Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
February 27, 2016

Is The U.S. Preparing A "Color Revolution" In Russia?

Via the former Indian ambassador M K Bhadrakumar we learn that the Russian government is preparing for a "color revolution" attempt during the parliament elections in September:

The annual meeting of Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB), which is the successor organization to the Soviet-era KGB is an important occasion to take the temperature in the ‘East-West’ relations. (The Cold War cliche is becoming useful once again.) President Vladimir Putin’s customary address at the FSB meeting was the hallmark of the occasion on Friday in Moscow.
The sensational part of Putin’s speech is his disclosure that the FSB is in possession of definite information that plots are being hatched in the West to stir up political turmoil in Russia as the country heads for crucial parliamentary election in October. Putin avoided the use of the expression ‘color revolution’ but hinted at it.

The various U.S. services and the neocons in the State Department would certainly like to invite some revolt in Russia. But the chances for a successful putsch in Moscow are tiny. There is no competent opposition to the current government and a bit of economic trouble is not what incites Russians to take on the state. They would have hanged Yeltsin every other day if it were so.

It would be much easier if Washington would accept Russia as it is and make some room form it in global polices. But that never can be, right?

Altogether, a grim scenario has been projected here with regard to Russian-American relations through the remaining period of the presidency of Barack Obama. The core issue for Russia all along is that the US interferes in its internal politics with a view to create political disharmony and weaken the Kremlin, forcing it to adopt policies that are in harmony with American regional and global strategies.
The US cannot countenance Russia (or any country for that matter) in such nationalistic mode, presenting formidable headwind against its global strategies.

Trump or Sanders winning the U.S. presidency could result in more friendly relations with Moscow. But there are many in the various bureaucracies, especially in the Pentagon, who have their budget depending on a hostile relation with Russia (and China). Their voices will be hard to silent. This makes it more difficult to solve the ongoing crises in Syria and Ukraine:

Putin has forewarned that Moscow will defeat any US design to instigate political turmoil in Russia, no matter what it takes. Trust Putin here. However, the big question remains: How could regional conflicts such as Syria or Ukraine be possibly addressed when the two big powers are locked in an existential struggle?

Should the U.S. really attempt to create some kind of trouble around elections in Moscow we can expect an intensification of the conflicts in both theaters, Ukraine and Syria, during the summer. If only to intensify the "Putin is Evil" message the "western" media were told to spread in their populations.

Posted by b on February 27, 2016 at 15:55 UTC | Permalink

« previous page

During the budget hearings last week the defense department defined their top five "challenges" (enemies list)
1. Russia
2. China
3. Iran
4. North Korea
5. Terrorism

Ash Carter framed this as a major shift in the military/defense with a new focus on "high-end" enemies. This allows them to go for the big, expensive stuff again. Not only the technology (espec cyberwar), which is a major feeding trough for all branches and every agency in the US right now, but the old, conventional military things that defense contractors love like new planes, tanks, ships, anti-access systems and space-based weapons/defense were brought up too.

Big dollar, lonnggggg term contracts. The kind of wars that many generals prefer (so I've read), not this counterterrorism stuff that is dominated by special operations forces community who now have so much power when compared to the conventional forces military community.

Putin's Russia has been the perfect boogieman to justify all of this. Just a few years ago the paradigm was budget cutting, across the board. Not any more. And they have a new slush fund that can skirt around budget caps imposed in 2011.

The navy is going wild too with the call for new ships, submarines, various systems, but China is their big budget boogieman.

Big, long defense contracts for big, expensive stuff. All enabled by the Putin Monster and China. A new Cold War. I don't see how any good card-carrying member of the Military-Intelligence-Industrial-Complex would want to disrupt that.

But, the war in Syria has shined a bright light on the fact that there are competing interests in the US, in a major way, to the point where we're fighting against ourselves, different factions are working at cross purposes, etc. If there is a faction planning a color revolution in Russia, they are working at cross purposes with the ones setting up a decades long defense contractor feast for the admirals, generals and the MIIC.

We know that the bank and resource dominated factions moved in when the USSR collapsed, and they feel like they didn't get a chance to finish the job looting the place. I tend to think they are the powers behind the regime change faction. The MIIC is behind the other faction, the more sane one at the moment, as they mainly want to maintain a really big budget and full spectrum "dominance" but I think they prefer the Cold War environment. I realize that's an oversimplified description of the factions and the oligarchs or other things behind them.

Posted by: Joanne Leon | Feb 29 2016 14:11 utc | 101

@21 I watch Arte, the German-French cultural channel, and it's astounding how openly they're carrying water for the demonize-Putin movement.

Posted by: Gene Poole | Feb 29 2016 16:30 utc | 102

Investigation Reveals US Funding Of "Color Revolutions" in Russia

Seized documents confirm that an activist from the People's Freedom Party (PARNAS), Natalia Pelevine, was involved in foreign foundations that organized the mass riots on the 6th of May 2012. This was reported on the website of the Investigative Committee of Russia (SKR) on Friday, March 11th.

During the investigation into Pelevine, documents were seized on the financing of an oppositional "Committee on May 6th", the American "National Endowment for Democracy" (NED). According to the Investigation Committee, its activity was aimed at discrediting law enforcement bodies that were investigating the case about the mass disorder on Bolotnaya Square on the 6th of May 2012.

"The seized documents confirm the version of events put forward by the investigation about the involvement of foreign anti-Russian centers in the financing of mass riots to attempt a "color revolution" in Russia", — stated the message.

The investigation claims that, in the period from 2013 to 2014, NED gave Pelevine more than $35,000. Also, a receipt for the reception of money from relatives of those convicted of involvement in the unrest in May 2012 was found during the search.

As was noted by the SKR, Pelevine is the Executive Secretary of the "Independent Council for Human Rights", as well as the founder and Director of the American nonprofit organization Democratic Russia Committee ("International Committee for a Democratic Russia").

If I were an official in any country in the world I would ban the coupsters from the US NED from entering and/or operating in my country.

Posted by: jfl | Mar 12 2016 0:14 utc | 103

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.