Obama Continues Psyop Against Russia, Threatens China, in Interview with The Economist

Well, look, there’s no doubt that a robust, interventionist foreign policy on behalf of certain principles, ideals or international rules is not a tradition that most countries embrace. And in the 20th century and in the early stages of the 21st century, the United States continues to be the one indispensable power that is willing to spend blood and treasure on that.  
Barack Obama in Interview with The Economist.

On the eve of Obama’s meeting with African politicians, he gave an interview with obsequious editors and reporters from The Economist.  He used it to attack Russia and Putin once again.  The objective was clear:  To dismiss Russia as weak and irrelevant and so to drive other countries away from it, including China and the EU.

But Obama’s effort was quite strange.  Like the entire U.S. anti-Ukraine, anti-Russian effort, it seemed to have little relationship to the truth.   To the very anti-Putin interviewers he feigned dismissiveness of Russia.  (If he was not lying and believes this stuff, we are really in deep trouble, because his ignorance could well reap the whirlwind for the human race.)  Among other things he claimed that: “Russia doesn’t make anything. Immigrants aren’t rushing to Moscow in search of opportunity. … The population is shrinking.” A few graphs will make clear that this is way off the mark.   The implication is that Russia is failing economically.  So let us look at Russia’s GDP, especially under Putin.  We can see it at a glance here:

It is clear that the period of the drunkard Yeltsin, so cherished in the West, was a disaster for Russia and that Putin reversed it.  Russia’s growth continues, interrupted only by the global financial disaster made in the good ol’ USA on Wall St where so many of Obama’s backers reside.  (Should we call them the Wall St. oligarchs?) So much for general economic well being.  How about “making things” as Obama put it?  That is a very non-technical and imprecise way of speaking, surely no accident for President Teleprompter.  Thus it is subject to much interpretation, backtracking and denial if need be?   But how about the more technical term “industrial output”?  How has Putin’s Russia fared in this regard.  Quite well as can be seen here which depicts Year on Year (YoY) Industrial Growth:

Now what about population?  Indeed population did fall as the U.S. preyed on Russia after the crackup of the Soviet Union.   But it has now stabilized and even ticked up a bit as can be read here and seen in the graph here. (Sorry, dear readers, but you must go to link to the graphic which mightily resisted my attempts to copy it so that it would appear right before your eyes.) The population situation is summed up thus, wherein Obama’s other claim in his  interview that there is no immigration into Russia is debunked:

The population hit a historic peak at 148,689,000 in 1991, just before the breakup of the Soviet Union, but then began a decade-long decline, falling at a rate of about 0.5% per year due to declining birth rates, rising death rates and emigration.[9]  The decline slowed considerably in the late 2000s, and in 2009 Russia recorded population growth for the first time in 15 years, adding 23,300 people.[10][11] Key reasons for the slow current population growth are improving health care, changing fertility patterns among younger women, falling emigration and steady influx of immigrants from the ex-USSR countries. In 2012, Russia’s population increased by 292,400 people.[12]  As of 2013, Russian TFR of 1.707 children per woman[5] was the highest in Eastern, Southern and Central Europe. In 2013, Russia experienced the first natural population growth since 1990 at 22,700 people. Taking into account immigration, the population grew by 294,500 people.[13]   (Emphasis, jw)

Again one has to worry about Obama’s notions.  If he is so out of touch with reality in that famous bubble of his, we are in deep trouble.  And if he is simply lying, then we have to worry that the U.S. elite feels so contemptuous of the people of the world.  Either way, the imperial elite may be led to miscalculate badly about its actions, a potential threat to our survival.

But Obama did not stop at trashing Russia.  As a follow-up he had a few words of warning to China where the tone of dismissal was replaced by condescension and threat.  Here is that part of the interview:

The Economist: Because that is the key issue, whether China ends up inside that system or challenging it. That’s the really big issue of our times, I think.

Mr Obama: It is. …..One thing I will say about China, though, is you also have to be pretty firm with them, because they will push as hard as they can until they meet resistance. They’re not sentimental, and they are not interested in abstractions. And so simple appeals to international norms are insufficient. There have to be mechanisms both to be tough with them when we think that they’re breaching international norms, but also to show them the potential benefits over the long term.  And what is true for China then becomes an analogy for many of the other emerging markets.  (That means you BRICS. jw)

Watch out China.  The message is that the U.S. will use the stick and the carrot to keep you in your place. The message is that you better obey and fit into the “international system” in the way prescribed by President Wall St.  And do not look to Russia if you decide to be disobedient – it is a basket case in the distorted world view of Obama.  And in case there is any doubt about the big plan for the21st Century, Obama tells us plainly what it is:

Mr Obama: Well, look, there’s no doubt that a robust, interventionist foreign policy on behalf of certain principles, ideals or international rules is not a tradition that most countries embrace. And in the 20th century and in the early stages of the 21st century, the United States continues to be the one indispensable power that is willing to spend blood and treasure on that.

“Blood and treasure.”  Got that.  Bribes when they work and war when they do not.  This is the world that the U.S. elite has planned for us all.  Is it one that we want? Is it one that humanity can live with? Is it even compatible with humanity’s survival?

NOTE.  As I finished up this piece, RT.com published a corrective on Obama’s warped view of Russia here.  The headlines read:
“Russia doesn’t make anything” – WRONG
“Immigrants aren’t rushing to Moscow” – WRONG
“Life expectancy around 60 years old” – WRONG

We are not supposed to read RT.com here in the West.  It is considered unfashionable or naive at best and downright subversive at worst.  But, dear reader, should we not read compare to the Western outlets and decide for ourselves who is telling the truth?

John V. Walsh can be reached at John.Endwar@gmail.com He writes for Antiwar.com, CounterPunch.com and The Unz Review.

40 thoughts on “Obama Continues Psyop Against Russia, Threatens China, in Interview with The Economist

  1. "It is clear that the period of the drunkard Yeltsin, so cherished in the West, was a disaster for Russia and that Putin reversed it. Russia’s growth continues …"

    A few word of caution on that:

    1) GDP is "make up statistics" at the best of times, in particular because it includes what goes on the state's credit card (one of the major problems of the book "Soviet Fates and Lost Alternatives" by Stephen Cohen btw, in which the statement is made that "GDP of the Soviet was not so bad" … you don't say?)
    2) It is unclear whether Yeltsin is a causal factor here; a change to a more-market-oriented economy from the utter dumps of centralized control, even if the new economy is kleptocratically inclined, takes a few years.
    3) It is unclear what the future will actually bring. Good old Putin is promising far too much Soviet-style "industrial policy", the worst of this being splurging on military toys that Russia can ill-afford. 30 billion have been "lost" at Sochi. This is not chump change. Demographics are not good, and further regional wars may drain manpower and coffers. Regime uncertainty, repression by the taxman and an authoritarian atmosphere are not conductive to liberal economic development. What will happen if Putin passes on the scepter as he invariably must?
    4) A recession seems to be in the offing in any case: http://bastiat.mises.org/2014/04/7984/ "Economic Sanctions Not Key Cause of Russia’s Possible Recession"

    We shall see….

    PS. The push to Africa. Directly from Reuters:

    The top U.S. diplomat for Africa, Linda Thomas-Greenfield bridles at suggestions that the Obama administration is playing catch-up [with China]. "Absolutely not," she said.

    "Our relationship with Africa is a very strong historic relationship … We see this as an opportunity to reaffirm that to African leaders," she said in a pre-summit conference call.

    I guess transforming the Congo into a charnel house by having the CIA pay Mobutu to cave the head of the elected Lumumba in counts as a "historic relationship" indeed.

    1. Unfortunately, this fellow is not citing any real facts. Any data shown that shows something favorable about Russia has to be false or irrelevant in his view. And anything good about Russia is bound to go bad soon in his view. It seems that we are dealing with someone who will not let facts get in the way of his opinions.
      More interesting is that he recognizes US neocolonialism and the evils it has wrought. But that is entirely permissible among the US critics of "our" government. What they will not permit themselves to think is that a major official enemy can be less evil than the US – or even a force for the advancement of humanity. Those ideological blinders are to be kept on at all costs. To take them off is to cause oneself some real problems.

    2. The four points you make about the Russian economy may be spot on but, except for the Yeltsin defense they also apply equally to the Good Ol' U S of A., if not more so.

    3. This conflict was started entirely by Washington, and sanctions/war with Russia is going to be the excuse when the US economy inevitably collapses.

    4. The most important characteristic of the Russians that seems lost on Obama has nothing to do with their industrial production, their GDP or their population growth rate. It has to do with their courage.

      As a people, THEY'RE NOT AFRAID OF US IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM. One need know only a few Russians to be convinced of this.

      And, here's the kicker…unlike Iraq, they really do have weapons of mass destruction, our destruction.


      1. You are the biggest buffon…..how do you live with yourself everyday without committing suicide?

  2. This is just sour grapes by Obama. He's frustrated his pathetic attempts to bully Russia with economic warfare are not having much of an impact. He's afraid of China's rise as an economic power. Statements like these just make him look weak and bolster the US's image as a declining power.

  3. Like most Americans, I started off my young life a devout believer in the propaganda indoctrination we call education. Now that I'm old, I'm simply sickened by America. Our words are absolutely meaningless, we haven't any ethics and signing an agreement with us is to be betrayed. As we slide into oblivion, all we have left is bluster and our sad, consistent resort to killing. Like many old vets, I find nothing in America I can relate to. Obama is simply the last in a long line of liars. I was for him initially but quickly saw I was, once again, taken in.

  4. What a joke and a case of projection. The US relies on Russian-made rockets to launch satellites. US exports are dominated by (heavily subsidized) weapons and agriculture as well as (intangible) entertainment.

    1. Why in Haruhi's holy name are the plutocrats of the West trying to provoke the country on which they depend for launching the satellites on which much of the modern economy depends?

  5. Not a peep about MH17 after Russia released all its satellite date and encouraged the US to do the same.
    It's been that way for days.

  6. As for Africa, yes, the US is playing "catch-up" with the Chinese. Why? Because the Chinese have had the sense to just buy raw materials or just bribe the right folks to get what they want. They've had the long view to not try and get what they want by militarization.

    This is a question I've had since I first heard, "hey, hey, ho, ho, we won't fight for Texaco" chanted during Viet Nam protests. Why must the US, the world's largest customer for petroleum products, send in troops to "guarantee the supply lines". Basic econ sez the best customers get the best deals…ooops…I forgot, the US hasn't tried free market economics since Lincoln…Mercantilism Uber Allis.

    1. No one in this world in their sane mind would trust USG, which is the reason for Russia and China having a mutual and trustworthy cultural, economic and political relations with rest if the wired.

      USG wants to destroy, that's in their blood no matter who is the presudent and that's because USG is a military regime, such thing as democracy doesn't exits in America.

  7. The world is crazy. Why succes of other countries does so upset USA and Obama ? For years Russia was naively thinking that she can trust USA ,Europ and Nato. Facts have proven the contrary.Obama is obsessed by Putin.I am sure, he dreams of Putin.Today we can even say that he has creates the present Putin by trying constantly to push him in the corner. If Yatseniuk did not shout that he will replace russian military bases by nato one, we would certainly have avoided Crimea annexion and support of Russia to the separatists. It is a question of geopolitics.
    If Obama is so peace minded why don ' t he help refugees of Donetsks region? His services are constantly trying to find something wrong in Russia and Putin. Even we can dislike annexion of Crimea by Russia -via refendum that western countries does not support- we can say that all the sanctions invented should be qualified as wishfull misconduct.-which is usually prohibited by national law.
    Some names in the "lists" should not be there (a journalist, a lady in charge of children questions, …).How can these persons defend themselves of an angry Obama ?
    It is also interesting to note a very big difference with the period of cold war : the reason of confrontation was the hate of communism. Now it is a hate of Russia and their cultural values.And here,we are not far from racism.

  8. Barack Hussein Obama is a politician from 1960/80s, he still believes that workd needs to follow the idea in American example of democracy before it can become a developed and progress in bothe aspects of political and social economic development.

    Obama he is the man from past who still believe that US Democratic Party and its domestic and forgen policies are based on the democratic principals while he develops NSA and making sure that us is a police stats.

    Obama ideas in democracy is from the past when the us Democratic Party could produce some politicians whom were not effected nor they were bribed by AIPAC/Zionism/vulture capitalism.

    Obama is the man from when USG hasn't become a militarism regime as us is today, a system which has changed its direct actions with drone killings and creation of religious fascist regimes as ISIS.

    Barack Hussein Obama and his democratically approach is falsified as when Bill Clinton fooled American people by lying to them about the closer of us army bases in us while importing solders to Europe in time of starting the Balkan and dividing Yugoslavia.

    Barack Hussein Obama saying that "USA is a indispensable power that willing to spend blood and treasure on that". Which he is refering to Geirge W. Bush or Bill Clinton regimes without using these words, the qyestion is who's blood dose and dies he talking about, America blood and treasure? The answer is NO. He has created ISIS where Saudis/Wahhabis and UAE in general are paying the costs, at the same time USG is the most dishonest government there is which therefore most of African and other nations are very cautious when they deal with USG, in the contrary, Russia and China have mutual beneficial economic, cultural and political relations with many nations, so, it is obvious that USG is way behind and have found itself cornered in political, cultural and economical terms thinking that Russia and China providing the grounds for USA to be left behind, hence, not willing to respect nations integrity and sovergnity over its militarism approaches Barack Hussein Obama thinking as politicians in 1960/80s that all and every governments in this world are communist and communist needs to be demolished, therefore, USG is hiring zionists as Berzinski, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perl, Victoria Nuland and others to assist the USG with ideas that are destructive and harms USA, the latest is Ukraine and the creation of ISIS which started in Syria.

    Look: the functioning democracy is based on social economic and political justice, you want to call it socialism be my guest.

    Just social economic means for people to have a long lasting jobs, free health care syste, free education and not creating or being at war with every presidents, you want call that socialism be my guest.

    If Barack Hussein Obama and rest of the far right politicians who call themselves "democrats" understood this, they wouldn't think that world is a flat and they wouldn't think that all is about America and that world is created for America. German fascism, Hitlerism was thinking the same, Roman Empire was thinking the same. Yet, this is 2014, the twentieth century there is not a place for ISIS, caliphate regimes nor there is a place for Neo fascism. If only they could understand that the world needs to develop with or without Barack Hussein Obama or us Democratic Party.

  9. Obama is whistling as he passes the graveyard.

    China is being successful because it prefers to trade with the rest of the world. The US is failing because it prefers to bomb the rest of the world.

    China is seeks to make friends. The US seems more interested in making enemies.

  10. The American people are just starting to experience the full effect of Zionist control over their government and financial system.

  11. Obama needs to just quit trying to outflank Putin and realize he's out of his element when dealing with old-school Russian politicians. For Obama's sake, I shudder to think if Putin was at the helm of a fully reconstituted and fully rearmed modern version of the Soviet Union- old Barry would be on the receiving end of some 'wall-to-wall counseling' as we called it in the Marines. It's pretty sad that I find myself giving the Russian President a much higher approval rating than the US President.

  12. Name one product Russians make that you would like to have?

    Drop the price of oil and other natural resources and Russia will be right there where drunken Jeltzin left off ….

  13. Appreciate it for this pleasant info , i wanted to share this along with my friends . Total agree to your Post , I think its crucial that you clearly show the almost all level while submitting . Please continue updating a web-site .

  14. Thank you for making the honest effort to discuss this. I feel very strong about it and want to learn more. It could be extremely useful and helpful for me and my friends. rebelmouse

  15. I have visited to this site multiple times and everytime I find beneficial jobs for me so I would suggest please come to this site and take the chance from here.visit site

  16. On daily basis you lose water by means of your breath, perspiration, urine and bowel actions. On your body to function correctly, you must replenish its water supply by consuming drinks and foods that include water. Substitute: The typical urine output for adults is 1.5 liters a day. Failing to absorb extra water than your body uses can lead to dehydration. http://aultphoto.org/

Comments are closed.