March 18, 2014

Russian Assertiveness Vs NATO Transgressions: Who Is Right In Crimea?

Objectivity is missing in the mainstream coverage of the ongoing developments in Ukraine and Crimea. So is history. So are basic facts. Fantasy is at the base of the media's portrayal of what has been termed "Europe's biggest crisis" in the 21st century by British Foreign Secretary William Hague. Neil Clark writes, "it‘s not the first time leading western politicians have talked in such alarmist terms in recent years."

What is essentially a democratic, peaceful, and spontaneous response by the people of Crimea to the unexpected and frightening coup by war-hungry radicals in Ukraine has been turned into a cartoon struggle between Obama and Putin. People are insecure about Obama's masculinity. They portray him as weak even though he has taken militaristic and aggressive steps in Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and elsewhere. Obama is far from weak. He is subtlety strong.

One big problem is that people have seen too many Cold War-era movies and have forgotten that the Cold War is over. Their minds are stuck in Hollywood film narratives. They need to be reminded that the Soviet Union is done. Russia is not the evil enemy anymore. Washington just needs to relax, and take care of home. A broken and collapsing economy should be the new evil enemy.

In this particular case Russia is right. It is acting completely rationally.

Crimea's voice should be recognized by all.

Patrick J. Buchanan writes in his article, "Is Putin the Irrational One?":
"America and Russia are on a collision course today over a matter – whose flag will fly over what parts of Ukraine – no Cold War president, from Truman to Reagan, would have considered any of our business.

If the people of Eastern Ukraine wish to formalize their historic, cultural and ethnic ties to Russia, and the people of Western Ukraine wish to sever all ties to Moscow and join the European Union, why not settle this politically, diplomatically and democratically, at a ballot box?"