‘NYT’ runs U.S. propaganda on Russian crimes– without even a comment thread

Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr

Last week the New York Times ran an article titled “Samantha Power: My Friend, the Russian Ambassador,” in which the former US ambassador to the UN described herself as “heartbroken” over the death of Vitaly Churkin, with whom she had worked closely.

First the good part.  I like that Samantha Power recognizes that the late ambassador was doing his job and probably wanted peace:

It is well known that it was Vitaly Churkin who raised his hand six times to veto Syria-related resolutions, but it is less known that it was Vitaly who worked frantically (and in the end futilely) to try to secure enough changes to the drafts that Moscow might support them…

I got the sense that he valued Mr. Putin’s restoration of Russia’s relevance on the global stage, but would have preferred peaceful methods.

This might also be true of Power. Maybe she is consciously or not describing how she sees herself: someone who wants peace but works within the system and covers up or whitewashes the brutal atrocities supported by the government she represents.  This piece might be a kind of absolution Power is granting herself.

But whatever subtext might be there, what is actually on the page is self-serving propaganda. She talks about “countless civilians” killed by Russia in Syria. This is a one-sided and frankly dishonest contrast between Russia and the US. She is right that Russia has killed thousands of civilians (not “countless”,  whatever that means) in Syria. But according to Airwars, which seeks to tabulate the killings by all sides in a thorough manner, the US has killed a lesser but comparable number of civilians in Iraq and Syria.

Our ally the Saudis have killed thousands of civilians in Yemen with our help. The Israelis killed about 1500 civilians in Gaza in 2014 with no condemnation from its prinicipal ally and arms supplier in DC. In all cases, the parties responsible either deny the facts or blame the other side.

So Power is basically describing herself when she both praises and criticizes her late friend the Russian ambassador.

Sometimes — such as when he ludicrously argued that civilians in Aleppo had simply covered themselves in dust to look like bombing victims for photographers — my abhorrence infected our working relationship.

The bigger issue is how the New York Times can justify giving space to a former government official to indulge in such hypocritical propaganda– with little or no likelihood that a detailed response will ever appear in the paper’s pages. There isn’t even a comment thread available on this article by a former official.

I don’t get why liberals tolerate this hypocrisy. Though perhaps this is the function of the New York Times: dishing out pseudo-liberal tripe that reinforces complacency among its readers about the crimes of the people they voted for.

You would like to think it would stop working.  You’d like to think political satirists would turn this kind of piece into an occasion for mockery, so that the readers would wise up.

13 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Well there’s no time for doubt right now, And less time to explain. So get back on your horses, Kiss my ring, And join our next campaign, And the Empire grows with the news that we’re winning, With more fear to conquer, more gold thread for spinning, Till it’s bright… Read more »

Harold Pinter when accepting his Nobel Prize had a dig at the “exceptional” nation.. “The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them,” Mr. Pinter said. “You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite… Read more »

Samantha Power is an intellectual and spiritual midget when compared with her betters such as Churkin. Her diatribes in the UN were the object of mirth and derision the world over. especially when she’d go half -cocked against Russia or Syria. Also, Donald – Russia absolutely did NOT kill thousands… Read more »

“Sometimes — such as when he ludicrously argued that civilians in Aleppo had simply covered themselves in dust to look like bombing victims for photographers — my abhorrence infected our working relationship.” Sometimes — the fake victims simply cover themselves in dust. Other times — as in the FAKE Rescue… Read more »

It’s amazing to me that the NYT, WaPo, Wall St Journal, for example, have any credibility on this issue, not to mention on the subjects of Israel and Wall Street, and The Fed, and Inflation.