© AFP 2021 / Getty Images North America / Spencer Platt /
The anti-Russian campaign has sharply intensified in the Western media. Here are just a few examples of the topics of recent publications:
Russia supports Catalan separatism in Spain;
The USA found the very same Russian “hacker” who interfered in the 2016 American elections;
Russia exchanged its vaccine for classified information about the explosions of military warehouses in the Czech Republic;
Dutch police already know from which Russian city the missile that shot down Flight MH17 was sent;
Russia sends migrants to Europe via Belarus.
Again, this is not a complete list of accusations against the Russian state, which have been voiced directly or indirectly only in the past few days in various Western media.
And it seems that we have already heard all this many times. Since 2014, the charges have been put on stream, and only after the “poisoning of the Skripals” and the American saga called “Russiagate” this very stream has become endless. However, after the new administration in the United States came to power, the accusations against Russia, if not abated, then in any case began to be thinned out by more calm materials.
There were even calls not to rush into groundless insinuations, as was the case with the fake that Russia allegedly offered the Taliban * a reward for the heads of the American military. Remember, the White House called these charges “shaky.” As if before that this circumstance kept America from sanctions against Russia.
It got to the point that the flagship of the Russophobic information war, the New York Times, through the lips of its columnists, in June this year stated “the strange death of liberal Russophobia”, calling the hysteria towards our country “paranoia” and “an overly acute reaction of the establishment.” Let us emphasize that this statement appeared on the pages of a newspaper that regularly received Pulitzer Prizes for anti-Russian information campaigns.
And this same newspaper launched a new wave of the same campaign, publishing its exclusive about “married Kremlin spies” who almost stand behind Catalan separatism. Referring to some “confidential documents of the investigation” (of course, without specifying a specific source), the newspaper claims that in 2019 the adviser to the leader of the Catalan separatists Carles Puigdemont, Professor Josep Lewis Alay made several trips to Moscow in order to enlist support. The most surprising thing: judging by the article, he did not receive any support. That does not prevent the newspaper from accusing Russia of interference.
Moreover, the author of the “investigation” admits that the leaders of the Catalan separatists traveled a lot in Europe. We must not forget that since 2017, Puigdemont has been hiding from political reprisals in the very heart of Europe – in Belgium. And more than once he traveled to various European countries. But the NYT argues that the Catalans did not receive support in Europe, unlike Russia, where they met with sympathy and understanding.
Meanwhile, if we talk about direct support of Catalonia’s movement towards secession from Spain, then we should rather blame the leadership of Scotland. It is the Scottish National Party and its activists, including members of the British and European parliaments, who openly support the separatists of Barcelona. All that remains is to await accusations that the Scots are doing it at the direction of the Kremlin.
Literally the next day after this article, the British newspaper The Times took up the baton of the New York Times and published its “exclusive”. It seems that the topic of the article is completely different – it is about the Russian businessman Vladislav Klyushin, who was arrested in Switzerland in the spring, and whom the United States is trying to get on allegedly on charges of trading insider information, that is, industrial espionage. At the same time, the material was compiled according to absolutely the same patterns as the “Catalan” article of the Americans: also with reference to a copy of some documents of the investigation (of course, without specifying the source) and also – in the style of “highley like” – with accusations against Russia, but this time in the interference in the American elections – 2016. We haven’t been accused of this for a long time, have we?
According to sources from The Times, the American special services are using a far-fetched pretext in order to bring the arrested businessman to the United States, where they intend to accuse him of infiltrating (of course, under the leadership of the Russian GRU – how could it be without it!) Into the network of the Democratic Party headquarters. Since Switzerland has laws prohibiting the extradition of people for political reasons, Washington just concocted a business crime story. The latter is believed – quite in the style of ridiculous accusations of “sexual harassment” against Julian Assange, fabricated solely in order to take him out of Britain to Sweden, where it would be easier for America to get a political opponent.
There is no doubt that the Americans hope to get from Klyushin the desired testimony against Russia. Let us recall, for example, how in 2018 they knocked out “recognition” in work for the Russian state from Maria Butina. In her book Prison Diary, published last year, she described the choice faced by her American investigators: “I already knew that I had no choice: either I sign a document composed by the prosecutor’s office, or the next time I’ll see my parents in 15 years “. Apparently, such a “choice” is being prepared for Klyushin in the event of his extradition to the United States. And again it will be possible to blame Russia for all mortal sins. After all, the principle of “recognition is the queen of proof”, which the West is so fond of ascribing to the Stalinist era, has long been the basic rule of American jurisprudence.
And not only American. Notice how the MH17 court show in the Netherlands is evolving (it resumed this week after the summer break, moving to the most emotional stage – the performances of the relatives of the victims of the Boeing crash). We have seen how the accusations against the four assigned defendants are based on the testimony of anonymous witnesses, whose identities and veracity cannot be verified. But the investigation was initially working on the “only correct” version related to the accusation against Russia. Therefore, it is not surprising that now, just before the resumption of the work of the Hague District Court, the Dutch police have turned to the Russian military and residents of Kursk (the Dutch already know where the notorious Buk was delivered to Donbass from) with an appeal to give them information about the missile.
Moreover, the police once again guarantee the anonymity of “witnesses”, urging them to use secure messengers for communication. And this means that further in the next act of the court show we will again hear the testimony of some “witness M58” about the “Russian accent of the Russian language” or a heartbreaking story about the flight from Russia of “valuable witnesses”, whose “FSB agents” killed a cat …
By the way, the author of this funny story is the Dutch journalist Haub Modderkolk, whose fakes have already been repeatedly pointed out by the Russian Foreign Ministry, last week published his English-language book, which also contains a lot of stamped accusations against Russia MH17, and hacking, and the same Catalans). All accusations, as usual, are based on “anonymous sources”, but at the same time the author openly admits that the Dutch special services, in cooperation with the CIA, infiltrated the hotel rooms in order to break into the laptops of Russian employees of Kaspersky Lab, that is, they were engaged in the same industrial espionage, in which the Americans accuse Klyushin. It also proudly describes the routine operations of the Dutch intelligence service to hack into Russian state institutions and even educational institutions. That is, it turns out to be a normal practice that the Dutchman admires. They can – we can’t.
It makes no sense to analyze each separate accusation against Russia. Some of them (as with the summons of the Czech Interior Minister Jan Hamacek for questioning to the police about his canceled trip to Moscow) are completely ridiculous and not subject to serious analysis. But it is worth paying attention to the fact that after the “strange death of liberal Russophobia” it is again experiencing a renaissance.
* Terrorist organization banned in Russia.
Subscribe to us