The Ukraine crisis - "disinformation', propaganda and counter-propaganda

This article was recommended on Facebook in glowing terms - "you are really missing out on great logic and writing!".

Well, I beg to differ. I found the article disingenous and full of innuendo - such as the comments connecting anti-semitism, bolshviks Putin and RT in one long, uninterrupted line of development.

I have decided to deconstruct this line by line, something that these people dare not do (he has no provided a single referenced source)

I cannot provide evidence for every single statement - evidence exists, in abundance on this blog.

Anyway, read and judge for yourself. 

My apologies that this is written with some haste - so will not stand up as an academic piece!

My comments appear in dark text. I have not edited the text of the article, but to see the original GO HERE

---Seemorerocks

Crisis in Ukraine: Disinformation and Useful Idiots

BY CHRISTOPHER MAJKA

Rabble.Ca,

15 March, 2014

Russians may not have invented disinformation, however, they have certainly perfected it.

At the turn of the nineteenth century, Pyotr Ivanovich Rachkovsky (1853-1910) and his agent Matvei Vassilyevich Golvinski (1865-1920), both working for Okhrana, the Imperial Russian secret service, cooked up an anti-Semitic tract called The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. It was a purported blueprint for a Jewish conspiracy to dominate the world. It was first published in Russia in 1903 by the Black Hundreds, an extremist, autocratic, xenophobic, anti-Semitic, and ultra-nationalist movement. Even though the book was debunked as a forgery in 1921 by Philip Graves writing for The Times, it continued to be accepted as authentic by the likes of Henry Ford (who printed 500,000 copies in the USA in the 1920's) and Adolf Hitler (who used it a major justification for initiating the Holocaust).

This is interesting history.

What this has to do with follows eludes me, except for saying that there is nothing to link ruling circles in Russia with official anti-semitism. However anti-semistism is rife in the Ukraine.

Until recently Ukrainian Jews felt protected by law – now they don't a one of the senior rabbis is packing his bags and warning others similarly to leave the Ukraine.

This speaks volumes about the nature of what is going on in the Ukraine, and who is in the ascendency

Indeed, to this day it continues to circulate as an "authentic" document amongst feeble-minded extremists.

Not by the Bolsheviks or current leaders of Russia as this article seems to imply (but does not say)

The Bolsheviks drew on this imperial expertise, as well as learning that Marxist dialectics could easily be redeployed as a subtle instrument of deception. Where this lead was brilliantly depicted by George Orwell in his dystopian novel (based on the Soviet Union), 1984. Mastering doublethink allows one to understand how the Ministry of Peace is in charge of war and atrocity, the Ministry of Love is in charge of torture and brainwashing, the Ministry of Plenty deals with rationing and starvation, and the Ministry of Truth oversees lying, propaganda, and historical revisionism. It's all very simple if you doublethink about it.

It is fine to draw parallels with 1984 but it is got to come with some material proof.

Canadians have even played a role in the development doublethink. As former Conservative party strategist Tom Flanagan once remarked, "It doesn't have to be true; it just has to be plausible," an excellent encapsulation of how disinformation works.

Disinformation became a vital important component of the Soviet approach to governance, generating plausible falsehoods could serve (at least transiently) to obscure the truth. This was aided and abetted by a category of stooges that the Soviets called useful idiots.

This is a distortion. The term “useful idiot” came from a single comment of Lenin during the Civil War. Subsequent to the Stalin regime this was not a major aspect of policy. “Propaganda” and “counter propaganda”might be fairer terms

These were mouthpieces for disinformation. In contrast to agents, paid to do such work, or zealots, genuinely convinced of the cause, useful idiots were simply cynically manipulated and, willingly or unwittingly, broadcast falsehoods as directed. Soviet authorities discovered, somewhat to their amazement, that there were no shortage of such useful idiots and that they were highly effective requiring no payment, inducement, or coercion. They swallowed the party line, hook, line, and sinker.

There is an implication that there is an unbroken line from Soviet times, and that anyone of the many people who comment on RT are “useful idiots” instead of being the informed and highly-placed critics of US imperial policy.

The utility of this approach has not been lost upon Vladimir Putin, who spent the first 16 years of his career as KGB officer working in counter-intelligence, monitoring foreigners and consular officials, and in illegal intelligence gathering, working both in the Soviet Union and East Germany where he was a KGB liaison to the Stasi.

We all know that Putin was a KGB colonel. What is this about “illegal” intelligence gathering – in the context of the GDR and USSR it was all quite legal. This is a purely ideological claim dressed up as fact.

The Putin phenomenon has to be seen in its own context. Yes, there is corruption and a kleptocracy in contemporary Russia. Yes, the last election was not "free and fair', but as Prof. Stephen Cohen said, it was the most "free-and-fair" Russia's had.  Putin does not claim to represent the world's greatest democracy (and even pointed to a 'corruption problem' in his latest interview. Who, by the way, in this world gives four hour press conferences?

What he has achieved is to bring Russian back from the disaster and chaos of the Yeltsin years, to restore some semblance of law-and-order, and checked the power (to some extent),  of the oligarchs.

He may not have the support of the youth (that aspire to everything they perceive the West can provide - just like the youth of Ukraine) - or of the neo-liberals of Moscow and St Petersburg. Mr Navalny is bought-and-paid for but he probably has the support of much of the Russian policy who appreciate stability above all, and have come to abhor revolution

And so we arrive at the crisis in Ukraine. In a previous article, Ukraine on the brink, I examine the historical backdrop to the present conflict. Russian state disinformation from Kremlin-controlled media such as RT - Russia Today is, as in Soviet times, a key element of the current conflict, muddying the waters to portray the Ukrainian government as illegitimate, as consisting of xenophobic, fascist elements, and representing the popular uprising that deposed and then impeached former president Victor Yanukovich, as a CIA-directed plot. Let's examine these claims.

To justify his claim the author is going to have to go through statements and articles by RT and show that they are disinformation.

It is patently obvious to anyone with an ounce of credibility that all of these claims are in fact true"

a) the 'interim government' is illegitimate because it seized power through violent means

b) It is full of xenophobic, anti-semitic and fascist elements who are present not only on the streets, but in the government

c) The United States (probably through the State Dept and not through the CIA) played a major role in the coup 'etat”.

Ex-president Viktor Yanukovych was impeached by a unanimous vote of 328-0, by 73 per cent of the deputies of the Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada (parliament), including the members of his own party, the Party of Regions, which has subsequently disowned him stating that, "we strongly condemn the criminal orders that led to human victims, an empty state treasury, huge debts, shame before the eyes of the Ukrainian people and the entire world."

There is strong evidence that Yanuovych was impeached 'unanimously' because of the presence of thugs carrying baseball bats at the very least.

There is video evidence of similar pressure being applied to members of the Party of Regions in a provincial government meeting.

Ukrainian constitutional guidelines do indicate that 338 deputies (i.e., ten more than were present) should have been present for the vote. However, even prior to the most recent events, 71 per cent of Ukrainian citizens disapproved of the Yanukovich regime and only 19 per cent approved it. It would require great credulity to believe that Yanukovych (now in exile in Russia) has any remaining legitimacy as president, repudiated by his own party and unanimously rejected by 73 per cent of the country's deputies.

Viktor Yanikovych & Vladimir PutinYanukovych's deposition was a de facto revolution. These don't meticulously observe constitutionality, something the Russian Bolsheviks know well having taken power in a completely un-constitutional October Revolution, overthrowing a Provisional Government lead by Alexander Kerensky and composed of Mensheviks, Kadets, and Social Revolutionaries in which they had no representation.

Is the author of this article suggesting that the election of Yanukovych was invalid, despite the fact that at the time nobody from the EU minded doing direct business with him until a few short weeks ago when he refused a proposal from the EU in favour of a much more favourable offer by Russia which involved cheaper rates of gas and credit without associated IMF adjustments and Greek-style austerity.

What does a negative polling mean. Does the fact that Obama has a record low polling rate and is widely unpopular mean that he should be impeached and forced out of office by people demonstrating violently on the street.

I think I would be correct ins saying that NO government in the world would put up with this situation for a minute. The water cannons, the guns, the tanks would have been out double quick

You just need to look back to the FULLY non-violent demonstrations at Occupy Wall St and the government reaction

Ukraine now has a new prime minister, a new president, a new cabinet, a stable majority coalition in the parliament, international recognition, and support from a large swath of Ukrainian society. Everyone save Russia recognizes it as the legitimate government of Ukraine. New presidential elections are slated for 25 May 2014.

Any bets about the possibilty of a “free- and -fair” election with nazis on the streets bearing baseball bats and beating people up.

Just think back to early-1930's Germany. Most of the elite thought they could easily defend Hindenberg against Hitler.

The present Ukrainian parliament is composed of five groups: 88 deputies from the Batkivshchyna or Fatherland bloc; 42 deputies from the United Democratic Alliance for Reform bloc of Vitaly Klitschko; 36 deputies from the All Ukrainian Freedom Union party, Svoboda; 33 deputies from the Economic Development group of Anatoliy Kinakh (which split from Yanukovych's Party of Regions faction) and 51 non-affiliated deputies. The opposition consists of 127 deputies from the Party of Regions bloc; 32 deputies from the Communist Party of the Ukraine, and 40 non-affiliated deputies.

Svoboda

There are legitimate questions concerning Svoboda ("Freedom"), a political grouping that as I earlier wrote displays some, "xenophobic, anti-Semitic, nationalistic, anti-Russian, and quasi-fascist inclinations." How deep these current run amongst the membership of Svoboda is unclear to me. Of greater concern is Pravij Sektor (the "Right Sektor"), a far-right, paramilitary, neo-fascist grouping. That said, Pravij Sektor has no parliamentary representation -- indeed it is not even a party but a loose collective of several right wing and paramilitary groups. Svoboda holds 36 of the 449 (i.e., 8.0 per cent) of the seats in the Verkhovna Rada, and according to the recent polling is supported by 8.1 per cent of the population.

There is no doubt about the nature of the Svoboda Pary. The fact that it has only 8 percent of votes is of less importance than the role in government. In NZ we have a right-wing party in the government, ACT, that according to polls has 0.1% of votes – it exercised a role WAY in excess of its support by the population.

Consider these facts:

• The new Secretary of the powerful National Defense and Security Council is Andriy Parubiy,

• The new Defense Minister is Ihor Tenyukh, former head of the Ukrainian navy and from the Svoboda party. Oleksandr Sych, also from Svoboda, is one of three Vice Prime Ministers.

• Another key post held by an open Svoboda member is that of Prosecutor-General. Oleg Makhnitsky is now the equivalent of Attorney General in the U.S., and has immediately set out to indict the leaders of Crimea who do not want to live under the new order in Kiev.

• Svoboda also holds the ministries of ecology and, especially critical in the Ukraine, agriculture in the new government.

In France, the similarly right-wing National Front polled 13.6 per cent in the last national election and has 118 deputies (6.3 per cent) in France's regional councils. There are extreme right wing and/or fascist parties in many European countries. The Jobbik Party in Hungary has 43 deputies (11.1 per cent) in the Hungarian National Assembly. In Greece, Golden Dawn is a nationalist, anti-immigration, neo-Nazi, fascist party with 6.9 per cent popular support and 18 seats (6 per cent) in the Greek parliament. There are many other examples. Should we regard France as crypto-fascist because of the existence of the National Front? Should we condemn the Hungarian or Greek governments because there are minority parliamentary representations of right-wing extremists? Not in my view. The existence of such groups is regrettable, but the fact is that the vast majority of the populace does not support them. This is as true of Ukraine as it is of most European countries.

This is disingenuous. Yes, there is a huge swing towards ultra-right and fascist parties in Europe and an upswing in support for these views all around the world (not least in Russia and Ukraine)

The main difference is that these other examples are within the context of relatively stable governments and not within the context of a revolutionary situation with extreme elements running riot unchecked on the street as well as holding positions within the government.

The existance of “these groups” is not just “regrettable”, but an indication of the direction events will develop (within a context where there is a 70-year old pretext for these groups). How will people on the street react when EU ...kick in?

RT Russian state disinformation channels have promulgated a conspiracy theory that the Ukrainian revolution is an American-engineered plot. The Kremlin-controlled RT - Russia Today is a unique example on the global stage of a media outlet that, as analyst Oliver Bullough (author of the acclaimed book, The Last Man in Russia: The Struggle to Save a Dying Nation) reported on the CBC's Day 6, "has given up any pretense of telling the truth," broadcasting, "relentless falsehoods that are verifiably untrue." RT has become as reliable a source of information on the Ukraine as KCTV, the North Korean state television broadcaster, is on events in the Korean peninsula -- or anywhere else for that matter.

This is the usual strategy of dismissing an inconvenient fact as “conspiracy theory”. In this case, try “conspiracy FACT” - the evidence is legion.

Funded annually by the Kremlin to the tune of $300 million a year (with financing guaranteed by Putin himself) RT is (in Bullough's characterization) "the in-house television station for the world's crazies" (of the "911-was-an-inside-job" variety) combining extreme libertarian ideas with the emerging neo-Soviet vision of Vladimir Putin. So egregious have RT's relentless falsehoods become, that RT news anchor Abby Martin denounced the network on air saying:

Simply untrue! Abby Martin stands by her employer and, far from being sacked stil has her show. She disagrees with RT's position as much as

corporate media – she said as much to CNN.

This is egregious distortion.

Presumably she comes under the category of “useless idiot” - so why quote her.

Presumably she has stuck with RT because they give her editorial freedom to say what she needs to say.

"What Russia did is wrong. Military intervention is never the answer, and I will not sit here and apologize or defend military aggression."

While another RT news anchor, Liz Wahl, took the even more extraordinary step of resigning on air at the end of a broadcast saying:

"I cannot be part of a network funded by the Russian government that whitewashes the actions of (Vladimir) Putin. I'm proud to be an American and believe in disseminating the truth. And that is why, after this newscast, I am resigning."

Yes, Liz was guilty of totally unethical behaviour – quitting on air

without airing her concerns with her employer. I suspect she is touting for a new employer.

Perhaps she might have been sent to the Gulag? (sic)

Disinformation generated by RT is then endlessly and uncritically recycled by other shadowy entities like "SCG News", which masquerades as a news outlet but is simply a shell without even a home page, registered in France with fake contacts to a freelance computer programmer purportedly working for a graphic design firm in India. These are transparent entities created to serve as echo chambers for Kremlin-funded propaganda.

So what? Again, guilty by association. Everything they write is sources and verifiable.

Vladimir Putin - KGBWorking hand-in-glove with RT are state entities such as the Russian security services FSB (the successor of the KGB) who, for example, bugged a conversation between U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and the American Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt. They were discussing whom they would like to see at the helm of the Ukrainian government. This FSB wiretap was then released by RT as 'evidence' that the American government was controlling the Euromaidan movement. In fact the conversation is precisely what might be expected of American, indeed diplomatic personnel of any country, discussing the developing political situation in Ukraine, who they feel might be most adept at steering the government, and how they should reach out to those figures. Listen yourself and judge.

I have listened several times and come to the opposite conclusion. And are we to conclude that the $5 billion Nuland talks about, the activities of the Endowment for Democracy and the appearance of John “we are all Ukrainians/Syrians” McCain on the Maidan in photo ops with Mr. Yaynybok of the Svoboda party is innocent. What if Mr Lavrov or Mr. Churkin had turned up to support the Occupy demonstrators?!

The FSB also tapped a conversation between Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton in which Paet relates that Olga Bogomolets (a dermatologist, cosmetologist, and folk singer) had blamed snipers "from the opposition" as shooting at demonstrators in Kyiv.

This is a case of telling only half the story – Olga Bogomolets is not just a dermatologist, a member of the People’s Confidence Group – an association of public activists which were at Maidan from the very beginning.

See this article - Ukraine’s Mother Teresa Of The Maidan

The author paints her as a nobody, but in fact,tending to the wounded after snipers opened fire on protesters on the Maidan would have put her in a good position to know what was happening and to have heard many witness statements.

The fact that the Estonian foreign ministry authenticated the tape presumably means nothing – yes I know, this comes from a 'disinformation site' and must ipso facto be a lie!

This was reported by RT as 'evidence' that the Ukrainian opposition had hired snipers to kill its own supporters to provide a pretext for deposing Yanukovich, and that this was further evidence of behind-the-scenes American manipulation. This is an illustration of how rumour and innuendo replace critical thinking, independent corroboration, fact checking, confirmation of sources and other investigative techniques used to determine reliable information.

So the leaked tape is just rumour and innuendo?! The author, by the stage has provided no evidence and no references

The identity of the snipers is a contentious issue, currently the subject of an investigation (see the Christian Science Monitor's Kiev snipers: Who was behind them? for a good summary) and such is the fog of war that this may never be resolved to the satisfaction of both sides. Some of the snipers were identified as members of the Berkut special forces of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (then controlled by the Yanukovych government). There may have been others.

By whom? By the “government”of the Ukraine who now claim that there are Russian tanks active in the Ukraine?

Yes, I agree about the “fog of war” (which he has not mentioned until now). That must apply equally to the other things he has accepted as articles of faith

Interviewed by reporters in Tallin, Paet said he was merely repeating what he had been told by Bogomolets and has no way of verifying any claims. Interviewed by the British newspaper, The Telegraph, Bogomolets said she doesn't know if police and protestors were killed by the same bullets and that, "I hope international experts and Ukrainian investigators will make a determination of what type of weapons, who was involved in the killings and how it was done. I have no data to prove anything."

Care to give us a reference. We are unlikely to find this on Google.

Plus, I imagine that Mr Paet must have been well embarassed to find his comments, made in confidence, circulating on the internet. I bet he was backtracking and spinning, as best he could, poor guy.

The larger point is that even if rogue elements (such as Pravij Sektor) decided to use the opportunity to shoot at police and protestors alike (a possible scenario) such extremists are not controlled by the mainstream Ukrainian opposition, nor does this provide any evidence of American machinations.

No one, until now (even RT) has made a claim that it was the Right Sector behind this. I would suspect someone more highly-place as being behind this. Why rule out US involvement – I suppose they are innocent of dirty tricks (sic)!

Euromaidan in LvivThese are only a couple of illustrations of recent RT-generated disinformation. While no one of consequence takes this seriously (least of all the Kremlin) it is, however, is an enormous disservice to the many hundreds of thousands (perhaps 800,000 in Kyiv alone) of Ukrainian protestors at Euromaidan gatherings in many (at least 33) Ukrainian cities and towns across the length and breadth of the country, who protested the corrupt government of Viktor Yanukovych for months on end during the winter, and some of whom died in Kyiv upholding their beliefs.

The author has failed to dismiss any of these things as untrue, much less as “disinformation”.

No disrespect is meant to the many people who came out to demonstrate against the elected government of Yanukovych. They are not behind any of these events and will find in time that the current gang are no less corrupt than any of the predecessors (including, by the way, Timoshenko), Yushchenko and others

None of this, of course, means that the United States doesn't have its own assets, operatives, and interests in Ukraine -- as it presumably has everywhere else. That doesn't, however, imply that the United States is a puppet-master directing all global affairs. Nor are the Russians; nor is anyone else. These notions are bogus as the claim that there is a hidden Jewish cabal running the world as promulgated by the fallacious Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The wormholes of conspiracy theory are not history. They don't contribute to knowledge or deepen understanding; they simply feed psychoses and paranoia.

Well, that might be the author's view. But after the events in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya etc. I come close to the view of a Russian who said “America has declared war on humanity”

Big Brother is Watching You!Many governments have learned the techniques of disinformation, and the Americans have certainly been no slouches. George W. Bush and Tony Blair's "War on Terror" in Iraq was constructed on patently fraudulent claims about the existence of "weapons on mass destruction" that had no factual basis. Closer to home, in Canada, the Harper Conservatives have made contempt for science, knowledge, fact, reason, truth, logic, and evidence a central component of their political vision. The further we depart from these, the easier it is to pull the wool over the eyes of the citizenry.

There's no pleasure or honour in being a stooge of American propaganda, however being duped by Russian propaganda is no better. Manipulation is manipulation, no matter who the manipulator is. Useful idiots are held in contempt and cynically exploited by their masters. They believe you can be fooled all of the time. Critical thinking, independent corroboration, fact checking, confirmation of sources, trusted and reliable sources, determining plausibility, thorough background information, first-hand experience, evidence-based reasoning all are techniques to fight back.

Well, finally we have it. There is certainly no honour in being a stooge to American propaganda.

However, this is placed, almost as an after-thought or an 'out' to the claims about Russia and implication that it is the main danger to the world.

That places him right up there with the Neo Cons.

You can't have it both ways, Mr Majka.