You have to dig for it, but there is another side to the mainstream media’s one-sided story on Ukraine. While everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion about Ukraine, nobody is entitled to his or her own facts. Here are a few facts that are inconvenient for the MSM narrative. Fact one: the democratically elected president of Ukraine, Victor Yanukovych, was overthrown in a US-aided coup, after he changed his mind and instead of aligning economically with the EU, accepted a Russian offer of aid. Fact two: the western package involved an IMF package of reforms that would have meant substantial economic hardship for eastern Ukraine. Fact three: the majority of eastern Ukraine are Russian-speaking ethnic Russians, and the leaders of the new government tried to strip away Russian as an official language. Fact four: there are significant neo-Nazi elements in the present Ukrainian government and in the military forces fighting in eastern Ukraine. Fact five: the current hostilities in the Ukraine are a civil war, not a Russian invasion. While Russia may be supplying arms, the rebels are eastern Ukrainians and they have borne the brunt of casualties. If this were not the case, wouldn’t the Ukrainian government have displayed at least one Russian corpse or prisoner of war to back up its endlessly repeated contention of a Russian invasion? Fact six: no US president or congress has, until now, thought of the Ukraine as a vital US interest, worth defending with US military might and treasure. On the other hand, Ukraine, on Russia’s doorstep, and who runs it, are vital Russian interests (akin to US interest in Cuba and who runs it). Ukraine was the entry point for Hitler’s armies in World War II (Cuba, to date, has not been the entry point for anyone’s invasion into the US).
With these facts in mind (and anyone who disputes these facts is free to offer comments and evidentiary support), here is another good article from Robert Parry, via davidstockmanscontracorner.com, on the MSM’s coverage of Ukraine. SLL harps on Ukraine because it could turn into a war between the world’s two biggest nuclear powers, which puts it in a whole different ballpark than any of our other recent interventions. From Robert Parry:
A basic rule of journalism is that there are almost always two sides to a story and that journalists should try to reflect that reality, a principle that is especially important when lives are at stake amid war fevers. Yet, American journalism has failed miserably in this regard during the Ukraine crisis.
With very few exceptions, the mainstream U.S. media has simply regurgitated the propaganda from the U.S. State Department and other entities favoring western Ukrainians. There has been little effort to view the worsening crisis through the eyes of ethnic Russian Ukrainians living in the east or the Russians witnessing a political and humanitarian crisis on their border.
Frankly, I cannot recall any previous situation in which the U.S. media has been more biased – across the board – than on Ukraine. Not even the “group think” around Iraq’s non-existent WMDs was as single-minded as this, with the U.S. media perspective on Ukraine almost always from the point of view of the western Ukrainians who led the overthrow of elected President Viktor Yanukovych, whose political base was in the east.
So, what might appear to an objective observer as a civil war between western Ukrainians, including the neo-Nazis who spearheaded last year’s coup against Yanukovych, and eastern Ukrainians, who refused to accept the anti-Yanukovych order that followed the coup, has been transformed by the U.S. news media into a confrontation between the forces of good (the western Ukrainians) and the forces of evil (the eastern Ukrainians) with an overlay of “Russian aggression” as Russian President Vladimir Putin is depicted as a new Hitler.
Though the horrific bloodshed – more than 5,000 dead – has been inflicted overwhelmingly on the ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine by the forces from western Ukraine, the killing is routinely blamed on either the eastern Ukrainian rebels or Putin for allegedly fomenting the trouble in the first place (though there is no evidence that he did, as even former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has acknowledged.)
I realize that anyone who doesn’t accept the Official Washington “group think” on Ukraine is denounced as a “Putin apologist” – just as anyone who questioned the conventional wisdom about Saddam Hussein giving his WMDs to al-Qaeda was a “Saddam apologist” – but step back for a minute and look at the crisis through the eyes of ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine.
To continue reading: MSM Jingoism on Ukraine