In recent times, the media has demonstrated biased opinions. Many times the interviewer or the media body itself directs the articles it publishes or the interviews it does to show the reality according to its worldview. This is how false or inaccurate news is spread or does not really show the full picture. In the next section, we will discuss one journalist, whose worldview probably interferes with her journalistic work and causes her to distort reality in front of her viewers.
Journalist and TV presenter Christiane Amanpour inserted herself into the Azerbaijani-Armenian conflict after she hosted David Vardinyan, Ruben Vardinyan’s son, in the CNN studio. Ruben Vardinyan is an Armenian billionaire and philanthropist who headed the separatist regime in Karabakh that opposed the rightful Azerbaijani control over the land. Azerbaijan accuses Vardinyan of sabotaging the peace process between Azerbaijan and Armenia. But Vardinyan is not only accused of this accusation but also of crossing the border illegally, financing terrorism, and personally dealing with the Armenian terrorism directed towards Azerbaijan.
According to the evidence, Vardinyan used to cross the border into Karabakh illegally to provide separatist gangs with money and ammunition to use against the Azerbaijani army. The amount of weapons that the Armenian separatists received from Vardinyan is so great that to this day they continue to find the weapons he donated to them. Vardinyan never denied these claims, and even more so. More than once, Vardinyan has been caught threatening the Azerbaijani government, asserting the right of the Armenians and presenting views that even Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan claims are extreme. Vardinyan openly glorified the Armenian terrorists who carried out Operation Nemesis, in which many senior level Azerbaijani officials were murdered, and also threatened: “Anything can happen to the government of Azerbaijan”.
This man is not a freedom fighter or a human rights and peace activist; this man is a terrorist financier and an illegal money launderer. But for some reason, the journalist and TV presenter on behalf of CNN, Christiane Amanpour, interviews Vardinyan’s son and presents him as a poor man, as the victim in the story and basically commits plagiarism here. According to the interview, Vardinyan is on hunger strike, and barely receives phone calls and the conditions of his prison changed for the worse when he was transferred to solitary confinement.
Even when Amanpour did mention the fact that Vardinyan Sr. is accused of financing terrorism and establishing armed groups, the question was what would happen with the quick and transparent trial he requested. I mean, the very fact that Vardinyan acted like a war criminal goes over her head, as if it were a child who stole candy from the store because he didn’t know it was forbidden. It does not correct incorrect facts that Daniel Vardinyan said, for example, that no evidence was found against him when there is an evidentiary evidence that is already published to the general public. Amanpour went so far as to make Vardinyan appear in an interview as a man persecuted for his political views rather than his criminal acts. I have no complaints against Ruben Vardinyan’s son after all any son will protect his father, but the interviewer Christiane Amanpour simply did an injustice in this interview to the truth, to journalistic integrity, and to the Azerbaijani people.
In another interview that Amanpour conducted with the Palestinian ambassador to the UN, Riyad Mansour, she once again changed the picture according to her worldview. Amanpour spoke with Mansour about the situation in Gaza after the Israel Defense Forces began a ground operation in Rafah, the southernmost city in Gaza. In the interview, she presents the Palestinians as poor, those who are forced to deal with an army that occupies their land in a barbaric and unjust manner. The interview echoes that a second Nakba may happen to the Palestinian people (meaning that the Palestinians will flee their land as they fled in the 1948 war), that the Egyptians will not agree to accept the Gazans and the Jordanians will not agree to accept the residents of Judea and Samaria, but she does not talk about the reason why the Palestinians have reached the situation they are in these days.
Why did the IDF enter Rafah? Why is the IDF attacking Gaza at all? Just because the Israelis hate Arabs? No reason? No, there is a reason. On October 7, 2023, Hamas launched a barbaric attack devoid of humanity against the citizens of the State of Israel. Hundreds and even thousands of Gazans breached the border with Israel and tried to slaughter every Jew. They raped women, raped men too, and murdered old people, women, children, and babies. They opened a pregnant woman’s stomach and slaughtered it too. They kidnapped over 250 hostages, from a 90-year-old Holocaust survivor woman to a 10-month-old baby. Hamas started the operation on October 7, but later that day, after the border fence had already been breached, Gazan citizens who are not part of Hamas also entered the territory of Israel, but they simply heard that it was possible to enter Israel, loot property, rape women and murder Jews, so they joined the most murderous act of terrorism in recent years as if they had gone on a spontaneous trip.
In the interview, Amanpour continued and asked about the extremists in the Israeli government, which is so ironic that there is nothing left to say. After all, Israel is a country of law, it listens to international law and it knows that if it violates it, it may pay a heavy price for it in many ways. True, this is the most religious and most right-wing government that has existed in Israel to date. But Amanpour cannot ignore the murderous terrorist attack by Hamas, the largest pogrom perpetrated on Jews since the Holocaust, and instead talk about Israel’s extremism. All this proves without a shadow of a doubt that Christiane Amanpour changes the reality she broadcasts to her viewers according to her personal opinions.
I don’t know why these are Amanpour’s views. Perhaps because of her Iranian origin and the fact that Iran arms both the Palestinians and the Armenians makes her biased. Maybe these are simply opinions like those of the hippies in the 60s in America, according to which the weak is the right. I do not know. What I do know is that Amanpour gives reports that do not reflect reality as it really is and that she constantly supports terrorist separatists.
News about US Secretary of State Blinken making statements on China came this week while we were re-watching Dr. Zhivago. Flipping back and forth made me think of how Hong Kong was mostly ignored when their democracy was silently given away by the rest of the world without much action or similarly robust statements from the United States. Hong Kong’s silent loss as a prosperous member of democratic nations came in stages, much like the scene where Omar Sharif’s character finds his way back to his family home after the Communists took over Moscow.
After serving his people in war, the good doctor was berated for having such a large and wealthy estate by Communist political officials. His home was parsed out to other families, and his family and their possessions were confined to one room in their former home. A few scenes later, the other families were able to take his personal possessions, save a Balalaika, and his family was warned that any protest would lead to their arrest. Connections to a family member who told him that he would likely be arrested for his political ideas gave them the chance to leave, more so, survive as best as possible as the accusation was as good as a death sentence. Prosperity turned to obedient survival for most in society, with those lucky enough to have connections being the only ones to prosper. While Hong Kong may have not reached the last stages of this process, the silence on Hong Kong lead to one of the greatest losses of a democratic nation in modern times, mostly lost without Western support. As an added irony, the story of Dr. Zhivago was banned by the Soviets for subversive ideas and the author harassed and tortured throughout his entire life for producing non-state sanctioned art while living in the Soviet system.
Recent statements by the US revolved around China shipping raw material products to Russia that can be used to produce artillery shells and other weapons of war. While it had been assumed that China was shipping already made artillery and other weapons to Russia, the statement stopped short of claims of anything being sent past electronic components for weapons systems and raw metals for Russian arms manufacturers. As billions in support had been agreed to help Ukraine fight their war against Russia, reports of raw materials being sold to Russia by Western allies, and even NATO members, were not addressed in his statement on China’s exports. No mention was made on the third party sellers of Russian energy products still making their way into the European energy grid, nor on policies that keep North American energy exports in the ground while NATO allies continue to beg their partners for support via energy exports. Canada declined such help to a fourth ally recently as well, allies that are the bulwark against Russian and Chinese military threats to Europe and Taiwan, helping raise energy profits for those pushing against NATO more than contributing to its collective defense.
Ukraine has been losing some territory in recent weeks, and the debate around giving military and financial assistance contributes greatly to later outcomes. Areas such as Western Ukraine that saw Lviv as an early escape for internal refugees inside of Ukraine is now suffering more missile and drone attacks. Much of the expense in defending Ukraine comes from having anti-air systems destroy missiles and drones that are targeting Ukrainian civilian infrastructure. Despite the tense disagreements in funding Ukraine, there is little to no thought given to targeting the source of many of the missile and drones by destroying their manufacturing plants inside of Iran. Despite multiple acts of war against international shipping, US allies, US service members, Ukraine, civilians and terror victims, the US will not address the source of these terror weapons despite them being designed purposefully to kill civilians. If Blinken wishes to openly condemn China for its exports on unmade weapons supplies to Russia, he should also address the suppliers in his own backyard and manage known threats that have already expanded the war in Ukraine globally. The lack of full action against the current conflict in Ukraine has given space for other conflicts to take hold, all to the external and internal detriment of Western allies. A stern speech against China exporting copper is not the main source of problems for Ukraine and its allies. Priorities ignored has lead to more conflict, starting with the active bleaching of Hong Kong from the discussion. Real priorities are very evident, being avoided if not directly discouraged from being addressed, and are currently flying towards a cargo ship in the Red Sea. The end result can be as bad as life in a Boris Pasternak novel, with the artists being treated as such in Western societies. It remains to be seen if his books will be eventually banned in Hong Kong under the current Government.
The years 2022 into 2024 has shown the importance of having sophisticated anti-air defence systems in the application of international policy. Attacks in Ukraine and in the Middle East, as well as possible future ballistic missile threats against South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan would often require a direct and immediate response to an attack. With more advanced AI, radar systems, and interceptor missiles, the ability to sustain an attack and measure out a proper response is something that was only imaginable over the last few years. With systems like Iron Dome, Arrow, THAAD, Patriot PAC-2 and 3, as well as the S-400 systems, and TOR, the tamping down of an escalatory situation is now possible with the reduction of lives lost during an attack. While this advancement of missile technology is a gift in preventing the escalation of war, it must be applied with a mix of different policy and defence measures to have a long term and lasting effect.
With missile protection, there is more room for adaptive policies, but no population should accept living under a constant barrage of missiles. An economy and society would not be able to tolerate constant threats of war and eventual losses of their citizens when the defense system is overwhelmed or outdated. Deterrence through political dialogue and strong offensive measures to match the defensive shield is essential in having a robust missile defense policy. The best way to avoid being hit by a missile, is to either not be in the location of the missile strike, or to eliminate the source of the problem. As most countries are unable to simply move, there must always be a real and direct ability to counter any artillery assaults on military and civilian populations. Often a missile assault is related to a past build up of tensions, and the best defense is not simply the best offense, but one that can target opposing missile forces at the time of preparation and launch. For this reason, generations of ballistic missile systems from the Soviet FROG systems, towards the infamous SCUDs, as well as Scarab, Oka and modern Iskander systems focused on shorter and shorter launch times. The inability to stop a ballistic missile or cruise missile means you have no deterrence measures to hold back a possible attack. Words must be combined with actions in the application of international relations, as has always been the case.
Diplomacy is still the Alpha and Omega of preventing conflict. In the modern era of ballistic missile systems that can range from hypersonic systems, to chemical, biological and nuclear, even an intercepted missile could still rain down chemical weapons on a population. Often nuclear missiles are detonated over a target, and an intercepted nuclear missile could still destroy a population centre if intercepted and detonated in the skies over a city. When diplomacy in the prevention of a ballistic missile attack is not respected or wholly ignored, it will only lead to more of the same in an increasingly harmful threat level and deaths of innocent populations. If a country is threatened with such an attack, they have the obligation to respond in protection of its citizenry. If a country does not possess such capabilities, they should acquire those systems or allies with those systems and counter threats with immediate and direct actions. While bunkers and missile defense may prevent mass casualty events, preventing aggressive actions against a population against actors from abroad is part of the Social Contract every citizen has with their Government. Any country that has existed and survived past three generations has always taken such steps to ensure their own future. Ones that do not react in such a manner are often already on the path to their own disintegration. Surviving is not by chance, and the survivors always prevail for good reason.