RT, ou la Guerre froide inversée

Brèves de crise


Un commentaire est associé à cet article. Vous pouvez le consulter et réagir à votre tour.



RT, ou la Guerre froide inversée

La furieuse et étrange attaque personnelle de John Kerry contre Russia Today (voir le 26 avril 2014) a fait de la station TV russe un enjeu et un symbole remarquables de la guerre entre les USA et la Russie au niveau du système de la communication. On y trouve l’évidence que les situations sont exactement l’inversion de celles de la Guerre froide, – les USA et leur presse-Système complètement sous l’empire de leur propagande, ou narrative, la Russie dispensant dans nombre de cas une information très diversifiée et libre de pressions étouffantes du pouvoir, – et cette évidence est certainement l’une des très grandes révélations, ou confirmations pour certains, de la crise ukrainienne.

Dans le texte que nous citons ici, publié sur ConsortiumNews le 30 avril 2014 et sur Antiwar.com le 1er mai 2014, c’est Ray McGovern, ancien officier de la CIA devenu un “dissident” notoire aux USA, qui fait l’apologie de RT contre les attaques extraordinairement hypocrites des Kerry & Cie. On observera qu’il le fait à l’occasion de cette émission du programme CrossTalk que nous avons signalée le 30 avril 2014, avec les professeurs et historiens (US, certes) Stephen F. Cohen et John J. Mearsheimer, dont le retentissement dans ces mêmes milieux dissidents US (ou du bloc BAO, si l’on veut) a été très grand, – à la mesure de la qualité des deux intervenants, en général ostracisés avec le plus grand respect par la presse-Système aux USA.

«When specialists with a good sense of history insist that war with Russia is “not unthinkable” precipitated by events in Ukraine, one should take careful note. The “not unthinkable” quote is from pre-eminent American historian of Russia, Stephen F. Cohen, who recently appeared with John J. Mearsheimer, historian of U.S. foreign policy, on RT’s Crosstalk.

»That Cohen and Mearsheimer are professors should not be held against them. They typify the best; they are not of the ivory-tower type. And, on Ukraine, they are a far cry from the ersatz-professors, the former U.S. officials and the blathering pundits dominating TV and newspapers, including the New York Times which is supposedly pledged to provide “all the news that’s fit to print.”

»The Cohen/Mearsheimer commentary provided much-needed historical perspective for what is going on in Ukraine. And the possibility of a war between nuclear-armed U.S. and Russia over Ukraine is unsettling. But watch the Crosstalk program; it will help you understand why Secretary of State John Kerry has launched his own personal vendetta against RT, which is funded by the Russian government but offers important on-the-ground reporting and diverse opinions on a wide variety of topics.

»Ironically, Kerry was warned three years ago by his predecessor of the steady strides being made by RT – as well as Al-Jazeera and CCTV (the new English-language programming set up by China). At a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee with then-Sen. Kerry in the chair, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton lamented that the U.S. is “losing the information war,” and added that she finds watching RT “quite instructive.”

»Are Kerry and Clinton unable to grasp that the U.S. corporate media’s regurgitation of the manifold and manifestly deceitful justifications for U.S. actions abroad is the main reason why RT and others are gaining on us? Despite awesome advances in communications technology, it remains difficult to make a silk purse out of a pig’s ear, which is often what U.S. policies abroad are, especially to the people of the targeted countries. [...]

»Full disclosure: I am a regular guest on RT and an occasional interviewee on Al-Jazeera and CCTV-America. Have I ever been given “guidance” as to what would be acceptable for me to say? No. Am I free to speak on live broadcasts as critically of President Vladimir Putin as of President Barack Obama? Yes. Lately, have I been more critical of Obama and the mischief-making Kerry people than of their Russian counterparts? Yes.

»And why is that? Simple. In Ukraine, the U.S. has sponsored one “regime change” too many. And, although this is rather obvious to thinking people, Obama has not yet been able to rein in his neoconservative “regime changers” and do what is necessary; i.e., fold his cards on Ukraine before he makes more of a fool of himself.

»And how do Obama and Kerry get a pass from the American people for what they are doing? Because the mainstream U.S. media has left Americans brainwashed. In the biased U.S. coverage, for example, there has been little or no mention of NATO’s eastward expansion despite solemn promises at the highest U.S.-Russian level not to do that. Indeed, a cartful of relevant facts that could provide crucial context goes unmentioned. It’s simply, “Putin bad; Putin very bad. Shame on him; he sometimes has no shirt on, even on a horse. Bad, bad Putin.”

»It was 51 years ago when I began work in Washington, so I have seen not only a lot of propaganda, but a lot of significant change, as well. By far the most important change I’ve witnessed is today’s near-total absence of a genuinely free U.S. media (elements of the Internet/Web being the sole and salutary exception). There is no way to exaggerate the significance of that sea change.

»What has this to do with Stephen Cohen’s warning that events in Ukraine could lead to war with Russia, and John Mearsheimer’s instructive comments on U.S. exceptionalism? Everything — particularly since most Americans citizens seem pretty well brainwashed by U.S. government propaganda, even though only a small minority can point out Ukraine on a map. Certainly, the “group think” on Ukraine and against Putin seems almost total among Americans who have access to a TV talk show or a newspaper op-ed page...»

Mis en ligne le 1er mai 2014 à 11H28