: Return "Jackals"

The US Ambassador explained how, when and why he met with representatives of the Russian opposition. The painting “Employment on Russian Sovereignty”, which is drawn by television and propagandists, immediately disappears after his explanation. But for the Russian authorities it is beneficial - citizens need to show the non -alternativeness of the authorities.

In recent weeks, some revival of state propaganda has caused a change in the ambassador of the United States in Russia. It was not a personnel diplomat, but a specialist in Russia Michael McFol and the “patriotic” configured state propagandists in full “tucked” in the new ambassador.

One of the main accusations against the ambassador was that the ambassador first met with representatives of the Russian non -systemic opposition. The state media saw in this meeting that the new ambassador almost came to make an “orange revolution in Russia”.

Now the new ambassador in an interview with Kommersant explained how everything was really. According to McFol, it turns out that the ambassador himself first of all, as required by the diplomatic protocol, did not meet with representatives of the political opposition, but with officials from the Russian Foreign Ministry, who transferred universal letters. Then there were meetings with “high-ranking officials” (again not with the opposition). And then he was present at a meeting with representatives of the civil society, which was held by the Deputy Secretary of State at that time in Russia, once the ambassador to Russia William Burns.

According to Makfol, "when high -ranking officials come, the ambassador must attend their negotiations," and he himself "did not say almost nothing at the meeting with representatives of the opposition, but mainly listened."

It turns out that propaganda has not quite correctly interpreted the meeting: if anyone is plotting all sorts of nasty things against the Russian authorities, then this is not a new American ambassador.

The “victim”, however, was chosen quite successfully. Political scientist McFaol studied the “orange revolutions” in the post -Soviet space - before the assumption that he came to “embody ideas in practice”.

“The appointment of McFol and a great honor for us and the best characteristic of American-Russian relations. McFol is not a specialist in Russia. He is a specialist in the “purely concrete” promotion of democracy, ” - this is from the commentary of Mikhail Leontyev on the air of“ Channel One ”.

“Imagine how to react in the United States. If the newly arrived Russian ambassador, having not yet had time to present the discomfort, in the midst of the election campaign would hasten to meet with opponents of President Obama from the Republican camp. Unimaginable? That's it! ”, - this is already from the material of the TV presenter, and now also the head of the State Duma Committee on International Affairs Alexei Pushkov. And further: “What the new ambassador of the United States is devoted to the ideas of“ promotion of democracy ”, which the United States before our eyes promoted in different ways and methods in Ukraine, Iraq, and in Libya, and the Obama administration, normal working relations with Moscow are still necessary.”

Natural, in other words, the “enemy of Russia” came to us, to whom the “friendly” Russian TV immediately recalled that “the internal affairs of Russia” is “our business”.

It is probably fair, only from the words of McFol it turns out that the television propagandists have been a little “confused”. And he himself claims that the purpose of his work, the task set by Barack Obama is to deepen the reboot, and not some revolutionary activity. And besides, as McFol said to Kommersant, commenting on his specialization in orange revolutions, "" You can be a cancer tumor specialist, but this does not mean that you are advocating for the spread of cancer. "

The story with the new ambassador, of course, is more for internal use. The layman should once again show “Russia in the ring of enemies” and the non -alternativeness of the current government against the backdrop of the opposition that practically living among the American embassy. Which, if we develop the logic of pro -government propaganda, should sleep and see how to “pass” Russia to the Americans.

Rational arguments (like - “normal practice” or “all the norms of diplomatic etiquette were observed”) do not play any role here. It is not for that propaganda works.

In 2007, United Russia led to the elections, focusing on an external threat and those within the country who "jackaling foreign embassies." Now it was decided to update the scheme again - on the nose of the elections, and citizens do not have confidence in the megapopularity of the Russian authorities and even Vladimir Putin himself. Yes, and these rallies are unpleasant.

It is not up to rational explanations that the grant system to non -profit organizations, in principle, is absolutely normal and there is nothing criminal or “revolutionary” in it (McFol completely reminded that businessman Vladimir Potanin allocated a grant to the Kennedy Center in the United States). Here is an actual election campaign. The question is, however, whether the external threat will work forever as an actual internal agenda, but the people who are responsible for the Putin’s excess campaign seem to not ask themselves not to ask themselves.