Why Washington Hates Putin: Scott Horton Explains

Summary

This transcript delves into U.S. foreign policy, focusing on the U.S.-Russia relationship, the role of neoconservatives, and the events leading to Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine. The speaker argues that the invasion was provoked by U.S. actions, such as NATO expansion, the 2014 Maidan Revolution, and ongoing interference in Russian and Ukrainian affairs. Emphasizing the distinction between causation and justification, the discussion critiques the mainstream media's portrayal of the conflict as 'unprovoked.' The speaker traces these tensions back to the 1990s, highlighting the persistent U.S. refusal to acknowledge Russia’s sovereignty and the consequences of its foreign policy decisions.

Takeaways

• 😀 The neoconservative influence in U.S. foreign policy has persisted across multiple administrations, from George Bush to Obama, Trump, and Biden.
• 😀 Many critics believed that once George Bush and Dick Cheney left office, neocons would lose their influence, but they remained active, even migrating to the Democratic Party.
• 😀 The U.S. has been involved in provoking tensions with Russia over many years, starting with NATO expansion and continuing through interventions in Ukraine and Syria.
• 😀 The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine is framed as 'unprovoked' in the media, but the speaker argues that the invasion was, in fact, provoked by U.S. actions over several years.
• 😀 The speaker emphasizes the distinction between causation and justification, stating that understanding why Russia acted the way it did doesn't equate to justifying its actions.
• 😀 U.S. support for Ukraine's 2004 and 2014 revolutions, including the Maidan coup, is framed as a major provocation that escalated tensions with Russia, leading to years of low-level fighting in Eastern Ukraine.
• 😀 The failure of peace deals like the Minsk agreements, due to U.S. influence, is cited as a reason for the prolonged conflict in Ukraine.
• 😀 The U.S. has consistently refused to acknowledge its role in escalating tensions with Russia, preferring to double down on its narrative of Russia as the aggressor.
• 😀 Early U.S. hostility toward Russia, dating back to the Clinton and Bush administrations, was fueled by attempts to control Russian territory and influence, particularly in energy markets.
• 😀 The U.S. sees Russia as a 'threat' due to its refusal to align with American interests, and this refusal to submit is a central reason for the long-standing animosity between the two countries.

Q & A

What is the main argument presented in the transcript about the role of the United States in provoking the war in Ukraine?

The transcript argues that the United States, through its foreign policy actions, particularly NATO expansion and involvement in Ukraine's internal politics, played a significant role in provoking Russia, which ultimately contributed to the escalation of the war in Ukraine. The book titled 'Provoked' suggests that the war was not entirely unprovoked but rather a consequence of American actions over many years.

How does the speaker differentiate between justification and causation in the context of the Ukraine conflict?

The speaker stresses that explaining why Russia invaded Ukraine does not justify the invasion. Instead, it focuses on the causal relationship—how U.S. actions, including NATO's expansion and support for Ukraine, contributed to the situation that led to Russia's decision to invade.

What historical context is given for the United States' long-standing animosity toward Russia?

The transcript traces the animosity back to the post-Soviet era, highlighting key events such as NATO expansion, the U.S. interference in Ukraine, and the Western support for anti-Putin movements. The speaker notes that U.S. policymakers, particularly neoconservatives, have consistently seen Russia as a strategic adversary, viewing its independence as a threat.

What was the significance of the 2005 speech by Dick Cheney in Vilnius, according to the speaker?

Dick Cheney's 2005 speech in Vilnius is highlighted as a pivotal moment when the U.S. government directly challenged Russia, accusing it of using gas as a weapon. This speech marked a clear break in U.S.-Russia relations, setting the tone for future confrontations over energy policies and geopolitical influence.

How did the U.S. involvement in the 2014 Maidan Revolution affect relations with Russia?

The U.S. involvement in the 2014 Maidan Revolution, where it supported opposition movements that ousted the pro-Russian president, is seen as a major catalyst for the conflict in Ukraine. This intervention, along with the subsequent failure to implement peace agreements, escalated tensions and contributed to Russia's decision to intervene militarily.

What is the speaker’s view on the U.S. media’s portrayal of the war in Ukraine?

The speaker criticizes the U.S. media for portraying Russia's invasion as 'unprovoked,' calling this narrative misleading. The media's use of such terms, according to the speaker, is part of a broader effort to justify American foreign policy and shift blame onto Russia, without acknowledging the role the U.S. played in provoking the situation.

Why does the speaker argue that Russia's actions in Crimea were misunderstood by the U.S.?

The speaker argues that Russia's annexation of Crimea was a reaction to U.S. actions, particularly the support for the Maidan Revolution, which Russia saw as a direct threat to its security. Rather than an unprovoked act of aggression, the speaker views it as part of the broader geopolitical struggle between the U.S. and Russia.

What role did NATO expansion play in increasing tensions between Russia and the U.S.?

NATO's expansion eastward, particularly into former Soviet states, is cited as a major source of tension. The U.S. has been accused of breaking promises made to Russia about not expanding NATO, which Russia perceived as a direct threat to its sphere of influence and security.

How does the speaker characterize the U.S. approach to Russia under various administrations?

The speaker suggests that the U.S. approach to Russia has been consistently confrontational, regardless of the administration in power. From Clinton to Obama to Trump and Biden, the U.S. has maintained policies that aim to isolate Russia, often ignoring or dismissing Russian concerns and interests.

What is the ultimate message of the book 'Provoked' by Scott, as explained in the transcript?

The ultimate message of Scott’s book, 'Provoked,' is that the conflict in Ukraine, and Russia’s aggressive actions, were not merely the result of Russian expansionism or irrational behavior, but were significantly influenced by U.S. foreign policy actions that provoked Russia. The book connects historical events and highlights the role of American intervention in triggering the war.