In further news the ‘US Perspectives on the War in Ukraine - Policy Choices, Political Debates and Public Attitudes’ panel by Presseclub Concordia is now online.
GMF delivers.
edit: Little nugget of information from the talk: Selenskyj has two American PR firms advising him “on how to do this” (get a great standing in terms of public opinion, in the US and around the world).
edit2: Its worth the watch. If only to see two people dance around a public polling person from the GMF that never has heard in his life, that US foreign policy is a bipartisan affair, where the public has exactly zero pull (Vietnam aside), and holds a 20 minutes presentation for no f*cking reason, because public polling (in the US) is the wrong tool for understanding the crisis. The other guy gives a baseline description on everything thats going on in US foreign policy from a power brokers angle - and gets it pretty right (imho), which is amazing in itself, because thats one of the perspectives lacking from public discourse for F*CKING three months by now.
No f*cking journalist in Austria would be caught dead, filing anything of the sort. So, worth watching.
Oh, Highlights? Aside from the Selenskyj uses two prominent USPR agencies to write his scripts? Ehm. How about “the Ukraine has to decide is bullsh*t” (probably different phrasing used in the video)?
People arent bouncing off each other, or even reacting to each other.
Half of the panel gets trapped in “if I say something with big feels, an internally coherent argument will follow”.
More than half of the panel is optimizing for social media likes, in a format, where there are no social media likes.
A panelist suggests, that maybe this is all about entertainment. More entertainment.
No one has any idea how to address the public, because, everyone would still very much like to feed it PR, and then not deal with it.
A few people don’t seem to know what the Montan Union was about.
People are still captured by the question, if the EU should build train tracks to get the grain out of Ukraine. Here is what Putin is probably telling the southern hemisphere where you are loosing your “war for the hearts and minds of people”.
“We opened harbors for them, they are not using them. We’d probably steal 20% of the grain Ukraine wants to ship through our facilities, but thats food that you are still getting. At a good price. We currently need the currency. When we are capturing land, we are sending you the food we captured. The europeans call that stealing. Ukraine will loose the capacity to produce as much grain in the following years, we will not. Russia and China can provide you with fertilizer next year, Europa can not. The US wont care to.
Then President Charles Michel holds a 20 minute speech on who seamined Odessa. To which the response diplomatically will be:
Yes. If they demine it, we would have to give up the city in the middle of a war and gift them a trade route (equipment goes in). Do you think thats a likely solution to your problem? How about some of our grain and more fertilizer next year?”
Here is what Europe is doing:
“We have no gas, we have no copper, we have no nickel, how about we build an infrastructure to get last years grain out of the Ukraine now?”
I hope this is just an effing PR mess (After all, it’s just the Erste Foundation…), and not a reflection of the state we are in right now. Oh god, I sincerely hope so…
(At least some of the questions/statements are decent.)
edit: Russias official stance on grain exports from Ukraine isnt so far removed from my ramblings.. 😉 Apart from the Ukraine itself currently not wanting to demine Odessa.
edit2: Turns out the most coherent voice in the “debate” was briefed. As in represented Carnegie Europe, not just her personal output/opinions. Oh well… Good to know that at Carnegie Europe some people are still asking relevant questions, I guess.
Putin is not attacking the Ukraine to colonize its land, or to get ressources, or to get a bufferzone against Nato, or to keep russias iceless black sea trading routes open for more than 10 years (when Ukraine would have tried to reintegrate Crimea), or to get back a form of soviet union, no - russia is making sure the conflict lasts, so more refugees have to flee to russia, which then means, that when they move towards family reunification Putin gets probably one third more people than those who fled, because of family reunification!
Because his intentions are to prevent a demographic collapse! But this is something we havent started to talk about in the west.
Ok, ok, new question!
So Europe is making the conflict last to get more than half of those refugees (Russia maybe gets a tenth? edit: A fifth.), which then means, that when they move towards family reunification, Europe can prevent demographic collapse?
Oh boy, oh boy, I love this new media reality, where Putin needs to become a rational actor, so the fear of an escalation towards nuclear war goes away. 🙂
Wen aus der von Rauscher empfohlenen Runde hatten wir jetzt eigentlich noch nicht? Timothy Snyder lässt sich von der Victor Pinchuk Foundation zum Business Frühstück einladen, sagt dort “ich bin ein Freund der Ukraine” sitzt neben Kuleba, und spult das selbe Statement, mit dem selben ukrainischen Einstieg wortwörtlich runter, mit dem er zuvor (etwas mehr als eine Woche davor) in der Victor Pinchuk Foundation auf sich aufmerksam gemacht hat. Das qualifiziert ihn dann auch dazu der einzige Geschichtswissenschaftler (*hust*) zu sein, den auch ukrainische Flüchtlinge bei Monitor kennen, denn Zitat “der hat gesagt was mir gefällt” (eigentlich “doch, doch, das sagen jetzt auch Leute, der Snyder hat das gesagt”), Fiona Hill, mit ihrer vier Stein-Statuen Theorie wie Putin wirklich denkt (!), und ihrer klaren Differenzierung, dass “Novorussia (in russischen Schulen gelehrtes russisches Geschichtsverständnis) referenzieren” noch der verrückte, Covid Isolations Putin ist, der komplett irrational handelt, aber “RUS durch den Patriachen der russisch orthodoxen Kirche propagieren”, bereits der berechnende Putin mit contingency planning (in petto) ist, und Krastev bei Precht, der im Argument die Filtrationscamps nicht bedacht hat, oder runterspielt?
Dh. die sind jetzt garnicht so schlimm? Denn Russland möchte mehr Flüchtlinge im Inland? Die dann ihre Männer heimholen? Und zerstört deshalb komplette Infrastruktur im Osten? Die es nach Snyder aber braucht, weil Russland neokolonialistisch unterwegs ist. Aber dann am liebsten die Kolonien abwickeln, und die Leute mit Familienzusammenführungen ins eigene Land integrieren würde?
Ich glaub jetzt hab ichs raus.
Laut dem Rauscher sollen diese drei Leute ja die österreichische Bundesregierung beraten. Und die SPÖ. Weil die könnten diese Beratung gebrauchen.
Ich merk mir dann, langer Krieg ist gut, der verbessert europäische Demographien. Ist ja nicht falsch.
edit: Ich Dummerle ich, ich hab ja noch das gut/böse Narrativ nicht drüber gestülpt! Also Putin will einen langandauernden Krieg, um seine Demographie aufzubessern, denn er ist böse. Deutschland will einen kurzen Krieg, um seine Demographie nicht aufzubessern (obwohl es dazu in der besseren Position wäre), denn es ist gut. Aber Deutschland will einen ZUKURZEN Krieg, und das ist auch wieder Böse, weil das hindert die Ukraine ja daran zu gewinnen, die aber selbst entscheiden muss, was das für sie bedeutet. Jetzt hab ichs! Endlich. Ich verstehe die Werte.
- Know who to put in any given room. Know, that the audience might not be able to present an argument fully, play off of that… I learned a bunch today.
Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha.
Some of us are looking at the situation - fully, granularly. Without the conceptual arguments of “what would be needed to still respect and fear an interest group after something unprecedented happened in their sphere of influence” (“lets teach them a lesson”), because, values…, of course, values - values, human rights, and the rest of the uniquely western concepts (?) you werent prepared to compromise on in 2014, or earlier. But what a mistake that was, right? Speaking of realpolitics…
Values and realpolitics, they go together like butter and honey. This has nothing to do with punishing an entity that attacked them in your immediate sphere of influence. Nothing with making an example out of a situation, so that no one ever dares to again… Sorry, I was talking values a second ago, I think. Like in 2014, but that was a mistake. No - no, values of course, I’m certain of it now. It must have been values that geopolitics is based on. Just listen to the guy in the “The print” video. “He probably didnt defend democratic values as strongly as he should have in the past but, …”
See, its all about who you put in a given room at a time.
edit: Summery for those who dont watch: The US enters wars late, because its still sleepy. It then acts like a Poker player (advantages in uneven game theory configurations) because it is sleepy. It doesnt want a Hegemon in southeast asia, because thats natural. It left afghanistan and iraq without contingency plans of who would take over the power vacuum (it didnt by the way but…) because the new president did’t like it. Informal international relationships without contracts are the new “great”, because india isnt as complicated as europe where everyone wants to build a Nato or structures like that. (Gorbatschow loves informal contracts…) In india - geopolitics would be much more personal, this is more modern, this is more flexible, this is the wave of the future. The Washington Post correspondent teaching a class of young geopolitical strategists then goes into a comparison on why sometimes arranged marriages are better than love marriages, because you then only find out later that the person is really someone else entirely.
Know your audience, know the room you are in. Know their level of education. Then pronounce common values.
A teacher at the side that always just nods with his head helps. End with -- the american indian geopolitical relationship will deepen over time, not because we actively want it to, but we have so many mutual interests, where it simply is beneficial. Then remind everyone of your long lasting history, and the common enemy in the british with whom you are in the five eyes alliance, because no one in the world wants them back in a hegemonial role anymore.
Tell them that Kissinger and Chomsky often hold the same opinion (they don’t click), when they ask a difficult question, then sideline both of those.
Then tell them that it is very important for mutual understanding to have student exchange programs, and that they should dock on at american indian friendship institutes to catch a few free semesters abroad.
And when they ask about non democratic tendencies, tell them, that foreign politics isnt like a formula, its much more free flow, where everyone is bound to make mistakes sometimes, but you have to find your own conviction on who is right, and then try to do it better the next time around.
Der ÖAG (Österreichisch-Amerikanischen-Gesellschaft) Präsident, und der Generalsekretär der ÖAG machen in den Räumlichkeiten der Österreichisch-Amerikanischen-Gesellschaft den Hampelmann zum Thema Jobs der Zukunft. Mit Medienpartner Wiener Zeitung (jetzt neu, erstmalig, nach Umstrukturierung). Mit dabei die WK, der CFO Egger Wood Products LLC, North Carolina, die Vizepräsidentin des EU-Parlaments nach Roberta Matsola, welche ihrerseits dem Business Breakfasts der Viktor Pinchuk Foundation ihre Aufwartung macht, wo f*cking Timothy Snyder die Aufziehpuppe gibt und immer die selben Statements widerholt (hier sein Programm: click und click, hier sein Programm WORTGLEICH, nochmal: click - diesmal aber vor deutlich größerem Publikum), den CEO für die Lehrlingsförderungsinitiative Zukunft.Lehre.Österreich der die Lehre zur attraktivsten Ausbildungsform machen möchte, lass ich mal weg, und Johannes Kopf, der dann mit Misik die “Wir müssen über die Neutralität Österreichs diskutieren” Öffentlichkeitsdebatten mittels “Bürgerinitiativen” aus dem Boden stampft. Während er auf dem Podium der Veranstaltung der Österreichisch-Amerikanischen-Gesellschaft den Experten mimt.
Als Medienpartner der ÖAG? Der Österreichisch Amerikanischen Gesellschaft?
“Im Vorfeld des Tags der Arbeit”, wollen wir darüber reden, dass “Arbeit ein sinnstiftendes Element ist”, während sich Energiekosten langfristig in Europa verdoppeln, der wichtigste Exporteur von Kupfer und Nickel wegbricht, wir langfristige Wirtschaftssanktionen auf einen ökonomisch global vernetzen Ressourcenlieferaten halten wollen, wir den Energieimport umstellen, was die Weltmarktpreise erneut hochtreibt, während unsere Wirtschaft von der Deutschen Exportwirtschaft abhängig ist, während wir Globalisierung zurückbauen…
Deutschlandfunk schreibt heute, dass der Co-Vorsitzende der Linken aktuell damit für Aufsehen sorgt, dass er öffentlich verlautbart, dass die USA strategische Gewinner des Krieges in der Ukraine seien. Aber das sind nur die scheiß Linken.
Jetzt halt ich mir aber mal ganz fest die Daumen, dass in der Podiumsdiskussion der ÖAG das Wort Klimawende fällt. Die in Deutschland durch Kupfer, Nickel, und Gas (Stahlproduktion) Verarbeitung gewährleistet wird.
edit: Oh, wie schön! Der CFO der Egger Wood Products LLC, North Carolina verarscht im ersten Wortbeitrag gleich mal das Panel! Die aufs Doppelte hochgeschossenen Benzinpreise in den US seinen so schlimm, alle Mitarbeiter kämen mit dem Auto!
Wollen wir Kurven vergleichen? Ja, ja? (click) Schlimm! Und das ist noch bevor Biden den Export von US Crude in den Weltmarkt eingestellt hat, aktuell ist ja der Preis so toll! Und ihr Gaspreis schwanke so stark, ja? (click) Schlimm! Wo kann man spenden?
Diese Webseite verwendet Cookies um die Nutzungserfahrung für seine Besucher zu verbessern. Bitte informiere dich bei Gelegenheit darüber wie sich Cookies auf deine Privatsphäre im Web auswirken.
