The New York Times has long performed the role of regime stenographer when it comes to US foreign policy. There is not a US intervention it does not whole-heartedly champion regardless of which party is in the White House. War is good for the New York Times and the other mainstream media outlets. Cozying up to the US regime keeps Americans ill-informed but keeps the fourth estate within the circle of the elites.
Which brings us to Ukraine today, where the resumption of war predicted in these pages is coming ever closer. As we have seen too many times to count, the US-backed regime in Kiev in times of increased tension begins to make dramatic claims about Russian tanks and other military equipment pouring over the border into Ukraine. A Russian invasion! No photographs are ever provided, but these claims are uncritically repeated by Kiev’s friends in the US embassy including by US Ambassador Geoff Pyatt. Pyatt, we remember, was instrumental in planning, along with Victoria “F*** the EU” Nuland, the February Ukrainian coup.
Today again the Ukrainians are accusing the Russians of an invasion. Col. Andriy Lysenko, a Ukrainian military spokesman, said 32 tanks, 16 howitzers and 30 ammunition trucks had entered Ukraine from Russia, along with troops. They provided no evidence. But NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe and Commander of US European Command tweeted the story as if it were true. Ambassador Pyatt re-tweeted.
But the New York Times did something different this time. They questioned Kiev’s claims of a Russia invasion. Speaking of Lysenko’s claim, the Times wrote:
He presented no clear evidence to support the claim, nor did the wealth of social media outlets in eastern Ukraine display any footage of a tank convoy. The Kiev government frequently made such claims during intensive periods in the fighting between Ukrainian government troops and separatists earlier this year that could not be substantiated.
Neither NATO nor the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which is monitoring a cease-fire, could confirm the report.
It is quite interesting to see the New York Times question a claim by the US-backed government in Kiev. Is it a sign of the paper starting to actually do its job and look at these claims critically, or has someone already been fired for it…?
