Juan Cole – Uninformed or Lying?

August 14, 2008

In a Salon article published today Juan Cole asserts in the first sentence:

Aug. 14, 2008 | The run-up to the current chaos in the Caucasus should look quite familiar: Russia acted unilaterally rather than going through the U.N. Security Council.

That is either a fat all out lie, or a mistake by Cole and the Salon fact-checkers made out of lack of research and/or knowledge.

Consider this Reuters wire report published on August 8, the day the conflict over South Ossetia went hot:

At the request of Russia, the U.N. Security Council held an emergency session in New York but failed to reach consensus early Friday on a Russian-drafted statement.

The council concluded it was at a stalemate after the US, Britain and some other members backed the Georgians in rejecting a phrase in the three-sentence draft statement that would have required both sides "to renounce the use of force," council diplomats said.

According to this time line the UN council rejected the simple Russian request to "to renounce the use of force" at 06:51 GMT, some 4-6 hours after the Georgian forces started attacked the city of Tskhinvali with a full artillery barrage.

So Russia did not go through the security council? No! The ‘western’ war mongers in the security council cheered on the Georgian assault when they assumed that there was still a chance for their client puppet in Georgia to win the blood bath.

Cole also wants to equate Bush’s actions on a rather peaceful Iraq with Russia’s actions on Georgia’s aggression. He falsely assumes Putin in the lead in Russia and for some reason mixes in Chavez, Abbas and various other not comparable cases. He ends:

But Russia is now demonstrating that the Bush doctrine can just as easily be the Putin doctrine.

Has Putin led his country into any preemptive war for false reasons? Has he instigated in his time as president brutal ‘regime changes’ by force in four countries – Afghanistan, Haiti, Somalia, Iraq? Have his doings killed more than a million people?

At home: Has Putin led his country into an economic crisis? Did he let the billionaires investment bank bandits rob the poor people and the country’s resources or did he fight them and tried to regain national assets?

Putin is certainly not a holy man. He has his mistakes. I personally don’t like him much. But to compare him to Bush is pure libel.

To do so while ignoring easily available facts puts Cole in the same league as ‘experts’ like Krauthammer, Kagan or Ledeen.

Cole is professor for Middle East history. What is his qualification on the Caucasus or Russian- Georgian relations? Does he really want to end up in that ‘useless pundit’ category?

Posted by b on August 14, 2008 at 20:00 UTC | Permalink

Comments

Has Putin led his country into any preemptive war for false reasons?

Well, there is the matter of the Second Chechen War to stop the terrorists from destroying Moscow. Fortunately for Putin this happened to coincide with his first premiership as well as an election for President. He then made sure that no charges was brought against Yeltsin, the man who attacked his own parliament when it tried to depose him for ruining the country.
Of course, at the time he was a friendly ally of the west, and hardly a bad word was heard from the western capitals.
So no saint, but neither in Bush league.

Posted by: a swedish kind of death | Aug 14 2008 20:42 utc | 1

i linked to it in a thread last friday, but inner city press blogs the u.n. security council & followed events thursday night into friday morning here & here

Russia convened a late-night Security Council session Thursday about the escalating conflict between Georgia and its breakaway region of South Ossetia. At 8:30 p.m., the Russian Mission to the UN emailed the Press to come in at 11 p.m.. Diplomats of the Belgian presidency of the Council for August confirmed the meeting would take place.
…
Update of 10:31 p.m. — At the stakeout there is a single TV crew, four reporters and some early arriving Russian diplomats. There is talk of an 8-page letter from Georgia, and that Russia, surprisingly, has not circulated any drafts in the lead-up to the 11 p.m. meeting…
…
Update of 11:25 p.m. — Finally a three-sentence Russian draft press statement has emerged, to “express concern at the escalation of violations in the zone of the Georgian – South Ossetian conflict.” The intial reviews were positive: “now who could object to that?”
Update of 11:29 p.m. — Bets are being taken which part of the three sentences will be objected to. One intrepid YouTuber says that “Georgian – South Ossetian” implied two separate sovereignties. Inner City Press’ bet? The call “to renounce the use of force,” something that Georgia has been resisting with regard to both of its breakaway regions. Call it the Trojan horse phrase…
….
Update of 12:51 a.m. — And now the real problem, the Trojan horse (see above) has been identified. The U.S. and UK refuse to include a call “to renounce the use of force,” which Georgia has been resisting. And so there will be no Council outcome. They move into the Chamber. And so it goes at the UN.
Update of 12:58 a.m. — inside the Chamber, delay for lack of translators. UK’s Karen Pierce jokes to Russia’s Churkin, “You call more emergency meetings that we do,” then refers to “vodka, gin and wine.” The waiting continues, the lack of outcome already assured.

Posted by: b real | Aug 14 2008 20:46 utc | 2

Thanks b real – you are, like usually, much better informed on details than I am.

Posted by: b | Aug 14 2008 21:04 utc | 3

Well, maybe Cole is speaking outside his area of expertise. But I don’t know why the professor is such a punching bag around here. Russia bringing the matter to the Security Council, with a letter of concern, is not equivalent to receiving UN sanction to proceed. Look, regardless of that, no one ought to dispute the right of the Russians to defend themselves after they were attacked. I certainly don’t.
Putin, while not a Bush by a long shot, has some dirty deeds under his belt, which most likely include false flag destruction of Russian lives in Moscow, to whip up war fever against the Chechens.
I’m ready to conceed that Bush is a scoundrel, and a war criminal of epic proportions, standing in a class by himself; and he shouldn’t be seriously compared as an evildoer, against lesser villains. But it is similarly slanderous to put Professor Cole with the likes of Leden, Krauthammer, et al, who are agents of right-wing noise and propaganda.
Cole has been instrumental in informing Americans who were interested in finding out about Iraq history, islamic culture, and political/sectarian issues in Iraq. I’m upset when he is denigrated to no good purpose, and compared to right-wing scumbags who traffic in lies and disinformation.

Posted by: Copeland | Aug 14 2008 21:09 utc | 4

The more that pundits go mainstream, the more they play their role in reinforcing the “truths” that form the accepted narrative. Then they quibble on from there.
It’ll be interesting to see if Cole (and Salon) pulls back from that false assertion.

Posted by: Dick Durata | Aug 14 2008 21:38 utc | 5

Dick Durata is right. Just as one example, on the day earlier this week that the Iraqi foreign minister was quoted in AlQuds alArabi as denying any talk of an actual schedule for the withdrawal of the American forces, explaining: “What Baghdad is demanding is a time-horizon for the reduction of American troops and their redeployment…” Cole was referring to “Maliki’s demand that the US set a timeline for the withdrawal of the US troops”, without reference to what Zebari said. I called attention to that, and–nothing. It happens all the time. If you don’t know much about a topic and you’re uncritical, Cole can perhaps seem useful, but the more you learn about something, the more you see the truth of DD’s point, and that’s being kind about it.

Posted by: Badger | Aug 14 2008 22:08 utc | 6

The answer is rather simple, as far as I can tell: even “experts” are people and people have biases. Add to that most “experts” have expertise in only a small and rather narrowly defined field–yet, they gain “expert” status on public stage over far more things than they deserve because they can talk eloquently about what they know. (Personally, I think Paul Krugman falls into the worst subset of that category–especially given his angry words in 1990s about how people who know nothing of economics were writing grandiloquent nonsense about “economic strategy” and what-nots…but that’s my personal beef.) When they get there, of course, they just spew their personal opinions wrapped in inappropriate guise of “expertise.” I don’t know if I can blame Cole personally–he got his soapbox because of his genuine expertise in one field and he’s using it to rant about things he has an opinion but not real knowledge. While “experts” should know better, an opportunity to rant in public limelight is often too big a temptation to refuse. One should only hope that enough people can see that, when outside their field of expertise, even alleged “experts” are ignorant windbags.

Posted by: kao_hsien_chih | Aug 14 2008 22:10 utc | 7

I remember years ago long discussions about how poor Cole was on military matters and how he needed to limit himself to his own expertise. Additionally, he has always shown a strong bias against Sunni Islam and its followers, so much of what he says about them as opposed to the followers of Shi’a Islam can be taken with a grain of salt as well.
Otherwise, he is brilliant within his expertise, and his ability to accurately translate Arabic media news and interpret its meaning and historic context is excellent.

Posted by: Ensley | Aug 14 2008 22:40 utc | 8

I once dated a semi-famous Ph.D.,she knew her fucking history, but her most intimate relationship was with her dry cleaner …

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 14 2008 23:19 utc | 9

If you look in the comments for the Juan Cole post you will see two comments that contradict Prof. Cole (one from myself). Unless one has followed this grubby little police action carefully, it would be easy to miss the reports about Russian efforts to resolve this issue within the UNSC from the beginning, certainly most of the fascist MSM have ignored those efforts.
BTW, I am absolutely shocked, shocked I tell you that the FMSM continue to report anything from that windbag Saakashvili as truthiness. And I hope they keep that reptile on as president as I’ve learnt how to spell his name and have you seen some of those other Georgian names (Irakli Okruashvili anyone).
Finally, even shitty little Red Tops like the IHT surprise me be having intelligent articles like this prescient one from November 2007 by Mark (not Marc) Almond:

The West should stop picking losers
By Mark Almond
Published: November 12, 2007
The tear gas has cleared from Tbilisi streets, but the political crisis in Georgia is not resolved.
Even President Mikhail Saakashvil’s surprise decision to call early presidential elections for Jan. 5 merely offers his country an increasingly tense eight-week run-up to what on past form will be an election that settles nothing.

Posted by: blowback | Aug 15 2008 0:08 utc | 10

what is utterly absent from any commentaries on saakashvili is how this little thug is drowned in criminality. a history of corruption connected to thevori v’zakone (thieves in law) connected also to the way he has delat with opposition in georgia
we have become so accustomed to that level of criminality in public life & i’d suggest it was not an accident that the thatcherite model encouraged criminal activity in preference to civil society – blair making a complete comedy of it with his anti social laws against the most marginalised members of society. it is a politics so ugly – people have always preferred the dualities of a rupert murdoch – to hide the real facts of that ugliness. it is no accident that a vor – boris berezovsky is a pal of rupert muroch. i have suggested before that for these elites have great needs of liquidity & that liquidity arrives as it did in the 18th century – it is arrived at through criminal means. always
intellectual who will not engage are complicit & the worst of them sanitise the daily crimes of the elites – whose base has always been inequality of opportunity. & this inequality of opportunity has always needed predators & enforcers
for me professor cole is one of those sanitisers – but it is no surprise – there are very few commentators willing to speak at the criminal chaos that lies at the heart of american political life. the day to day neglect. the day to day exercises of cutting off opportunity, the day to day sidelining of greater & greater sections of the population until our existence is one of a victim-in-waiting. noam chomsky is one of the few american intellectuals who without comprimise speaks again & again & again of the criminal chaos
copeland is correct – in the sense that cole is not like kristol & krauthammer & kagan – men who visibly delight at the idea & reality of other people shedding their blood. indeed the shedding of blood is central to their project
intellectuals of my generation in the west have been embarrasingly silent before the crimes of their elites & the generations after them have considered the act of complicity as a virtue
lies, changing rules, sleight of hand ‘diplomacy’ are also central to the project of our elites – so that a bush or a mccain – with blood on their hads, a great deal of blood on their hands can say it is not possible invade another country in the 21st century. that they can breathe after uttering such things is in & of itself a crime

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 15 2008 1:25 utc | 11

ummm…..I suppose you meant “uninformed” in the title?

Posted by: shanks | Aug 15 2008 1:57 utc | 12

r’giap,
I picked up a book recommended by a friend: Thomas Frank’s “The Wrecking Crew”, and one thesis within it is the idea that for America’s new political gangsters, “the best government is bad government”, because it turns the people away from government and toward private sector solutions. Civic order is being broken up in US by just the process you suggest, by methods that rely on the efffective use of chaotic changes, the undercutting of education being one. University students today have to go deeper and deeper in debt. I worked part-time when I went to school (ages ago) while students today work full-time and somehow attend school as well.
(I’ve ordered that Khlebnikov book you recommended and am looking forward to reading it.)

Posted by: Copeland | Aug 15 2008 5:13 utc | 13

Thaqnks shanks, corrected – then again – uniformed fits too ?

Posted by: b | Aug 15 2008 5:20 utc | 14

If Putin were run over by the proverbial bus and this happened, say, Wednesday last week, I don’t think there would have been any difference in the outcome in Georgia this week.

Posted by: YY | Aug 15 2008 7:56 utc | 15

b @14
that too. uniform thinking at lots of sites.

Posted by: shanks | Aug 15 2008 12:05 utc | 16

Cole is professor for Middle East history. What is his qualification on the Caucasus or Russian- Georgian relations
As opposed to an unemployed German engineer with an internet connection in Hamburg?

Posted by: rictus | Aug 15 2008 14:51 utc | 17

As opposed to an unemployed German engineer with an internet connection in Hamburg?
not exactly. b isn’t writing for salon. maybe he should be. besides, who says b isn’t employed?

Posted by: annie | Aug 15 2008 15:30 utc | 18

To my recollection, b never set himself up to be an “expert”. What he does is collate bits and pieces of information tucked away here and there, then reaches a tentative conclusion. You don’t need to be an “expert” to figure out who’s lying and who’s not. Nowadays, with the neocon media lying through its teeth, it’s not exactly engineering, is it?
On the other hand, if you set up yourself to be an “expert” and you miss information that is available to any human with a pulse and two brain cells to rub together, anyone can call you on it, be he an engineer or a garbage collector. It doesn’t take specialized knowledge, just an increasingly rare regard for truth and honor.
A neocon wouldn’t understand.

Posted by: Thrasyboulos | Aug 15 2008 15:45 utc | 19

saakshivili goes on & on about being bullied; the only bullying i witness 24/24 7/7 is that by the mass media of the west & its masters

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 15 2008 15:51 utc | 20

New to the site. Enjoy it and largely agree, but must say it has a decidedly less than objective flavor.

Posted by: Extinct Species | Aug 15 2008 15:57 utc | 21

& as thrasyboulos makes clear – the search for truth on this & other matters requires only a keen mind & sources & a refual to follow the goebells like strategy of the western media that we have already witnessed this in its full glory in the 2006 invasion of lebanon whose clear & obvious target was the dismantelement of hezbollah. this week we also saw how that target has now concretised its position in lebanon in what is obvious a political victory
us imperialst can always buy off ‘leaders’ & elites but it cannot buy off the people & again it is the people who finally decide
the same is true here – the people of georgia will see – in whose interest saakshivili works & he & his corrupt crew will be thrown out

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 15 2008 15:57 utc | 22

Cole’s is the expertise of a partisan, and his writings are always tendentious (promoting his agenda). We all know this, and we’ve discussed it here before.
Does his style throw us off, perhaps? Certainly he’s earnest and indignant: he writes without a trace or irony or sarcasm. He invites us to take him as an impartial and objective source on every topic he discusses.
He doesn’t have the foggiest idea as to how or why anyone could doubt him, because he doesn’t doubt himself: rather, he sees himself as an exemplary scholar and historian.
When reading him, we should remember how we read the NYTimes : with a grain of salt.

Posted by: alabama | Aug 15 2008 17:09 utc | 23

Back to Main