A month later, with Russia, Ukraine, and the public in Western countries exhausted, former President Bill Clinton gave his perspective.
And like McFaul, when Clinton talks about Putin, he is mostly talking about himself.
For example, in this video, Clinton discusses the ways in which “Putin” control of the media allows him to cling to power. Putin? It’s the Western corporate media that covers up for Clinton by refusing to dig into revelations from the Jeffrey Epstein-Ghislaine Maxwell scandal.
That’s just one of many scandals surrounding both Bill and Hillary Clinton.
In the essay in The Atlantic, Clinton displays the kind of racist and colonialist attitude towards Russia and other countries that much of the Western political establishment holds.
I understood that renewed conflict was a possibility. But in my view, whether it happened depended less on NATO and more on whether Russia remained a democracy and how it defined its greatness in the 21st century. Would it build a modern economy based on its human talent in science, technology, and the arts, or seek to re-create a version of its 18th-century empire fueled by natural resources and characterized by a strong authoritarian government with a powerful military?
How other countries define how they want to change and grow — what their destiny is — is not up to Clinton or America, or NATO.
What has been underlying the reaction to Russia is racism.
That’s what allows people like McFaul to cheer for more weapons to Ukraine, a country that has been shelling its own people, as if he’s ordering up another round of appetizers at a fancy restaurant.
It’s why Curtis and Posobiec are so comfortable smugly posing and using this crisis for relevance, to hit out at other people. It’s all about them. Not the Russian soldiers who are dying to clean up the mess the Obama administration made of Ukraine. Curtis would never be able to think about that if there wasn’t a ribbon involved.
It’s also what underlies the actions of warmongers’ like Cheney and Hillary Clinton in calling for the economic, political and cultural punishment of Russia and its people for this conflict. The isolation, humiliation, and ruin of Russia, and any country that dares to step out of line, is the point.
For another example of how arrogant and tone-deaf — or let’s be honest, not as bright as he thinks he is — Clinton writes at one point that Russia has not stepped up to meet the challenges of terrorism, tribal conflicts and bioweapons. Bioweapons? Like the American-funded biolabs in Ukraine?
Clinton ends the piece with memories of the recently deceased Madeleine Albright, Secretary of State in his presidency.
“Madeleine saw her lifelong fight for democracy and security as both an obligation and an opportunity. She was proud of her Czech heritage and certain that her people and their neighbors in Central and Eastern Europe would defend their freedom, ‘because they know the price of losing freedom.’ “
However, in a moment that was largely missed by Western press, activists confronted Albright at a book signing in Prague in 2012 about the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in the ’90s, which was led by the U.S.
Albright, outraged, called the activists, “Dirty Serbs.”
It’s not about “democracy,” or “security.” It’s about preserving the privilege of the Clintons, Cheney, McFaul, Curtis, and many others like them. It’s about being a Czech and not a “dirty Serb.”
It’s about racism.