CounterPunch | In this episode we discuss the economic and political
implications of the attempted murder of former Russian double agent
Sergei Skripal. We also touch upon the long history of collaboration
between Russian oligarchs and Western banks and how it fits into the
larger neoliberal project pursued after the collapse of the Soviet
Union.
Michael Palmieri: Professor Hudson welcome back to the third episode of The Hudson report. It’s great to have you here.
Michael Hudson:It’s good to be here.
Michael Palmieri: So everyone who’s been following
the news media for the last week or so has become–even if they didn’t
want to be–pretty familiar with the case of Sergei Skripal and his
daughter. He was once a double agent for British intelligence and
recently there’s been allegations that he’s been poisoned by or
attempted to be poisoned by Russian intelligence services. Although much
of the coverage seems to be pretty breathless in condemning Russia for
an attempted assassination. You seem to have a different perspective or
perhaps believe that we should be looking somewhere else and the kind of
larger implications of what this may mean. So can you start us off and
kind of explain what you see to be going on here right now?
Michael Hudson: Well I was puzzled at first about
the whole treatment of the affair of poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his
daughter because the treatment is so out of proportion–the reaction is
so out of proportion–that it’s obvious that the issue is not about the
poisoning itself. First of all there’s no evidence to show Russian
involvement. But the important thing to realize is that even if there
were a government assassination attempt, the reaction is entirely
different things. It’s really about international diplomacy and NATO
maneuvering for a military posturing and the reaction has no connection
at all according to the poisoning, they’re only using the poisoning as
an excuse to wrap a policy that was already thought of and sort through
before the actual Skripel Gate occurred. I think anyone who’s seen James
Bond movies knows that 07 can kill enemies. And the U.S. assassinates
people all the time. It’s killed foreign leaders like the president
Allende in Latin America and the whole wave of political terrorism that
followed–killing tens of thousands of union leaders, and university
professors, and land reformers, and the Obama administration targeted
foreigners for drone strikes. Even when this kills large numbers of
civilians as collateral damage.
No foreign country broke relations with Britain, or the United
States, or Israel, or any other countries using targeted assassination
as a policy. So this pretense that Russia has killed someone even
without any evidence or with any trial is implausible on the very
surface.
So, the question is why are they doing this with Russia? Why are they
imposing sanctions and mounting a great publicity campaign? And I think
the answer has to lie in looking at why are they doing this now. Timing
is the key. So let’s step back a minute and note what seems to be out
of the ordinary in the British and US and NATO reaction.
0 comments:
Post a Comment