Let us say, for the sake of argument, that Russia is indeed financing, supplying military hardware or soldiers, and otherwise supporting the rebels in the Donbass region of Ukraine. Why would Russia be doing that? What could be Putin’s motivation? Many in the West want the world to believe that Russia’s intention is expansionist – a rebirth of the Soviet Union or the perhaps the reestablishment of the glorious tsarist empire. This is what they keep telling us. Russia is a big, bad bear; he is aggressive and takes what he wants. Indeed, they have been telling me this since I was five years old and hiding under my desk in Ms. Simpson’s kindergarten class at Pocantico Hills Elementary on, wouldn’t you know it, Rockefeller’s estate. But really this is just so much calculated and, dare I say, misleading propaganda, relying on the ignorance (naiveté) of the American people.
Let us recall that in 1992 the infamous Wolfowitz Doctrine was trotted by then Defense Secretary, Paul Wolfowitz. Widely seen initially as far-overreaching and off-the-scale imperialistic, it laid out what would become standard US policy for unilateralism and pre-emptive military action to suppress potential threats from other nations. Yet, “its most ambitious and controversial proposal… was that the United States should commit itself to preventing any other country from dominating any region of the world that might be a springboard to threaten unipolar and exclusive US global dominance.”
Not six years thereafter we have the great awakening of long embittered and homeless Zbigniew Brzezinski, the son of low-level Polish nobility but, like a wandering nomad, estranged from his beloved homeland with the allotment of Poland to the Soviet Union at the Yalta Conference of 1945. In his 1998 political magnum opus, The Grand Chessboard, this ancient and “withered mummy of imperialism” sets out his great geopolitical strategy for the United States. It is a typically disastrous zero-sum game strategy from a wounded, revengeful, and myopic weakling “whose life had been devoted to hatred for Russia.” His fundamental thesis is the imperative that no Eurasian challenger should emerge capable of dominating Eurasia and thus challenging America’s global pre-eminence. Boy, is this the mark of an imperialist psychopath, or what? And you only need listen to his “moronic” daughter on MSNBC to get the full picture of this family’s twisted philosophy.
All current US foreign policy – especially in light of peak oil and a global climate fast approaching a negative sum-game scenario – has been directed to this end. Our overt and covert military excursions across MENA and the rest of the ‘Africa Command,’ our journeyman wars (declared and undeclared) in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, our interference in Syria, Iran, and Georgia, our increased presence in the China Sea, and, of course, our putsch in Ukraine with all the accompanying military, political, and financial support; these are all indicative of our adherence to a policy of world tyranny. But, of course, it was under the Clinton administration, (in full compliance with Wolfowitz and Brzezinski), that the United States started this process by reneging on an explicit agreement with Gorbachev that NATO would not expand one thumbnail eastward if a united Germany were allowed into the organization.
Not a year after release of Brzezinski’s book, and disregarding James Baker’s assurances to Shevardnadze, NATO began an expansionist creep eastward gobbling up Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic, with numerous other former “Eastern-Bloc” countries following in their footsteps. In short, the USA and its allies have been pursuing an aggressive policy of containment, surrounding and isolating Russia, in the hopes of breaking its back. The US is committed to this policy, (likewise with China… just watch!); and it will continue down this path until (1) all necessary resources are expended, (2) someone cries uncle, or (3) the USA comes to its senses (this last item, I doubt). So, if Putin is securing Russia’s borders, protecting his estranged countrymen and his warm water port, in short, defending Russia’s rights vis-a-vis Ukraine, I would say he has very good reason to do just that! By the same token America has absolutely no rights in this affair, and no reason to be there or to be upset. Its sole (and undisclosed) justification is some blind adherence to the pathological policies of the Neoconservative cabal of Wolfowitz and Brzezinski, bi-polar pillars of our New American Century… a century that will no doubt last significantly less than one hundred years! (maybe another decade)!