<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<STYLE>.hmmessage P {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
BODY.hmmessage {
FONT-FAMILY: Calibri; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
</STYLE>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23580"></HEAD>
<BODY class=hmmessage bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><A
href="http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/04/28/why-is-putin-in-washingtons-crosshairs/">http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/04/28/why-is-putin-in-washingtons-crosshairs/</A><BR><FONT
style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt" size=4><BR></FONT><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 16pt"
size=4>Ukraine, Russia and China</FONT><BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 20pt"
size=5><B>Why is Putin in Washington’s Crosshairs?</B></FONT><BR>by MIKE
WHITNEY<BR><BR> "Washington wants to weaken Moscow
economically by slashing its gas revenues and, thus, eroding its ability to
defend itself or its interests. The US does not want an economically-integrated
Europe and Asia. The de facto EU-Russian alliance is a direct threat to US
global hegemony."<BR><BR>US provocations in Ukraine cannot be understood apart
from Washington’s "Pivot to Asia", which is the broader strategic plan to shift
attention from the Middle East to Asia. The so called "re-balancing" is actually
a blueprint for controlling China’s growth in a way that is compatible with US
hegemonic ambitions. There are different schools of thought about how this can
be achieved, but loosely speaking they fall into two categories, "dragon
slayers" and "panda huggers". Dragon slayers favor a strategy of containment
while panda huggers favor engagement. As yet, the final shape of the policy has
not been decided, but it’s clear from hostilities in the South China Sea and the
Senkaku Islands, that the plan will depend heavily on military force.<BR><BR>So
what does controlling China have to do with the dust up in
Ukraine?<BR><BR>Everything. Washington sees Russia as a growing threat to its
plans for regional dominance. The problem is, Moscow has only gotten
stronger as it has expanded its network of oil and gas pipelines across Central
Asia into Europe. That’s why Washington has decided to use Ukraine is a staging
ground for an attack on Russia, because a strong Russia that’s economically
integrated with Europe is a threat to US hegemony. Washington wants a weak
Russia that won’t challenge US presence in Central Asia or its plan to control
vital energy resources.<BR><BR>Currently, Russia provides about 30 percent of
Western and Central Europe’s natural gas, 60 percent of which transits
Ukraine. People and businesses in Europe depend on Russian gas to heat
their homes and run their machinery. The trading relationship between the EU and
Russia is mutually-beneficial strengthening both buyer and seller alike. The US
gains nothing from the EU-Russia partnership, which is why Washington wants to
block Moscow’s access to critical markets. This form of commercial sabotage is
an act of war.<BR><BR>At one time, the representatives of big oil, thought they
could compete with Moscow by building alternate (pipeline) systems that would
meet the EU’s prodigious demand for natural gas. But the plan failed, so
Washington has moved on to Plan B; cutting off the flow of gas from Russia to
the EU. By interposing itself between the two trading partners, the US hopes to
oversee the future distribution of energy supplies and control economic
growth on two continents.<BR><BR>The problem Obama and Co. are going to have, is
trying to convince people in the EU that their interests are actually
being served by paying twice as much to heat their homes in 2015 as they did in
2014, which is the way things are going to shake out if the US plan succeeds. In
order to accomplish that feat, the US is making every effort to lure Putin into
a confrontation so the media can denounce him as a vicious aggressor and a
threat to European security. Demonizing Putin will provide the necessary
justification for stopping the flow of gas from Russia to the EU, which will
further weaken the Russian economy while providing new opportunities for NATO to
establish forward-operating bases on Russia’s Western perimeter.<BR><BR>It makes
no difference to Obama whether people are gouged on gas prices or simply freeze
to death in the cold. What matters is the "pivot" to the world’s most promising
and prosperous markets of the next century. What matters is crushing
Moscow by slashing gas revenues thus eroding its ability to defend itself or its
interests. What matters is global hegemony and world domination. That’s
what really counts. Everyone knows this. To follow the daily incidents in
Ukraine as though they could be separated from the big picture is ridiculous.
They’re all part of the same sick strategy. Here’s a clip from former US
national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski in Foreign Affairs explaining
how–as far as Washington is concerned–it makes no sense to have separate
policies for Europe and Asia:<BR><BR> "With Eurasia now
serving as the decisive geopolitical chessboard, it no longer suffices to
fashion one policy for Europe and another for Asia. What happens with the
distribution of power on the Eurasian landmass will be of decisive importance to
America’s global primacy and historical legacy." ("The danger of war in Asia",
World Socialist Web Site)<BR><BR>It’s all about the pivot to Asia and the future
of the empire. This is why the CIA and the US State Department engineered a coup
to oust Ukrainian president Viktor Yonuchovych and replace him with a US-stooge
who would do Obama’s bidding. This is why the imposter prime
minister, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, has ordered two "anti-terror: crackdowns on unarmed
activists in East Ukraine who oppose the Kiev junta. This is why the Obama
administration has avoided engaging Putin in constructive dialog aimed at
finding on a peaceful solution to the present crisis. It’s because Obama wants
to draw the Kremlin into a protracted civil war that will weaken Russia,
discredit Putin, and shift public opinion to the side of the US and NATO. Why
would Washington veer from a policy that clearly achieves what it’s supposed to
achieve? It won’t. Here’s an excerpt from an article on
antiwar.com:<BR><BR> "Reports out of Moscow say that President
Putin has "shut down" all talks with President Obama, and say they are "not
interested" in speaking to the US again under the current environment of threats
and hostility.<BR><BR> Putin and Obama had been speaking
regularly on the phone about Ukraine in March and early April, but Putin has not
directly spoken to him since April 14, and the Kremlin says that they see no
need to do any more talking." ("Putin Halts Talks With White House Amid
Sanctions Threats", antiwar.com)<BR><BR>There’s nothing to be gained by talking
to Obama. Putin already knows what Obama wants. He wants war. That’s why the
State Department and CIA toppled the government. That’s why CIA Director John
Brennan appeared in Kiev just one day before coup president Yatsenyuk ordered
the first crackdown on pro Russian protestors in the East. That’s why Vice
President Joe Biden appeared in Kiev just hours before Yatsenyuk launched his
second crackdown on pro Russian protestors in the East. That’s why Yatsenyuk has
surrounded the eastern city of Slavyansk where he is preparing an attack on
pro-Russian activists. It’s because Washington believes that a violent
conflagration serves its greater interests. It’s pointless to talk to people
like that, which is why Putin has stopped trying.<BR><BR>At present, the Obama
administration is pushing for another round of sanctions on Russia, but members
in the EU are dragging their feet. According to
RT:<BR><BR> "At the moment there is no consensus among
the EU members on which economic measures against Russia would be acceptable, or
even if they are needed at all," a European diplomatic source told
Itar-Tass.<BR><BR> The diplomat, who spoke on the condition of
anonymity, said only an open military invasion of Ukraine or irrefutable proof
of Russian clandestine military presence in Ukraine would tip EU’s stance toward
economic sanctions. So far every piece of evidence that Kiev and Washington made
public of alleged involvement of Russian agents in Ukraine was either
inconclusive or simply false." ("US failing to push economic sanctions against
Russia through EU allies", RT)<BR><BR>Once again, it appears that Washington
needs to draw Russian troops into the conflict to achieve its
objectives.<BR><BR>On Sunday, RIA Novosti published satellite images showing a
large buildup of troops outside the eastern Ukrainian city of Slavyansk.
According to a report in Russia Today:<BR><BR> "160 tanks, 230
APCs and BMDs, and at least 150 artillery and rocket systems, including "Grad"
and "Smerch" multiple rocket launchers, have been deployed to the area. A total
of 15,000 troops are positioned near Slavyansk, he
said….<BR><BR> Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu said the
large buildup of Ukraine troops, as well as war games and additional deployments
of armed forces to the NATO states in the region have "forced" Russia to respond
with military drills of its own…..If Kiev choses to escalate the crackdown on
the protesters by using heavy arms against them Russia says it reserves the
right to use its own military to stop bloodshed." ("Tanks, APCs, 15,000 troops’:
Satellite images show Kiev forces build-up near Slavyansk", RT)<BR><BR>Putin has
stated repeatedly that he will respond if ethnic Russians are killed in
Ukraine. That’s the red line. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov
reiterated the same message in an interview last week with RT’s Sophie
Shevardnadze. The usually soft-spoken Lavrov, condemned Yatsenyuk’s
attack on Ukrainian civilians as "criminal" and warned that "an attack on
Russian citizens is an attack on the Russian Federation."<BR><BR>The
statement was followed by ominous reports of Russian troop movements near
Ukraine’s border indicating that Moscow may be preparing to intervene to stem
the violence against civilians. According to Russian Russia’s Itar Tass "Defense
Minister Sergei Shoigu said, "As of today exercises of battalion tactical groups
has begun in the border areas with Ukraine." Also aviation will conduct flights
to simulate the actions near the state border."<BR><BR>So there you have it: It
looks like Obama’s provocations WILL draw Putin into the fray after all. But
will things turn out the way that Obama thinks they will? Will Putin
follow Washington’s script and leave his troops in the east where they’ll be
picked off by US-funded paramilitary guerillas and neo Nazis or does he have
something else up his sleeve, like a quick blitz to Kiev to remove the junta
government, call for international peacekeepers to quell the violence, and slip
back over the border to safety?<BR><BR>Whatever the strategy may be, we won’t
have to wait long to see it implemented. If Yatsenyuk’s army attacks
Slavyansk, then Putin’s going to send in the tanks and it’ll be a whole new
ballgame.<BR><BR>MIKE WHITNEY lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to
Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also
available in a Kindle edition. He can be reached at
fergiewhitney@msn.com.<BR><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>