Protectionist Dems, Litvinenko Murder, etc. November 26 2006
Posted At : November 26, 2006 6:06 PM
| Posted By : Cyrill Vatomsky
Related Categories: KSCO Radio Shows,Russia,Podcasts,Capitalism,Free Market
Related Categories: KSCO Radio Shows,Russia,Podcasts,Capitalism,Free Market
The Embassy of the New World Order on KSCO AM 1080. November 26, 2006. This is not a transcript, but rather is an outline. As usual, there is much more in the podcast.
The first hour is mostly devoted to economic and international trade issues, mostly discussing warning signs from the Economist in combination with the protectionist mood of the recently elected Democrats and their baseball bat wielding union paymasters.
The news are not good and I am not happy to be an albatross of bad news but the current protectionism wave in the US can only spell bad economic things to the US and the rest of the world. And as it always happens, even a small recession in the US can result in a big slump elsewhere where bad economic situation can lead to dire consequences. But, unfortunately, there is nothing good on the horizon. Free Trade Agreements with Latin American countries are going to be re-negotiated or canned, there will be calls for getting even with China and others.
Capitalism and free market has been the only vehicle of lifting masses from poverty. Ever. Curtailing capitalism and free trade will keep more people in poverty. Protectionists will have their day, but then we will all pay the price for this folly with more instability, more recessions, more economic, social and political strife.
The predicted policies of the new Democrat Party controlled Congress will help the likes of Hugo Chavez, Evo Morales and eventually, terrorists.
The second hour is mostly devoted to Russia and in particular the theme of the day, the murder in London of Alexander Litvinenko, a former KGB spy, turned Putin critic. London Times offered 5 theories with pros and cons for each of them. There is a good analyses of them at Sean's Russia Blog. Let me go through each of them as well.
The theory: With presidential elections due in 2008, the Kremlin is eliminating any obstacles to a smooth transfer of power to Putin's chosen successor.
I am sorry, this is ridiculous. Putin has nothing to gain by killing Litvinenko. Besides, Putin is not running for re-election, he is going to be the grand poobah at Gazprom. Also, we are talking about Russia. No 10 year old facts that Litvinenko could posses would have much of an influence on Russian elections. I would speculate that even if it can be proven conclusively that Putin's FSB did blow up these buildings in 1999, that would have any effect on 2008 elections.
The only way I can think of Putin issuing the contract is if he were an uncontrollable vengeful lunatic, which is hardly the case.
The theory: The exiled oligarch is locked in mortal combat with Vladimir Putin and will stop at nothing destroy the President's reputation in the West.
This is just as ludicrous. Barezovsky would kill one of his allies just to hurt Putin? This theory actually is worth discussing from a totally different standpoint. In all the years of me fighting, debunking and ridiculing conspiracy theories, one thing consistently occurred to me. That is that conspiracy theories speak much more about the state of mind of the theory peddler. Imagination of such a person opens a little window into the mind of the conspiracy theorist - is this what you would have done? Add to this the pervasive tradition of "????? ???? ??? ????????" (loosely: cutting nose in spite of the face) mentality within Russian culture, and you have the making of the Berezovsky slant. The popularity of this view is quite telling, as well as the popularity of the view that the US did it. In particular, it speaks volumes about the low value of human life in Russia.
The theory: Litvinenko became a victim of a struggle for control of Chechnya because of his links in London with the exiled rebel Akhmed Zakayev
Also
The theory: Litvinenko’s former colleagues in the Federal Security Services (FSB) wanted to avenge his betrayal of the service. Acting on their own — but in the belief that they were helping the Russian President — they arranged the assassination using a special poison developed in a top secret laboratory.
This is interesting. The Times needlessly separated these two theories. They do not have to be. It is clear that Politkovskaya was investigating something about Russia's dealings in Chechnya. Litvinenko was definitely involved in the subject. There was also another murder - of one Chechen commando, apparently formerly under FSB protection. They have cut him loose and he was gunned down. There is also an oil connection. Chechnya is a mechanism for Russia to destabilize the Caucasus and try to prevent any development.
Russia is a feudal state and feudal states always have entities within itself doing their own business. After all, feudal government does not pay its officials well, it usually gives them enough opportunities to steal or embezzle. There is a subject of rebuilding of Chechnya and money allocated for it. It would be quite a surprise to me it a huge portion of it was not stolen.
I would not be at all surprised as well, if all this is just different corrupt entities within government, mafia, law enforcement are doing their own bidding without regard for geopolitical results. The main con against the Rogue FSB entity theory is that it is tightly controlled by Putin. I seriously doubt that this is the case. I mean the tight control.
Here are some good quotes from Kommersant about why some Russian officials think the West care so much about Litvinenko's murder.
Igor Morozov, State Duma members in the Rodina (Fatherland) faction, retired Foreign Intelligence Service colonel:
On the threshold of the presidential elections in the U.S., the parties are seizing any chance to draw attention to themselves. They make out pretty well with that PR. It is possible that Berezovsky, whose work with Russian parties and movements was unsuccessful, is seeking a way to create tensions in Russia at the request of the U.S. administration.Nikolay Leonov, member of the State Duma Security Committee, former head of the analytical department of the foreign intelligence section of the KGB of the USSR:
An anti-Russian campaign is gaining force around the world. The Americans never miss a chance to lash out at Russia. But, in this case, the poisoning scandal plays into the hands of someone else – Berezovsky. By raising a world scandal against Russia, he is getting his revenge for having burnt out as a politician and businessman.
What a bunch of crap.
The last segment was a conversation with caller Ken from Carmel CA about grim prospects for Russia. I hope my fears are proven wrong.
Digg This!TrackBacks
There are no trackbacks for this entry.
Trackback URL for this entry:
http://cyrillvatomsky.com/trackback.cfm?272F0BEE-3048-78AB-651EC45CF05BA4AB
http://cyrillvatomsky.com/trackback.cfm?272F0BEE-3048-78AB-651EC45CF05BA4AB
Bookmarks:
Blogs
- Robert Amsterdam
- Publius Pundit
- Russian Blog
- La Russophobe
- Sean Guillory
- Vilhelm Konnander
- Accidental Russophile
- Russia from the Inside
- David McDuff
- Edward Lucas
- Siberian Light
- Scraps of Moscow
- Russian Standard
- ZheZhe [dot] us
- Ruminations on Russia
- Nosemonkey / Europhobia
- Marginalia
- The Oil Drum
- Hello Estonia
- The Observer Blog
- WaPo World Opinion
In fact though, we can think of many things Putin has to gain. (1) Terror. Killing people is scary. Putin lacks real economic or military might just like OBL, but he can use terror effectively. (2) Stopping Litvinenko's invesigation into Politkovskaya's killing. (3) Honor. Putin is a KGB spymaster and must feel some obligation to obtain "justice" against this "traitor" to the country. (4) Unknown. You have no idea what other sorts of things Litvinkeno was working on, or what Putin might have feared he was working on.
First Politkovskaya, then Litvinenko, now Gaidar. How many must die before you'll be convinced Putin might be behind it?
Now, does it mean FSB or some other Russian entity is not involved? Absolutely not. I could even accept that Putin would like to see Litvinenko dead - Putin does have a reputation of quite a vengeful person. And he did not even need to give the order.
The number of dead or killed does not add or take away any proof or lack of it from Putin making the order. Quite frankly, I do not care if he did order it. As I said on my radio show, I am not sure what scares me more - that he did or that he did not.
I understand your point, but try as you may you'll never make me "see why" Russians would elect a proud KGB spy as their leader so soon after the KGB destroyed the country. I'll never "understand" why member of the KKK would kill little black children. I'll never "understand" why Germans would build concentration camps and put Jews into them and kill them. I think human beings do irrational things sometimes, or another way of characterizing them is simply "evil." I don't think spending time trying to "understand" why people take such actions is productive. I don't think we would have been better able to close down Hitler's concentration camps if we "understood" the "rational" reasons he built them.
Is it really a "rational" decision to sell nuclear technology and missiles to defend it to Iran, given that not only is Iran a Muslim state bent on Orthodox Russia's destruction but the US and the whole of Europe are outraged? I think that most of Russia's current plight is explained by realizing that both the people and the government are making irrational (or evil) decisions and must simply be confronted and stopped, as much in their own interests as in ours.
If Putin wanted Litvinenko dead, and if Russian agents killed him, then the question of whether Putin formally gave the order is moot. The only question then is what to do about it, and how to protect the person who's next on the list.
Moreover, I think this whole situation is a wonderful test case. Let's say, just for the sake of argument, that we had 100% sure and certain proof that Putin personnally ordered and planned the Litivenenko hit. He trained the hitmen personally. What should our response be? What would we actually be capable of doing about it?
"As the implications of Alexander Litvinenko’s poisoning - and now the poisoning of his associate, Mario Scaramella - become increasingly clear, revealing Moscow’s aim of intimidating its critics and silencing those who would support them, additional signs of the Kremlin’s real policies with regard to its neighbours, and the rest of the world, are also becoming more obvious."
http://halldor2.blogspot.com/2006/12/cold-war-is-n...