For anyone wondering if “NATO is the problem”, before you go anywhere near that look at:
(a) escalation of violence, theft & political manipulation by klepto-oligarchic leaders trying to survive /1.
(b) the convenient, for Putin, mythology of Ukraine & Rus (“Kiev is the heart of Rus & the origin of the Muscovite dynasty”) /2.
(c) EU success when observed, by Russians from Russia, happening in neighbouring former Soviet republics, as a profound destabilising factor for Russian domestic politics under Putin’s terrible, failed regime /3.
(d) the way propaganda directed at international audiences is used by Putin to pursue his objectives while masking his real concerns/ intentions. “Maskirovka” is pretty much Putin’s top specialist subject on Hitler Channel Mastermind
In such an analysis you’ll find: /4.
🔹(a) is dominant
🔹(b) is a major factor in Putin’s domestic strategy to ensure a compliant population, as a key part of effective execution of (a)
🔹(c) is the primary external factor, feeding into (b) &, of course, (a) /5.
🔹and (d) will look very confusing indeed, because it’s mostly about things completely different to (a), (b) & (c).
Why?
Because 99.99% of the international audience hasn’t got the faintest idea. /6.
None about the realities of the klepto-oligarchic escalation dynamic (anyway, that’d hardly make good propaganda).
Not the foggiest about the mythology of Rus. /7.
And it’s almost impossible to explain - except to Faragiste Europhobes, which is one reason Putin is keen on them, although in truth they don’t really understand either - how it can be that the boring old EU is a threat to a country with thousands of thermonuclear warheads. /8.
What is (d) mostly about?
NATO, it turns out.
Surprise! /9.
And why might that be?
Because, like so many things which are untrue but plausible, it’s easy to explain to the 99.99%.
And so to influence them to oppose their governments acting against poor old Vladimir Vladimirovich, a “bear” being foolishly “poked with a stick”. /10.
Is the NATO story 100% untrue? No.
But 99.99%? So untrue as to be completely misleading & essentially indistinguishable from pure disinformation propaganda? Yes. /11.
Do Russian generals get antsy about it? Some of them, sometimes.
The “evil NATO” story is core (see above🧵) & is used because it resonates in the West, with many. Not because it’s true. Then there’s a swirling confusion of stuff, from a spewing propaganda sewer, intended to produce some sh*t which will stick👇
A long 🧵. To read with a strong cup of tea to hand.
Let’s think of President A & President B. I’m not naming any individuals, you understand.
President A thinks “America” (first) & “European (& Asian) free-rider weaklings” & “beautiful deals”./1.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, of course. For President A it looks like this:
- the strong do deals, the weak suffer what they must
- who is strong, in style & nuclear warheads?
- Putin & Xi
- who is strong economically? /2.
- of the first lot Xi. There’s also the EU & Japan. But they have “weak” leaders, & no nukes. (Well, France & UK have nukes, but they’re really American, even the French ones (don’t tell anyone I told you that))
“Diplomacy” is a board game, based on a map of pre-WW1 Europe, & a set of rules which would delight Machiavelli - or Bismarck.
It helps us see what Putin wants.
It should really be called “War”, because that’s ultimately how you win the game.
A 🧵/1.
All the talking, dealing & betraying is purely directed at invasion & occupation of territory, to the greater glory of the victorious World - or at least European - King.
In real life it would mean immense riches &, fundamentally, survival. /2.
You can’t stay put & be satisfied with what you’ve got. Because you’ll likely be eliminated. There are no cooperative, peaceful, enduring alliances you can rely on.
Does anyone still think “NATO enlargement” has been “the problem”?
Does anyone still labour under the illusion our governments haven’t known for many years precisely what Putin is, & what needs to be done about him? /1.
Let me tell you a story from 2008. My son was 10 days old. Having co-led a UK diplomatic crisis response to Putin’s invasion of Georgia, I’d been asked urgently to review our policy toward Russia. “Urgent”, for such a fundamental piece of work still meant a month or so. /2.
Now here I was sitting opposite the Foreign Secretary explaining the outcome to him. This is part of what I said:
“Russia is run by the people who own it, principally an elite of a few dozen, largely dominated by ex-KGB officials with a world view formed during Soviet days./3.
The crisis facing Europe makes an incapable, unfit PM, reviled by key international allies, an even more unacceptable threat than it already was, to the security, prosperity & well-being of GB & NI.
Code red.
Time for action, @Keir_Starmer & true political leaders.
A🧵/1.
The largest group of Westminster MPs which still supports constitutional, liberal democracy, is led by @Keir_Starmer.
He should now become PM, backed by the majority of MPs across the Commons who also do so.
Including a third of Conservative MPs.
And all opposition MPs. /2.
With the possible exception of the DUP parliamentary group. Up to them to decide whose side they’re on.
The time for party politics is over. For some years.
… warmongering on behalf of US aggressors, & making binary, anti-Russian judgements, faced with complex, multi-faceted conflict situations & identities.
Wait, I forgot: @STWuk doesn’t “endorse the nature or conduct of either the Russian or Ukrainian regimes”. /3.