Clinton’s electoral defeat, the Brexit and the rise of the right across the West … if you believe the Spin doctors, all these phenomena have one thing in common: they follow a far-reaching strategy of Russia, whose goal is to “destabilize” the West. Anyone who denies this “only” as a faint tactic to demonize Russia, does not recognize the perfidious ingenuity of this PR strategy: according to this logic, any criticism of the foreign and security policy of the West would be suspected of interest control by Moscow. Other potentially destabilising criticism would then be branded as “externally controlled”. A relapse to the long-gone McCarthy era, to which we must oppose with all our might.
If you read articles such as the recent Spiegel report on Russia’s supposed tactic of electoral influence in the coming European elections, you need either good nerves or a healthy Portion of cynicism. A news agency is informed by unspecified “intelligence circles” alleged “findings” about “Russian campaigns for election influence”, which are then disclosed in an article as facts. This culminates in the conclusion that “the political leadership in Moscow has spent strategic goals”, which “could be, for example, to promote Russia-friendly forces or to incite disputes within the EU or NATO”. Russia’s tools in this strategy should therefore be unspecified actors in the “social networks and media”, unspecified “Russia-friendly parties” and, of course, the Russian news channel RT. Documents or even evidence? Fail! Welcome to the age of post-factual quality journalism.
Has Putin made Greece starve?
It is surprising that this unreal narrative finds this kind of distribution and editors repeat it indistinguishable. But you have to leave your mind running idle to realize that such statements are completely absurd.
Why did Hillary Clinton lose the election? Was it Moscow, which has ensured that a large part of the American middle class feels suspended and members of the political establishment no longer trust in the way? It was the Russians, who have failed to create in the “rust belt” of the USA, new Jobs, after the manufacturing industry is deducted in low-wage countries? It was Putin, has handed Wall Street the keys to the White house on a silver platter? Who declared Trumps electoral success of mono-causal with the leaked emails of his rival, is stupid – and who makes for then even Russia is responsible, is fool-hardy.
And the Brexit? Have Russian Facebook trolls fed the British the fairy tales of billions of euros that could be invested in the National Health System after leaving the EU? For decades, have RT editors written the headlines of the British press, with which the rejection of the EU has been rooted in the minds of the British? Was it Putin who first left eastern European migrant workers without conditions in the kingdom to make the day after mood against the free movement of workers? Sun, Mirror and Mail also belong to the Russian state media?
And how exactly does Putin manage to destabilize the EU? Is the EU’s commitment to market conformity a consequence of the influence of Russian-friendly parties? Has Putin forced Greece to starve its people in the debt crisis? Are the Black Zero, the Maastricht criteria, the debt brake and the resulting austerity policy an idea of Russian economists? Is it Moscow’s front-line organisations that have drawn any social component out of the nice and Lisbon treaties and ensure that the EU has dramatic democratic deficits?
Ironically, one could now say: if the Russians are such devilish guys who manage not only to manipulate the US elections, but also to force the entire west into a self-destructive doctrine, which has the stuff to decompose and destabilize the “best of all possible worlds” from within, then you should acknowledge this Husar piece in terms of PR. But-irony aside – the real question is rather: does anyone actually believe this nonsense?
Hold the thief!
Anyone who is seriously concerned with the subject, would also have to first check the basic assumption, which is in the narrative “of Russia’s supposed destabilization campaign”. Why should Russia be interested in destabilising Germany or the EU? Russia’s economy has a large interest in access to Western markets. For in the long term, acting as a mere supplier of raw materials and a sales market for China would be a nightmare for Russia. Of course, Russia also has foreign policy and security interests – not only in Europe. However, since the collapse of the Soviet Union at the latest, Russia is primarily concerned with defending regional hegemonic claims and obtaining security guarantees from the US empire, which is expanding into its own sphere of interests. For this reason alone, Russia has a great interest in continuity and stability.
Rather, the US and its junior partners of the “value world” have a great interest in destabilization. Since the collapse of the bipolar system in all parts of the world, who has undergone regime change and, with its foreign, security and intelligence policy, has plunged formerly stable states into Chaos? It was the Russians who left in the Middle East, the spirit of the Islamic fundamentalism out of the bottle? Has Russia made a power-political vacuum from the formerly stable Iraq without a UN mandate? Has Russia fired the Balkan wars and bombed a European Capital? Were it the Russians who were trying to push the Arab Spring and overthrow the government in Syria with arms violence?
The West paradoxically accuses Russia of exactly what it pre-exposes itself. However, what is almost spooky is that the supposedly oh so free and independent media can be clamped up for it. The “uncommented” printing of agency reports is part of this as well as the waiver of any critical requests. Instead, the same story as a Mantra is repeated over and over again – directly or indirectly by politicians, spread over the entire classical journalistic spectrum.
Moscow’s red servants
If criticism of the abuses is potentially destabilizing, and the destabilization of the West is the “strategic objective of Russia”, which has been defined by the “political leadership of Moscow”, running every critic, of course, also the risk of becoming a “stooge of Moscow” – we are “Moscow’s red servants, every word of us a shot in the heart of the free world”. This is especially true for the “left and right populists”, whose parties are already under general suspicion of being Russia’s puppets.
This resurrection of the McCarthy-Era is the brilliant core of the “destabilization campaign”. Especially in the left-liberal camp there has long been the panic fear of being attributed to a whatever kind of “transverse front”. Those who criticize the West’s maladministration – especially in the foreign and security policy spectrum - are even running the real risk very quickly, as “voice of Moscow” branded and thus – which is even worse for the participants-in the drawers “right-wing” and “cross-front” to be sorted. For left-liberal intellectuals and journalists, this can cause not only the end of the career, but also the material crash. Food first, then morality. And before you are put on compulsory diet, you prefer to prescribe an intellectual diet for yourself and consider this again with the “destabilizing critique”.
And if you look at the long list of facts that have de facto contributed to the fact that Clinton was not elected, the British have made their cross at leave and many EU citizens are now critical of the EU, the scope of the whole begins to be understood. Debates are channelled here with the utmost energy and great success. When was the last time you heard or read about the mistakes of the established politics that made the election success of Trumps possible? When was the last time we were talking about the causes of the yellow-West protests? When are the reasons for dissatisfaction with the EU? Instead, you only hear and read something about Russians and populists from right and left who want to manipulate and destabilize. So slowly, you will feel as if you woke up in an Orwellian dystopia, in the Newspeak and double-directed thinking. War is peace! Freedom is slavery! Ignorance is strength! Criticism is the destabilization!