Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Economy
In reply to the discussion: STOCK MARKET WATCH -- Tuesday, 20 January 2015 [View all]Demeter
(85,373 posts)14. Did a Russian Parliamentarian Just Commit Treason?
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.mx/2015/01/did-russian-parliamentarian-just-commit.html
An interesting thing happened in Washington recently... a relatively small, little publicized event took place at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a prominent liberal-leaning think tank in Washington. The event, Russias Opposition in a Time of War and Crisis, featured prominent Russian liberal opposition parliamentarian (member of the Russian Duma) Ilya Ponomarev, a noted critic of Russian President Putin, providing a detailed presentation regarding the current political climate in Russia, and the potential for the ousting or overthrow of the Russian government. Yes, you heard that right. A Russian elected official came to the United States to give a talk about how best to effect regime change in his own country. At this point, the question is not so much whether what Ponomarev did was improper. The much more pressing issue is whether or not, by making this presentation in Washington precisely at the moment of heightened tensions between the US and Russia, Ponomarev has committed treason. While this may seem a rather extreme characterization, it is in fact quite appropriate.
What Is Treason and Does It Apply?
If we define treason as the offense of acting to overthrow ones government or to kill or harm its sovereign, then Ponomarevs actions seem to tread very close to the threshold for treason. Moreover, the fact that such a presentation was delivered at CSIS a think tank rife with strategic planners and proponents of the use of soft power to expand US hegemony is instructive as it provides a window into both Ponomarevs thinking and, perhaps more importantly, that of the political establishment in the US...During his presentation, Ponomarev touched on a number of critical issues related to Russias domestic political situation, trying to illustrate for the attendees that the political reality in Russia, despite the simplicity of the western corporate media narrative, is rather complex. Though he described the Putin-led government as Bonapartist, he noted that Putin is Russias only reliably working institution. While the veracity of that statement is debatable, it does seem interesting that an elected Russian lawmaker would go to a foreign country under the auspices of wanting to help his country move forward, and then proceed to advocate the overthrow of the only reliable institution. Would this not be a thinly veiled attempt to advocate for destabilization, putsch, or something similar?
The most significant portion of Ponomarevs presentation centered on a slide titled Conditions for the Change of Power in Russia, which laid out essentially a roadmap or blueprint for regime change in Russia. Ponomarevs slide outlined what he believes to be the essential elements for successful overthrow of the democratically elected government. These include:
Organized street protest (versus spontaneous one)
Appealing vision of the future presented to the majority of Russians
Leader, acceptable for all protesters and the elites
Access to some financial resources
Part of the elites should support the revolution
Trigger event
Examining these points, it is clear that Ponomarev is not merely informing the assembled policymakers, journalists, and guests about what should happen, but rather is making a case for what must be made to happen. This is no educational exercise, but a thoughtfully crafted appeal to the political establishment of the US to support Ponomarev and his faction both financially and politically. Of course the prescription above is nothing new to keen political observers who have followed the development of the crisis in Ukraine, and who have knowledge of how soft power works, and the concept of the color revolution. What Ponomarev is describing has happened more than a few times before. What is particularly troubling this time is that a sitting parliamentarian, himself a beneficiary of the democratic electoral process, is openly advocating an anti-democratic, unconstitutional overthrow of his own government. And Ponomarev is perfectly aware of this fact. Indeed, he included in the slide entitled Conditions for the change of power in Russia the following points:
Unlikely elections
Likely revolution (non-violent or violent)
Compromise with the current elites increases probability of non-violent changes, but decreases the probability of successful reforms in the future
Here, Ponomarev is openly acknowledging a number of critical points. First, that regime change is unlikely to come through elections. This is a blatant admission that not only is Putin democratically elected and wildly popular, but that the opposition will never have anything close to enough popular support to defeat him. In other words, Ponomarev is tacitly saying that Putin must be overthrown precisely because the Russian people support him, and will likely continue to do so. Imagine: a democratically elected politician from a country supposedly run by an authoritarian dictator comes to the US allegedly the worlds great champion of democracy to advocate an anti-democratic regime change scenario. The hypocrisy is beyond words.
Second, and this is crucial to the question of treason, is the fact that Ponomarev is advocating non-violent or violent revolution in collaboration with a foreign power. Here the propagandists and assorted mouthpieces for the Empire might argue that CSIS is a private institution that is not affiliated with the US Government. One would have to painfully naïve about the nature of power in the US and how it functions to believe such a line of argument. CSIS, with its long association with individuals such as Zbigniew Brzezinski who come from the uppermost echelons of power, is one of a small number of hugely influential think tanks that directly impact US foreign policy. CSIS, along with the Rand Corporation, Council on Foreign Relations, and a handful of other groups, are a useful barometer for measuring the pulse of the US establishment, and for individuals such as Ponomarev to get close to the levers of US power.
Therefore, it could be argued that Ponomarev is openly collaborating with a foreign government in this case through the nominal intermediary of CSIS to bring about the overthrow of his own government. I would refer readers back to the above-referenced definition of treason.
MUCH MORE--THE AUTHOR NAMES NAMES....VERY SIGNIFICANT REPORT
Eric Draitser is an independent geopolitical analyst based in New York City, he is the founder of StopImperialism.org and OP-ed columnist for RT and frequent contributor to New Eastern Outlook.
An interesting thing happened in Washington recently... a relatively small, little publicized event took place at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a prominent liberal-leaning think tank in Washington. The event, Russias Opposition in a Time of War and Crisis, featured prominent Russian liberal opposition parliamentarian (member of the Russian Duma) Ilya Ponomarev, a noted critic of Russian President Putin, providing a detailed presentation regarding the current political climate in Russia, and the potential for the ousting or overthrow of the Russian government. Yes, you heard that right. A Russian elected official came to the United States to give a talk about how best to effect regime change in his own country. At this point, the question is not so much whether what Ponomarev did was improper. The much more pressing issue is whether or not, by making this presentation in Washington precisely at the moment of heightened tensions between the US and Russia, Ponomarev has committed treason. While this may seem a rather extreme characterization, it is in fact quite appropriate.
What Is Treason and Does It Apply?
If we define treason as the offense of acting to overthrow ones government or to kill or harm its sovereign, then Ponomarevs actions seem to tread very close to the threshold for treason. Moreover, the fact that such a presentation was delivered at CSIS a think tank rife with strategic planners and proponents of the use of soft power to expand US hegemony is instructive as it provides a window into both Ponomarevs thinking and, perhaps more importantly, that of the political establishment in the US...During his presentation, Ponomarev touched on a number of critical issues related to Russias domestic political situation, trying to illustrate for the attendees that the political reality in Russia, despite the simplicity of the western corporate media narrative, is rather complex. Though he described the Putin-led government as Bonapartist, he noted that Putin is Russias only reliably working institution. While the veracity of that statement is debatable, it does seem interesting that an elected Russian lawmaker would go to a foreign country under the auspices of wanting to help his country move forward, and then proceed to advocate the overthrow of the only reliable institution. Would this not be a thinly veiled attempt to advocate for destabilization, putsch, or something similar?
The most significant portion of Ponomarevs presentation centered on a slide titled Conditions for the Change of Power in Russia, which laid out essentially a roadmap or blueprint for regime change in Russia. Ponomarevs slide outlined what he believes to be the essential elements for successful overthrow of the democratically elected government. These include:
Organized street protest (versus spontaneous one)
Appealing vision of the future presented to the majority of Russians
Leader, acceptable for all protesters and the elites
Access to some financial resources
Part of the elites should support the revolution
Trigger event
Examining these points, it is clear that Ponomarev is not merely informing the assembled policymakers, journalists, and guests about what should happen, but rather is making a case for what must be made to happen. This is no educational exercise, but a thoughtfully crafted appeal to the political establishment of the US to support Ponomarev and his faction both financially and politically. Of course the prescription above is nothing new to keen political observers who have followed the development of the crisis in Ukraine, and who have knowledge of how soft power works, and the concept of the color revolution. What Ponomarev is describing has happened more than a few times before. What is particularly troubling this time is that a sitting parliamentarian, himself a beneficiary of the democratic electoral process, is openly advocating an anti-democratic, unconstitutional overthrow of his own government. And Ponomarev is perfectly aware of this fact. Indeed, he included in the slide entitled Conditions for the change of power in Russia the following points:
Unlikely elections
Likely revolution (non-violent or violent)
Compromise with the current elites increases probability of non-violent changes, but decreases the probability of successful reforms in the future
Here, Ponomarev is openly acknowledging a number of critical points. First, that regime change is unlikely to come through elections. This is a blatant admission that not only is Putin democratically elected and wildly popular, but that the opposition will never have anything close to enough popular support to defeat him. In other words, Ponomarev is tacitly saying that Putin must be overthrown precisely because the Russian people support him, and will likely continue to do so. Imagine: a democratically elected politician from a country supposedly run by an authoritarian dictator comes to the US allegedly the worlds great champion of democracy to advocate an anti-democratic regime change scenario. The hypocrisy is beyond words.
Second, and this is crucial to the question of treason, is the fact that Ponomarev is advocating non-violent or violent revolution in collaboration with a foreign power. Here the propagandists and assorted mouthpieces for the Empire might argue that CSIS is a private institution that is not affiliated with the US Government. One would have to painfully naïve about the nature of power in the US and how it functions to believe such a line of argument. CSIS, with its long association with individuals such as Zbigniew Brzezinski who come from the uppermost echelons of power, is one of a small number of hugely influential think tanks that directly impact US foreign policy. CSIS, along with the Rand Corporation, Council on Foreign Relations, and a handful of other groups, are a useful barometer for measuring the pulse of the US establishment, and for individuals such as Ponomarev to get close to the levers of US power.
Therefore, it could be argued that Ponomarev is openly collaborating with a foreign government in this case through the nominal intermediary of CSIS to bring about the overthrow of his own government. I would refer readers back to the above-referenced definition of treason.
MUCH MORE--THE AUTHOR NAMES NAMES....VERY SIGNIFICANT REPORT
Eric Draitser is an independent geopolitical analyst based in New York City, he is the founder of StopImperialism.org and OP-ed columnist for RT and frequent contributor to New Eastern Outlook.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
32 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
These Two States Will Revoke Your License If You Can’t Pay Back Your Student Loans
Demeter
Jan 2015
#3
Exponential growth is unsustainable. There must be something that will stop this.
tclambert
Jan 2015
#32
The Poorest Danish Children Receive 2.6x the Transfer Income as the Poorest American Children
Demeter
Jan 2015
#17
Iran Says It's Strong Enough To Cope With Oil At $25 As Prices Start Plunging Again
xchrom
Jan 2015
#19