The unhinged meeting

16. März 2022

Can we get some mood music, and some peop­le admit­ting in per­fect rea­li­ty TV script style, that that was the moment, when they rea­li­zed that this would beco­me a war? May­be add a few “they are afraid” and “he’s unhin­ged” sound­bi­tes to it?

Thank you PBS.

Also - at the same time the offi­cial nar­ra­ti­ve on the sci­en­ti­fic side is, that US intel­li­gence cir­cles war­ned about the strong pos­si­bi­li­ty of a war at least two weeks pri­or (see: click). Which then is a litt­le bit embezzled by the Hoo­ver Insti­tu­te for ger­ne­ral pun­dit con­sump­ti­on, and made into the rea­so­ning for the nar­ra­ti­ve, that the one good aspect that came out of this is, that euro­pe is now clo­ser in terms of poli­cy posi­ti­ons than ever befo­re. Of cour­se some peop­le also call BS on that, becau­se it is unity by neces­si­ty, but tho­se are just mad wierdos.

At the same time it is ack­now­led­ged, that the ent­i­re mee­ting was made up for PR pur­po­ses, that it was pre­recor­ded, yet it shows with abso­lu­te cer­tain­ty, how distant Putin is to his advi­sers, and how unhin­ged, even cra­zy he is, and that ever­yo­ne in his own “balan­ce of power cir­cles” is afraid of him.

Wait - do I need his­to­ri­cal experts for that pur­po­se, that are exact­ly dumb enough not to under­stand that should a balan­ce of power in Rus­sia exist, it is not “argued for free­ly” in the open, in a pre­recor­ded PR pro­duc­tion? Do I need experts just dumb enough not to noti­ce, that the fact that Putin put down the SVR intel­li­gence chief, was repor­ted by the same media out­lets (PBS) as a public dis­play of the noti­on, that the for­eign secu­ri­ty sec­tor wit­hin rus­sia has lost influence?

Sor­ry - not dumb enough, just situa­ted in the right tal­king cir­cles of course.

Peop­le spea­king in the video:

What was espe­cial­ly weird and cree­py was the way he dres­sed down the head of his for­eign intel­li­gence ser­vice, [Ser­gey] Narysh­kin,” says Dani­el Fried, cur­r­ent­ly a dis­tin­guis­hed fel­low at the Atlan­tic Coun­cil, who ser­ved as the U.S. ambassa­dor to Poland from 1997 to 2000 and as assi­stant secreta­ry of sta­te for Euro­pean and Eura­si­an affairs from 2005 to 2009.

[Putin] see­med to go off the rails, angry and bera­ting his intel­li­gence chief,” recalls Scha­ke, who pre­vious­ly ser­ved at the U.S. Sta­te Depart­ment, the Depart­ment of Defen­se and the Natio­nal Secu­ri­ty Coun­cil. “It was such a stran­ge and such an orches­tra­ted per­for­mance, that that’s the moment when I rea­li­zed that Putin was actual­ly going to attack Ukraine.

src: click

Oh, just for com­pa­ra­ti­ve pur­po­ses, lets see how fran­ce reacts to stuff simi­lar to this:

US intel paints Putin as aggrie­ved, angry over Ukrai­ne war

Washing­ton (AFP) – US intel­li­gence chiefs on Tues­day bran­ded Russia’s Vla­di­mir Putin an “angry,” iso­la­ted lea­der grap­p­ling for glo­bal clout, frus­tra­ted about how his Ukrai­ne inva­si­on has not gone to plan, and lob­bing pro­vo­ca­ti­ve nuclear thre­ats at the West.

The long-standing pre­si­dent in Moscow has been “stewing in a com­bus­ti­ble com­bi­na­ti­on of grie­van­ce and ambi­ti­on for many years,” CIA Direc­tor Wil­liam Burns told US lawmakers.

He cal­led the inva­si­on of Ukrai­ne a mat­ter of “deep per­so­nal con­vic­tion” for Putin, his latest defi­ant clash with Euro­pe and the United States.

I think Putin is angry and frus­tra­ted right now. He’s likely to dou­ble down and try to grind down the Ukrai­ni­an mili­ta­ry with no regard for civi­li­an casu­al­ties,” Burns said at a con­gres­sio­nal hea­ring on glo­bal threats.

The Rus­si­an strong­man has encoun­te­red a tidal wave of opp­ro­bri­um for the dead­ly inva­si­on, lea­ving him iso­la­ted like never before.

The US intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty war­ned of the poten­ti­al for Putin to lash out, espe­cial­ly noting an ele­va­ted nuclear threat.

Lieu­ten­ant Gene­ral Scott Ber­ri­er, direc­tor of the Pentagon’s Defen­se Intel­li­gence Agen­cy, said Rus­sia under Putin has been working over­ti­me to moder­ni­ze its wea­pon­ry, par­ti­cu­lar­ly smaller-yield nuclear weapons.

Putin has “inves­ted in tac­ti­cal nuclear wea­pons,” Ber­ri­er said. “I belie­ve that he thinks that gives him an asym­metric advantage.”

Putin took the shock step last mon­th of put­ting Russia’s nuclear for­ces on high alert.

Some US offi­cials have pri­va­te­ly expres­sed con­cern that, in a worst-case sce­n­a­rio, he might order deploy­ment of such mini-nukes on a city.

Direc­tor of Natio­nal Intel­li­gence Avril Hai­nes said “Putin’s nuclear saber-rattling” has put the West on notice.

We assess Putin feels aggrie­ved the West does not give him pro­per defe­rence, and per­cei­ves this as a war he can­not afford to lose,” Hai­nes told the panel.

But what he might be wil­ling to accept as a vic­to­ry may chan­ge over time,” she said.

Putin’s inva­si­on has pro­du­ced “a shock to the geo­po­li­ti­cal order with impli­ca­ti­ons for the future that we are only begin­ning to under­stand, but are sure to be consequential.”

With Putin under immense pres­su­re, the “sys­tem” the Rus­si­an pre­si­dent crea­ted of a cir­cle of clo­se advi­sors is get­ting “nar­rower and nar­rower,” the CIA’s Burns said.

In such a sys­tem, “it’s not pro­ven care­er enhan­cing for peop­le to ques­ti­on or chal­len­ge his judgment.”

france24 via AFP

Wait paints?

Oh, and can I get some mood music for that - and a rea­li­ty TV pro­duc­tion set­up, with peop­le com­men­ting on how they felt, when they saw it?


Subject(s): Social Sci­en­ces, Media stu­dies, Com­mu­ni­ca­ti­on stu­dies, Theo­ry of Communication

Publis­hed by: Факултет по журналистика и масова комуникация, Софийски университет „Св. Кл. Охридски”

Key­words: Rus­si­an tele­vi­si­on; per­so­na­liz­a­ti­on; pro­pa­gan­da; poli­ti­cal talk shows; inter­na­tio­nal rela­ti­ons; public opinion

Summary/Abstract:This arti­cle shows how Rus­si­an media use per­so­na­liz­a­ti­on to incre­a­se pro-Russian influ­ence on every Russian-speaking com­mu­ni­ty. Based on the examp­les it gives an under­stan­ding, why such man­ner of repre­sen­ting the news can be dan­ge­rous as it incre­a­ses natio­na­lism and xeno­pho­bia, making the ste­reo­ty­pes rule over the facts. The long-term objec­ti­ve of [this] work is to pre­vent the deve­lo­p­ment of such kind of per­so­na­liz­a­ti­on and to decre­a­se the nega­ti­ve influ­ence upon other countries.

src: click

Oh, shit, wrong coun­try, wrong country…

Hinterlasse eine Antwort