President Putin’s been accused by the West of being many things, but ironically enough, it’s former President George H. W. Bush who embodied many of them.
The passing of former President George H. W. Bush over the weekend prompted a lot of reflection about the influence that he had on America’s role in the immediate post-Cold War era. Notorious for literally proclaiming the “New World Order”, Bush Sr. also has the ignoble distinction of being one of the US’ few one-term presidents, dramatically losing then-Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton in the 1992 election. More interestingly for most foreign observers, however, is that Bush Sr. literally embodied much of what Russian President Vladimir Putin is accused of being, even if the Western Mainstream Media will never recognize this paradoxical reality:
“Deep State” Prodigy
The West loves to fearmonger about President Putin’s intentions by endlessly reminding their audience of the Russian leader’s time in the KGB and later as the head of Russia’s FSB, though Bush Sr.’s decades-long experience rising through the ranks of the CIA to eventually lead it and then go on to being America’s Vice-President and later President is usually overlooked in favor of pretending that it was the voters and not the US’ permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (“deep state”) that pave his path to power.
Backstabbed By His Own
Another common myth is that President Putin apparently has to watch his back out of fear of being backstabbed by his own “deep state” that’s apparently plotting his ouster (with the most recent variation of this narrative being that they’re ‘provoked’ by the US’ sanctions regime), though it was actually Bush Sr. who was betrayed by his own after some of them broke ranks with the American leader to support his presidential opponent in 1992, forever reshaping domestic politics and indelibly altering the course of the “New World Order”.
President Putin is commonly cast by the Western Mainstream Media as the world’s worst international bully after Crimea’s reunification with Russia was deliberately misportrayed as an “aggressive annexation”, though Bush Sr. isn’t held anywhere near those same ‘standards’ after invading Panama in 1989 and then eventually launching the First Gulf War against Iraq, the legacy of which still impacts regional politics today and was in hindsight partially carried out as a sign of force to the rest of the world during the USSR’s rapid decline from superpower status.
Along the same token, President Putin is wrongfully held accountable by many decision makers in the West for the downing of MH17 over Eastern Ukraine in July 2014 on the unproven basis that he allegedly dispatched BUK anti-air missiles to the local rebels that are blamed for shooting it down, though those same leaders have ‘conveniently’ forgotten that Bush Sr. was Vice President of the US when his country’s navy “accidentally” shot down Iran Air Flight 655 over the Persian Gulf.
US Defense Secretary James Mattis recently insulted President Putin by declaring him ‘untrustworthy’ on the supposed basis that the Russian leader “rips up international agreements”, yet Bush Sr. is being held up as a man of honesty unheard of in American politics since the time of “Honest Abe” even though he allegedly broke his promise to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev about not expanding NATO beyond the border of reunified Germany, an act of duplicity that set into motion far-reaching consequences that continue to destabilize Europe today.
It may sound strange to countenance, but George H. W. Bush embodied much of what President Putin is accused of being by his Western Mainstream Media enemies just like the latter represents a lot of what the former is said to have been in terms of the positive spin being put on his legacy.
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
This article was originally published on Eurasia Future.
Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.