Scott Ritter: ずくなしの冷や水


Scott Ritter

If telling the truth puts me on Ukraine’s ‘Russian propagandist’ blacklist, I’ll wear that tag proudly
When it comes to fact-based analysis, I’ll take so-called ‘Russian propaganda’ over ‘Ukrainian truth’ every day

In 1997, I flew into Kiev, on-mission with the United Nations Special Commission to seek the assistance of the Ukrainian government in investigating the activities of a Ukrainian citizen suspected of illegally selling ballistic missile components and manufacturing capabilities to Iraq in violation of Security Council-imposed economic sanctions. During my visit, I held several meetings with senior officials from the Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council, including its Secretary, Vladimir Horbulin. I left on good terms, with the Ukrainians agreeing to cooperate (they ultimately did not) and hoping that I would pass on their good attitude to US authorities in hopes that it would assist their desire for NATO membership (I did, in fact, do this.)

Twenty-five years later, this same National Security and Defense Council, through its “Center for Countering Disinformation,” has published a blacklist of individuals deemed to be “promoting Russian propaganda.”

My name is on this list. My “crimes” include describing Ukraine as a base of NATO, challenging the narrative surrounding the Bucha massacre, and defining the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia as a “proxy war between NATO and Russia.”

I am guilty on all three charges, and more.

But I am no Russian propagandist.

The Center for Countering Disinformation was established in 2021 on the order of Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky. It is headed by Polina Lysenko, a lawyer who received her law degree in 2015, and whose resumé includes time with the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, the Office of the Prosecutor General (where she received a commendation from the US Federal Bureau of Investigation) and, up until her current appointment, as the Director of the Information Policy and Public Relations Department at a state-owned railway operator.

Lysenko unveiled the work of the Center for Countering Disinformation to the ambassadors of the G7 countries, as well as to Finland, Israel, and NATO shortly after her appointment. Her boss, the Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, Aleksey Danilov, emphasized “the importance of coordinating actions with strategic partners in combating hostile information operations and fighting disinformation,” while the head of the Office of the President, Andrey Yermak, indicated that he hoped “that the Center will become not only a Ukrainian center for countering disinformation, but also an international one.” According to Yermak, the center was “fully operational.”

Polina Lysenko, in outlining the goals and mission of her organization, emphasized that “the truth will be the main weapon.”

She should have started by fact-checking Yermak – two months after he’s declared her center “fully operational,” Ukrainian media was reporting that the center lacked “premises, funding, and staff.” Lysenko was the only employee, and “she has not been paid her salary for several months.” The Center was supposed to have a staff of 52, who were to be paid some $2,000 per month. The Ministry of Finance was responsible for finding the funds for the center, something it had not done as of mid-June 2021. Lysenko worked by herself from a “tiny office on the ground floor of the National Security and Defense Council building.”

It's tough to tell the truth when you’re not being paid, it seems.

A year later, while funding and staff do not seem to be a problem (thanks in large part to the underwriting of the Ukrainian government payroll by the US taxpayer), quality control is. Take, for example, the case outlined by Lysenko and her new agency on disinformation against me. If “describing Ukraine as a base of NATO” makes one a Russian propogandist, then I should have been joined by Ben Watson, an editor with the notoriously pro-Russian (sarcasm emphasized) web-based journal, Defense One, who in October 2017 published an article with the self-explanatory headline “In Ukraine, the US Trains an Army in the West to Fight in the East.” The article detailed the work done by US and NATO military personnel at the Joint Multinational Training Group – Ukraine’s Yavoriv Combat Training Center in western Ukraine – literally a NATO base inside Ukraine – where every 55 days a Ukrainian Army battalion was trained to NATO standards for the sole purpose of being deployed into eastern Ukraine to fight Russian-backed separatists in Donbass.

Pro hint, Ms. Lysenko – when your country hosts a permanent contingent of NATO troops on its soil, that makes it a base of NATO.

Lysenko’s staff of top-notch disinformation-countering analysts (again, sarcasm) likewise highlighted my assessment of the massacre of civilians in Bucha in late March-early April as having been committed by Ukrainian forces. Lysenko was in good company here – I was banned from Twitter for this same analysis. Some four months removed from the atrocities committed in Bucha, I stand by my analysis – the fact set has not changed. I am prepared to debate this issue with Polina Lysenko and her entire staff, live on Ukrainian television, anytime she likes. I’ll debate it with anyone, anywhere – that’s how confident I remain in my original analysis. Truth, after all, is my main weapon.

The last charge levelled against me by Lysenko’s intrepid truth sleuths, that I’ve labelled the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia as a “proxy war between NATO and Russia,” again brings to question the professionalism of her staff. After all, the Moscow-born self-hating Russian, Max Boot, in an opinion piece published in the Washington Post on June 22, called the Ukraine conflict “our war, too.” It’s one of the few times I will agree with Max Boot on anything. Boot, however, was merely echoing US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s articulation of US policy regarding the Ukraine conflict as being focused on weakening Russia by supporting Ukraine – sort of the textbook definition of a “proxy conflict.”

Do better, Polina Lysenko – at least try to score some cheap points by highlighting the fact that much of my analysis regarding Ukraine is published by Russia Today (for instance, this article.) At least then you could say that I was being paid by Russia. Of course, you’d have to wrestle with the fact that my analysis is also published in numerous non-Russian outlets – I mean, what kind of Russian propagandist gets published by American and British publishers?

And then, of course, there is the tricky issue of the controlling Russian editorial staff. The following exchange serves as a guide:

Me: Any interest in me doing a deep dig on Stoltenberg’s presentation on “paying the price”?

Controlling Russian Editor: What’s your take?

Me: I don’t think Stoltenberg understands the scope of the price tag.

Controlling Russian Editor: It’s the same speech where he said ‘stop complaining’, yeah?

Me: Yes.

Controlling Russian Editor: Cool, let’s do it.

The strategic intent of the Russian propaganda machine is well documented there. I can’t believe I fell for it.

All sarcasm aside, the publication by Lysenko’s Center of a blacklist of so-called “Russian propagandists” should be an insult to anyone who believes in the concepts of free speech. I’m proud to be associated with many of those who joined me on that list – Ray McGovern, Tulsi Gabbard, Douglas MacGregor, John Mearsheimer, and others. I’m confident everyone named here would say that their motivations in taking the stance they have about the Ukraine conflict is to pursue the truth – real truth, not the confused version promulgated by Polina Lysenko and her American-paid analysts. None consider themselves to be Russian propagandists, but rather American practitioners of free speech, the kind protected by the same US Constitution many of the named individuals (and myself) have taken an oath to uphold and defend.

I’ll conclude by speaking for myself – if adhering to fact-based analysis that has withstood the test of time is the new definition of 'Russian propaganda', then count me in. It certainly is better than the Orwellian version of free speech being bandied about by the US government and its proxies in Ukraine (see what I did there?).






ウラジーミル・ゼレンスキー・ウクライナ大統領の命により、2021年に設立された「偽情報対策センター(Center for Countering Disinformation)」。代表を務めるのは、2015年に法学博士号を取得し、国家汚職防止局や検事総長室(米連邦捜査局から表彰された)、そして現職までは国営鉄道事業者の情報政策・広報部長を務めた経歴を持つ、ポリーナ・リセンコ弁護士である。

リセンコは就任早々、G7各国の大使をはじめ、フィンランド、イスラエル、NATOに情報統制センターの活動を公開した。彼女の上司であるウクライナ国家安全保障・防衛会議のアレクセイ・ダニロフ長官は、「敵対的な情報操作に対抗し、偽情報と戦うために戦略的パートナーと行動を調整することの重要性」を強調し、大統領府のアンドレイ・ヤーマク長官は、「センターがウクライナだけでなく、国際的にも偽情報対抗の拠点となることを望む」と示唆した。Yermak氏によると、同センターは "完全に稼働している "という。

ポリーナ・リセンコは、自身の組織の目標と使命を説明する中で、"真実が主な武器となる "と強調した。

センターが「完全に稼働している」と宣言した2カ月後、ウクライナのメディアはセンターが「施設、資金、スタッフ」を欠いていると報じていたのである。リセンコは唯一の従業員で、"彼女は数ヶ月間給料が支払われていない "という。センターには52人のスタッフがいて、月給は2,000ドル程度になるはずだった。財務省はセンターの資金を見つける責任があったが、2021年6月中旬の時点ではまだ見つかっていない。リセンコは、"国家安全保障・防衛会議ビルの1階にある小さな事務所 "で一人働いていた。


1年後、資金やスタッフは問題ないようだが(ウクライナ政府の給与を米国の納税者が引き受けていることが大きい)、品質管理は問題になっている。たとえば、リセンコと彼女の新しい偽情報機関がまとめた私に対するケースを考えてみよう。もし「ウクライナをNATOの基地と表現する」ことでロシアのプロポガンディストになるのなら、私は、悪名高い親ロシア(皮肉が強調されている)ウェブベースの雑誌『ディフェンス・ワン』の編集者ベン・ワトソンに加わるべきだった。"In Ukraine, the US Trains an Army in the West to Fight in the East" という自明な見出しで記事を出版しているのである。その記事は、ウクライナ西部にある多国籍合同訓練グループ-ウクライナのヤヴォリブ戦闘訓練センター-文字通りウクライナ内のNATO基地で、米国とNATO軍の職員が行った作業について詳述し、そこでは55日ごとにウクライナ軍の大隊が、ドンバスでロシアが支援する分離主義者と戦うためにウクライナ東部に配備されるという唯一の目的でNATO標準に従って訓練されていたのでした。




リセンコ氏の勇敢な真相究明家たちが私に課した最後の告発は、ウクライナとロシアの間で進行中の紛争を「NATOとロシアの代理戦争」と名付けたというものだが、これはまた彼女のスタッフのプロ意識に疑問を抱かせるものである。結局、モスクワ生まれの自己嫌悪のロシア人、マックス・ブートは、6月22日にワシントン・ポストに掲載された意見書の中で、ウクライナ紛争を "我々の戦争でもある "と言っている。私がマックス・ブーツの意見に同意するのは、数少ないうちの1つだ。しかし、ブーツは、ロイド・オースティン米国防長官がウクライナ紛争に関する米国の政策として、ウクライナを支援することでロシアを弱体化させることに焦点を当てたことを述べただけで、「代理戦争」の教科書的定義と同じようなものだ。






Controlling Russian Editor: それは、彼が「文句を言うな」と言ったのと同じスピーチですね?






posted by ZUKUNASHI at 13:21| Comment(0) | ウクライナ
お名前: [必須入力]

メールアドレス: [必須入力]


コメント: [必須入力]