How ironic that Associate Professor Hoadley’s opinion piece in the Herald this week, warning of the threat posed by Russian propaganda to our understanding of the war in the Ukraine, should appear in a newspaper which only publishes accounts of the conflict which support the US/NATO narrative.
Claiming Russian propaganda is being “widely promulgated” when, in fact, since Russian news outlets are blocked and with our media publishing only the US version of events, an opposite reality seems more likely, Prof Hoadley exposes himself as either naïve or woefully biased.
Describing Russia’s version of events as being “strikingly implausible narratives” and “as audacious and superficially credible as it is false,” Hoadley asked why it was believed, when actually the self-same description might be ascribed to the version of events we’re being fed, and the self-same questions asked.
How convenient is it that such a litany of atrocities as those we’re told are being perpetrated by Russian troops, should now suddenly appear in our newspapers and on our TV screens? And how reminiscent are they of the stories of similar atrocious acts being committed by others opposed to the US and its “New World Order,” in other theatres of conflict in recent times?
Remember; Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, babies being thrown from incubators in Kuwait, Syrian civilians being savagely attacked with barrel bombs and poisonous gas by their government. And who can forget the utterly discredited “white helmets,” not to forget the on-going creeping genocide being waged on the Palestinians, but blamed on them by our media.
To provide proof of Russia’s perfidiousness, Hoadley sited the actions of the mediaeval Rus tribe against rival tribes, in the 9th and 10th centuries, and then later against the Mongol rule in the 12th century, as somehow being proof that Russia cannot be trusted today.
If ever there was an example of a betrayal of trust which Hoadley could have used, but didn’t, it was surely that which followed the dissolution of the USSR and Russia’s conversion to a Capitalist economy, not in centuries past but just a decade or so ago.
With no more need for NATO to exist then, let alone double in size and spread, that was a betrayal of trust which, contrary to solemn promises given, clearly signalled to Russia that the West has plans for Russia that involve more than just a change of economic direction.
But most significantly, in failing to mention that betrayal of trust, or the 2014 US-engineered coup in Ukraine, which installed a regime that immediately signalled its intent to join NATO, a red line long drawn in the sand by Russia, Hoadley steered well clear of any contemporary context, because he knows it doesn’t fit his story.
It’s one thing for a member of the community to express a biased opinion on a matter of such gravity, but quite another when the message is being delivered by an Associate Professor from the faculty of Politics and International Relations in our biggest university.
But, in this instance, especially as we’re talking about integrity, readers should also have been made aware that, according to the Auckland University website, Professor Hoadley is a former US Navy serviceman and an honorary Captain in the Royal New Zealand Navy.
But, that aside, and to be fair to Associate Professor Hoadley, if his opinion piece had been more balanced the Herald wouldn’t have published it.