Commission, an international South
\nOssetian monitoring body. It lets Russian troops
\nsecure a corridor five miles beyond either side of
\nSouth Ossetia’s border that extends into Georgia. It
\nalso allows Russian peacekeepers to operate under the
\nauspices of the Commonwealth of Independent States.<\/p>\n

On August 23, RIA Novosti reported that Nogovitsyn
\nsaid Russian forces will patrol Georgia’s Black Sea
\nPoti port as “envisaged in the international
\nagreement. Poti is outside of the security zone,” he
\nsaid, “but that does not mean we will sit behind a
\nfence watching them riding around in Hummers.” Nor
\nallow Georgia to rearm for more aggression as Russia
\nsuspects, and that Georgia’s deputy defense minister,
\nBatu Kutelia, admitted doing initially. On August 22,
\nhe told the Financial Times that his government
\nattacked the S. Ossetian capital, Tskhinvali, and
\nattempted to seize it.<\/p>\n

On August 22, Nogovitsyn heightened tensions by
\nclaiming Georgia is now preparing for new military
\naction against Abkhazia and South Ossetia. “We have
\nregistered an increase in (Georgian) reconnaissance
\nactivities and preparations for armed actions in the
\nGeorgian-South Ossetian conflict zone.” As a result,
\nhe said that Russia reserves the right to maintain
\npeacekeepers in both provinces. For its part, RIA
\nNovosti reports that America now refuses to
\nparticipate with Russia in “NATO’s Operation Active
\nEndeavour naval antiterrorism exercise,” according to
\na Russian Black Sea Fleet source. The announcement
\ncame after Russia’s NATO envoy, Dmitry Rogozin, said
\nhis country was “temporarily suspending military
\ncooperation with NATO until a political decision on
\nrelations” between the two nations had been resolved.<\/p>\n

Also on August 22, the Israeli Ynetnews.com published
\na Russian daily Kommersant interview with Washington’s
\nnew Moscow ambassador, John Beyrle, sure to embarrass
\nhis superiors. He called Russia’s response justified
\nafter its troops came under attack. “Now we see
\nRussian forces which responded to attacks on Russian
\npeacekeepers in South Ossetia, legitimately….” He
\nwent on to criticize Russia’s over-reaction and warned
\nabout its impact on US – Russia relations as well as
\ninvestor confidence. Nonetheless, his first comment is
\ntelling and quite contrary to everything from
\nWashington and biting anti-Russian media responses.<\/p>\n

Finally on August 23, Russia Today reported that the
\n“local (S. Ossetian and Abkhazian) population (said)
\nthey fear Georgia might repeat its regional
\naggression. They also (want) Russian troops to stay in
\nthe area to shield them from any possible attacks.”
\nRussia has set up 18 S. Ossetia peacekeeping posts and
\nplans a similar number in Abkhazia “to deter looters
\nand the transportation of arms and ammunition.”<\/p>\n

All the News Not Fit to Print<\/p>\n

Not a major media hint that Georgia is a US vassal
\nstate. That its military is an extension of the
\nPentagon. That its aggression was manufactured in
\nWashington. That it’s well-supplied and trained by
\nAmerica and Israel. That pipeline geopolitics is
\ncentral. Beating up on Russia as well. Diverting
\nMoscow from any planned intervention against Iran.
\nEven enlisting Russia’s cooperation – not to sell Iran
\nsophisticated S-300 air defense missile systems and
\nagreeing to tougher sanctions in return for perhaps
\nWashington deferring on Georgian and Ukrainian NATO
\nadmission and recognizing S. Ossetian and Abkhazian
\nindependence. Perhaps more as well to put off greater
\nconfrontation for later under a new administration.<\/p>\n

Clearly, however, the fuse is lit. It has been for
\nsome time. It relates to everything strategic about
\nthis vital area with its immense energy and other
\nresources as well neutralizing Russia’s power as
\nAmerica’s top rival and key Eurasian competitor.<\/p>\n

Controlling the region’s oil and gas is crucial and
\nwhat Michel Chossudovsky explains in his August 22
\narticle titled: “The Eurasian Corridor: Pipeline
\nGeopolitics and the New Cold War.” He calls the
\nCaucasus crisis “intimately related to the control
\nover energy pipeline and transportation corridors (and
\ncites) evidence that the Georgian (August 7)
\nattack….was carefully planned (in) High level
\nconsultations (between) US and NATO officials” months
\nin advance. On August 23, RIA Novosti said a Russian
\nsecurity source accused Georgia of involvement a year
\nago in “coordinat(ion) with NATO’s plans to strengthen
\nits (Black Sea) naval presence.”<\/p>\n

Chossudovsky discusses America’s (1999) “Silk Road
\nStrategy: The Trans-Eurasian Security System (as) an
\nessential building block of (post-Cold War) US foreign
\npolicy.” Proposed in House legislation but never
\nenacted, it was for “an energy and transport corridor
\nnetwork linking Western Europe to Central Asia and
\neventually to the Far East.” It aims to integrate
\nSouth Caucasus and Central Asian nations “into the US
\nsphere of influence.” It involves “militariz(ing) the
\nEurasian corridor,” much like Security and Prosperity
\nPartnership plans are for North America.<\/p>\n

Efforts are largely directed against Russia, China and
\nIran as well as other Eastern-allied states. It’s to
\nturn all Eurasia into a “free market” paradise, secure
\nit for capital, assure US dominance, control its
\nresources, exploit its people, transform all its
\nnations into American vassals, and likely aim to
\ndismantle Russia’s huge landmass if that idea ever
\ncomes to fruition.<\/p>\n

Russia, however, isn’t standing idle and is partnered
\nin two strategic alliances:<\/p>\n

— the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) since
\nJune 2001 along with China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
\nTajikistan, Uzbekistan with Iran in observer status.
\nIt defines its goals as: “good neighborly relations;”
\npromoting “effective cooperation in politics, trade
\nand economy, science and technology” and more as well
\nas “ensur(ing) peace, security and stability in the
\nregion.” Given NATO’s potential threat, its main
\npurpose is military; and<\/p>\n

— the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO)
\nsince 2003 “in close liaison with the SCO” with a
\nheavy emphasis on security against NATO Eurasian
\nexpansionism; its members include: Russia, Armenia,
\nBelarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and
\nUzbekistan.<\/p>\n

The stakes are huge as both sides prepare to confront
\nthem. All part of the new Cold War and Great Game.
\nReinventing the Evil Empire and beating up on Russia
\nas part of it. Risking a potential nuclear
\nconfrontation as well and what a new US president will
\ninherit with no assurance a Democrat will be any more
\nable than a Republican. And with a global economic
\ncrisis unresolved, either one may resort to the age
\nold strategy of stoking fear, going to war, hoping it
\nwill stimulate the economy, and be able to divert
\npublic concerns away from lost jobs, home
\nforeclosures, and a whole array of other unaddressed
\nissues.<\/p>\n

In early 2003, it worked. Will 2009 be a repeat? Will
\nit deepen what author Kevin Phillips calls “the global
\ncrisis of American capitalism?” Will the Doomsday
\nClock strike midnight? It moved two minutes closer on
\nJanuary 17, 2007 to five minutes to the hour. It cited
\n27,000 nuclear weapons, 2000 ready to launch in
\nminutes. It said: “We stand at the brink of a second
\nnuclear age. Not since….Hiroshima and Nagasaki has
\nthe world faced such perilous choices.” It said the
\nsituation is “dire.” It called for immediate
\npreventive action. Its message went unheeded, and
\nconditions today have worsened. The high Eurasian
\nstakes up things further, and neither side so far is
\nblinking.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Stephen Lendman – RINF | For the West, everything changed but stayed the same, hard-wired and in place. Things just lay dormant in the shadows during the Yeltsin years, certain to reemerge once a more resolute Russian leader took over. If not Vladimir Putin, someone else little different. Russia is back, proud and reassertive, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[56],"class_list":{"0":"post-4465","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-contributions","7":"tag-stephen-lendman"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4465","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4465"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4465\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4465"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4465"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4465"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}