Fakery! Russia Has Published Books I Didn’t Write!

The Daily Beast ^ | 08.20.15 | Edward Lucas

[Krosan]

Russia Has Published Books I Didn’t Write! A dodgy imprint has compiled old material by several U.S. and British analysts, without their permission. The aim is pro-Putin spin.

A new foreign-language edition is normally cause for celebration in an author’s household. But in this case the news that two books have been published under my name by the Moscow publishing house “Algoritm” has prompted puzzlement mixed with consternation. One of them is called "How the West Lost to Putin". The other is "With Putin or without him: what awaits Russia in the next 10 years". I had no idea about either. Nor had my agents, Rogers Coleridge and White, who have dealt with 30-plus foreign-language editions of my previous books.

I am not the only recipient of this unexpected and unwanted compliment. My colleague Luke Harding, a former Moscow correspondent of the London Guardian, and my friend Don Jensen, a veteran cold warrior and commentator, have also had books published in their names. Rather more grandly, another book has come out in the name of Henry Kissinger.

It is hard to work out the justification for what looks like an act of intellectual piracy. “My” two books seem to be a collection of interviews and articles already published in other outlets. I may be mistaken, but I don’t think that Algoritm is going to find that a commercial bonanza. I did publish my first book, The New Cold War in Russian, but sales were modest. The effort of collating and translating less substantial bits of work would hardly be merited by the likely sales.

So it is more likely that the aim is propagandistic. The blurb on the publisher’s website says that: “Lucas expresses the views of that part of the British establishment which is negatively directed to the politics of the Putin regime.” The Kremlin’s spin machine wants to portray Russia as a besieged fortress surrounded by malevolent outsiders. How better to demonstrate that than by publishing an establishment jackal who yaps the tunes of the British establishment?

A wise friend of mine from Washington, D.C., has another explanation. A regular theme in my articles is that the West is underestimating the threat from Putin’s Russia. Put bluntly, we are losing. We don’t understand the effect of Russian propaganda, of Russian money in Western politics, and the scale and speed of Russia’s military buildup, especially as far as nuclear weapons are concerned.

Those words are aimed at the complacency-mongers in the West: people who intone that “there is no military solution” and who believe that all we need to do is to craft a win-win solution that Russia will go for. But seen from the Kremlin, they look like a hymn of praise. Putin has outsmarted the West. A strong, united Russia is winning over its weak, divided and decadent adversaries. Perhaps it is worth publishing a book or two which paints that picture in persuasive colors.

For the record, I also argue that the West is losing not because it is weak, but because it is weak-willed. Against a combined NATO and E.U. GDP of $40 trillion, it is hard to see how Russia, a shrinking petro-economy with a GDP of $1.7 trillion, could mount a serious challenge. The Kremlin’s weapons are at best surprise, bluff and subterfuge, not real muscle. I doubt any Russian publishing house will be interested in making that point forcefully.

I suspect (and hope) this episode will end up as a minor footnote in a bigger story. For now, my efforts are concentrated on my new book, Cyberphobia, which comes out later this month. I don’t want to give too much away (it deals with trust, identity, anonymity and the way the Internet is run), but the Kremlin will hate it.

[Krosan]

Seems something that North Korea would do.

Buy the newest book by James Joyce titled ‘Kim Jong-Un is the perfect human being’!

[ETL]

One of them is called "How the West Lost to Putin"

Here's how...

Obama was talking with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev when neither of them realized that their conversation was being picked up by microphones. Here is what they said:

Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space.”

Medvedev: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you ...”

Obama: “This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.”

Medvedev: “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”

“This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.” That statement tells us much about the president’s mindset.

The specific mention of missile defense is worrisome enough. Mr. Obama has retreated from the missile defense plan that was negotiated with European allies during the George W. Bush administration. Apparently, he is signaling Moscow that he intends to retreat further. The clear implication from the president’s comments is that he cannot tell the American people before the election what he plans to do after the election.

In addition, there is the phrase “on all these issues,” implying more is at stake than just missile defense.”

Article: Obama plans double cross on missile defense
When it comes to keeping America safe, we shouldn’t be too flexible:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/29/obama-plans-double-cross-on-missile-defense/print/
_________________________________________

Obama was talking with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev when neither of them realized that their conversation was being picked up by microphones. Here is what they said:

[ETL]

Obama To Betray Missile Defense Secrets To Moscow
Investor's Business Daily ^ | January 9, 2012 | IBD staff

Appeasement: From ObamaCare to recess appointments, honoring the Constitution has not been an administration hallmark. But when it comes to betraying secrets to mollify the Russians, it becomes a document the president hides behind.

It was bad enough that the 2012 defense authorization bill signed by President Obama set America on a downward spiral of military mediocrity.

He also issued a signing statement, something he once opposed, saying that language in the bill aimed at protecting top-secret technical data on the U.S. Standard Missile-3 — linchpin of our missile defense — might impinge on his constitutional foreign-policy authority.

Section 1227 of the defense law prohibits spending any funds that would be used to give Russian officials access to sensitive missile-defense technology as part of a cooperation agreement without first sending Congress a report identifying the specific secrets, how they'd be used and steps to protect the data from compromise.

The president is required to certify that any technology shared will not be passed on to third parties such as China, North Korea or Iran, that the Russians will not use transferred secrets to develop countermeasures and that the Russians are reciprocating in sharing missile-defense technology.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
__________________________________________________

[ETL]

From the campaign trail, 2008...

Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs

February 29, 2008 :: News
MissileThreat.com

A video has surfaced of Presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama talking on his plans for strategic issues such as nuclear weapons and missile defense.

The full text from the video, as released, reads as follows:

Thanks so much for the Caucus4Priorities, for the great work you've been doing. As president, I will end misguided defense policies and stand with Caucus4Priorities in fighting special interests in Washington.

First, I'll stop spending $9 billion a month in Iraq. I'm the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning. And as president I will end it.[i.e. not win it]

Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending.

I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems.

I will not weaponize space.

I will slow our development of future combat systems.

And I will institute an independent "Defense Priorities Board" to ensure that the Quadrennial Defense Review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.

Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals.

You know where I stand. I've fought for open, ethical and accountable government my entire public life. I don't switch positions or make promises that can't be kept. I don't posture on defense policy and I don't take money from federal lobbyists for powerful defense contractors. As president, my sole priority for defense spending will be protecting the American people. Thanks so much.

Article: Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090412030633/http://missilethreat.com/archives/id.7086/detail.asp

"MissileThreat.com is a project of The Claremont Institute devoted to understanding and promoting the requirements for the strategic defense of the United States."

Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs

[sport]

I believe that he already has. I also believe that if he hasn’t , Hillary has. And last but not least, I do not believe that our enemies did not learn anything from Manning that they already did not know. That the information Manning released had been given to them by Obama and/or Clinton long before Manning released it. I know that Obama and Clinton are the god and goddess of the Democrats.

[ETL]

That was an old article. Sometimes old articles contain bits of info that gets lost later on.

[Krosan]

You probably mean Snowden leak. Manning leak had less important stuff as it was mostly just embassy telegrams.

[lodi90]

For the record, I also argue that the West is losing not because it is weak, but because it is weak-willed. Against a combined NATO and E.U. GDP of $40 trillion, it is hard to see how Russia, a shrinking petro-economy with a GDP of $1.7 trillion, could mount a serious challenge.

---

LOL. So true. Russia is biggest country in the world with a kleptocratic petro economy the size of Italy.

So some Russkies stole this guys work? Russians doing what they do best: stealing.

[Krosan]

with a kleptocratic petro economy the size of Italy

---

That is old data from time with high oil prices. By latest IMF predictions Russian 2015 GDP will be $1.17 trillion. That is smaller than Mexico’s $1.23 trillion and yet some people talk about Russia as if they were a superpower.

[Krosan]

Oh ... and they didn’t steal Mr. Lucas’s work. They just published a book praising Putin under his name. Something that Edward Lucas never wrote and would never do. Same with fake books praising Putin under the names of other famous authors.

[sport]

You are correct. I got them confused.

[sport]

And true to the Free Republic tradition, I posted before I read the article.

[ETL]

No problem. I do need to update some of these from time to time.