Nobel Peace Laureate Vladimir Putin?

Nobel Peace Laureate Vladimir Putin?

by Stephen Lendman ( – Home – Stephen Lendman)

In today’s upside down world, warmakers win peace prizes, champions of peace, stability, and the rule of law shunned.

Nobel hypocrisy is longstanding, a rogue’s gallery of lawbreakers honored by its Committee’s highest award since 1901, including 4 US warrior presidents, Obama the most recent in 2009.

Vladimir Putin is cut from a different cloth, a champion of peace and the rule of law throughout his time in high office, notions US authorities abhor and don’t tolerate.

Nominated on September 10 for Nobel Peace Prize honors, Putin is highly likely to be shunned for supporting peace over forever wars waged by the US and its imperial partners.

In 2016, a huge banner bearing his image against the backdrop of Russia’s national flag  — along with 2 stars on a white background similar to Syria’s flag — was captioned peacemaker.

Draped over the Manhattan Bridge, NYPD removed it. 

Its spokesman at the time said he didn’t know how long it was there, adding:

“We do not know who did it. No arrests have been made.”

He didn’t say whether city authorities considered the flattering public display of his image a crime or a misdemeanor.

In June, Putin called for the 5 permanent Security Council members to develop “collective principles (for) preserving peace, strengthening global and regional security, strategic arms control, as well as joint efforts in countering terrorism, extremism and other major challenges and threats.”

He also urged collective world community efforts to deal responsibly with economic crisis conditions and COVID-19 outbreaks.

At the time, he noted that “(t)he  creation of the modern system of international relations is one of the major outcomes of the Second World War,” adding:

“It is a duty of ours — all those who take political responsibility and primarily representatives of the victorious powers in the Second World War — to guarantee that this system is maintained and improved.”

He opposed elimination of veto power by the Security Council’s 5 permanent members, saying:

Calls to abolish it are “irresponsible…(I)f that happens, the United Nations would in essence become the League of Nations – a meeting for empty talk without any leverage on the world processes. How it ended is well known.”

In response to deadlocked talks between Russia and the US on extending New START, their last remaining bilateral arms control agreement, he proposed its extension for another five years as stipulated by its terms while talks continue — with no preconditions.

Days earlier, Putin urged cooperation between Russia and the US on cybersecurity.

Preventing cyberspace confrontation is the “special responsibility” of key world community nations, he said.

He urged “continued and effective work via communication channels between the agencies concerned.”

“We are calling upon the United States to give the green light to a Russian-US professional expert dialogue on international information security issues, without making it a hostage of our political disagreements.”

“These measures are aimed at enhancing trust between our countries and ensuring the security and prosperity of our peoples.” 

“They would make a tangible contribution to establishing global peace in the international cyberspace.”

Putin called for “guarantees of nonintervention into the internal affairs of each other, including into electoral processes.” 

He urged bilateral dialogue to avoid being “hostage to our political disagreements.”

Whenever he, Sergey Lavrov or other Russian officials call for improved bilateral relations with the US, it falls on deaf ears in the White House and Congress.

Establishment media mock him. In response to his call for Russia/US cyberspace cooperation, the NYT defied reality, saying:

He “used cyber-techniques to attack elections from the Ukraine to the United States (sic), stole emails from the (war) department to the White House (sic), and developed some of the world’s most sophisticated disinformation efforts (sic).”

In response to his call for guarantees of non-interference in the electoral process of both nations, the Times repeated the Big Lie of Russian US election meddling in 2016, intending it in November (sic), claiming:

Groups “linked to” Russia’s “military and…intelligence agencies (are) intense(ly) focus(ing) (on) the 2020 (US) election (sic).”

The above and much more is typical Times rubbish, while supporting endless US wars against invented enemies, ignoring its high crimes of war and against humanity.

The same goes for other establishment media, featuring fake news over truth and full disclosure.

A Final Comment

In response to Putin’s Nobel Peace Prize nomination, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the following:

“You know that absolutely different people are being nominated for this prize.” 

“These are initiatives of those putting forward relevant proposals.” 

“There is a certain procedure of considering nominees.” 

“If such a decision is made (honoring Russia’s president), it will be great.”

“If it is not, it will not be a problem. It is hard to say anything else.”

VISIT MY WEBSITE: (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at

My two Wall Street books are timely reading:

“How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion, and Class War”


“Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: