In an impassioned editorial, Alexander Grishin unlocks the history of what he sees as repeated American lying as regards Syria and chemical weapons.
Corporation of Lies: Washington, Pennsylvania Avenue
Sometimes, from behind American politicians’ veil of lies the truth erupts – and it is even uglier.
Over the past few days, the feeling that Washington has become a world centre of lies, distortions and something even worse has only become strengthened. Moreover, in the U.S. capital representatives from almost all branches of government are lying: politicians, ministers, diplomats, etc.
Here, for example, is the lovely story about the launching towards the east of two missiles from the waters of the Mediterranean Sea. Remember, the Pentagon, almost crossing its heart, tried to persuade everyone that it had no hand in the matter. And then it turned out that it was supposedly a joint missile defence system test, carried out by the U.S.A. and Israel. Let us leave aside the fact that in the busy shipping lanes of the Mediterranean all countries are notified in advance about such exercises and that only a stupid person (or an agent provocateur) would carry out such launchings near a potential war zone. Everyone knows that. But there was a four-hour silence and fuzzy negative responses that were eloquent in themselves. Well, they did not know that we were able to see them and track them. They say that all Russian equipment is rusty, cannot fly and cannot shoot. And then suddenly – bang! The early detection system detected the launch from start to finish. They did not count on that. Imagine how the phones were heating up (figuratively speaking) in Washington DC and its environs, as well as those of the Israeli Foreign Ministry and the General Staff of the Israeli armed forces, as they sought a way to get out of the scandal that they themselves had created.
“The Russians? Spotted? That can’t be?”
“It turns out that it can, sir. What are we going to say, sir?”
As a result, they told half-truths: they acknowledged the launches and gave a muddled explanation about some missile tests.
Vladimir Putin, of course, did not call the U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry, a liar outright: that is not permissible at their level diplomacy. However, Putin described quite clearly the statements of the head of American diplomacy: “Well, he’s lying and knows he is, which is sad.”
At a hearing on Syria, a congressman simply asked Mr. Kerry if U.S. attacks against that country would lead to a strengthening of Al Qaeda’s position. Whereupon, glancing at him with his noble, grey and honest eyes, Kerry said, “No, and we say with all responsibility that they are not there.”
“The most basic combat unit is the so-called al-Nusra, a division of al -Qaeda. They know of this”, the Russian president has said, revealing the American diplomat’s lies. And he has explained why he finds this unpleasant. “It was not very pleasant for me to hear this and so it is no surprise that we do not engage with them. We used to act on the premise that they were decent people. Well, he’s lying and knows he is, which is sad.”
The most interesting thing is that Kerry has not said anything in response to this criticism: he just quietly decided not to fly to the St. Petersburg G20 summit, even though the day before he was going to do this.
Only do not say that Americans pay no attention to such “unimportant matters”, that they are supposed to be above that etc: they do, and how! At the same meeting the Secretary of Defence, Chuck Hagel, got carried away in his home country by his very unhealthy fantasies when answering the question “Where did Damascus get its chemical weapons from?” He stated: “Russia supplied them. Others supplied chemical weapons to the Syrian regime as well. Some things they do themselves.” But as soon as surprised raised eyebrows appeared from the Russian side, the Pentagon immediately and officially apologized on behalf of its chief, explaining that Hagel had meant “conventional weapons “. What is most interesting is that most of the questions posed by members of the U.S. Congress were answered by the formidable Chuck with an air of “I’ve no idea” or “this has nothing to do with me”.
Kerry tells the whole world that there is evidence of Assad’s use of chemical weapons, but does not produce one bit of evidence that would give cause for him to be believed. He has not even presented one test-tube of the stuff, as did Powell before the Iraq invasion. The Russian Foreign Ministry has published the results of an investigation undertaken by a United Nations certified laboratory into the use of these weapons of mass destruction in Syria. Its conclusions are watertight: the explosive material used and the poison itself (sarin) was homemade, using substances employed by Western countries for the production of chemical weapons during the Second World War. (British parliamentarians, by the way, are now demanding answers from their government into why it has delivered to Syria materials suitable for the production of sarin.) Kerry, however, asks the world to simply accept that “the evidence is there, and there’s plenty of it”.
Washington is lying when it says it was interested in a peaceful resolution of the problem. Deputies of the Russian State Duma and Federation Council had just started to form a parliamentary delegation to discuss the situation in Syria with their U.S. counterparts when John Boehner, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, said that he would not be meeting the Russian parliamentarians. And it is against such a background that in Washington they talk about their welcoming any initiatives. Many other congressmen have refused to meet and to have discussions on this topic. People who are confident that they are in the right and about their integrity do not behave like that.
American politicians are lying not only worldwide, but also to the United States. The same Chuck Hagel, apparently while still in Fantasyland, told congressmen that the operation against Syria would be a low-cost one: “To all intents and purposes, the cost of the operation will be in the range of tens of millions of dollars.” The upkeep of each USN aircraft carrier costs Americans approximately $160 million per year. Off the coast of Syria there are now two such ships, each of which even in peacetime require $26 million a month. Two months (a 60- day campaign is being talked about) would cost $52 million. And do not forget that when undertaking military operations this figure can easily increase twofold, if not threefold. And each aircraft carrier requires another group of support ships and escorts etc., which under the most favorable scenario would cost another $100 million.
Let’s move on. If there is going to be an American attack against Syria, it will be carried out mainly by Tomahawks and precision bombs. The cost of one Tomahawk is $1.5 million. During the 78-day air war against Yugoslavia, the Americans and British used about 700 Tomahawks. Only during the first week of operations in Libya, the U.S. and its allies launched against air defence and other important targets in that country 199 cruise missiles, 192 of them fired by the Americans. So, gentlemen, you will have to fork out a billion at the very least. And if your aeroplanes do not return to their bases and aircraft carriers, or something happens to your ships, a second billion will go – and even more.
However, the financial aspects of the war will not cause the Obama administration any concern, as a generous sponsor has been found: Those sympathizers of democracy, the Arab monarchies. Probably one of the few truthful phrases sounded from the lips of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry were heard in those same hearings.
“Actually, some of them have said that if the U.S. is ready to do all that we have done before in other countries, then they will cover these costs (themselves – Ed.)” Saying this did not even embarrass Kerry, though he did not specifically name the sponsors – that was not part of the plans, and no one speaks of it, but they are seriously talking about it.
That’s what I believe. So, as Gleb Zheglov {Translator’s note: Popular fictitious Russian detective} said: “He’s only interested in one thing: money.” Just what does that mean, comrade citizens? Does it mean that you can simply pay the US army, the United States itself, to fight a war for you as a common mercenary? It reminds me of what Winston Churchill wrote about the inhabitants of the Arabian Peninsula: “An Arab can’t be bought, but you can hire him.” Since then, the situation has changed: now it seems that the Arabs are hiring Americans at a reasonable price. Washington, as before, still has inflated cheeks as it tries to blow out the whole world. However, the customers of the music that is often performed on Capitol Hill and on Pennsylvania Avenue are sitting at their oases on the other side of the ocean. That may explain the fact that in some countries the United States is at war with “Al- Qaeda “, whilst in neighbouring places it is arming them and even seeking to kill their enemies. It remains open to question whether the U.S. military will deliver the pizza to the house hot, and for some reason it seems that the answer to this question depends on the amount of payment it receives for its services.
They say that Barack Obama will soon deliver an address to the American people. I have no doubt that he, with trustful eyes, will make a broadcast about democratic values and the right to liberty and the fight against tyranny; nor do I doubt the fact that most of what he utters will turn out to be mendacious. These things do not matter, because Washington, still intoxicated with its victory over the Soviet Union, considers all things said by him as verities, without noticing that he has become a corporation, the main product of which is, to some extent, a barefaced lie that few people believe.
P.S. And yes, the last thing that Mr. Obama desires is that in no event should a strike be made against Syria on September 11, otherwise it might, you know, give rise, to it being mistakenly associated with something.
