How much are the emotions of President Obama clouding his judgment
about Europe, Ukraine and Russia? Columnist Vladimir Zharkhin charges
Obama with letting his feelings toward Putin dictate American
policy.
'Envy of the Gods': Obama 'Unfit to Lead' a Great Power (Izvestia, Russia)
"It isn't politically correct to say, but this is the way
it is: the overall impression is that a weak, unpopular, and unsuccessful president
is trying to wound a strong, successful, and very popular president. Such
unsatisfactory behavior by the first African-American president of the United
States proves again that the destinies of nations are too often influenced not
only by the ingenious plans and pragmatic forecasts of hard-headed analysts,
but by outright envy - the envy of a man who has shown himself to be simply unprepared
for the heavy burden of leading a great world power."
Has the United States intentionally undermined the dream of a 'single economic space from Lisbon to Vladivostok' by creating turmoil in Ukraine? Columnist Vladimir Zharkhin accuses an 'envious' United States with doing everything it can to keep itself from being sidelined by stoking tensions between Europe and Russia - and President Obama with being overcome by 'childish' emotions.
Political
analyst Vladimir Zharkhin discusses Barack Obama's
role as the Herostratus of the new world order
As events in Ukraine escalate, America's
role seems ever more ominous.
Initially it seemed that the main
supporters of the Euromaidan protesters were the Europeans, in particular
those from newer E.U. countries like Poland and Lithuania. The moment of truth came on February
22, when the plotters took power by force, showing complete disregard for
previously agreed upon trade guarantees and solemn assurances from the foreign ministries
of Germany, France and Poland.
From that moment it became quite clear
who the real paymaster was behind the tragic scenes in Ukraine.
Earlier this year, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, the current German foreign minister, is
complaining that developments in Ukraine undermine the entire system of
security in Europe, which for more than half a century has allowed for
relatively conflict free way of life on the continent. Then the "great
European powers," who had guaranteed the agreements of February 21,
silently swallowed their humiliation and the complete nullification of their
authority.
Yes, Europe has something to lose.
After centuries of almost continuous
warfare among one another and the two global battles of the 20th century that
were first ignited in Europe, a half century of respite has allowed Europe to
unite and turn into an oasis of relative peace compared to the destruction and
instability on other continents.
Moreover, the idea of a single economic apace
"from Lisbon to Vladivostok" would create an enormous self-sufficient
single market and an incomparable concentration of financial, technological,
intellectual, and natural resources.
That notion, however, suggests that the United
States would be sidelined from European affairs and its dominant role in the
Atlantic Alliance eliminated, with the American economy consigned to the
periphery of world development.
The undermining of these plans for European
and Eurasian integration was executed by the Americans both precisely and
effectively. The Ukrainian state had an inherent weakness associated with the
historic clash between its eastern and western regions.
The integrity of Ukraine during its
years of independence was maintained only because the country's leaders
alternated between moderate representatives from the east and central regions.
In light of current events and the background of the victorious coalition, even
Viktor Yushchenko, who by the way came from the central Sumy Oblast, seems like a politician
of peace and moderation.
However, as soon as a neo-fascist
radical from western Ukraine came to power, the country began to implode and
fall to pieces. This was precisely in line with U.S. plans to block the
formation of a unified economic space, a "Greater Europe," by making
Ukraine the bone of contention between Russia and the E.U.
Here though, to create a hotspot for
many years to come right in the middle of Europe; to halt its industry, render
its debts unpayable, and destroy the state of Ukraine,
turning it into the Somalia of Europe, all in the name of the long term
interests of the United States, is extremely risky.
In an article unsympathetic to Russia
written by Katrina vandenHeuvel
and published
in The Washington Post on May 13,
vandenHeuvel wrote "U.S.
actions over the past several months have defied common sense." She wrote
further, "If the
country [Ukraine] has any chance of recovery, assistance from both Russia and
the West will be needed.This outcome will be
possible only if common sense can find some traction in Washington and in media
coverage of the crisis."
Publisher of respected magazine The Nation, VandenHeuvel laments the lack of common sense in the
Washington administration. Indeed, such an open attack on the interests of
European countries, despite their servility toward the United States, is
already engendering opposition that has remained hidden so far, but is quickly
rising to the surface.
Threatening Russia with blackmail and
sanctions, and given the perception of a threat of attack from the West, Russia
has moved toward a rapprochement with China, which is certainly not in the
interests of the United States. This is particularly true now that the U.S. has
decided to strengthen its influence in Southeast Asia to limit the power of
China.
Such contradictory behavior by our
central hegemon can be explained not only in terms of geopolitics, but human
psychology. From U.S. leaders, too many emotions, resentments, and ill-conceived
threats and sanctions have been expressed, none of which make sense as part of the
pragmatic promotion of American geopolitical interests.
Even in the midst of the Snowden epic, Barack
Obama's childish emotions atracted attention.
Snowden, the prodigy, fled to Russia, just as Gordievsky,
Suvorov and Kalugin
fled from us. These are the kinds of people involved with intelligence activities
who from time to time defect to the other side.
But it never occurred to our general
secretaries or presidents to use such events as a pretext for canceling
meetings with American leaders out of anger, or ground and search the aircraft
of Latin American heads of state. It is not the way of great leaders to squabble
over such trivia and lose face! Further actions by the American administration
to discredit the Sochi Olympics, and even more so, in their destabilization of
Ukraine, show that a personal and emotional component to Obama's actions have
prevailed over reason and caution.
Posted By Worldmeets.US
It isn't politically correct to say, but
this is the way it is: the overall impression is that a weak, unpopular, and unsuccessful
president is trying to wound a strong, successful, and very popular president.
Furthermore he [Obama] isn't thinking about the long range consequences of his
actions on his own country.
Such unsatisfactory behavior by the first
African-American president of the United States proves again that the destinies
of nations are too often influenced not only by the ingenious plans and pragmatic
forecasts of hard-headed analysts, but by outright envy - the envy of a man who
has shown himself to be simply unprepared for the heavy burden of leading a
great world power. Of course, Obama could go down in history as the man who
destroyed peace on the European continent, but that will be to the glory of Herostratus.
[Editor's Note: According to Greek
mythology, Herostratus was an arsonist who destroyed the Temple of
Artemis, one of the seven wonders of the ancient world. His name has become synonymous
with people who commit a criminal act in order to become famous.]
