Comment: The following biased opinion piece was co-written by Agnia Grigas, a fellow at the McKinnon Center for Global Affairs at Occidental College. It's a private Presbyterian institution currently under investigation by the U.S. Office of Civil Rights "for possible violations of federal law over the handling of sexual violence and harassment complaints."

This article was co-written by Marcel Van Herpen, a director of the Cicero Foundation, 'An Independent Pro-EU and Pro-Atlantic Think Tank', and named after one of the most dishonest, two-faced, weasely, master-manipulator politicians of the Roman Empire. So much for objectivity...

This obvious propaganda was published on Forbes' website - a magazine whose motto is "The Capitalist Tool", and is currently making the rounds on Facebook as a counter-argument against all the legitimate pro-Putin articles on SOTT and other alternative media.

The story below is so full of lies, twists and distortions that it's not even wrong!

The authors go into great detail about 5 supposed "myths" that the western media have bought into regarding the situation in Ukraine, regurgitating the very same lies that their colleagues in other American media outlets spout incessantly every day, so their premise is flawed from the beginning: this is lie number one.


Image
Vladimir Vladimirovich, leader of the free world
The West's latest round of sanctions against Russia and the fragile truce between Moscow and Kiev fails to alter the fact that the Kremlin has already succeeded in achieving most of its aims in Ukraine. Crimea is an all-but-accepted lost cause, and territories in Eastern and Southern Ukraine are under serious pressure to follow suit. But the US and the EU should realize that it was not solely militias in Eastern Ukraine or Russian weaponry that secured the upper hand for the Kremlin. In its campaign in Ukraine, Russia's propaganda and information warfare have been far more effective than military action in helping Moscow achieve its agenda while largely tying the West's hands in its attempts to respond.


Comment: Do the authors seriously expect us to believe that Russia's propaganda machine is so effective that it has even stymied western governments from making a response? Apparently it hasn't worked because the US continues to respond every day, inventing a reality that fits their hegemonic agenda. What is more likely is that people around the world are no longer buying into the BS coming out of Washington and are learning the truth about what's actually happening in Ukraine. Obama and Co. are panicking and have to rely on their media lackeys at Forbes to do damage control.


The significance of Moscow-spun propaganda needs to be recognized and should not be underestimated. Much of the point of view of that propaganda has insinuated itself into and been internalized by the Western media, complementing Russia's military tactics in achieving Putin's expansionist goals. Since the start of the Kremlin's campaign to take over Crimea in March, five myths successfully promulgated by the Russian propaganda machine have played a central role in allowing Putin to consolidate his gains in Ukraine.


Comment: Nonsense. The western media have internalized none of the above. They all sing to the same tune; Putin is evil, Putin is Hitler, Russia invaded Ukraine, Russia shot down MH17, Russia wants to rebuild the Soviet Empire. Blah, blah, blah. The only myth in the above paragraph is the authors' delusional belief in their own objectivity.


The first myth, and the one that set the events in motion, was the narrative that depicts Crimea and Eastern Ukraine as essentially Russian. Moscow's arguments promote the concept of a Kievan Rus, or a 9th century cradle of Slavic [Russian according to Moscow] civilization in the territory of Ukraine. Yet, whatever slim basis this notion might have in medieval history, in today's reality, according to the 2001 census, out of Ukraine's 24 regions, only the Donetsk and Luhansk regions had populations where Russian speakers totaled more than 50 percent. And even this figure fails to distinguish the fact that in former Soviet countries, where for many years Russian was the administrative language, a Russian speaker is not necessarily an ethnic Russian. For instance, pre-conflict Crimea was 77 percent Russian speaking but only 58 percent ethnically Russian, with Ukrainians and Crimean Tartars making up the balance.


Comment: This is not a myth. The narrative is true. Crimea and Eastern Ukraine are essentially Russian. By the author's own statistics, 58% of the people in Crimea are ethnically Russian (it's actually higher). Last time we checked, more than 50% equals a majority.


The second myth of Russian propaganda posits that since the Euromaidan revolution toppled the government in Kiev, Eastern Ukrainians have been calling for Russian protection from the new government. While this notion was widely disseminated and even routinely believed, the Gallup Organization conducted polls in Ukraine April 2014, which found that only 8 percent of the population in Eastern Ukraine responded 'definitely yes' to wanting protection by the Russian army. In contrast 52 percent responded 'definitely no.' Likewise, 11 percent responded 'rather yes' while 17 percent responded 'rather no.' These first two inventions - which can be summarized as Russia was only responding to Russians asking for protection from Russia - were used as the initial pretext for Russian military adventurism in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.


Comment: This is not a myth. The narrative is true. Even though Eastern Ukrainians have been calling for Russian protection from the new government, Russia has so far been reluctant to become directly involved in the conflict, preferring instead to send in convoys of aid to eastern Ukraine and letting the pro-Russian separatists fight their own battle for freedom from the fascist government in Kiev. From the looks of it so far, they are doing just fine on their own without direct Russian military intervention.


The third myth of the Russian propaganda effort, the frequent reference to militias in Ukraine's Donbas region as local "separatists," is one that is highly relevant today and continues to obscure the facts on the ground in Ukraine. It is an open secret that these "separatists" are largely composed of Russian special-forces, Russian militias of former (contract) soldiers, Cossack and Chechen militias, and local mercenaries. The ongoing use of the term "separatists" by the Western media reinforces the Kremlin's construction of events, which denies Russian interference and characterizes the war as a conflict between Kiev and a group of local, homegrown rebels.


Comment: This is not a myth. The narrative is true. The militias in Ukraine's Donbas region are local "separatists". An overwhelming majority of citizens in Crimea, Donetsk and Lugansk voted in a legal referendum to join with Russia. This is how democracy is supposed to work, people vote for authentic alternatives to determine their collective future. America should try it sometime.

As for the "open secret that these 'separatists' are largely composed of Russian special-forces, Russian militias of former (contract) soldiers, Cossack and Chechen militias, and local mercenaries", the authors neglect to mention that Russia is playing by the ground rules set by the US in dozens of countries for decade. Here, they specifically neglect to mention the special forces and mercenaries in Ukraine from the US, UK, Germany, Poland, Israel, Czech Republic and elsewhere.


A fourth, particularly cynical myth broadcast by Russia - one that has been seen as transparent in the West - is the proposition that the Ukrainian government consists of "fascists" as the Russian media would have the people of Eastern Ukraine and the rest of the world believe. This portrayal of the government in Kiev enables Russia to propound the fifth and most insidious propaganda myth: that the Russian government and its proxies are "anti-fascists." Recently Putin compared the struggle for Donetsk with the heroic anti-fascist struggle of the Russians during the siege of Leningrad in World War II. The truth, however, is that present-day Russian "anti-fascism" is nothing more than a nationalist and xenophobic self-celebration. It has nothing to do with genuine anti-fascism, which is characterized by adherence to democratic principles, respect for international law, and the protection of human rights.


Comment: This is not a myth. The narrative is true. The Poroshenko government in Ukraine is openly fascist, forming a coalition government consisting of elements of the far-right Ukrainian Nazi party.

America's neo-Nazi government in Kiev: Towards a scenario of military escalation?

Is the US backing neo-Nazis in Ukraine?

Video evidence shows Ukrainian Neo-Nazi government, supported by the U.S., engaged in atrocities and war crimes

Nazis In Ukraine? German TV Shows Ukrainian Soldiers Displaying Nazi Symbols

Meet another Neo-Nazi fighting on behalf of Kiev

Fascist forces: Kiev's Neo-Nazis being incorporated into U.S.-style 'Ukraine National Guard'

Speaking of "adherence to democratic principles, respect for international law, and the protection of human rights", as we mentioned before, America should try it sometime.


What present-day Russia calls "anti-fascism" is rather the expression of a jingoist, nationalist mood, which in fact comes close, very close indeed, to a modern variant of fascism itself. It is, therefore, no coincidence and has been well documented that Putin's friends in Europe can be found in particular in neo-fascist and extreme right parties.


Comment: This is blatant lie number three. A typical example of the psychopath accusing others of what they do with impunity. "A jingoist, nationalist mood, which in fact comes close, very close indeed, to a modern variant of fascism itself", accurately describes the United States. That the authors can gloss over real, actual anti-Semitism in Ukraine with such ease is alarming, particularly after decades of using the Jewish Holocaust to serve western interests wherever and whenever it suits.


It is important to debunk all these myths and in particular this final, most sinister myth of Russian "anti-fascism" and call Putin's regime what it is: ultranationalist, populist, nativist, and directly opposed to liberal democracy. Or put another way: neo-fascist.