After a history of U.S. bullying and humiliation — from a broken promise not to expand NATO to deceit over Minsk — it can’t be assumed Moscow is bluffing when it warns of nuclear war.
By Joe Lauria
Special to Consortium News
In his momentous speech at American University in Washington 61 years ago, in which he controversially sought peace with Soviet Russia and an end to the Cold War, President John F. Kennedy said:
“Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war. To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy — or of a collective death-wish for the world.”
Twenty-eight years later, the Bill Clinton administration and every U.S. administration since, culminating in perhaps the most reckless, has proven the bankruptcy of U.S. policy by doing the exact opposite of what Kennedy advised, namely displaying a determination to humiliate and bully nuclear-armed Russia.
Today that most frightening moment has arrived, one dreaded by generations. The United States on Monday continued to provoke Russia with American and British missile attacks on Russian soil fired from a third country with American and British personnel, ignoring Moscow’s unequivocally clear warning that this could lead to nuclear conflict.
By firing directly into Russia with its ATACMS and Storm Shadow missiles, the U.S. and U.K., which Russia has not attacked, have given Moscow “a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war.”
Beginning at the End of the Cold War
The humiliation of Russia began with the end of the Cold War that Kennedy had sought, but not on the terms he envisioned. Despite George H.W. Bush’s vow not to engage in triumphalism, that was in full swing once Clinton took power.
Wall Street and U.S. corporate carpetbaggers swept into the former Soviet Union in the 1990s, eyed its enormous natural resources, asset-stripped the formerly state-owned industries, enriched themselves, gave rise to oligarchs and impoverished the Russian, Ukrainian and other former Soviet peoples. The humiliation intensified with the decision in the nineties to expand NATO eastward despite a promise made to the last Soviet premier Mikhail Gorbachev in exchange for reunifying Germany.
Even Washington’s man in the Kremlin, Boris Yeltsin, at first objected to NATO expansion, while Sen. Joe Biden supported it though he knew it would provoke Russian hostility.
After eight years of U.S. and Wall Street dominance, Vladimir Putin became president of Russia on New Year’s Eve 1999. He sought friendship with the West. But in 2000 Clinton humiliated him when he refused within hours Putin’s request for Russia to join NATO.
Russia sought to be welcomed into the rest of the world when the Cold War ended, but the U.S. “tricked us,” Putin said. It could not respect Russia’s independence when there was so much money to be made — and still to be made.
Putin then closed the door on Western interlopers in order to restore Russian sovereignty and dignity, ultimately angering Washington and Wall Street. This process didn’t occur in independent Ukraine, which remained subject to Western domination.
On Feb. 10, 2007, an aggrieved Putin gave a Munich Security Conference speech in which he condemned U.S. aggressive unilateralism, saying, “One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way. This is visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about this?”
But he focused particularly on NATO expansion eastward. He said:
“We have the right to ask: against whom is this [NATO] expansion intended? And what happened to the assurances our western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact? Where are those declarations today? No one even remembers them. But I will allow myself to remind this audience what was said. I would like to quote the speech of NATO General Secretary Mr Woerner in Brussels on 17 May 1990. He said at the time that: ‘the fact that we are ready not to place a NATO army outside of German territory gives the Soviet Union a firm security guarantee.’ Where are these guarantees?”
Putin speaking at the 2007 Munich Security Conference. (Munich Security Conference/Wikimedia Commons)
Burns’ Warning
Putin spoke three years after the Baltic States, former Soviet republics bordering on Russia, joined the Western Alliance. The West humiliated Putin and Russia by ignoring its legitimate concerns, when in 2008, just a year after his speech, NATO said Ukraine and Georgia would become members. Four other former Warsaw Pact states then joined in 2009.
William Burns, then U.S. ambassador to Russia, and presently C.I.A. director, warned in a cable to Washington, revealed by WikiLeaks, that,
“Foreign Minister Lavrov and other senior officials have reiterated strong opposition, stressing that Russia would view further eastward expansion as a potential military threat. NATO enlargement, particularly to Ukraine, remains ‘an emotional and neuralgic’ issue for Russia, but strategic policy considerations also underlie strong opposition to NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia. In Ukraine, these include fears that the issue could potentially split the country in two, leading to violence or even, some claim, civil war, which would force Russia to decide whether to intervene.”
In November 2009 the West again humbled Russia by rejecting out of hand its proposed new security arrangement in Europe. Moscow released a draft proposal for a security architecture the Kremlin said should replace outdated institutions such as NATO and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
In 2014, the United States pushed the issue in Ukraine by organizing a coup, stoking what Burns had said were “fears” that “could potentially split the country in two, leading to violence or even, some claim, civil war, which would force Russia to decide whether to intervene.”
The U.S.-installed government attacked ethnic Russians in the breakaway Donbass region, which defended its democratic rights against the coup. Civil war ensued as Burns warned. Russia worked out with Europe a peace formula, the Minsk accords, that would keep an autonomous Donbass inside the Ukrainian state. They were endorsed by the U.N. Security Council.
But they failed. In December 2022, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel told us why. She essentially admitted that the West had deceived Russia into thinking it had agreed to peace when instead NATO bought time to arm and train Ukraine for war against Russia. It was another outright humiliation of Moscow, which was “played” as Putin would say.
All this history is hidden to Western publics who only see Russia invading Ukraine as an isolated event.
Going to War in Ukraine
A building burns in Bakhmut City, Sept. 15, 2022. (Ministry of Defense of Ukraine)
Before Russia’s intervention into Ukraine Russia tried one last time with draft treaty proposals to the U.S. and NATO in December 2021 laying out a new security architecture for Europe in which forward NATO deployments of troops and missiles in the new Eastern European NATO states would be withdrawn. Again the West condescendingly dismissed the treaties out of hand despite Russia’s warning of war.
On the night in February 2022 Putin announced Russia’s intervention into the Ukrainian civil war. He spoke of the way the West repeatedly humiliated Russia by ignoring its legitimate security concerns, including those of ethnic Russians in Donbass. He gave what Russia sees as the existential threat from NATO’s expansion as the main reason for the military intervention.
Russia had clearly had enough of 30 years of America’s reckless condescension. Putin told the world:
“Our biggest concerns and worries, [are] the fundamental threats which irresponsible Western politicians created for Russia consistently, rudely and unceremoniously from year to year. I am referring to the eastward expansion of NATO, which is moving its military infrastructure ever closer to the Russian border.
It is a fact that over the past 30 years we have been patiently trying to come to an agreement with the leading NATO countries regarding the principles of equal and indivisible security in Europe. In response to our proposals, we invariably faced either cynical deception and lies or attempts at pressure and blackmail, while the North Atlantic alliance continued to expand despite our protests and concerns. Its military machine is moving and, as I said, is approaching our very border.
Why is this happening? Where did this insolent manner of talking down from the height of their exceptionalism, infallibility and all-permissiveness come from? What is the explanation for this contemptuous and disdainful attitude to our interests and absolutely legitimate demands?”
Putin said the Americans had “played” Russia in lying about NATO expansion. He referred to
“promises not to expand NATO eastwards even by an inch. To reiterate: they have deceived us, or, to put it simply, they have played us. Sure, one often hears that politics is a dirty business. It could be, but it shouldn’t be as dirty as it is now, not to such an extent. This type of con-artist behaviour is contrary not only to the principles of international relations but also and above all to the generally accepted norms of morality and ethics.”
Putin said Russia had long wanted to cooperate with the West. “Those who aspire to global dominance have publicly designated Russia as their enemy. They did so with impunity. Make no mistake, they had no reason to act this way,” he said.
The collapse of the Soviet Union had led to a redivision of the world, he said, and a change to international law and norms. New rules were needed but instead of achieving this “… we saw a state of euphoria created by the feeling of absolute superiority, a kind of modern absolutism coupled with the low cultural standards and arrogance of those who formulated and pushed through decisions that suited only themselves.”
Who Is Humiliated Now?
After nearly three years now of major conflict in Ukraine, it is the United States, Europe and especially Joe Biden that face humiliation.
Russia has won the war: economic, information (except in the West), and on the ground. Biden will limp to the Jan. 20 finish line still vowing that Ukraine can win. However he said he decided to allow the U.S. to attack Russia from Ukrainian territory to help Ukraine hold on to enough Russian territory it seized in Kursk over the summer to trade at cessation of hostilities talks. In other words, he must know that Ukraine has lost.
But this has not been a war to defend Ukraine. It has been a war to overthrow Russia’s leader, as Biden admitted, and to humiliate Russia back into its 1990s servitude, a war that still goes on.
In his speech, Kennedy sought world peace. He asked:
“What kind of peace do I mean? What kind of peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children–not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women–not merely peace in our time but peace for all time.”
Biden and other Western leaders have invested too much of their pride, their credibility and their citizen’s money into trying to use “American weapons of war” to enforce a Pax Americana on Russia. They are forcing a choice on Moscow of either a humiliating retreat or nuclear war.
Just how far do they think they can push Russia this time?
Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former U.N. correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe, and other newspapers, including The Montreal Gazette, the London Daily Mail and The Star of Johannesburg. He was an investigative reporter for the Sunday Times of London, a financial reporter for Bloomberg News and began his professional work as a 19-year old stringer for The New York Times. He is the author of two books, A Political Odyssey, with Sen. Mike Gravel, foreword by Daniel Ellsberg; and How I Lost By Hillary Clinton, foreword by Julian Assange.
“They are forcing a choice on Moscow of either a humiliating retreat or nuclear war.”
Certainly BRICS need a balancing threat short of nuclear war, e.g. a proxy fight against a small non-NATO ally.
But a non-military threat is best except in domestic appeal. Can the US be mollified until its economic collapse?
When BRICS+ trade does not require exports to the US/EU it can embargo them and force them to manufacture.
But surely they could simply outbid the US factions in the bribes that control the duoploy.
As bribed puppets, the Executive, Legislative & Judicial branches might actually serve the People.
Then we could amend the Constitution to isolate the federal government and mass media from money power.
The US might become civilized in practice within a generation, with better education and public debate.
Ultimate topic: The Big Lie…
(Defined): Nuclear conflict can be limited enough to practical view: Winnable.
Easy enough to say from relative safety of geographic isolation due to surrounding oceans… But… Realistic?
Enough to adopt brinksmanship as official policy?
This commenter recalls video of Putin’s smile following past conference with was / is again
POTUS. Which, BTW, appeared genuine…
Given the stakes, (try delivery systems, insane power of weapons, result if speculation wrong)
hoping DJT and his Russian counterpart were / will be not just Talkin Smack!
Putin & Lavrov are the only real statesmen that at this point keep the world from its destruction. Thank God or Goddess for these strong, supremely competent, intelligent men.
“Putin & Lavrov are the only real statesmen that at this point keep the world from its destruction.”
I think that might be true. And real adults, too. Certainly Joe Biden is not a real statesman. Nor is Donald Trump. And neither is Kamala Harris a real stateswoman.
I am reminded of a very disgusting puff piece put out last year by political commentator and former Labor Secretary Robert Reich in which he says that Joe Biden is the last adult in the room. Just about everybody else are immature children. Putin and Xi are dismissed as autocrats.
hxxps://robertreich.substack.com/p/the-last-adult-in-the-room
I used to like Robert Reich, and liked his easy to understand explanations of somewhat difficult or controversial topics, particularly regarding economics; however I lost all respect for him after his puff piece about Biden. I wonder what planet Robert Reich is living on, what was he thinking?
And I unsubscribed to emails I had been receiving from him in which he shared what he wrote on his substack blog.
Michel Chossudovsky in THE GLOBALIZATION OF POVERTY AND THE NWO and others have identified the IMF and the US military with the CIA have packaged loans to foreign nations and impoverished the indegious people. John Perkins in CONFESSIONS OF AN ECONOMIC HIT MAN has exposed the IMF is the cover for Wall Street bankers’ globalist aspirations.
It is Wall Street financiers that is using NATO and DOD using bio-weapon labs in Ukraine to impose servitude or conquest. The same goal is being sought in the USA.
Audit the auction accounts of Treasury securities managed by FRBNY. Ref 31 CFR #375.3.
The western military industrial complex refuses to give up our profit motives for permanent war. We are controlling ourselves from NATO for world economic, religious, and military dominance and the profit motives of aggression. This is the pivotal point of western Roman and Viking world raiding party logic aiming at Asia fir fear of losing our grip on world realty and our image of superiority.
My attempted sharing of this to Facebook was summarily blocked / removed “for Spam”. My guess is that it’s not the speech itself, but that they have targeted Consortium News. This would not be the first time for that.
This tells me just how critically important Consortium News is in this ever-narrowing Overton Window of acceptable thought. Keep it up, Joe, et al. And thanks.
Facebook will not allow me to post a link to this. Anyone surprised?
I wouldn’t have been surprised even if they hadn’t done that to me as well.
Beautiful writing, Joe. You present a concise summary of how American arrogance caused the horrific war in Ukraine. The U.S. ruling elite are oblivious to history, facts and logic. They live in a pretend world where perpetual war is considered desirable—so long as they are reaping the profits but doing none of the fighting.
Lauria is correct. Naomi Klein and Joseph Stiglitz have written in detail about the history of the 1990s that the American public does not know, but it is not “hidden” from them. They just do not read beyond what Washington tells them to think. In addition, everyone should read about the six years of talks between Russian and many Western leaders about a new security home for Europe, which ultimately US neocons like Wolfowitz sabotaged and put instead on a track of NATO expansion. The talks referred to are in recorded as summaries in the US National Security Archives. SPREAD THE WORD:
Summary (and documents) of agreements with Gorbachev and EU/US leaders
hxxps://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early?fbclid=IwAR1L220ZQKmGTJ5_3i2Wg-Eu8cykABbs8gUgEwWG1u3KnXCpKnOZn2yKMeQ
Yeltsin and Clinton on NATO expansion
hxxps://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2018-03-16/nato-expansion-what-yeltsin-heard
hxxps://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2021-11-24/nato-expansion-budapest-blow-1994
hxxps://warontherocks.com/2019/11/promises-made-promises-broken-what-yeltsin-was-told-about-nato-in-1993-and-why-it-matters-2/
Goldgeier, “Promises Made, Promises Broken? What Yeltsin was Told About NATO in 1993 and Why It Matters: hxxps://warontherocks.com/2016/07/promises-made-promises-broken-what-yeltsin-was-told-about-nato-in-1993-and-why-it-matters/
Joshua Shifrinson, Deal or No Deal? The End of the Cold War and the U.S. Offer to Limit NATO Expansion: hxxps://direct.mit.edu/isec/article/40/4/7/12126/Deal-or-No-Deal-The-End-of-the-Cold-War-and-the-U
Brilliant Summary !!! Thank you so much
This article should be on blast in every news outlet. Excellent outline with loads of context, something almost absent on the MassMediaCartel outlets. After the “Maidan” coup in 2014, Robert Parry was one of the first and few journalists to expose the facts and context of the situation and dispel the falsehoods, and disinformation regarding Russia, Ukraine and long-term US foreign policy. I am sure that Mr. Parry would be (or is) proud of the continuing tradition of the highest grade journalism available here on CN.
Similar to what Mr. Lauria outlines here about Russia, China has stated that it is ending the “Century of Humiliation” by the west. The Adelson/Musk/DT regime wants to pivot to Asia and strangle China into submission. A quick look on a map will show that China is surrounded by US vassals and US military bases. (Taiwan, Japan, S. Korea etc.). Our MiniTrue Media and politricksters say China is the aggressor, the Yellow Peril …barbaric “oriental autocracy” vs. the democratic and enlightened West.
The Coming War On China (see documentary by John Pilger on YT) will be put on the front burner and Ukraine will be put on the back burner, but economic warfare is already in play. The tariffs, “sanctions” are the first step in escalating hostilities and of course this has the full support of the Bipartisan Consensus in Warshiton.
Depends on how you look at things. One could perhaps say that the Golden Billion with its main concentration in Europe and North America, is surrounded by the Global South. Its the Yankee perspective that says “we’ve got your surrounded”, like they’ve accomplished some great victory.
There’s also an old military saying that I’ve seen attributed to Gen. Omar Bradley. It goes something like … “amateurs worry about tactics, professionals worry about logistics.” In other words, those forward bases that look like fine tactics are at the end of long supply lines (and even longer supply chains).
The conflict between China and the USA is a conflict between people who’ve read Sun Tsu, and people who think its a chicken dish on the menu. After Ukraine, we definitely know a couple of things about USA/NATO/Israel. They do not win their wars via advanced preparation, as Sun Tsu advises. And, that usually they are very surprised when their wars do not turn out in the way they predicted when they foresaw a great victory. Instead, “wtf” appears to be their standard position six months into a war. In other words, expect that the latest Brilliant Plan may not quite work out as foreseen.
All of American policy is built on the cry of 8 year olds on the school yard …. “They hit me first!” Thus, the last 30 years of propaganda constantly claiming that such a long list of nations have been the ‘aggressors’. To Americans, I suppose it might make a bizarre form of sense. After all, the world let them get away with crimes against humanity in Hiroshima and Nagasaki because the Americans could say “they hit me first!” But, in the long run, a very bad lesson to teach to people with the moral equivalent age of 8.
If America was a free democracy, this article would be repeated on and commented on across a wide range of outlets. But, that won’t happen here.
So, that is why he was assassinated for preaching global forever peace?
This solves the puzzle in my mind.
Those persons responsible are the Anti…,, Peacenik, Christ, American…
Are you paying attention Donald?
Yes Kennedy killed, like Martin Luther, MalcomX, John Lennon, Princess Diana, Arafat, Begin, Lamumba, Gandi to name a few. Very revealing video.
Keep up the good work CN.
By the way.
hxxps://x.com/Palestine_UN/status/1861458396735557754
“29 November 2024
Every year on this day, the international community stands in solidarity for the dignity, rights, justice and self-determination of the Palestinian people.
This year’s commemoration is especially painful as those fundamental goals are as distant as they have ever been”
“All this history is hidden to Western publics who only see Russia invading Ukraine as an isolated event.” Fortunately we have a few alternative media organizations that mention these things. It should be our task to convince our friends and neighbours to pay attention to the non corporate media.
I do NOT agree that Russia or Putin has been humiliated. Look at BRICS, look at the global majority compared with the pathetic G7,look at mighty China, a perfect partner for Russia and most of the world’s commerce and development . Putin is patient and his country is acting responsibly.
Yes
Very Interesting to watch China and Russia behaving responsibly, while the USA thought it could run rampant because it controlled CNN et al. Turns out, China and Russia were correct in respecting the opinions of the rest of the world, while the exceptionally arrogant Americans were wrong in thinking that nobody outside of America mattered or that they could be controlled. Slowly, over the last decade or two, Russia and China have gained respect for their ‘acting responsibly’, while America has lost respect to the point that we now see constant ‘stories’ in our ‘news’ about how evil Russia or evil China is gaining ground in [fill-in-the=blank]
Today we see a world where America stands alone, 14-1 against in the UNSC, maybe 10-15 votes with the Yankees in the UNGA. If one looks closely, America gets much of its support through bribery or coercion. Acting responsibly matters.
Superb article.
“Biden and other Western leaders have invested too much of their pride…” As has been stated “pride goeth before destruction and an haughty spirit before a fall” Proverbs 16:18
There is this saying in Spanish…buscando algo que no se nos ha perdido. We are looking for something we haven’t lost. Is the West looking for war? What a Christmas present that would be, eh?
Villainy has been passed off as foreign policy in the US for so long it’s been normalized. Organized crime has replaced diplomacy as the new normal. Perhaps it was always thus. It’s no longer hidden, but right in everyone’s face. Delusional criminals always think they will be the ones to escape the consequences of their reckless behavior. As always, they are wrong.
What if Putin is overthrown?
His replacement could be far worse.
What if he decides that he cannot survive politically because of all this humiliation? These are considerations that are not being addressed at all as far as I can tell.
“All this history is hidden to Western publics who only see Russia invading Ukraine as an isolated event.”
Absolutely correct. A very clear example of lying by omission in order to manufacture consent for the war.
Incidentally, Keir Starmer would ensure that any Labour MP who repeated the statements contained in this article would have the whip withdrawn and would probably be sacked as a future election candidate. The fact that it is true would be no defence.
Understanding the other side was one of the principles set out by Robert McNamara in the documentary film “The Fog of War” but completely ignored now.
We must not allow these lunatics to continue to put our lives at risk as it can only end in disaster.
“We must not allow these lunatics to continue to put our lives at risk as it can only end in disaster…”
Absolutely. But it seems whoever we vote for, as here recently in the UK, does not make any difference. Our two main political parties (and most of the media) just portray Putin as a madman, with nothing more to be said.
Excellent piece by Joe Lauria as usual.