Senior US official John Bolton has published an article in which he calls for the organization of a coup in Russia. Scenario for which he argues the added value of an interventionism assumed by Washington.
“Putin must go”, or in French “Poutin must leave”: this is what, from the title, announces the color of a platform signed on October 5 by John Bolton, a former senior official at the White House, who vehemently calls for regime change in Russia.
Regularly intoned in the high spheres of influence of American foreign policy in anticipation of a reversal of power, the formula is quite natural in the mouth of a senior official who, as recently as last July, claimed his active contribution to the planning of coups on both sides of the globe.
“The obstacles blocking Russian regime change are significant, but not insurmountable”
While the Russian-Ukrainian military conflict is engaged in its eighth month, John Bolton is formal: the prospects for negotiations are to be ruled out, just like those of a potential future normalization of relations with “Putin’s regime”. It should be noted that such a speech echoes the remarks made by the President of the European Commission during her recent trip across the Atlantic. Ursula von der Leyen notably took a stand against calls for a ceasefire in the context of the conflict, justifying her position by arguing for issues that go beyond the Ukrainian cause alone.
For the senior American official, there is therefore only one condition for envisaging the end of the ordeal that the populations affected by the conflict are going through: the departure of Vladimir Putin. And to do this, the former national security adviser of the United States, is full of advice. “Since we are already accused of subverting the Kremlin, why not give it a change?” asks the man for whom “the obstacles and uncertainties that block the change of the Russian regime are important, but not insurmountable”.
One-star Colonels and Generals, and their civilian counterparts, are most likely to take charge
“Disagreements and animosities already exist, as in all authoritarian regimes, [et sont] exploitable as soon as the dissidents get started”, writes John Bolton who enthusiastically shares his analysis according to which, “as in many coups d’etat in third world countries, the probable leadership for regime change does not will not come from senior officers and civil servants”. “One-star colonels and generals, and their civilian counterparts, are most likely to take charge,” he adds.
Bolton pleads for quiet US aid
“Foreigners can help in many ways”, recommends for the senior American official, before mentioning several fields of action in the matter, including the provision of financial support which he thinks could prove to be ” crucial”, even on a small scale. On this subject, John Bolton encourages the American administration, as far as possible, to exercise discretion. “It may be impossible to keep our actions secret, but it is probably not necessary to announce them with great publicity”, he sums up thus.
Now is not the time to be shy
In conclusion, the former senior White House official reaffirms loud and clear his attachment to assumed American interventionism in such situations. “Washington’s obvious strategic objective is to see Russia aligned with the West, an ideal candidate for NATO […]. While Russian regime change can be disheartening, the American goal of a peaceful and secure Europe, pursued episodically for more than a century, remains central to our national interests. Now is not the time to be shy.”
A long-standing attachment to American interventionism
Like the participation he himself claims in the planning of certain coups, the senior official is known to belong to the neoconservative current, which wants to support a warmongering and interventionist American foreign policy.
Thus, according to revelations by the former Director General of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the Brazilian José Bustani, John Bolton sometimes does not hesitate to use all the means of pressure in his possession, among the most threatening, in order to establish American interventionism in the face of the diversity of perspectives in certain international issues. “You have 24 hours to resign, we know where your children are, you have to make the right decision”, he would have threatened the senior Brazilian diplomat when he began to obtain some major advances on the Iraqi and Libyan files at the start. of the 2000s. At the time, José Bustani was the subject of a campaign by the American administration aimed at having him leave the OPCW – and which will indeed lead to his departure – because of his positions.
John Bolton was then in charge of disarmament issues for President George W Bush, who was to launch Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Iraq in 2003, under the false pretext, as we now know, that the latter would have had ‘weapons of mass destruction.
“If the Americans had taken a different position, we could have avoided the war in Iraq and all its consequences which are still relevant 20 years later. It is a great frustration for me”, confided on this subject José Bustani in October 2020.
RT All Fr Trans