A notable rant – but what does it say?July 9, 2014
For many readers of a certain age, the blame and accusation game between Moscow and Washington is nothing new.
According to this rambling interview primarily targeted against the SBU (Ukrainian security services) by advisor to President Putin, Sergei Glazyev, he infers that as Ukraine has ceased to be a Kremlin controlled puppet, it must now, by default, be a Washington controlled puppet – and by extension the SBU are now a Washington tool.
There is simply no contemplation of the possibility that Ukraine may now be entirely responsible for its own actions and decisions, be they good, bad or indifferent, to the annoyance of both Kremlin and Washington now and in the future.
Clearly from the viewpoint of Mr Glazyev, if The Kremlin isn’t leading Kyiv by the hand, then Washington must be. Ergo Ukraine has never been and remains simply incapable of leading itself.
One wonders whether The Kremlin will distance itself from the ranting statements in the linked article above, as it did when Sergei Glazyev called President Poroshenko a “Nazi” on 27th June, a statement that forced President Putin’s Press Spokesman Dmitry Peskov to state “Glazyev’s statements do not reflect the official point of view.”
That said, unusually, Mr Glazyev’s RAI Novesti interview appears only in Russian thus far – and not as yet in English as well, as historically would have been the normative. This then raises the question as to which audience this interview was aimed at – or perhaps what his message is?
Clearly it is not for “western” audiences of which only a tiny percentage understand Russian.
Rather than the occasional clever propaganda piece based on half-truths and subsequent manipulation of which it is capable and would gain more traction, The Kremlin propaganda machine seemingly works on a very Stalinist mindset of “Quantity has a quality of its own” – if indeed that quote is correctly attributed to Joseph Stalin. The vast majority of the domestic Ukrainian audience has long since tired of Kremlin rhetoric that is time and again proven to be entirely false propaganda. Perhaps quality over quantity would have been a better decision.
Therefore the interview seems to be predominantly aimed at the Russian domestic audience who are now very accustomed to such narratives – and yet perhaps it subliminally conveys a far more important message. That message being, that the Kremlin is starting to lose its control and influence over, and within, the Ukrainian SBU.
If that be so, then it is indeed a notable interview.