Ambassador Nikki Haley Is Completely Clueless – OpEd

Just when we thought the great national embarrassment of a UN Ambassador Samantha Power was over, we are suddenly faced with a new US Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, who almost makes Ms. Power look like a giant in world affairs and diplomacy.

Addressing the UN Security Council Open Debate on Conflicts in Europe this week, Ambassador Haley managed to get nearly every single point spectacularly wrong while mixing in the most banal of platitudes to further deaden the delivery.

Said Haley:

It can be tempting to take Europe’s peace and security for granted. Europe is a continent of strong, stable democracies. And Europe is a continent of flourishing economies that benefit from close cooperation.

But Europe faces serious challenges – most acutely, Russia’s attempts to destabilize Ukraine and infringe upon Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

How exactly is Russia attempting to destabilize Ukraine? It was Russia, after all, and not the US, which called together the opposing sides two years ago to hammer out the “Minsk II” ceasefire and reconciliation agreement. Was not that in fact a stabilizing move rather than a destabilizing move?

Haley continues:

More than three years ago, the Ukrainian people took to the streets to speak out against political oppression and corruption. These protesters demanded freedom, democracy, and respect for the rule of law, and they succeeded in creating a new Ukraine.

That is not all what happened. It was the “protestors” who started the killing. They targeted police officers to provoke a response and thus add fuel to the simmering flame of months long protests in 2014. Russian propaganda, you say? Not at all. The killers went on television to brag about it!

Here is the story of one of the cop killers, Ivan Bubenchik, as reported in Foreign Policy magazine (hardly a pro-Russia outlet) and told on camera to Ukraine’s Hromadske TV station:

To create a word of mouth effect, you have to shoot two or three [police] commanders I only picked two. And after that, there was no need to kill anyone else, so I aimed at the legs.

Does Nikki Haley support killing police officers?

Another report — this time in the BBC — told the same story. It was Nikki Haley’s peaceful protestors who started the violence by shooting at police:

The protest leaders, some of whom now hold positions of power in the new Ukraine, insist full responsibility for the shootings lies with the security forces, acting on behalf of the previous government.

But one year on, some witnesses are beginning to paint a different picture.

‘I was shooting downwards at their feet,’ says a man we will call Sergei, who tells me he took up position in the Kiev Conservatory, a music academy on the south-west corner of the square.

‘Of course, I could have hit them in the arm or anywhere. But I didn’t shoot to kill.’

Sergei says he had been a regular protester on the Maidan for more than a month, and that his shots at police on the square and on the roof of an underground shopping mall, caused them to retreat.

Does Nikki Haley believe shooting police officers is justified as long as you’re demanding “respect for the rule of law”?

In fact, the overthrow of the government in Ukraine was not at all set in motion by the Ukrainian people. It was planned in Washington and executed in the streets of Kiev, where US policymakers openly urged an overthrow of the elected Ukrainian government.

It is established fact that US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland was on the streets of Kiev with US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt meeting with the protesters, encouraging them, and handing out food. Later she was caught in a phone call with the US Ambassador plotting in detail the overthrow of the government and how to replace it with Washington’s picks.

Senator John McCain (R-AZ) was also on the streets of Kiev during the early stages of the coup. He was actively supporting the overthrow of Ukraine’s legal government. Said McCain:

We are here to support your just cause, the sovereign right of Ukraine to determine its own destiny freely and independently. And the destiny you seek lies in Europe…

Later on CNN, McCain admitted his role in the coup, stating:

What we’re trying to do is try to bring about a peaceful transition here…

How would Senator McCain react were a Russian member of parliament appear in the midst of a Washington, D.C. riot urging “a peaceful transition here”?

Trump’s Ambassador to the UN continued:

But Russia has tried to prevent the change that the Ukrainian people demanded. Russia occupied Crimea and attempted to annex this piece of Ukrainian territory – an act the United States does not recognize.

That is also demonstrably false. Russia did not “occupy” Crimea because the Russian military was already in Crimea! Russia had leased the naval base in Crimea from the Ukrainian government until 2042. The troops were already there. Russia did not attempt to annex Crimea, but rather a referendum was held in which, according to the BBC, 90 percent of the residents voted to rejoin Russia (of which they had been a part since the 18th century).

Surely this is fake news! Why would Crimeans vote to leave Ukraine and join Russia? In fact Russians make up more than 65 percent of the population of Crimea and when the US-backed coup brought to power a vehemently anti-Russian government in Kiev was it really so surprising that the people would look for the exit signs?

Haley continues:

Russia then armed, financed, and organized separatist forces in eastern Ukraine, leading to a devastating and senseless conflict that has cost more than 10,000 lives.

Again untrue. The rebellion in eastern Ukraine was fueled by the US-backed coup in Kiev. Eastern Ukraine is predominantly Russian-speaking and in some parts of the region 96 percent voted for the president ousted with US support. As one might expect, unrest follows when one’s president is overthrown with assistance from an outside power. And it was the US who did the arming, financing, and organizing the unelected coup forces who took power in Kiev.

More Haley:

The scenes of destruction from the town of Avdiivka in recent weeks show the consequences of Russia’s ongoing interference in Ukraine.

Avdiivka fell under attack after the Kiev forces advanced into the no-man’s land separating the opposing sides. Ukrainian deputy defense minister Pavlovaky admitted that “meter by meter, step by step, whenever possible our boys have been advancing.”

You get the point. US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley has no clue what is happening in eastern Ukraine and so has just dusted off the dusty old talking points of the Obama Administration.

While on the campaign trail last year, Donald Trump sharply (and correctly) criticized the Obama Administration’s militaristic foreign policy. At the time Trump said:

…unlike other candidates for the presidency, war and aggression will not be my first instinct. You cannot have a foreign policy without diplomacy. A superpower understands that caution and restraint are really truly signs of strength.

He continued by calling for new people and new approaches to foreign policy:

My goal is to establish a foreign policy that will endure for several generations. That’s why I also look and have to look for talented experts with approaches and practical ideas, rather than surrounding myself with those who have perfect résumés but very little to brag about except responsibility for a long history of failed policies and continued losses at war. We have to look to new people.

Well, Mr. President, I am sorry to have to inform you of this, but when it comes to Ambassador Nikki Haley, you may technically have “new people” in positions but you most certainly do not have new ideas. You have failed former ambassador Samantha Power’s stale, regurgitated talking points. Enough!

This article was published by RonPaul Institute.

3 thoughts on “Ambassador Nikki Haley Is Completely Clueless – OpEd

  • February 26, 2017 at 12:42 pm
    Permalink

    Nikki dicki is nuts based on what she said. Is the U.S. running short of people with brains??

    Reply
  • February 26, 2017 at 1:07 pm
    Permalink

    Look folks, it’s NOT about Nickki. I’m sure she’s very smart. As an ambassador, she doesn’t speak her own mind; rather, she speaks for the USA. Every word of her speech was vetted and approved for “publication”. Which makes her speech far more alarming.

    Reply
  • February 26, 2017 at 3:40 pm
    Permalink

    Daniel McAdam’s dissection of Nikki Haley’s speech at the UN and countering every one of her points with the real life facts is refreshing. What a gift to us who also know these facts and get called Putin trolls whenever we state them. No, McAdams is not a Putin troll, just a person with a brain. But:

    Nikki Haley by virtue of her job of representing the US- i.e. the government – would have been entrusted with and obliged to say what she said at the UN. Which can have many reasons: For one, Trump wanted to normalize relations with Russia, but encountered large resistance in the Senate from the Dems who see their neocon hegemony agenda disappear and the Repub war hawks who insist on Russia being such a danger to justify more war. Trump has to be careful to avoid Congress passing a bill, which would limit the president from lifting sanctions on Russia without Congressional approval that would bind his hands and impede his strategy. He therefore changed his tactics a bit. Repeating the tired mantra of Russian interference in Ukraine may in fact be a way to have a lever to get Russia to come to the negotiating table and make some concessions too in order for Trump to lift the sanctions. Lifting the sanctions will in effect also be a refusal of the narrative of Russian intervention in Ukraine, which according to Obama is the “cause” for the sanctions. (In reality the sanctions were imposed to bankrupt Russia and force to submit to US hegemony.) Thus, until Trump can lift the sanctions, the false narrative about Ukraine has to be maintained. It is not for nothing that the Dems can’t stop vilifying Putin and Russia for all and everything that went wrong for the Dems. Notably that Trump won the election. Hence more sanctions. Just as nobody really knows how Russia in effect manipulated the elections – according to senator Al Franken there were no voting fraud or hacked voting machines.

    For a second sign that Nikki Haley’s speech is a place holder: Trump was effectively prevented from cooperating with Russia in Syria due to the absurd allegations that he and his campaign staff had continuing interactions with the Russians during the elections and before he was sworn in. There is no proof for that either and merely on the surface of it it sounds pretty unlikely that the Russians would have wanted to discuss any issues with campaign staff before Trump was even elected. As to the phone conversation between Flynn and Kislyak – clearly they didn’t discuss sanctions though that topic may have been mentioned, but Flynn would not have been able to make any statement about it. That Flynn was forced to resign is again a consequence of the vilification of Russia, Putin and Trump as Russian stooge: because Flynn is not an enemy of Russia and gave an interview on RT and attended a celebration for the many awards that RT won doesn’t mean that he would act in any way against US interests. But the Dems would tread that topic into an elephant and it risked to taint any later move by Trump to negotiate an agreement based on which the sanctions can be lifted. Unreported by the US MSM is the fact that the Iraqi government ordered strikes on Syria by its air force. These strikes were agreed upon by the Syrian government and are a sign that the four plus one, namely Syria, Iraq, Iran, Russia and Hezbollah (Lebanon) are all cooperating again. I.e. the arc of resistance to terrorism is restored. It is unlikely that the US military would not have known of these strikes and may even have provided the intelligence for them. Thus, although for interior US political reasons, the US cannot openly cooperate with Syria in the fight against ISIS, de facto via Iraq, it is cooperating. Which would confirm that Nikki Haley is “protecting the surface”. What further confirms that analysis is that various Trump aids beseeched the FBI to demur the endless accusations that the Trump camp had and continues to have ongoing conversations with their Russian counterparts. The topic was ridden to death by the Dems and there is no proof for those secret interactions. But the ongoing accusations again threaten to derail a carefully constructed base for negotiations with Russia and prove that the Dems and neocon Repubs will do everything they can to prevent Trump from normalizing relations with Russia.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CLOSE
CLOSE