I am just bemused by the low level of analysis offered by these Western think tank people. This is a Professor at a London University an expert in defence studies and a former director of the Royal United Services Institute and MOD linked Royal College of Defence Studies. He is chirruping about the USD 61 billion. He keeps saying “now Ukraine can plan”. Until the end of the year. This is going to run out in one year. It it took months to get it past Congress this time and given that opinion polls in the US show an upwards trend against funding the war, it looks far from certain that there will ..read more

To my readers: if you don’t follow Inside Story I recommend it. What I notice here is a convergence of views from people who might a year ago have been to some extent ‘supporting’ Ukraine with strong critics – Chris Hedges. That is good news. One final point; the aim of this package might be to get Biden over the election line. The House speaker said that he changed his view on the package as a result of being given security briefings about how Iran, Russia and China are collaborating and how Russia will attack Europe after Ukraine. – I wonder if he wasn’t simply manipulated by the intelligen ..read more

1) Poison in the machine (Russophobia) This is an article in Foreign Affairs magazine, the journal of the ‘Council on Foreign Relations’ – a think tank. I have been wondering about subscribing. (I hope readers can see this article; it may be limited by a paywall – I am seeing it as a free ‘taster’ article). I would be willing to subscribe even though I know the overall line of this think-tank is very ‘pro-Western’ and is probably more weighted towards narrative production than clear analysis. But what puts me off is the sheer poison in the tone. But this article (and perhaps this journal) are ..read more

This is my favourite Times Radio presenter. She has this wide-eyed look of total innocence and cult-like belief in the narratives of the West. I am struck by the dialog at 8.10. It is absolutely bizarre. Listen carefully. “You are clear in your mind that anyone who says NATO is next is wrong. Given NATO’s extensive and nuclear capabilities, economic, technological and demographic advantages, how much of this is about touting a narrative to scare the West into avoiding escalation? When people go around into saying NATO is next, it’s a very good way of persuading people not to escalate and to co ..read more

Well, at least in parliament. The story is – one MP was contacted on a gay dating app by someone. He gave them some kompromat on himself. They then used this to blackmail him and he gave them the contact details of several of his colleagues. These people were then subject to attacks and two of them responded by sending intimate pictures of themselves – that is to total strangers. The attacker may be a criminal or foreign state actor. The reality is most people do not behave like this. I find Jeremy Hunt’s comments in the clip when he tries to pretend that the public would also behave like thi ..read more

This is State Department spokesperson John Kirby displaying some rather interesting body language as he assures the media that since October 7 Israel has not violated International humanitarian law once. The urging for a investigation (by Israel) into the (most) recent aid worker massacre to be allowed to take place at its own pace stands in rather striking contrast to the categorical statements that Ukraine was not involved in the Russian Crocus Hall terrorist attack. (Personally I would be surprised by that but, I take John Mearsheimer’s point, that the denials seemed to be rather swift and ..read more

It never stops. Here we have the wide-eyed and gushing anchor for whom no amount of lies about Russia can evince the slightest degree of journalistic scepticism interviewing a “Russia expert”. The expert puts on a laugh when asked about the recent Russian elections. (He makes the mistake that different is just “not” or is “sham”). The expert says: “Russia has not had a competitive election since 1996”. [1.30] He is referring to the 1996 Presidential election between Yeltsin and the Communist party candidate. This was, rather obviously, a key election for the West as the whole shock therapy pr ..read more

I’ve noticed that the number of sheer lies, as opposed to narrative glosses, has started to increase in Western media recently. Possibly related to the fact that right now Ukraine is losing the war. This is an interview with one of the stalwart Russians still willing to face the routine abuse they get on Western media. Comments: As usual the anchor frequently interrupts the speaker. (Frustratingly she didn’t let him answer her point about how in the UK people can freely discuss independence for Scotland and Wales). Sergei Markov makes his point about how Russians see losses in Ukraine, claimi ..read more

Unfortunately I only have time for a stub. The subject demands more in-depth treatment. I have been looking at the Independent and Guardian chiefly. What strikes me about the coverage of the Russian election is an unquestioned and unexamined premise. The charge is that the election is “rigged” or, a “sham” or a “Non-election”. They struggle a bit to justify this but the following factors are usually cited: only approved candidates can take part, Nadezhdin who was anti-war was blocked by the Electoral Commission (which is said to answer to the Kremlin), Russian ballots have in the past been sho ..read more

This is an interview with a former British Ambassador to the USSR/Russia, Sir Roderic Lyne. I like watching these interviews with slightly independent former players. They often talk a lot more sense than current incumbents. Sir Roderick talks at length about how in the early years of his rule Putin was very “pro-West”, seeking integration with Europe and even NATO. For Sir Roderick the turning point came during the “Orange Revolution” in Ukraine. In that event a candidate won the Presidential election who might have been more interested in maintaining relations with Russia – Victor Yanukovyc ..read more