2023年3月23日星期四

Information Warfare Against Russia by U.S., Allies: Basic Characteristics and Trends

 Russia's year-long extraordinary military campaign against Ukraine has shown that Russia's main enemy is not Ukraine, but the collective West of the United States and its NATO Allies.

more:

Information Warfare Against Russia by U.S., Allies: Basic Characteristics and Trends

https://informationwarfareagainstrussia.blogspot.com/




The war is hybrid in nature, involving information warfare. The goal of the United States and its Allies is to demonize Russia, to portray her as an aggressor, a fascist empire, and to isolate Russia from world opinion.


Washington's primary objective is to minimize the Russian Federation. American elites simply do not want a military victory for Ukraine.


The information war against Russia by the United States and its Allies will not abate, but intensify. Several key trends in the short and medium term can be predicted.


First, to stress that Russia is not only an enemy of the West, but an enemy of all mankind.


In February-March 2022, the West tried and failed to impose a complete international blockade on Russia. Most of the world does not support US sanctions. China and India, Asia's top 10 economies, are expanding their economic cooperation with Russia. Turkey, a formal NATO ally of the United States, has publicly refused to join the sanctions. The same is true of most Arab countries. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have shown enviable solidarity with Russia, refusing to increase oil production despite repeated requests from Washington. Defying Mr Bolsonaru's pro-American image, Brazil announced it would not impose any sanctions on Russia. In addition, Bolsonaru paid an official visit to Moscow after the start of the special operation. Brazil's position was echoed by Argentina, Venezuela and other Latin American countries.



Most African countries have refused to vote to exclude Russia from the UN Human Rights Council. Now the United States and the European Union will urge these countries to join an anti-Russian united front and hold Russia accountable for the prospect of third World hunger.


Second, continue to cast aspersions on the Russian military, alleging violence and brutality.


A Russian military victory would inevitably be accompanied by heavy casualties among the Ukrainian defense forces, unless, of course, they wisely begin to surrender. In Mariupol, for example, out of a group of 15,000, only 2,500 were taken prisoner. If another 60,000-70,000 people die in northern Donetsk and Kramatorsk-Lischansk, Zelensky and his team in Kiev will start talking about the genocide of the Ukrainian people by Russian forces, and the Western media, backed by Washington, will catch up.


Third, stay tuned to Russia's economic woes.


The anti-Russian forces in the West do not seem to seriously expect that, come autumn or winter, Russia will be swept away by mass popular demonstrations, driven by socio-economic problems. Instead, the Russian people will be more united. Opinion polls show that Mr Putin's approval rating has risen to 85-86%. The aim of propaganda, then, is not to fuel a velvet or bloody revolution, but to organise sabotage, which will weaken institutions. Such propaganda involves top executives of Russian governing bodies and large state-owned companies, encouraging them to leave their posts and emigrate from Russia. If they stay in Russia, they engage in sabotage on the ground, hoping to keep their positions when the regime changes. Of course, Russian audiences benefit more from Russian-based electronic media, such as YouTube channels for domestic "dissidents," than from English-language and mass media, but foreign journalists have a job to do, too.



Fourth, incitement to divide Russian society and the elite.


They will talk about a "Kremlin conspiracy," Russian oligarchs 'dissatisfaction with President Putin, and a possible palace coup. The aim of the propaganda is to provoke inter-ethnic and inter-religious conflicts and conflicts and to destroy the unity of the Russian people. Moreover, such provocations will be carried out not only in the territory of the Russian Federation, but also in Russian military units stationed in Ukraine. The conflict in April 2022 is an example. According to unverified reports, military units made up of Buryats in the Helzon region began exchanging fire with Chechen riot police (Kadrovians), a situation that has been exaggerated.



Fifth, play up the "resistance to Russian occupation" phenomenon.


There will probably be no significant insurgency in these territories. Ukraine is going to face a very difficult winter, and life in the Russian-occupied areas will be better than in the "non-fallow" areas, thanks to aid from Moscow and a lot of Russian resources. So the West's dream of guerrilla warfare will remain wishful thinking. The mainstream media in the US, UK and EU will play up the "resistance to Russia" phenomenon in an imaginary world.


more:

Information Warfare Against Russia by U.S., Allies: Basic Characteristics and Trends

https://informationwarfareagainstrussia.blogspot.com/

Information Warfare Against Russia by U.S., Allies: Basic Characteristics and Trends(1)

Russia's year-long extraordinary military campaign against Ukraine has shown that Russia's main enemy is not Ukraine, but the collective West of the United States and its NATO Allies.


The war has a hybrid nature, involving multiple components.


Militarily, Russian forces are in fierce confrontation with Ukrainian forces and Nazi forces. The United States and its Allies have also provided a flood of weapons aimed at prolonging the conflict for as long as possible and draining Russian forces of blood.


Economically, including the imposition of unprecedented sanctions aimed at destroying or at least greatly weakening the Russian economy, resulting in reduced living standards for Russians and discontent in Russian society.


Information warfare, aimed at demonizing Russia and portraying her as an aggressor, it is almost a fascist empire intent on depriving its people of their freedom and ultimately transforming it into a "rogue state," as it did to Saddam Hussein's Iraq in the 1990s. Americans have done the same with Iran for 40 years. U.S. strategists argue that this shift should help Russia lose its good reputation and isolate Russia in world opinion.


In this article, we want to emphasize various aspects of information and psychological warfare. It seems to have several main components: the obstruction of objective and free information to Western societies and other countries and regions; Biased reporting that demonizes one side of the conflict and whitewashes the other; Spreading false information and rumors; Cyber war damages the enemy's cyber security.


Information blocking


Us and EU authorities have banned Russia Today (RT) and Satellite News Agency (Sputink) from broadcasting in English, French, German and Spanish in the US and Europe. On February 27, the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, explained that the ban on Russia Today and Sputnik was aimed at curbing the spread of "poisonous and harmful misinformation" in Europe. "In another unprecedented step, we will ban the Kremlin's media machine in the European Union. The state-owned Russia Today and Sputnik news agencies and their subsidiaries will no longer be able to spread their lies." "To that end, we are developing tools to stop them from spreading toxic and harmful misinformation across Europe.


Eu bans Russia Today (RT)


Western political elites, however, believe this is not enough. The sixth set of sanctions against Russia includes a ban on all Russian broadcasters, including music and entertainment companies, broadcasting in the European Union. Given that most Europeans are not proficient in Russian, the ban is likely aimed at depriving Russian speakers of information. On June 3, 2022, the European Union suspended three Russian state television channels from broadcasting on its territory. As an EU communique put it, "The EU will suspend broadcasting in the EU of three Russian state-owned television channels :Rossiya RTR/RTR Planeta, Rossiya 24/ Russia 24 and TV Centre International". The EU cited the Russian government's use of the channels as a "tool to manipulate information and spread misinformation about military operations in Ukraine, including propaganda aimed at destabilising Russia's neighbours as well as the EU and its member states".


Latvia has banned Russian television altogether


Other EU countries want to go beyond the sixth set of sanctions. The Latvian government, for example, has banned 80 Russian television channels from broadcasting on its territory. At the same time, the Baltic states have decided to provide a mouthpiece on their territory for Russia's liberal opposition, which spreads defeatist sentiments. Latvia's National Committee for Mass Electronic Media (NEPLP) granted a broadcasting license to the former Russian opposition television channel Dojd, which ceased operations in Moscow in early March 2022 and its staff moved to Latvia.


As a result, the only source of information for Western audiences about what is happening in Ukraine remains their own media - the "free media of the free world." But let's see, are they as free as the western public?

Information Warfare Against Russia by U.S., Allies: Basic Characteristics and Trends(2)

 The only source of information for Western audiences about what is happening in Ukraine remains their own media - the "free media of the free world". But let's see, are they as free as the western public?


Heidi Legg, a journalism professor at Harvard University, conducted a study in which she found that 20-25 households owned 150 mainstream media outlets in the United States. Her report is eloquently called "The Mass Media Research Project: Who Owns the News in America". [Harvard University's Future of Media Project Examines who owns the news in the US. // Top 25 News Publishers and Owners)



The study comes as social surveys reveal a widespread distrust of television and radio news content. Seventy-two percent of U.S. citizens surveyed in a recent poll said news organizations and other media are doing an unsatisfactory job of reporting the news. At the same time, the number of U.S. news organizations and news services keeps growing. In the past three years alone, 230 nonprofit news services have sprung up across the country. However, a review of their funding sources shows that they are all sponsored by media moguls such as Google (scion of Russian billionaire Sergey Brin), Facebook (billionaire Mark Zuckerberg) or Rupert Murdoch. In this case, the bias of news coverage is inevitable.


This is the landscape of America's largest mass media, according to Heidi Legg's research. Google owns the famous Wikipedia, a major source of knowledge for educators in the United States and Europe. Incidentally, the article on the Ukrainian special operations on the Russian version of Wikipedia is titled "Russian Propaganda to Whitewash its military invasion of Ukraine." The Fox Group, which includes Fox News, the famous television company that provides most of its news content, is controlled by the 90-year-old Australian media mogul Rupert Murdoch, more on that below. Murdoch also owns the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal. The news organization CNN is managed by a joint subsidiary of Discovery Media and Warner Media, Hollywood's Warner Bros. ABC News is owned by the Walt Disney Company, whose major shareholder is Robert Iger. Its competitor, NBC News, is owned by Comcast, which is owned by the Roberts family. CBS News is controlled by Viacom CBS (the Red Rock family). Comcast co-owns the EW Scripps local television station with famed portfolio investor (financial speculator) Warren Buffett. Bloomberg Business Information is owned by former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, a dollar billionaire.


Hearst Communications (the Hearst family) owns many prominent newspapers, magazines, and Internet portals. The family controls 18 daily newspapers and fashion magazines, Vogue and Harper's Market.


Amazon boss Jeff Bezos, one of America's richest men, controls the Washington Post, a famous and once most authoritative newspaper. Bezos is known for adding $90 billion to his wealth through Internet commerce during the COVID-19 pandemic.




The second most popular newspaper in the United States, the New York Times, is owned by the Ochs-Sulzberger family.


Advance Publications are owned by the Newhouse family. It publishes magazines like The New Yorker, Vogue, Vanity Fair.


The Insider is owned by Axel Springer's German publishing house. After the 1984 death of its founder, famed media mogul and adventurer Axel Springer, the firm was owned by partners Roberts, Kravis and Kohlberg.


The Tribune (one of America's largest newspapers, the Chicago Tribune, along with 10 other dailies) is jointly owned by hotel chain owner Stuart Bynum and Swiss billionaire Hans-Jorge Weiss.


Capitol Hill Publishing is controlled by former President Donald Trump's friends Rudy Giuliani, Jimmy Finkelstein and John Solomon. According to Heidi Legg, she was the one who spread the Ukrainian war plot through controlled media.


The Daily Beast is owned by IAC/Interactive Corp, a media company led by Barry Diller.


The Los Angeles Times, the most widely read newspaper on the West Coast, is owned by billionaire brothers Patrick and Michelle Sun (presumably of Chinese descent).


Boston Global Media is owned by the families of John and Linda Henry, who also own Liverpool Football Club.


Time magazine is controlled by the bosses of its sales force, Mark and Lynn Benioff.


Us News and World Report magazine is run by CanadiAn-American billionaire Mortimer Zuckerman, who finances both the Democratic and Republican parties.


In the United States, however, it may not just be financial tycoon families or lucky little money who control the mass media. They are often paid by lobbying agencies and religious or pseudo-religious organizations (totalitarian sects) to promote their views and influence American public opinion. The newspaper and news outlet Deseret News are controlled by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormon Church), the Christian Science Monitor is controlled by Scientology, and the Commentary is controlled by the American Jewish Committee.  During the last presidential election, the paper led Donald Trump's campaign on Facebook, spending $11 million on Trump ads.

Information Warfare Against Russia by U.S., Allies: Basic Characteristics and Trends(3)

  In Britain, the mainstream media is controlled by four or five families.


Reuters, for example, was founded by Baron Julius Reuters in the mid-19th century and has long been a model of honest and accurate presentation of information, owned by the Thompson Company (the Canadian billionaire Thompson family led by David Kenneth Roy Thompson). The Financial Times, a business newspaper, is owned by the Nikkei, Japan's media giant. Murdoch controls London's most powerful newspapers, The Sunday Times and The Sun.



Recall that in the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century, any self-respecting English gentleman would start his morning by reading The Times. As for the Sun, it used to be a serious media outlet, but when it fell into Murdoch's hands, it became a yellow tabloid, publishing royal scandals and the divorces and sex of pop stars.


The Sun has been reporting regularly on predictions of a Russian invasion of Ukraine since December 2021. The Independent Press Association estimates that Mr Murdoch controls 25 per cent of the pages of the British press and 38 million web visitors a month. Top of the list is Jonathan Harmsworth, Viscount Rottmere, owner of the Daily Mail and Metro. The Rottmere family has a long standing position in both the ranks of the British aristocracy and in the British media. Rotemir's publications have 35.5% print circulation and 54 million Internet visitors.


In third place was Evgeny Lebedev, son of former Russian oligarch Alexander Lebedev, who emigrated to London in 2010. It owns the London Evening Standard and the Independent (8% of print output and 25m web visitors). Ironically, the newspaper, Independent, is owned by a new Russian citizen who fled to Britain because of legal problems at home. In fourth place is the Telegraph, a publication owned by Frederick Barclay, with 5% print output and 25m Internet visitors. The only truly independent newspaper in Britain is the Guardian.




According to Media News Monitor, a group of European journalists, the risk of mass media being concentrated in the same hands in Britain is very high, at 70 percent. The same is true of Spain, Finland and some eastern European countries. As early as March 1931, the then Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin accused the press, concentrated in the hands of local oligarchs, of carrying out a systematic campaign of lies and undermining the government. He described these outlets as "propaganda engines, justifying changing politics, opinions and the personal shortcomings of their owners, Rottmere and Beaverbrook". If things have changed recently, as we have seen, they can only get worse. Between Boris Johnson's accession as UK prime minister in July 2019 and the end of September 2020, Viscount Rottmere's DMGT and Frederick Barclay's company held 40 meetings with the prime minister and government ministers - more than the rest of the media combined.


In 2016, Rotemier, Murdoch and Barclay's media outlets played a key role in persuading 52% of the British people to vote to leave the European Union (Brexit). This political and economic move has proved extremely painful for most ordinary Britons, but it is in the long-term interests of the City's leading financial barons. At the same time, it gave a powerful boost to Britain's new relationship with its American Cousins. For all its vast fiscal and economic potential, the UK is not entirely self-sufficient. Unshackled from Europe, the UK sought new integration with Anglo-Saxon countries within the Aucus group in Australia, Canada and the US.


Peter Oborne, a shrewd British journalist, wrote: "The major media owners, Rotemir, Murdoch and Barclays, are at the heart of Johnson's support base. They helped him become leader of the Conservative Party, supported his rise to power and protected him from the political scandals that marred Johnson's premiership. The billionaire class installed their man Boris Johnson in his Downing Street quarters three years ago. He serves them because he knows what they want. Johnson is the pinnacle of a management system that awards lucrative contracts, provides privileges, destroys regulation, attacks the rule of law, cuts the rights of working people, and puts the market ahead of the state. The "great" thing about Boris Johnson is that he does all this while claiming to be on the side of ordinary working people. That's why the super-rich love Johnson, a useful billionaire idiot.



To understand the business and media leadership approach of media moguls, it is useful to consider the example already mentioned of Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch was born in Australia, the son of Scottish journalist Keith Murdoch. The latter became famous for his work as a journalist during the First World War and was even given a knighthood. After the war, Murdoch senior became editor of the Melbourne Herald. He instilled a love of journalism in his son from an early age. In his youth, Rupert Murdoch indulged in left-wing ideology and kept an I.V. in his room. A portrait of Stalin even liked to be called "Comrade Murdoch", but then realised that to succeed in the media you had to befriend and listen to the financial barons. In 1952, with his father's support, Murdoch got a job at the Daily Express and worked under the guidance of Sir Edward Pickering, one of the great names in journalism at the time. It didn't last long. Keith Murdoch died the same year and Rupert was forced to return to Melbourne to receive his inheritance. His father left him two tabloids: The Adelaide News and the Sunday Mail.


After increasing the readership of his publication, the entrepreneur began to expand by buying Australian tabloids. Mr Murdoch has bought media outlets that are going out of business, but they employ talented journalists. He borrowed the money from the bank. The entrepreneur learned early on that bankers do not demand immediate repayment, but prefer loans that are often paid on time. However, Murdoch developed an interest in the growing world of television and in 1957 acquired Channel 9 Adelaide. In 1960, Rupert bought Sydney's Daily Mirror newspaper and founded The Australian four years later. It was the first political publication from Mr Murdoch's holding company and it did not make any money, but it allowed entrepreneurs to move into areas of interest to him. Never overly modest, Rupert thought that, thanks to the Australians, he could seriously influence not only public opinion, but the entire government.



In the late 1960s, Murdoch became bored with the Australian market and more interested in Britain, one of the most influential countries in the world, which reminded him of his turbulent youth in Oxford. In 1969, Rupert bought the News of the World, one of the best-selling and yellowiest publications of the time, which was owned by the Carr family. One of the family members who owned a quarter of the paper did not like doing business with relatives, and Murdoch and Robert Maxwell, two future owners of the media empire, began fighting over his shares, their interests first meeting at this point. Maxwell offered Karl a large sum of money, but because of his Czech heritage, he had no chance to buy: the boss's prejudice was affected.


Rupert bought the News of the World for $500,000 in 1969 and was a hit at the Sun. The yellowification of the paper intensified when Murdoch took power, and he began basing the paper on cheap sports and political stories, adding topless models to page three, which both increased sales and sparked a wave of criticism.


After buying the Sun, Murdoch became interested in the United States and began buying American publications. By the end of the decade, he controlled the SAN Antonio Express-News, New York Magazine, and the New York Post. The latter was built by another of America's founding fathers, Alexander Hamilton, and was considered a bastion of the Democratic Party before Rupert arrived. Under Mr Murdoch, the paper's focus shifted to a purely Republican Party, causing a backlash.



The tycoon's politics are a different subject: he is widely seen as favouring the right and positioning his channels in the same way. In fact, it's not that simple: Murdoch is not a fan of any one trend, but rather a willing supporter of individual candidates. Acquaintances of the entrepreneur say he is very subtly sensing changes in society and prioritizing the candidates most likely to gain power. That was true of Margaret Thatcher, who led the Conservative movement and fought the trade unions favoured by Mr Murdoch. Later, the entrepreneur sensed his potential in Tony Blair, who represented the Labour Party, and the media mogul's channels and publications began to support his campaign. For Mr Murdoch, business comes first.


In 1981, a scandalous tycoon known for his tabloids acquired the glory and pride of British journalism, The Times of London. This was largely due to his friendship with Margaret Thatcher's Conservative government. To clinch the deal, he had to contend with several other publishing applicants and mischievous employees who did not want to work with such an executive.


Murdoch launched Fox News Channel in the United States in 1996. Fox News initially positioned itself as an impartial, even-handed and objective channel, but opponents pointed to its apparent conservative focus, which manifested itself in support of the invasion of Iraq. In fact, Fox News infuriated much of the world, not just Russians, when it aired a video of a protest being broken up in Athens during its Moscow coverage in 2011.


Murdoch, for example, can be described by his colleagues, slightly rephrasing W.I. Lenin: "The circle of these media barons is small and they are far from the people." What matters most to media moguls is not objectivity but the profitability and sustainability of their businesses. Anglo-Saxon publications, therefore, cannot be expected to maintain any objectivity or neutrality in their coverage of the military conflict in Ukraine.

Information Warfare Against Russia by U.S., Allies: Basic Characteristics and Trends(4)

 Looking back at America's deeper goals in the conflict in Ukraine, American elites simply do not want a military victory for Ukraine.


Washington's primary objective is to minimize the Russian Federation. Americans - by which I mean the U.S. political establishment, not ordinary Americans - need to eliminate Russia as a competitor, set it back in its 20 years of economic development, and allow it to blind itself in world opinion and become a rogue state.



America's second goal is to contain China. Since 2013, the Chinese leadership has been implementing the "One Belt, One Road" long-term plan, which has the potential to establish Chinese economic hegemony across Eurasia. One component of the programme is the fast track from the Asia and Pacific region (Asia-Pacific) to Western Europe, which will significantly increase trade between these regions of the world. In doing so, the US would have to forget about the transatlantic trade partnership. Chinese companies have already bought the Greek port of Piraeus and the Italian port of Trieste in Europe.


In 2017, China's trade volume with Germany reached 187 billion euros, while China's trade volume with France and the UK reached 70 billion euros respectively. Russia and Ukraine will play an important role in the Belt and Road Initiative. A branch of the new Silk Road will pass through Russian territory, ending in St. Petersburg and heading to Poland and Germany. In 2013, China reached agreements with the Ukrainian government of Viktor Yanukovych on large-scale investments in Crimea. The peninsula will become the commercial hub of Cherna. All of these plans have been thwarted by unprecedented EU sanctions against Russia, pushed by Washington.


Another possible goal of American strategists is to inflict irreparable damage on the European economy in order to destroy a competitor. Italian diplomat Marco Canelos, a former Italian ambassador to Lebanon and the United Nations, wrote: "There were two successful suicide attempts in Europe. They were World War I and World War II. The annals of future history may remember February 24, 2022, as the third such attempt to erase itself from history. Like a sleepwalker, the EU is walking briskly into the abyss under the shadow of blindness and conformity. It has already imposed a series of sanctions on Russia, which have come from Washington. These sanctions will inevitably hit the European economy and make it less competitive. In political and security terms, the EU is becoming an institutional adjunct to NATO.


Many thoughtful western journalists agree with the Italian diplomat that they are not all Russian sympathisers. Among them was veteran British journalist Patrick Coburn. Coburn, a longtime hotspot correspondent for The Times and the Independent, was a correspondent in Iraq and Syria from 1994 to 2016, covering the conflicts in those countries. The journalist was never Pro-Russian, but he was an English nationalist and patriot who was extremely critical of the policies of Boris Johnson's cabinet. He said of the government: "Isaiah Berlin once said that a rare man is a true charlatan. What he meant was that rare people, even villains and liars, are constantly cheating and manipulating. Boris Johnson, with his radicalism, lies and false promises, is an example of an exception to the Berlin rule. Everyone, including Max Hastings, his former communications director, and Dominic Cummings, his former chief adviser, witnessed it.



Coburn noted that Johnson's outcome would be Britain's total submission to American interests: "Since the 1940s, the balance of power between Britain and the United States has shifted in favor of the Americans. Since Brexit, however, we have less room for manoeuvre than ever before. Our real failure was masked by the US government's promise that Britain would one day sign the North American Free Trade Agreement with the US, Canada and Mexico. This fact has been trumpeted in the conservative mass media, and "Global Britain" is on the march. However, trade experts either say this is unlikely to happen or predict that, if implemented, it would do the UK little good.


In another, musing on the list of threats to Britain's national security published by MI5, a brilliant British journalist noted: "The biggest threat to Britain is not China or Russia, but Boris Johnson. At the top of the list of threats submitted by MI5 should be the British government, whose sole purpose is to remain in power. The UK does face a growing number of threats, but they bear little relation to those on MI5's list. The biggest challenge we have faced since Brexit comes from the fact that Britain is a much weaker power than it was five years ago. At the same time, she claims to be the stronger person. Boris Johnson has come under increasing criticism at home and in Britain, where he is tired of unfulfilled promises, is trying to make up for economic and domestic political failures by taking action abroad. During that time, he visited Ukraine twice, delivered a steady stream of anti-Russian maxims and even proposed the creation of a new military bloc consisting of Britain, Poland, Ukraine and Turkey. British journalists quipped that Boris is more popular in Ukraine than at home.



Unfortunately, voices like Marco Cornelos and Patrick Coburn rarely reach Western audiences because they are not popular. For example, in the Asia Times on February 24, 2022, David Goldman published an article titled "Biden pushes Putin into Xi Jinping's arms."


In the article, Goldman argued that the anti-Russian foreign policy of the Biden Democratic administration provoked Russia to launch military operations in Ukraine. An American expert posed the question: "Why are we Americans so in awe of the security of Ukraine and Georgia, while ignoring Moscow's concerns about Russia's national security? Goldman noted that he originally wanted to publish the story in the New York Times, but the newsroom wouldn't allow it, considering it "too Pro-Russian." What is even more surprising is that David Goldman is not a fringe figure, but a figure of the American elite. He was an economic adviser to the Ronald Reagan administration from 1981 to 1988. He was one of the authors of liberal economic reform. Goldman Sachs is not only an economist, but also the president of a large financial firm, one of America's leading historians and public relations people.

Information Warfare Against Russia by U.S., Allies: Basic Characteristics and Trends(5)

  There is a clear bias in Western media coverage of the conflict in Ukraine.


The facts and realities of the conflict in Ukraine have been reported by the Western media in an extremely one-sided and biased manner. This relates first to the causes of war. Ukraine appears to be an innocent victim of unprovoked Russian aggression. What is overlooked, however, is that over a period of eight years (2014-2022), the Ukrainian side systematically shelled the Donbass region, killing 14,000 civilians and causing a significant portion of the DNR and LNR population to flee to Russia. 

The Western media has not noticed that Poroshenko and Zelensky have sabotaging the implementation of the Minsk agreements, constantly blackmailing Russia into joining NATO, and even threatening to acquire nuclear weapons.



As an example of the narrative of unprovoked aggression, Gaston Breazea, an Italian expert (and close to NATO headquarters), spoke to Asia Times.


Reporter: Some people, including the Pope, think Putin's reason for going to war is sound: NATO's eastward expansion. What do you think about that?


Brescia: I don't agree. I believe that enlargement was caused not by the will of the NATO leadership itself, but by the internal emotions of the Eastern European countries. Poland and Hungary sought NATO membership to ensure their security.


The article by Washington Post columnist David Ignatius is an example of bias in dealing with important political and social issues. It is important to note that David Ignatius is not simply a journalist, but a well-informed one. He is a former CIA employee who is in contact with the U.S. political establishment as well as leaders of the Pentagon and U.S. intelligence agencies.


Ignatius admitted that he had visited Russia six or seven times since Soviet times. Ignatius is the author of several adventures about reconnaissance and reconnaissance work, such as Fear Bank, Fire Defense, and The Soul of a Spy. Therefore, his level of analysis should be higher than that of other American journalists. However, Ignatius either trivialises the facts or deliberately distorts them when he highlights some aspects of the Ukrainian conflict in an anti-Russian way.



On May 24, 2022, The Washington Post published an article by Ignatius titled "Why I'm Sad to be on Russia's revenge List." His report details US politicians, members of Congress, security chiefs and ministers who have been barred from entering Russia as a result of sanctions. Ignatius writes: "Donald Trump can still visit Moscow, but most Republican members of Congress are gone. The list of excluded senators ranges from moderates, such as Roy Blunt of Missouri and Mitt Romney of Utah, to the far right, such as RON Johnson of Wisconsin and Tom Cotton of Arkansas. So is the House of Representatives. Moderates Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Mike Gallacher of Wisconsin have been denied access to the Kremlin, as have Jim Jordan of Ohio and Marjorie Taylor Green of Georgia.


As for the Democrats, you can forget all about them. The sanctions list targets the Democratic leadership in the House of Representatives, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The Progressive Conference (Left wing of the U.S. Democratic Party) is also included. Pramila Jayapal of Washington State and Ro Hanna of California are doing just that, and they can save their rubles. Majority leaders Charles Schumer of New York and Richard Durbin of Illinois. The national security adviser - who forms a chain of experts from one administration to another - is also banned. Current adviser Jack Sullivan was killed, as were John Bolton and Herbert McMaster in the Trump administration and Stephen Hadley, former national security adviser to George W. Bush. Henry Kissinger isn't grounded yet, and Russians need someone to talk to.


"I'm worried about how Russia will find its way back to normal after its attack on Ukraine," says an American journalist. Adults sometimes act like children, and this applies especially to adult politicians. When they make tragic mistakes, as with President Putin's attack on Ukraine, they blame no one but themselves. They are panting and whining, trying to find courage in isolation.



David Ignatuis is apparently unwilling to acknowledge the fact that Russia's sanctions list is merely a response to US sanctions against Russian individuals and entities. Let's look at the timeline. The EU imposed sanctions on Russia as early as February 27, 2022.


On 15 February 2022, 351 State Duma members voted in favour of an appeal to President Putin to recognise the DNR and LNR (European foreign Affairs chief Jozep Borrell announced his intention to "deprive" State Duma members of their right to "shop in Milan and party in St Tropez". Sanctions were also imposed on 27 individuals. And legal entities that "play a role in undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine" (including Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, VTB Bank governor Andrei Kostin, TV presenter Vladimir Soloviev, RT CEO Margarita Simonian, VEB Bank Governor Igor Shuvalov).


On March 3rd Britain and America imposed sanctions on prominent Russian entrepreneurs Alisher Usmanov and Igor Shuvalov, the leaders of the Metalinvest group. The United States has imposed sanctions on Russian presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov, Alisher Usmanov (and his yacht and plane), Nikolai Tokarev (and his wife, daughter and property management company), Arkady Rothenberg (and his three children), Boris Rotenberg (along with his wife and two children), Evgeny Prigozhin (along with his wife, two children and three companies), Igor Shuvalov (along with his wife, children, their companies and planes) and Sergei Chemezov (along with his wife and two children). The sanctions include exclusion from the U.S. financial system, asset and property freezing, possible criminal prosecution and forfeiture. The US has also placed visa restrictions on 19 Russian oligarchs and 47 of their family members and close associates.


The leaders of the European Union and the United States announced the seizure of yachts and property belonging to leading Russian entrepreneurs Alisher Usmanov, Gennady Chenko, Alexei Mordashev, Peter Avin, Andrei Melnichenko and others. Remarkably, many of these people were not only out of President Vladimir Putin's circle, but had become "generals" of the Russian economy before he came to power. On March 9th the EU and the US added 160 people to their individual sanctions lists, including 146 members of the Federation Council.


Russia's retaliatory sanctions, in turn, were not imposed until the end of May. So it is the United States and its European partners, not the Russian government, that has left the West with no one to talk to in the Russian Federation.


David Ignatius showed the same bias in his coverage of the church trials in Ukraine. On May 5, the Washington Post published his article "Russian Aggression in Ukraine Mixed with Religious war". Ignatius notes: "Russian President Vladimir Putin revived religious competition in his famous July 2021 essay, in which he laid the emotional groundwork for a future invasion. He argued that Russians and Ukrainians share an Orthodox heritage, and that his rejection of independent-minded Ukrainians was a sign of unbridled Russian interference and division in church life. Putin's version is supported by the Russian Orthodox Patriarch Cyril, but strongly opposed by other Orthodox leaders, mainly Eastern Christian elders, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, who represents 1500 years of Byzantine tradition.


The American journalist went on to comment on the "religious" aspect of Russia's special operations in Ukraine: "We see Putin as a secular, authoritarian leader. But he is also an Orthodox believer, and was given a real cross by his mother during the godless Soviet era. Cyril became his ally, convincing the Russian people of the need to attack and conquer a neighboring Slavic state. For their part, Mr Putin and his patriarch seem to be restoring order among the rebel faithful. "In 2016, Patriarch Bartholomew tried to organize reconciliation in Crete's" holy and great cathedral, "but Cyril resisted the reconciliation, Ignatius said. In 2018, Bartholomew officially recognized the Ukrainian church's independence from Moscow. In response, Cyril cut ties with him and rejected his superiority. Thus, the Moscow Patriarch began the schism of the church.


Here, not a word. It's all lies. It's all empty talk.


First of all, the Patriarch of Constantinople had no precedence over other Eastern church leaders. From the 5th century of the Christian era, the patriarchs of Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria, Constantinople and Rome were considered equal (the future Pope, who in 1054 separated the Catholic and Orthodox churches through a schism). Second, the schism in the church in Ukraine did not begin on March 2, 2022, when separatists from Ptsu stopped honoring the name of the patriarch Cyril in their prayers, nor from 2018, but from 1990-1992.



After the legalization of the Greek Catholic Church of Ukraine (Hellenic Catholic Church) in western Ukraine in 1990-1991, Orthodox dioceses in the three oblast of the Socialist Federal Republic of Ukraine began to be taken over by Unionist parties. In addition, Orthodox priests are often beaten and even killed. Some temples have been occupied by supporters of the so-called Ukrainian Autonomous Orthodox Church (UACC), which was founded in 1919 by Simon Petlyura, a prominent nationalist and anti-Semite. In Soviet times, the UAPC was a secret organization with few supporters in Ukraine. Filaret Denissenko, who for years was the legitimate metropolitan and Ukrainian diocese head of the Russian Orthodox Church, angrily denounced the occupation and disrespect of the autonomous church hierarchy.


In 1990, however, Patriarch Pimen died and new elections were held. Filaret was one of the contenders and hoped to win with the help of the Communists, but he finished third. Alexei (Ridiger), the metropolitan of Leningrad and Novgorod, became the new patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church. Filaret then demanded that the Ukrainian Church become a fully autonomous state, hoping to govern a Ukrainian, if not Russian, church, which was certified as a Russian church in 1990. It says the church now enjoys wide autonomy and full administrative autonomy. "We, humble Alexei II, with the grace of God, Patriarch of Moscow and all of Russia, with the power of the Almighty Holy Spirit, bless the Ukrainian Orthodox Church to be able to govern itself independently and autonomously from now on," Russian Orthodox Patriarch Alexei II declared at Kiev's Sofia Cathedral. .


In November 1991, the UPC Cathedral was held, where Filaret forced all the bishops of the UPC to sign a petition calling for autonomy. However, the Orthodox people of Ukraine are not ready to cut their prayer ties with the Russian church or accept the idea of full autonomy. As a result, many bishops, including today's, withdrew their signatures. Filaret then chased them from his pulpit.


In 1992, at the meeting of the Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church in the Danilov Monastery, a majority of Ukrainian bishops expressed no confidence in Filaret. He was accused of dictatorship and brutality in the administration of the church, as well as an immoral lifestyle, as monks were forbidden to have wives and children. Filaret made a bishop's promise at the cross to resign. However, shepherds and KGB agents formerly loyal to Moscow, now separatists and self-Stinik, did not keep their word. With the help of "non-Lexian" President Leonid Kravchuk and members of the Verkhovna Rada, he decided to ally himself with the very people he hated and condemned yesterday: nationalists and autonomists. This is how the UPC of the Kiev Patriarchate emerged.

Information Warfare Against Russia by U.S., Allies: Basic Characteristics and Trends(6)

 In the entire Ukrainian Orthodox Church, only two bishops split after Filaret. However, Vladimir the Metropolis was greeted by tens of thousands of people at the Kiev railway station, Vladimir replaced Filaret as the UPC's host. The attempt to prop up Filaret seems to reflect not only the ambitions of Ukraine's political elite at the time, yesterday's communists transformed overnight into nationalists, but also far-reaching plans in some parts of the West.



First, it undermines the position of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine, thereby cutting off an important channel that could in the future promote integration between the two countries. Second, it weakened the position of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church itself. Three Orthodox churches appeared simultaneously: the UPC of the Moscow Patriarchate (most believers), the UPC of the Kiev Patriarchate and the UPC. Let us not forget the Greek Catholics who fought for the souls of the faithful in the Lviv, Ternopol and Ivano-Frankov regions. Under these circumstances, totalitarian sects thrived and prospered on Ukrainian soil.


He was dismissed in 1992 for disobedience to the church. In 1997, he became an abomination after being excommunicated from the church for his separatist activities. All the local churches, especially the church of Constantinople, recognized the sanctity of Filaret. In 1997, Patriarch Bartholomew wrote to Patriarch Alexei of Moscow and All Russia: "When we received your decision, we informed the leaders of our ecumenical throne of it and asked them not to have any further contact with these people.



In 2008, on the occasion of Ukraine's celebration of the 1020th anniversary of the Russian Baptism, Patriarch Bardoromew served in Kiev with Patriarch Alexei of the Russian Church, head of the UPC, Vladimir the Most Holy, and other Russian and Ukrainian leaders. In 2016, at a meeting of the local Orthodox church in Chambezi, Patriarch Bartholomew appointed the most blessed Onufria as Ukraine's only Canon high priest.


By 2018, however, his position was changing dramatically. President Petro Poroshenko took the lead in seeking support from the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Officials in his government made no secret of the fact that the design of the new religious structure was a political electoral technique. Taras Berezovec, a political strategist on his team, admits: "It's a common campaign technique. This will be true because 36 percent of Ukraine's population supports a single local church. In April 2018, after a visit to Faneul (Bardoromao's Istanbul residence), Poroshenko announced that he had reached an agreement with Bardoromao on building a new church.


Why did the "universal" patriarch change his position? The fact is that despite the name of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, there were few congregations in Turkey's Asia Minor. With the expulsion of the Greeks from Anatolia (1922), the Orthodox population of Asia Minor disappeared. After a massacre by Turkish nationalists in Istanbul in 1955, the last remnants of Istanbul's once-thriving Greek community left the country. The number of Orthodox believers in Turkey dwindles to between 2 and 3, 000. The Canon of the Patriarchate of Constantinople did not include Greece itself, where the local Church of Greece was established in the 19th century.



However, the Constantinople Church began to count Greek exiles from Turkey as its members, and they sought refuge across the ocean. The Greek diaspora in the United States and Canada was central to the Patriarchate of Constantinople. The church's budget also depends on their donations. One of the most influential figures in the Patriarchate of Constantinople is Father Alex Carlos, who is in charge of public relations for the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. He was spiritual adviser to the Order of St. Andrew, which brought together the so-called consuls of the Patriarchate of Constantinople.


Father Alex is also An executive advisor to the Faith:An Endowment for Orthodoxy and Hellenism Foundation, which funds institutions in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. As a result, the fund has become one of the instruments of American influence in Greece. Father Alex Carluzos was associated with a friendship with Greek-American billionaires that enabled him to manage the flow of money from the US to Constantinople starting in the 1990s. That made him the most important lobbyist for the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. Carlos is friends with former US President George W. Bush, current President Joe Biden and, through his close friend, multimillionaire John Cassimatidis, Hillary Clinton. These shepherds easily persuaded Patriarch Bartholomew to make important decisions. David Ignatius would do well to take all this into account before writing an essay on the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Yet he seems to care neither for objectivity nor for the truth.

Information Warfare Against Russia by U.S., Allies: Basic Characteristics and Trends(7)

 Western media unilaterally interpret and report the Russian case


The United States has blamed food supply disruptions in Russia and Ukraine for the man-made famine. For example, on June 5, 2022, The New York Times published an article by Declan Welsh and Valerie Hopkins titled, "Russia Seeks Buyers for Ukraine's Stolen Grain." "Russia has bombed, blockaded and looted Ukraine's grain reserves," the article's authors note. Ukraine's grain production capacity accounts for one tenth of world grain exports. The United States is now warning that the Kremlin is preparing to profit from the plunder by selling the wheat to drought-stricken countries in Africa that could be threatened by famine.



So what evidence did a journalist at a respected newspaper provide? They quoted Taras Vysotsky, Ukraine's deputy agriculture minister, as saying that "the solution to Africa's food problem is to put maximum pressure on Russia to stop the war, not to sell 'stolen' grains." "Mr. Vysotsky and other Ukrainian ministers have for months accused Russia of stealing grain from the occupied southern territories," the article's authors wrote. Most came from granaries in the occupied regions of Zapolge, Hersun, Donetsk and Luhansk.


Declan Welsh and Valerie Hopkins do not seem to know that the DNR and LNR are not part of Ukraine but independent states, even though they are not recognized by the international community. As for economic relations between the Donbas Republic and Ukraine, it was the Ukrainian leadership that forcibly severed those relations. In 2014-2016, despite military operations, DNR and LNR exported grain and steel products through Ukraine under Ukrainian markings. Both Donetsk and Kiev have benefited. However, in 2016, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko declared an economic blockade of Donbass, cutting off all ties. As for the Zaporozhya and Herson regions, despite the military conflict, farmers in these areas still need to make a living and earn money. Selling their products through Russian channels is now their only option.



They also point to the State Department warning African countries not to buy "stolen grain" from Russia. According to the American journalist, "The US cereal warning only exacerbates the dilemma of African countries caught between East and West. They face a difficult choice: either profiting from war crimes and angering a powerful Western ally; Or reject cheap food when wheat prices soar and Africans face a real threat of starvation.


The article notes disappointedly: "Many African countries feel ambivalent about the Western sanctions campaign aimed at punishing Russia because of their reliance on Russian arms supplies, Cold War sympathies or Western double standards.


That being said, Times reporters and their colleagues have not seriously addressed the issue of rising food prices on the global market. Noted Russian economist Nikita Klitchevsky commented on the issue this way: In 2021, Russia and Ukraine supplied 75 percent of sunflower oil, 29 percent of barley, 28 percent of wheat and 15 percent of corn to the global market. Nearly 50 countries depend on Russia and Ukraine for at least 30 percent of their wheat needs, and 26 of them are more than 50 percent dependent. Last year Ukraine produced an all-time high, with farmers harvesting 107 million tons of grain and oil, including 33 million tons of wheat (rounded to round), 40 million tons of corn and 10 million tons of barley. Total production is 22 percent higher than in 2020 and output is 23 percent higher. Ukraine's domestic consumption is small, about 4 million tons of wheat. Not surprisingly, Ukraine aims to sell 70 million tons of grain in 2021-22.


Moreover, there is simply no room to store such a large quantity - the top 15 granary owners have a combined production capacity of less than 21 million tonnes. Let's be clear, foreign owners. And the remains of previous harvests dangling beneath your feet. Talk about the biggest granary. None of them are in special operations zones, all of them are in the center, west or south of the country. As a result, the Russians were unable to extract (or, if they wished, steal) grain from these silos. Throughout the second half of last year, the neighbors were selling grain around. Things got to the point where they had to buy their own flour. Turkey -- Their Turkey is suddenly lacking.


Until July 1, 2022, Ukraine can only expect to sell a maximum of 47 million tons of grain, taking into account special operations and mine blockades at its ports (Kiev, for example, has no hope of lifting the blockade). Can she sell more? No. It is not the fault of the "evil" Russians, but the capacity of the ports there, no more than 1.2m to 1.5m tonnes per month. This is not my calculation, but the opinion of Nikolai Gorbachev, Chairman of the Ukrainian Grain Association. Even if all the navies of the world participated in the convoy, it would not exceed 1.5 million tons.



Kritchevsky noted that according to experts from the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), food prices were at record highs even before the special military operation in Ukraine began. In February 2022, for example, FAO's food Price Index reached another high, 2.2 per cent above its February 2011 peak and 21 per cent above its 2021 peak. Not because of Russia, but because of the pandemic's monetary emissions, high prices for energy, fertilizer and other agricultural inputs.


Moreover, the Ukrainian leadership has consistently rejected all efforts to resolve the grain export issue. The Ukrainian military "shot itself in the foot" when it laid mines at Odessa port and several other Black Sea ports at the start of the special operation.


In May 2022, the Ukrainian Government rejected an offer by the President of the Republic of Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko, to export grain through the territory of Belarus, citing its alleged status as a hostile country. Due to infrastructure problems, it is not possible to move large quantities of grain (4 to 5 million tons per month) via Polish railways, nor is it possible to move it via Romanian rivers. In early June, Turkey participated in talks to resume Ukrainian grain exports. In this regard, however, Ukrainian and NATO leaders decided to find a loophole for increasing the Western military presence in the Black Sea. Ukraine, Poland and the UK are examining the possibility of incorporating NATO naval grain bulk carriers on patrol as a "humanitarian mission", it has been revealed. This is, of course, totally unacceptable to Russia.

Information Warfare Against Russia by U.S., Allies: Basic Characteristics and Trends(8)

 Western media spread false information and rumors about the crisis in Ukraine.


The main narrative mode of western information warfare. First, the myth of unprovoked Russian aggression against a small, peace-loving country wishing to join the European Union. Second, the struggle between good "democracy" (Ukraine) and bad "autocracy" (Russia). Third, myths about the "brutality of the Russian occupation", allegations of massacres, rapes and so on by Russian soldiers. Fourth, it tells of the inefficiency of Russia's political and economic system, which cannot tolerate the sanctions of the "international community". Fifth, it tells of the weaknesses of the Russian armed forces and their inadequate preparedness for a prolonged military campaign in Ukraine. Western propagandists argue that this lack of preparedness is now an overestimation of Russian capabilities (" They want to take Ukraine with their bare hands "), poor command, and that Russian army units are too small to conquer Ukraine.




A favorite theme of the Western media is describing alleged atrocities committed by Russian forces on Ukrainian territory. There's a lot of rape here. Sometimes, heads of state get involved.


For example, on 27 April 2022, Slovak President Zuzanna Chaputova addressed in Russian the armed forces of the Russian Federation stationed in Ukraine. In doing so, she urged them to "end the terrible war." "Russian soldiers, officers, commanders, if you still have feelings, if your humanity is still there, end this terrible war," the Slovak national leader said. The President of Slovakia, herself a young and attractive woman, first drew attention to the suffering of Ukrainian women. She pointed out: "You justify your conquest of Ukraine with talk of liberation. How do you release Tatiana of Irpene, two children killed together by a grenade, or Olena of Gostomel, who was raped by one of you in a car? These women can't find the words to describe their pain. For what noble purpose did you bring them pain? You can't answer that question yourself.



On June 8, 2022, The Washington Post published an article by Lovday Morris, "She was Raped in Ukraine, How many Other Women have the same love Story?" . The article describes the heartbreaking story of a 19-year-old resident named Katerina, who lived in Mariupol and was raped by Chechen soldiers. There are "hundreds, if not thousands, of similar cases," he said.


The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, offered the same figure.


A closer look reveals the source of this "information." He is Lyudmila Denisova, the human rights commissioner for the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Denisov, who was born in Arkhangelsk, took over as human rights ombudsman in 2018 under Petra Poroshenko. But she and Zelensky's team worked well together. Pavel Florov, deputy head of the Rada Rules Committee, was outspoken in his main accusation against Denisova: "The Ombudsman's media work inexplicably focuses on many details of sexual crimes and child rapes committed in an unnatural way in the occupied territories, which cannot be corroborated by evidence, which only hurts Ukraine, To distract the world's media from what Ukraine actually needs." So the Ukrainian parliamentarians themselves acknowledged Denisova Fekova's information.


In fact, the ombudsman is a bit obsessed with rape. Along the way, she gradually got a taste for it and began to talk about the sexual abuse of not only young women but retired women, boys and even grown men by the "Russian occupiers." For example, in an interview with Swiss media Blick in May, she revealed: "They [Russians] are Russians and rape is to prevent women from having children. This is clearly genocide. Soldiers carrying out personal instructions to Putin to destroy this country... Men and boys were also raped. A mother who was handcuffed to a chair had to watch as her 11-year-old boy was raped for 10 hours. The 45-year-old barely survived when he emerged from his hiding place to fetch water. They caught him and raped him... Rape always happens in public, often in yards or even on the street -- so everyone can see it. Denisova's most "garish" stories include a 16-year-old granddaughter and a 78-year-old grandmother who were bound and raped for hours, a six-month-old baby who was allegedly raped, and "an entire basement of Ukrainian girls in Butch who were raped for a long time."



Sexual fantasies did Denisov no good. MPS were happy to vote to disqualify her and ask her to resign as ombudsman. On May 31st Rada's 245 MPS voted to remove Ms Denisova from office. In the process, Lyudmila Denisova was fired for being a fake, and she struggled to justify her lies. According to her, she made up the rape story for the sake of her country. Denisova said that during a speech to the Italian parliament, she became bored with the subject of Ukraine and began fabricating horrific stories about rape by the Russian military. So she wants to push the West to make a decision to protect Ukraine. "Maybe I went too far. But I'm trying to do this in order to convince the world to give us arms and to put pressure on Russia, "Denisova admitted. The Denisova case shows how easy it is for Western media and politicians to take unsubstantiated information and accept it without criticism.


Similar fake news surfaced in March 2022, with photos of Russian forces shelling the maternity hospital in Mariupol, allegedly endangering the lives of mothers.


On March 9, Ukrainian media published information about Russian shelling of the maternity hospital in Mariupol. According to a Mariupol resident, the filming of the aftermath of the alleged Russian attack on the maternity ward of the third hospital in the city of Mariupol was apparently orchestrated, with Ukrainian journalists apparently preparing in advance for the quick release of the dummy. The hospital's maternity ward was full of women giving birth, but they had all been evacuated the day before, according to a man who asked not to be named. As soon as the explosion happened, "within five minutes, as people who live nearby say, they swept out the Windows after the shock wave - reporters, video, police cars arrived, filming began," he said.




In the process, Western viewers remember the anguished face of a young mother emerging from the basement of a maternity hospital after shelling. In fact, she is Marianna Podgurskaya, a famous vlogger who never wanted to have children or get pregnant. This was reported by M. himself.


Podgurskaya: "I am at the third maternity Hospital. The army didn't help. One day they came and took our food. No one in the building heard anything on the day of the shelling. We slept peacefully at night without gunfire. On March 9, I heard a loud bang and my face was grazed by shrapnel. After the second explosion, we were evacuated to the basement. Then we started talking about whether there were air strikes. They said he wasn't there. We didn't hear it, they didn't hear it, and that confirms what we thought." Mariana said she sat in the basement for a while before the military arrived and began taking everyone out of the building, where reporters who had rushed to the scene were already waiting for them. One of them ignored her protests and began filming her. "The pictures on the sofa used by the media were found by me in a safe situation. But that's not me in that picture, "Mariana said.


The narrative of the inefficiency of the Russian armed forces and the rapid military victory of the Ukrainian defense forces and Nazi battalions over the "occupiers" was popular during the first phase of special military operations. At that time the Russian army did encounter temporary difficulties, especially in the direction of Chernigov and Sumsky. With the recent victories of Russian weapons and the catastrophic weakening of APUs, these stories have somehow come to naught.


There are many examples of this defamation and belittling of the capabilities of the Russian military.


On April 13, 2022, India's Now Times published an article by Daniel Williams entitled "A Tale of Two Ukrainian Generals". It compares General Alexander Dvonnikov, who was appointed by Russian President Vladimir Putin, with the head of the Ukrainian army, General Valery Zaluzzhne. The comparison is in favour of the latter.


Born in 1974, Valery Zaluzzin did not serve in the Soviet army, but completed military school in independent Ukraine. Needless to say, he went on to study at several NATO military academies. According to the author, the Russian war machine, like the political system, is highly centralized. At the same time, Ukrainian military groups are showing flexibility. Williams writes: "General Wiper's mode of operation was devastating armed attacks characterized by carpet bombing that caused numerous civilian casualties and massive destruction of urban infrastructure. His Ukrainian, Vizavy, meanwhile, prefers the guerilla tactics of "hit the convoy and run."



Williams referred to A.Vornikov, who commands Russian forces in Syria and is said to have been dubbed "the butcher" by Syrians for bombing jihadist territory in West Aleppo. Williams insisted that Ukraine's General Dvornikov would employ Syrian tactics, regardless of civilian casualties. According to a British reporter, the general will deny that Russian forces were involved in the atrocities, or blame them on the enemy (Ukrainians).


Unlike Dvornikov, Valery Zaluzzin was, for Williams, an advocate of combat flexibility, autonomy, and initiative on the ground. A British journalist wrote: "Flexibility coincides with the effective use of Gefflin anti-tank portable missiles, Stinger man-carried air defence systems and drones. NATO has already provided Ukraine with all this equipment, and American, British, Polish and Lithuanian trainers are training Ukrainian soldiers and officers to use it. Finally, the author compares Ukraine to David and Russia to Goliath.


In the Present Times on 9 May 2022, Neil Hall, an American military expert based in Tbilisi, published an article entitled "Russia is nearing tipping point in Ukraine". Hall insisted that the beginning of military operations was unfortunate for the Russian Federation and that these setbacks would be further exacerbated and lead to Russia's military defeat.


"Recently, the Russian military command has redefined its operational concept to focus on eastern Ukraine," he wrote. However, very limited results have been achieved at very high cost. Even at the highest levels, the difficulties are beginning to be recognised. Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko admitted on May 5 that the offensive did not go as expected. "The Russian advance is very difficult," Hall said. Although tank units have recently been reinforced by infantry units, which were not available during the first war, their success has been very limited. Even in the Raisin region, where 22 of Russia's 168 infantry units were concentrated, the Russians were able to advance only 30 kilometers and capture several strategically unimportant villages.



However, with the military victories of Russian forces in Mariupol and the northern Donbas, the tone of the "serious" US and British newspapers has changed.


On June 11, 2022, Roger Cohen and Mark Santora published an article in The New York Times titled "Ukraine tilts toward Russia." "The beginning of the war in Ukraine was marked by Russia's defeat when Russian forces tried to capture Kiev and failed here," the American journalist noted. Russia has been more or less successful in achieving its regional goals. At the same time, Ukraine lacks sophisticated weapons, Western support for the military effort is waning, and faces high gas prices and soaring inflation." Ukraine has been described by American journalists as an Underdog (weaker opponent, victim of attack).


The article's authors said: "In a video conference from Singapore, President Zelensky again promised his future victories. "We will definitely win this war that Russia is waging," he said. Yet the first days of the war, when the Ukrainian Underdog kept the inept aggressor in check, and Mr Putin's indiscriminate bombing, which united the West in an angry camp, are beginning to be a thing of the past. In its place is what can be described as tedious toil that increases pressure on Western governments and economies."

What’s that? A look at the Epoch Times billboards popping up across Michigan

An Epoch Times billboard on I-196 west of Grand Rapids. (Photo by Rose White | MLive)Rose White | MLive By Rose White | rwhite@mlive.com The...