Dmitry Babich, observer of the radio “Golos Rossii”, exclusively to Vestnik Kavkaza
When the Western countries begin seriously dealing with intervention into another independent state, the American and European mass media always discuss rapes and crimes against children in the enemy country. From this point of view mass accusations of the Syrian regime and President Bashar Assad by the Western media is the most dangerous sign.
Media managers’ invisible hand
It is a strange thing – in the USA, the UK, France and even Turkey the mass media seems to be free and independent from the government. Why does drama of such reports grow ahead of Western military interventions, which are usually prepared for months or years? The Western states and the “independent” media, the army and press are united in such situations. As if someone’s invisible hand gradually increases tension in the media space and provides awful pictures from Iraq ahead of the intervention in 1991 and 2003, from Yugoslavia in 1999, and other countries. It is an example of the almost totalitarian “self-regulation” of the Western society, where formally independent from each other state and social segments begin to work for a common result, after a decision is made by the top authorities.
From primitive thinking to cognitive mistakes
Neither Russia nor other countries of the former USSR have learned to work as softly and quietly as their Western partners. In our countries interparty fighting on military actions can lead to a serious conflict. In the USA the situation was different during the last wars, which almost always began after Congress’s agreement, according to decisions made by a narrow circle of people. That’s why the West, which has controlled democracy, can easily blame Russia and its neighbors for non-democracy.
To follow democracy and to gain liberalism
The result of lies in the news is "project lie" (artificially founded reasonless projects). In Egypt, the West wanted two opposite things from the new authorities– the West wanted the authorities to be both liberal and democratic. What does “be liberal” mean in the Western view? It means that the new authorities should give freedom to women, to establish in Egypt some “cutting-edge art”, to open its market to Western goods, breaking its own economy. At the same time the authorities should be democratic, i.e. the mentioned reforms should be provided through sincere love of people, stable popularity and fair elections.
At the same time, Syria, where the regime hasn’t done anything different from the actions of its Egyptian counterparts, is threatened by military intervention from the US. Where is the logic? It seems the logic is in demography: the Syrian population is a quarter that of the population of Egypt, and its geographical position is more important: close to important Iran, Turkey, Iraq.
Egypt’s tragedy is a lesson for the CIS
The Egyptian and Syrian stories are important lessons for the CIS. In Russia, Ukraine, Moldova and even Azerbaijan there are many young and old politicians who hope to appear in heaven following Western advice. The experience of the Middle East shows that the CIS countries should think for themselves. The West has no recipes for Russia and its neighbors. Of course they have some formally, but they are based on the mentioned combination of democracy and liberalism. In the former USSR this scheme doesn’t work.
In Russia the word “liberal” is associated with sad memories. For example, with “setting free” prices on products under Gaidar, with monetization of benefits under Kudrin, with electing Chubais the head of RAO UES, which was organized by the current leader of the fund of “Liberal Mission”, Yevgeny Yasin. Since 1993 liberals haven’t won any major elections in Russia. “In Russia you have to choose whether you are a liberal or a democrat,” the head of the Institute of Globalization and Social Movements Problems, Boris Kagarlitsky, concludes.
When will the West become smarter and stop insisting on a combination of liberalism and democracy? It seems the moment won’t come fast. Today none of the authors of the catastrophic American decisions on the Middle East have been called to account. It means there is no impetus to correct mistakes. Wait for new interventions.
