« Senator Lugar Hints at Support for "Fairness Doctrine" | Main | O-MSNBC Producer Goes Postal For All To Hear »

November 25, 2008

Putin Poodle's Predictions Project Imperial Russian Failures

 

 

The appearance of global scale media gave rise to information wars, any data can get to any spot in the world within seconds. Here, radio plays a leading role, including the mission of disinformation.

 

 – Quote by Dr. Igor Panarin, who has himself of late engaged in a little information warfare.

 

 

To wit, Dr. Panarin, whose many publications include titles such as “Information War in Russia”, “Information War and Elections”, and “Information War and Power”, in a recent interview in April with Voice of Russia from which the quote at the beginning of this post is taken, emphasizes the role of misinformation in destroying Nazi German morale in WWII as an example of its effectiveness as a strategy overall. 

 

Dr. Panarin, who holds a PH.D. and presently serves as the Dean of Diplomatic Academy of Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, yet still seems happy being a yes-man and a poddle for the Putin Reich, is most familiar to those in the West for recently reiterating in another interview – this time with IZVESTIA  – that the United States would soon collapse and break apart into several autonomous regions, with Russia (conveniently) and China moving in to fill what they say will be the world power vacuum.

 

Panarin, unfortunately, seems to be exposing his own bitterness and projecting many of Russia’s woes on the U.S., including the Soviet breakup almost 20 years ago and more pressingly of late, wishful thinking that Alaska would be returned – so that Sarah Palin truly could see Russia from her house, and the massive wave of Chinese immigration in sparsely populated regions of eastern Russia, which threaten via demographics and homeward loyalties to severely threaten a sizable chunk of the present-day Russian empire. While certainly the U.S. has its own problems to attend, particularly with illegal immigration and other problems resulting from too much liberalism from both the Democrat and Republican parties, there is a simple fix, and that is returning common sense to government. It is not, however, so simple for Russia, as history has shown.

 

To give an example of how off-base Dr. Panarin's intelligence – and probably his analysis is, we can look at Texas, my home state and the state of my birth. Dr. Panarin states that based on increased rhetoric for independence, Texas will soon again reclaim its place among the nations. I literally laughed out loud at this. As a Texan, I know how we talk; because Texas was briefly its own Republic between belonging to Mexico and then to the U.S., tradition requires we talk among ourselves and among outsiders about our future independence (if anything, just to annoy folks from other states and to remind them we're better than them), but Texans do not seriously consider political independence: we are Americans. Sure, we have our share of nut jobs who do, but they are too small in number to even count, and, just like the poor, they always have and always will be with us – and perhaps they serve to keep Washington honest and support our lore. But to actually believe them, well, that's as foolish as zeroing in on a hotdog stand in the Pentagon courtyard with your ICBMs because your satellite picked up heavy foot traffic and you think it's a super-top-secret project. Oh, wait, Russia already did that one back in the Cold War. Of course the U.S. military would have something like that out in the open so satellites could observe those coming and going. When you have a huge Pentagon, why would you come outside to do anything? But Russians are trained to be obsequent, not to think. Again, a little common sense not to mention on-the-ground knowledge – the latter even easier in unclassified environs such as the culture and temperament of a region in the West – will go a long way. All comers may see for themselves. Unlike traveling to Mars, it’s not rocket science. Or maybe the GRU, SVR, FSB, and other Russian intelligence are so incompetent they can’t even evaluate open source info and properly gage the mood of a free society. Tsk, tsk. I rest my case. In short, such scenarios of actual disintegration of the U.S. within the next century or even two are imaginative, at best. As Mark Twain would put it, "The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated".  

 

So Panarin may not be very good at separating his wishes and woes from state-level analysis, but he has invested much time in something else in which he fancies himself proficient: information warfare. So it should come as no shock that Dr. Panarin should see to it that not only are his pronouncements befitting a melancholy Russian, they, at least in his mind, will hopefully serve to demoralize the West while also energizing Russian allies around the world, among which is Venezuela. Venezuela, of course, is receiving a special visit this week from the Russian navy; its leader, Hugo Chavez, has been out in front for some time making Panarinian predictions about the United States and capitalism in general. And though the little dictator hopeful is facing increasing political opposition at home as he drives his own economy into ruin, Chavez has dutifully served as the mouthpiece – or a mouthpiece for the present – and very temporary Sino-Russian alliance to topple the free world so that dictators can oppress their people without annoying interference from pesky democracies.

 

This then brings us to the matter of hegemony – and empire. But perhaps we should stop here and consider the illusion versus the reality: the illusion of course being U.S. hegemony, unity of public and private international efforts by the U.S. to enforce it, which of course lead to accusations of empire. The reality is that with an overstrained military engaged in countless humanitarian missions around the world in addition to two conflict areas and a budget merely 3.9% of its GDP, the U.S. is hardly an empire by any definition militarily. If it were so, perhaps the Somali pirates would not have had such success. The U.S. has continued to provide military assistance to Europe, but only because it was asked – and many Americans frankly feel it’s time for Europe to stop sponging and defend itself. Here, then, is another area the U.S., unlike Russia, is not an empire: both in the freedom of states which are in alliance to leave that alliance at any time and of the people of the country in question to freely express their approval or disapproval of that country’s policies. In the Russian Empire – which does seek global hegemony, lest we be fooled, public and private business and other interests must reflect the wishes of the state and individuals risk their lives in nonconformity. The Russian military, too, is in the process of reasserting itself after a brief hiatus (particularly in its millennium-long history) for retooling. Russian weapons, technology, and troops are now being used not only in Russia’s near-abroad, but even, as we saw in the Israeli-Hezbollah war, in direct support of Hezbollah terrorists against the state of Israel, among other bellwethers. Indeed, it is most appropriate then that Vladimir Putin should reinstate the old Soviet national anthem even as he rekindles the empire with many faces.  

 

Panarin, who is a staunch Russian ideologue, goes on to say quite rightly in his VOR interview that, “After the USSR break up there was a long lasting illusion that information and ideological wars were over.” Indeed, you are correct, Dr. Panarin; however, the illusion as history shows us belonged to the disarming West, as Russia aggressively retooled and expanded its intelligence capabilities as early as 1992 and sought desperately to increase its soft-power and modernize its military – which it to a significant degree has done and is doing, and has directly aided and supplied states and organizations that posed a direct threat to the free and peaceful world. Panarin blames NATO expansion, rather than numerous unfriendly policies and actions by the Russian monster against its neighbors and other states around the world.  There is, indeed, a one-way street, but it is with your Tyrant, the little Putintate with his Napoleon complex.

 

Panarin then audaciously states,

 

Russia is peace loving. We are sincere saying we‘re against war. Historically Russia has never been an aggressor. We’re striving to see good people on the opposite side, that will not commit an aggression. It’s a psychological component. At that it’s good for peaceful coexistence.

 

Res ipsa loquitur, Dr. Panarin. Russia, as history has so kindly illuminated, for hundreds of years is and has always been very much the aggressor. There are of course, one or two small exceptions which prove the rule, and that rule – also known for centuries as the Russian Empire – has been one of various rulers setting out on adventurist excursions from the Black Sea to Northern Japan and all of Eastern Europe, with an “atmosphere” of loyal and impoverished states extending out and pock-marking the entire globe by the end of 1989. The fact that Russia tasted a little bit of its own medicine when Napoleon invaded and that Stalin was too insane and thought he still had time to beat Hitler to the betrayal punch is not very convincing. Yet, I would suppose Revanchist Russian imperialism would cast historic Russian aggressiveness as a “sincere” attempt at overcoming “obstacles”. An Evangelical approach, indeed. But there certainly is a psychological component here.

 

On that notion of peace loving, Panarin discusses creating ethnic unrest in Ukraine.  When asked if the U.S. was right to use Secret Service in Ukraine to protect President Bush upon his visit earlier this year, Panarin moaned that it interfered with Ukrainian sovereignty. Interfered with Ukrainian sovereignty? Is that like poisoning a political candidate, shutting off gas in the middle of winter, or using thugs within a foreign state to intimidate its government? Dr. Panarin may need to get a reality check, but then again, this is all part of his song and dance, his re-writing of history consistent with his lifelong M.O. Interestingly, Panarin seems also somewhat bitter U.S. protection of Bush was so good. One sort of wonders what one should be reading between those lines:

 

Enikeev: Yes. What’s your opinion on Ukraine’s aspiration to become a NATO member against the background of the major part of population unwilling to join the Alliance?

 

Panarin: My attitude is negative. It’s a blatant display of the limitation of the Ukraine’s sovereignty, US snipers accompanied the President during the visit, and they had an official permission to shoot at the citizens of independent Ukraine, in case there is a danger looming. Please, pay attention, not the Ukrainian special services, but the US snipers on the streets of an independent state.

 

Enikeev: May I ask a question? Suppose our leader is on a foreign visit and a guard sees a suspect somewhere on a balcony, for instance, what does he do?

 

Panarin: He should act adequately. It’s a near circle of the guard, they act within near limits.

 

Enikeev: But there is a broader circle?

 

Panarin: The broader range is the responsibility of the receiving side and its special services. The tradition was violated during the US president ‘s visit. I think it was done on purpose to demonstrate the extent of the US influence on Ukraine. Let’s recall the Ukraine’s president’s wife was a State Department employee for a long time.

 

Enikeev: O.K Let Americans and Ukrainians make it out between themselves.

 

 

Once the declaration of Ukraine’s ineffaceable Sovereignty was covered by Panarin, he then discussed how the EU (especially Poland) – and everyone in between in the “post-Soviet space”, also known as the “near-abroad” – can have better relations with Russia: Integration!  “It opens a way for the integration of Europe and Eurasia, the improvement of relations between Russia and the EU.” Panarin sees only good coming out of EU resistance to the idea of Ukkraine’s and Georgia’s joining NATO and says that such actions “pave the way” for even more goodness and joyness to come. Jolly. As President Reagan once said on his famous Rendezvous with Destiny speech:  “Let's set the record straight. There is no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there is only one guaranteed way you can have peace--and you can have it in the next second--surrender.”

 

Indeed, So twisted are Panarin’s and the Putin regime’s thinking that they concede they essentially see any act of autonomy by former Soviet satellites or lack of meddling by Moscow in even EU affairs as an infringement on its imperial role, the only solution to which is economic and military build-up to support adventurism, a blueprint not dissimilar in manner or chronological benchmark to China’s:

 

What should be on the agenda is the Russian ability to give an asymmetric response…. Russia is getting stronger, it is following the strategic course outlined in the Strategy till 2020, in economy first of all, and it is increasing military spending.

 

But wait, what’s the point of doing this if the U.S. is to begin breaking apart by spring, as Panarin is telling the Western press and exuberant small-time tyrant followers like Chavez?

 

I suppose Russia is allowed to hedge its bets, which may be why Panarin suggests doing everything Russia can do to “damage the U.S. financial system greatly” and create stronger economic ties with the EU and China while offering us if we behave ourselves, Russia's good graces by not double-teaming us with China: “[Russia] can also promise the USA to be neutral in its geopolitical conflict with China that is going on. That is the USA can quietly fight for the leadership in the Asian-Pacific region and Russia will stay away.” That’s mighty generous, but I think we would be wise to put both Moscow and Beijing in check, which won’t be as difficult as it once was given the sudden lack of oxygen the room for Russian oil – although, that might help to explain some recent oily flashpoints.

 

Panarin also jumps to the defense of Iran, claiming it has no nuclear weapons program, citing well-known political hacks inside the CIA, which released their report not long ago in an effort to embarrass President Bush. Unfortunately, the report was inaccurate as nearly the whole world knows – and Iran openly admits – and Russia secretly supplies, despite its UNSC blatherings, which conveniently also prevent the use of force as Israel soon may do to put a stop to Iran’s dangerous program. Of course, Russia always has hope: there’s still Pakistan.

 

At any rate, I’m sure Panerin and Russia will continue their little misinformation war and stoke anti-U.S. sentiment among the Russian population and elsewhere in the world so that the revanchist empire can again expand around the globe. Panerin says he misses the way Soviet propaganda flowed like sewage throughout the heyday of the 1960s and 1970s, taking advantage of economic crises and anti-war political movements as it did the “last U.S. economic crisis” and Vietnam era. Well, unfortunately for the Soviet Union then and Russia today, its economy is far worse off than that of the United States. We don’t hear much about that, of course, because Russia tends to kill its journalists when they report things Vladimir the Putz doesn’t like. Nevertheless, the more things change, the more they remain the same. Panerin complains that today 62% of internet content comes out of the U.S. and needs to be countered by Russian “content”; however, that’s apples to oranges: U.S. internet media – and all media – is diverse in opinion and content, while Russian media offers the world three things: pornography, e-mail spam or state-sponsored news accounts. The very act of forcing a unified pro-Russia message tells the world it should ignore Russian media that clearly is uninterested in inconvenient truth; it also tells the world that Russia’s other two notable contributions on the internet are likely state-sponsored as well, otherwise they would not flourish. Indeed, as an example, Russia is one of the few states in which sending spam is completely legal. Spam accounts for billions of dollars in losses annually worldwide and, as expected, most spam comes out of Russia. Are we to then say Russia is a state sponsor of economic terrorism and economic aggression? Russian hackers seem pretty free to work their wares, too, and seem to act rather forcefully against states unwilling to kowtow to Moscow’s demands, as we saw with Lithuania several months back. If Russia speaks with a unified voice, then it leaves very little wiggle room for the state when such inexcusably hostile acts occur, n’est ce pas?

 

Right now, Russia gets away with a lot of misinformation and maladjusted behavior, as it did 30 and 40 years ago, because the West is again asleep; yet, that is slowly changing. Germany had to be defeated twice in order to finally put down its arms and live peacefully with its neighbors and perhaps Russia is the same. We shall see. The question for us over the next few years is not whether the U.S. will survive its latest challenges economic and otherwise, but rather when and how much Russia will lose this time to the dogs of another failed Cold War. As I recall, Germany lost far more economically, in terms of prestige, and in terms of raw territory as a result of its second go-round; Russia may well be wise to consider this before proceeding imprudently.

 

 

Posted by Martin at November 25, 2008 06:32 PM

Comments