So - first lets put it on record that the position of “we, the allies of the west” now switched from “Russia is going to invade”, to “Russia is not so dumb to invade, they are going to play this as a conflict of attrition” - which is probably correct from my point of view - at this very moment - as well - btw.
But the lies are still so effing outragious. So Ian Bremmer is currently building a new narrative, where Putin (always the devil himself) has been allowed to walk over red lines in the past, without consequences - mostly in terms of “cyberattacks” (unattributed cyberattacks mostly, btw - but who needs proof these days…) - and now is high on his short term success, lashing out like a bully at a UN rally (Why does the US come to mind, while formulating that mental image?). But now that has changed, and NATO standing in absolute unity will act as a detractor (so great, always the things you coined as a reality two days earlier, turn out to have been the most important all along…), and show Putin that he cant continue his provocations, and divide Nato members, etc, etc.
Slight issue with that. Putin himself was on a promotion tour for bilateral diplomatic discussions with the US, eight months ago, stating several times, that they are open to discuss a bilateral position against cyberattacks, but the US has refused to hear them under Obama, under Trump, and always rejected direct talks on the matter.
See: click
Sure, its a political gambit, but Putin “having been encouraged by how devastatingly effective his cyber attacks were, and now believing he can use them again and again because the west was too timid to react” - is the opposite of what was part of the public diplomatic staging as the precursor of the conflict.
But who needs to factcheck, when they have a journalism that never shows any professional courtesy? And instead is exchanging smiles with former public representatives on how far western information warfare is allowed to go… (Last blog entry. Read it.)
Sh*t - its almost like some people believe that the public cant factcheck statements or political background affiliations.
Bremmer has held research and faculty positions[which?]at New York University, Columbia University, the EastWest Institute, the World Policy Institute, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and the Asia Society Policy Institute, where he has served as the first Harold J. Newman Distinguished Fellow in Geopolitics since 2015.[citation needed]
In 2013, he was named Global Research Professor at New York University.[11] and in 2019, Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs announced that Bremmer would teach an Applied Geopolitics course at the school.[12]
Bremmer serves on the President’s Council of the Near East Foundation, the Leadership Council for the Concordia Summit, and the board of trustees of Intelligence Squared. In 2007, he was named as a “Young Global Leader” of the World Economic Forum, and in 2010, founded and was appointed Chair of the Forum’s Global Agenda Council for Geopolitical Risk. In December 2015, Bremmer was knighted by the government of Italy.[13]
Council member of the Near East Foundation, Ledership council of the Concordia Summit, Board of trustees of Intelligence Squared (seems like an outlier, and judge on american idol?) - but doesnt read transcripts of public interviews Putin gave eight months ago to NBC…
Named “Young Global Leader” by the WEF, Chair of the Global Agenda Council for Geopolitical Risk at the WEF, but doesnt read transcripts of interviews Putin gave eight months ago.
Also sh*t its Alpbach all over again! (Mandatory curse, because look, we’ve found us another “Young Global Leader” here. (And all the best people have taught at Columbia once more…))
Oh, and on the point of coordinating public narratives. You get payed for repeating what was stated in the briefing room of the white house two days earlier, of course. Then a journalist asks you what the new narrative is. Then you repeat that. As an independent political scientist. At the Munich Security Conference.
Thats job security.
And if Russia attacks the United States or our Allies through asymmetric means, like disruptive cyberattacks against our companies or critical infrastructure, we are prepared to respond.
We’re moving in lockstep with our NATO allies and partners to deepen our collective defense against threats in cyberspace.
Two paths are still open. For the sake of the historic responsibility Russia and the United States share for global stability, for the sake of our common future — to choose diplomacy.
src: click
Thats how propaganda works in the west.
edit: Oh second outright lie in one statement “I think germany being cut off from russian gas moves europe in the direction of renewables faster.” Bullsh*t. The promise of a socially just energy transition relies on fossile fuels becoming more expensive, but in terms of the state being able to skim off the difference in taxes, so it can redistribute it in compensation payments for the not so affluent, and use the income to subsidize industries that are working towards sustainability but that arent economically viable yet. While fossile fuels produced will get used by non allied partners, at lower prices, because russia still needs trading partners and to aquire foreign currency. The last part is acknowledged in the interview.
The entire prospect of a carbon tax on imported goods into the EU is based on that principle as well. Primarily so.
But what does a f*cking payed croney care. Or Habeck for that matter, who in public interviews pretty early on into the escalation of the Ukraine conflict (probably without having been fully briefed) also couldnt conceptualize the difference. And by difference I mean money landing in US’ corporate hands (fossile fuel companies and freight shipping, mind you) that should have accelerated Germanys green transition. But whos biting the hand thats feeding their politcal careers, right?
If the journalist in front of them does a *blink blink* with their eyes, and not much else.
Third faux pas - is the matter of fact way, the expert states how germany was whipped into position, while france wasnt. You have to hear it to believe it. Watch the video.
