Last week, when the story came out of USAID's failed “color revolution” in Cuba - using “Serbian music promoters” no less - I thought its airing was just another effort at perception management. For one thing, it was an old story: the initial revelations were made in April. Then there was the fact that everyone was talking about the CIA torture report, so airing this was the perfect way to deflect attention from it, while also ensuring that nobody will pay too much attention to the Cuba fiasco as well.
Instead, the story was a trial balloon for Wednesday's announcement that Washington would lift the embargo on Cuba first imposed during the Kennedy administration.
That's good, right? Uh, not so fast. Consider the phrasing of Obama's announcement: “We will end an outdated approach that for decades has failed to advance our interest.”
Outdated? Why, then, is Washington using the very same approach against Russia, Iran, and other places? Because the US policymakers believe that in those cases, the “sanctions” are working. Just look at the maniacal glee with which Russophobes in the US media are cackling over the manipulated oil price and the equally orchestrated attack on the ruble. Which is, by the way, still a fundamentally stronger currency than the dollar.
So, the blockade wasn't lifted on grounds of the tactic being morally unacceptable for Washington, but because it didn't achieve the desired result (“failed to advance our interest”). That result, however, hasn't changed a bit: it's still “regime change” - in Cuba, in Russia, in any country that continues to believe it is sovereign, free and independent of Washington's commands.
If this all sounds too much like the attitude of the Hunger Games' Capitol towards the rebellious and disenfranchised Districts... well, decide for yourselves whether the resemblance is purely accidental.
Instead, the story was a trial balloon for Wednesday's announcement that Washington would lift the embargo on Cuba first imposed during the Kennedy administration.
That's good, right? Uh, not so fast. Consider the phrasing of Obama's announcement: “We will end an outdated approach that for decades has failed to advance our interest.”
Outdated? Why, then, is Washington using the very same approach against Russia, Iran, and other places? Because the US policymakers believe that in those cases, the “sanctions” are working. Just look at the maniacal glee with which Russophobes in the US media are cackling over the manipulated oil price and the equally orchestrated attack on the ruble. Which is, by the way, still a fundamentally stronger currency than the dollar.
So, the blockade wasn't lifted on grounds of the tactic being morally unacceptable for Washington, but because it didn't achieve the desired result (“failed to advance our interest”). That result, however, hasn't changed a bit: it's still “regime change” - in Cuba, in Russia, in any country that continues to believe it is sovereign, free and independent of Washington's commands.
If this all sounds too much like the attitude of the Hunger Games' Capitol towards the rebellious and disenfranchised Districts... well, decide for yourselves whether the resemblance is purely accidental.
