America’s Game Plan an Emergent Phenomenon
by Kennedy Applebaum
Quemado Institute
September 10, 2015
(–typewriterintl.tumblr.com)
Geopolitical analysts the world over have written reams of commentaries speculating on the motives behind US foreign policy — policy that is self-destructive as well as murderous to other nations. The plethora of hypotheses is proof of the futility of ascribing rational motives to the United States Government. Composted like manure in a 15-year vacuum of leadership, from post-alcoholic C-average George W. Bush to Kenya-born ex-Indonesian closet-Muslim Obama, US policy is an emergent phenomenon, a Darwinian monster looming out of a chaos of competing agendas.
Oxford PhD Joseph P. Farrell offers a case with point in his commentary on America’s schizoid Ukraine policy:
Russia’s Sputnik Magazine: Growing Rift Between
US and EU on Ukraine and Donbass?
Guest Article by Joseph P. Farrell
Giza Death Star, Website of Joseph P. Farrell
September 10, 2015
This article in Russia’s Sputnik magazine was shared by so many people, that it gave me a bit of a pause, for beyond the obvious and now well-known growing rift between the USA and the EU over the way America has (mis)handled the Ukrainian crisis which it brought about, and then tried to blame on Russia, I could not quite figure out why this article attracted so many people’s attention. It took a couple of read-throughs, and then I spotted why it may have caught the eye of so many people.
Sputnik of course used to ba an official media mouthpiece of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, and one may reasonably assume there is still some connection between that party in Russia and this media outlet. So with that caveat lector, here’s the article, and see if you can spot it as well:
Apple of Discord: US, EU Split Over Future of Ukraine, Donbass Status
Right off the bat, the first thing one notes is that the article, or rather, the thoughts in it, do not emanate from Russia, but rather from an American, Eric Zeusse, and then comes the first geopolitical “rub”:
Angela Merkel and Francois Hollande toast during a private dinner in a restaurant in Berlin. (–cbc.ca)
The Minsk II agreement has become an apple of discord between the US and the EU, American author and investigative historian Eric Zuesse emphasizes, adding that while the Ukrainian leader backed by the Obama administration continues to violate the accord, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois Hollande are insisting that the parties should fulfill the Minsk II provisions.
“On Friday, August 29th, this split became public concerning whether the Minsk II accords for ending the Ukrainian civil war should remain in force. Obama supports the view of Ukrainian President, Petro Poroshenko, to violate the Minsk II accords, which would end it; the same day, Hollande and Merkel agreed with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, that the Minsk II agreement needs to be implemented in full,” Zuesse underscored.
In other words, the Minsk agreement, to which the Ukraine itself in the person of Poroshenko was a participant, indicates that The European Big Three, France, Russia, and Germany, wanted a negotiated end to the situation, and the ability of the Donbass to elect its own local officials (certainly should be no problem in a real democracy, right?), while the USA, as odd man out, favors no such thing. Plainly put, the Minsk agreements really expose the fact that the USA is unilaterally driving the situation regardless, and in spite of, the wishes of its European “allies and partners.” Poroshenko, in other words, is completely Washington’s creature.
Or is he?
Thus far, there’s nothing new in the Sputnik article, cited and quoted above, that we didn’t know before. So why the fuss for a Russian media outlet to take up yet more space with it? This was what caused me to read the article twice, the second time, a bit more slowly, and then I spotted what may have been the real centerpiece for the Russians:
“On August 27th, Edward Basurin, a military official of the Donetsk People’s Republic had announced ‘UAF Massively shelling DPR — Drastic Deterioration,’ saying that, ‘The fascists have used heavy artillery prohibited by the Minsk Agreements against the civilian areas of Aleksandrovka and Marinka. The outskirts of Donetsk have been struck’,” Zuesse narrated.
Victoria Nuland and John Kerry (–thepeoplesvoice.org)
According to Zuesse, Poroshenko is most likely following the instructions of the Obama administration, most notably the Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland. The US investigative historian called attention to the fact that while US Secretary of State John Kerry put it clear on May 12, 2015 in Sochi that the White House would not support Poroshenko’s attempts to take Donbass by force, Victoria Nuland contradicted that openly.
In other words, what Zuesse, and hence Sputnik, is highlighting is that American foreign policy is not being set in the White House, but at the State Department, and this means that there is a very real factional rift between whatever faction Secretary Kerry represents, and that well-known neo-con-war faction that Victoria foul-language Nuland represents. And the reason one can confidently assume that it is factional infighting is because in any normally functioning government, public contradiction of the policy position of any department or bureaucracy head by a personal nominally under his or her authority, would be subject to dismissal. After all, Mr. Kerry is the presidentially nominated, Senate-approved, constitutional head of the US Department of State, and made his (and presumably the White House’s) position clear. Yet, Ms. Nuland has seen to contradict her boss, and remains in her post. The mind boggles at the possibilities and implications, for if this be true, if there is a real rift between the White House and State, then the possibility exists that there may be similar open defiance in other departments of government. ONe may think, for example, of Mr. Obama’s firing of several generals and admirals.
So the real question remains: why is Ms. Nuland still there? It’s a question, perhaps, that only Mr. Kerry or Mr. Obama can answer and clarify.
See you on the flip side…
Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.
.
Kennedy Applebaum Comments:
Actually, probably neither Kerry nor Obama would be able to answer why Nuland is still there. To them it’s phenomenological, just as it is to the rest of us.
The leadership vacuum has given birth to a number of unexplained phenomena, some so disastrous for humanity that ex post facto damage control is a top US priority. From think tanks to the Pentagon, US Ambassadors to the NSA, collectively the American government is engaged in constant cover-up. This activity is evidenced by its outrage over Snowden’s revelations, its refusal to address the cause of 9/11, its denial of the geoengineering chemtrail program, its offhand dismissal of the Iraq WMD fabrication and the subsequent shattering of a secular nation, its failure to produce evidence of Russian aggression, its barrage of MH17 propaganda, and so on. Searching for coherent intent attributes too much integrity to Washington. The latter is an obsolete concept.
What is the prognosis?
Unless there is a miracle of new presidential leadership, the monster will continue to rave and flail. The best policy for Europe, Russia and China is to isolate the US by simply ignoring its existence. Eventually, the monster will curl its tail and slink away. Like laughing at a dog who is charging you with its teeth bared, the sheer humiliation of being perceived as nobody renders a creature docile.
Europe and Russia would then be free to resolve Ukraine’s crisis with reason, humanity and enlightened dialogue.
Quemado Institute 
Discussion
No comments yet.