How & Why the U.S. Media Do Propaganda Against Russia

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at

The owners of U.S. newsmedia know that in order to serve their fellow U.S. aristocrats who want to kick out Russia’s current leader, Vladimir Putin, so as to enable them to buy Russia’s natural resources (and highly educated work-forces) cheap via “privatizations,” their PR campaign for their fellow aristocrats (their major advertisers) must be led by ‘respectable’ newsmedia, such as Foreign Policy  magazine, and not by blatantly right-wing, obviously trashy, ones, such as Fox News. Overtly conservative, nationalistic, ‘news’ media wouldn’t be able to sell to anyone who isn’t already on-board with privatizations of government assets as being a fundamental “free market” principle (i.e, equating fascism — the actual originator of privatizations — with constituting ‘capitalism,’ confusing the two systems as being one-and-the-same). So: not only the fascist media are anti-Putin, but media that pretend not to be are also.

Also important, however, is to black out entirely from all U.S. reporting, the U.S. Government’s now very active campaign to conquer Russia by installing next door to Russia, in its former buffer states (the Warsaw Pact nations), new NATO nations, such as Obama hopes to achieve in Ukraine by his February 2014 coup e’etat, which violently overthrew that nation’s then-neutralist democratically elected President, whom U.S. newsmedia very prominently reported was corrupt (in order to fool Americans into thinking that this was somehow a justified overthrow), while they didn’t report that all previous leaders of Ukraine had also been corrupt, so that this U.S. excuse for overthrowing Ukraine’s President Viktor Yanukovych was entirely fake — not just illegitimate, but fake. Furthermore, they didn’t report that the reason why Yanukovych had turned down the EU’s offer (which the U.S. had backed, and which turndown by him was America’s other main excuse for overthrowing him) was that it would have cost Ukraine $160 billion. In fact, U.S. newsmedia didn’t even report that the coup was  a coup, even though the head of Stratfor, the private-CIA firm, has acknowledged that it was “the most blatant coup in history,” and the President of the Czech Republic has said that “only poorly informed people” don’t know that it was a coup. He said of these “poorly informed people,” that, “They believe that there was something similar, to our Velvet Revolution … Majdan was no democratic revolution.” And, on 20 June 2015, an obscure news-release from the Ukrainian Government itself headlined “Poroshenko asking Constitutional Court to recognize law stripping Yanukovych of presidential title as unconstitutional,” and reported, as I explained two days later:

Ukraine’s President Petro Poroshenko requests the supreme court of Ukraine to declare that his predecessor, Viktor Yanukovych, was overthrown by an illegal operation; in other words, that the post-Yanukovych government, including Poroshenko’s own Presidency, came into power from a coup, not from something democratic, not from any authentic constitutional process at all.

In a remarkable document, which is not posted at the English version of the website of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, but which is widely reported outside the United States, including Russia, Poroshenko, in Ukrainian (not in English), has petitioned the Constitutional Court of Ukraine (as it is being widely quoted in English):

“I ask the court to acknowledge that the law ‘on the removal of the presidential title from Viktor Yanukovych’ as [being] unconstitutional.”

It’s also interesting that when Stratfor’s founder admitted that it was “the most blatant coup in history,” he was saying this to a Russian publication, which published it only in Russian, whereas when his employee recently referred to it, in a video for an American audience, she said (at 4:43 on the video) “the United States helped support the revolution [though it was no revolution, just a coup] that took place in Ukraine this past year.” Stratfor doesn’t want to go overboard to the extent of losing its big-bucks clients, some of which are the people that Obama’s foreign policies represent, but even this employee was so bold as to admit that the United States and not Russia is the aggressor between the two — something the U.S. media won’t allow to be said.

(She expressed puzzlement there at why the U.S. public have come to believe the demonization of Putin, but she’s not so dumb as not to know the answer to that, and she later even said it on the video, at 4:43: “The way that the American media has put it out there is that Russia is being the aggressor.” The video itself was even posted to youtube as, “Conversation: The U.S. Media’s Misleading Portrayal of Russia.” But the video portrayed the newsmedia as merely reflecting American public opinion, instead of as shaping  it and being paid by their sponsors to shape it their way, which everyone at Stratfor knows is the reality. The deception is all paid-for. America’s aristocrats are running both the U.S. Government, and the way it and the world-at-large are being portrayed to the public. They control the public, both coming and going.)

America’s aggression against Russia first became overt when the U.S. aristocracy’s President, Bill Clinton (who killed FDR’s Glass Steagall Act and Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society AFDC program, and so was one of the best fake ‘Democrats’ until Obama came along and turned Heritage Foundation ideas into U.S. national policies), rejected Russia’s request to join NATO, and he instead invited into NATO three former members of the Warsaw Pact: Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland. Clinton used the cooked-up excuse against Russia that Russia was then trying to retain Chechnya, though that’s a part of Russia which serves as an essential buffer against possible invasion by Islamic tribes to the south, from Georgia, Dagestan, and Azerbaijan; and so Chechnya’s breakaway movement actually did constitute a national security threat to the rest of Russia. Chechnya was none of the United States’s business, but Clinton needed an excuse, and it served that function for him. The Toledo Blade’s Mike Sigov even headlined on 7 November 1999, “Clinton’s Appeal to Halt Fighting in Chechnya Falls on Deaf Ears,” and he wrote: “‘Why does the United States keep humiliating us?’ they often ask. My friends in Russia, … periodically ask me this question. It happened when the United States and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies denied Russia’s request to join NATO and instead admitted Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic.” The U.S. aristocracy had wanted, actually, to conquer Russia; they didn’t want merely for the Cold War to end — this was now clear. They want to keep it going until Russia itself is conquered. Obama is doing the same thing at the end of his Presidency that Clinton had done at the end of his, but maybe even worse, because Obama has placed Ukraine into control by rabidly anti-Russian nazis, who are also now teaching the children.

Despite the general blockade against truth, a few American newsmedia have reported, throughout this summer, that Ukraine’s far-right leaders (such as Dmitriy Yarosh) are threatening another “Maidan,” to overthrow the present President of Ukraine, but they don’t report that those same leaders (including Yarosh himself) were instrumental in Barack Obama’s coup in February 2014: the CIA had arranged payments for Yarosh and his people, and, without this U.S. organization and financial backing (including even the establishment of a major TV station to propagandize for overthrowing Yanukovych and for mass-murdering the people who had voted for him), there would have been no coup. None of this information appears in U.S. newsmedia. The American public are widely ignorant of the reality about Ukraine. There are plenty of reports that stenographically transcribe and transmit to the American public the official ‘facts’ about Ukraine, but nothing that exposes the reality, which would be to expose the U.S. aristocracy itself (and this extends all the way from George Soros on the left, to the Koch brothers on the right: virtually the entire aristocracy are committed to defeating the public, not only at home, but abroad).

Therefore, Poroshenko is, in effect, telling Yarosh and his supporters: If you do this again, this time to me, then there will already be a decision from our highest court saying that what you did last time was illegal. And, Poroshenko had already acknowledged, just as the coup was ending, when the EU’s investigator asked him how the overthrow had occurred: We did it, the snipers who shot both the demonstrators and the police were ours; it was a set-up job so as to appear that the violence had been initiated or perpetrated by Yanukovych’s forces, which were actually performing a defensive function, not offensive at all. So: he was already privately on record as having acknowledged this. But that, too, was not published in the American press, even though the evidence for it was first posted online on 5 March 2014, just a week after the coup. Basically, it has all been kept secret from the American people, just as the coup itself has been, and just as the ethnic cleansing to get rid of Yanukovych’s voters has been.

And this has been a thoroughly bipartisan operation of the U.S. Government, not merely Democrats, and not merely Republicans. Both Parties are in the aristocrats’ pockets. (The man whom Congress applauded there was then overseeing the nazi operation.) This has not always been the case; it certainly wasn’t so when Franklin Delano Roosevelt was America’s President; but it is today.

So, some typical examples of their propaganda-operation are:

Bruce Stokes headlines in Foreign Policy  on 6 August 2015, “NATO’s Rot from Within,” and concludes his analysis of polling in the 9 major NATO countries by noting a lack of public support for NATO in all countries except “the Americans (56 percent) and the Canadians (53 percent) stand ready to go to the defense of a NATO partner against Russia.” His implicit viewpoint is that all NATO countries need to tool-up for a war against Russia; Russia is surrounding NATO, NATO isn’t surrounding Russia.

The mainstream The Daily Beast headlines on 14 August 2015, “Pentagon Fears It’s Not Ready for a War With Putin,” and Nancy A. Youssef opens: “The U.S. military has run the numbers on a sustained fight with Moscow, and they do not look good for the American side. A series of classified exercises over the summer has raised concerns inside the Defense Department that its forces are not prepared for a sustained military campaign against Russia, two defense officials told The Daily Beast.” Again, the underlying assumption is that Russia is the biggest national security threat to the United States, and so there need to be increases in U.S. ‘defense’ spending, to counter Russia’s ‘aggression.’

U.S. News headlined on 23 June 2015, “Top GOP Lawmaker: US Must Consider Building New Nukes,” and Paul D. Shinkman opened: “America needs to replace a rotting arsenal of nuclear weapons and counteract an increasingly boisterous Russia, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee said Tuesday. For these reasons, it must consider the long-taboo prospect of building new nukes.”

The U.S. already spent 55.2% of its discretionary federal spending on its military. More money than that would transform the national economy into national impoverishment, because one can’t eat, nor live in, bombs and tanks, nor in any of the other machinery of destruction.

Why even watch ‘the news’ on television, or read about it in magazines or newspapers?

But there are a few honest news reports even in the U.S. major newsmedia: On 24 February 2014, just as the U.S. coup in Ukraine was ending, NBC News bannered, “U.S. Military Spending Dwarfs Rest of World,” and they showed that “The U.S. spent more on defense in 2012 than the countries with the next 10 highest budgets combined.” It was about 8 times what Russia had spent, and this amount didn’t even include the additional spending by other NATO countries, all of which have mutual-defense treaties with the U.S. When the Soviet Union broke up in 1991, the Warsaw Pact, which was to Russia what NATO was to the U.S., simply terminated; Russia has since been all alone; and it should have been brought into NATO if NATO weren’t to disband as the Warsaw Pact had done. But the U.S. didn’t do likewise; instead, it rejected Russia. Instead, to the exact contrary, the U.S. invited and brought into NATO seven of the eight former Warsaw Pact countries. That’s aggression. But the U.S. calls “aggression” anything that Russia does to protect itself. Only suckers would believe that, but there’s a sucker born every minute — no, every second! (How could the aristocracy even survive, otherwise?)

In February, President Obama issued his “National Security Strategy 2015” and it used the word “aggression” 18 times, of which 17 referred to Russia as the alleged “aggressor.” If this is merely a mental illness that Obama has, then why are the U.S. ‘news’ media in lockstep behind it? But this strategy isn’t directed only against Russia, it’s directed also against the rest of Europe, even against other NATO countries.

A 2013 Gallup poll of 65 countries that was co-sponsored by the U.S. Government and thus never fully published, reportedly found that among people worldwide, “The US was the overwhelming choice (24% of respondents) for the country that represents the

greatest threat to peace in the world today. This was followed by Pakistan (8%), China (6%), North Korea, Israel and Iran (5%).” (Russia wasn’t even there, in the top 5; and nothing below the top 5 was mentioned.) And Obama hadn’t yet perpetrated his coup and ethnic cleansing in Ukraine.

But there was no report of any such poll made afterwards, none at all. Perhaps the U.S. Government didn’t want another, because they now knew that they and their press would need to do a lot more work in order to get Russia to be #1 on that list. Maybe this is what they’ve been working on.

However, it’s already clear that the Nobel Committee should abolish their ‘Peace Prize,’ after their having given it to Kissinger, and then to Obama. Maybe they should replace it with a Hypocrisy Prize. Obama would certainly qualify for that. Maybe they could get him to trade in his old prize for that new one, so as to reduce their embarrassment (if they’re not just psychopaths, anyway, like Kissinger and Obama).


Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

This entry was posted in Business / Economics, Energy / Environment, General, Media, Politics / World News, propaganda and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • The single greatest threat to world peace was to allow the MIC contracts to supply while including ISDS provisions.

  • Libertybelle

    I will discuss the theme of this article in a moment. But first things first. Someone needs to edit this article for run-on sentences. The lack of good editing may be the reason why so few people commented on this important article.

    I can handle extremely difficult English writing–James Mdison–for instance. I can even handle some of Chaucer written in the original Middle-English (it is mixed with German). But I had to grind my eyes nearly to a halt to work my way through most of the sentences in this article.

    In English composition or grammar, once you have a verb and a subject, you ought to put a period down on your paper. Then move to the next thought. The purpose of a period is to BREATHE in oxygen. It is a full stop. It represents, in writing, how one would talk aloud. Try reading most of the sentences in the above article aloud to a stranger. It would sound like gibberish. People might start looking for excuses to leave the room or get away from you. And that is sad because so many important things are being communicated.

    When one has to go back several commas to recapture the original thought, unnecessary obfuscation is at work. The subject matter alone is hard enough to comprehend. It need not be made more difficult by excessive grammatical errors. Not to mention excessive use of parentheses complicated by blue hyperlinks.

    A paper riddled with run-on sentences is evidence of a lack of knowledge in one of the most basic rules of English composition and grammar. But it is one of the easiest things to correct.


    Now onto the subject at hand.

    Zuesse hits the nail on the head bringing in Foreign Relations (FR) magazine. Why is that publication important to this discussion and what is happening overseas and in the US media? FR is produced by The Council On Foreign Relations. The CFR is a tool of the CIA. And the CIA is at the bottom of much villainy in the world today. I sense they think themselves clever and lawful by working through an organization having to do with “foreign relations”. And I sense they think this allows them to infiltrate the US media.

    But they would be wrong. It is lawlessness on their part. It is unethical, immoral, and diabolical. And in my opinion it is satanic.

    Furthermore, every major media outlet from ABC to Fox News is a corporate member of the CFR and is this controlled by the insidious presence of the CIA at these meetings. I repeat endlessly to any who will listen that the CFR is dedicated to global government. And to achieve that goal the nation states around the globe must be neutralized and subjugated to the supra-national authority the CFR wishes to create. And the CIA wants control over that authority. That is what all of this is about. And as you never hear the US media tell the truth about what really happened in the Ukraine with the coup, you will never hear, say, Megyn Kelly of Fox News, or Anderson Cooper of CNN blast the public continually with the truth that their “news” outlets are controlled by the CIA through the CFR for the purpose of subjugated the whole planet to supranational governance.

    All major players in both mainstream US political parties belong to the CFR. Clinton and Cheney. Kerry and Kissinger. Biden and Bush. You get the picture. The CIA is currently trolling for its next president which it will elect because it controls the voting booth. They are, after all, the spooks with all the toys.

    The CIA/CFR don’t necessarily need to bomb others into submission to supra-national governance. They just need nations to surrender ahead of time. I guess when Allen Dulles set this up many years ago when he was the director of the CFR and director of the CIA, he thought this was the only way to stop the spread of communist hegemony. But US hegemony is not any better in the way the CIA is presenting it.

    They are presenting it in the form of criminality. Like in Iran in 1953 when Mossadegh was deposed. Like in South America with the drug cartels. Like in Benghazi Libya. And like in the Ukraine.

    Now I don’t believe that Russia is innocent. No way. Neither is China. It is hard enough to get Christians to be righteous let alone the godless. They are always worse. But that is no excuse for American crimes against humanity made more sure today by the mass murderer Abe Lincoln who long ago with the “help” of our corrupt courts centralized the federal power of the US government. Since then, the US has been a foreign menace to others. Humanitarian disaster aid noted.

    This sedition and treachery perpetuated by the CIA, CFR, and US government for the bulk of the 20th century (including FDR and Woodrow Wilson) wasn’t just played out in the CIA/CFR controlled media. It was played out in the public schools, this there should be no surprise that the public cannot figure out what is going on, they were intentionally dumbed down by their own government and then fed lies by these same powers.

    And why is anyone like Mr. Zuesse, supposedly interested in justice, defending LBJ? It was LBJ who,was responsible for much unjust bloodshed in Vietnam. And his welfare state programs?

    Utter lawlessness.

    • cettel

      Foreign Policy magazine is not Foreign Affairs journal, which is published by the CFR. Foreign Policy is owned instead by Donald Graham, who, like when he owned the Washington Post, was serving mainly the Pentagon’s contractors. That is, the owners of those contracting firms. He then sold it to one of the biggest Pentagon contractors, Jeff Bezos, whose Amazon does the NSA’s cloud computing. As regards my “run-on sentences,” I can’t stand unnecessarily many words, and I also like the structure of my sentences to fit the structure of (the interrelationships within) what the words are referring to. Unlike with most writers, my writing is about interrelationships. It’s not about things.

      As regards LBJ, he was the most progressive President after FDR: He created Medicare, Medicaid, the two Civil Rights Acts, the Voting Rights Act, the War on Poverty, the Great Society, Head Start, Food Stamps, AFDC, National Endowment for the Humanities, National Endowment for the Arts, etc. He got trapped into Vietnam, by Republicans and Southern Democrats who hated his guts; he thought that he needed to stick by the erroneous information he had received about Gulf of Tonkin. You’ve got a lot of facts wrong, in the ordinary way. When a person builds his interpretations on falsehoods, the interpretation is false. Cleaning out the entire false interpretation requires re-learning, on a new foundation. Few people can do it. This fact makes things rather easy for the aristocracy — easy for them to retain control of the country.

      • Libertybelle

        You are correct about the magazines. My big mistake.

        I know the NSA lied about the Gulf of Tonkin incident. The feds told us this forty years later. But the fact is Democratic presidents don’t mind it so much that they go about their time on earth slaughtering folks. Wilson figured it out too late. Clinton is greatly responsible for starving 500,000 children to death in Iraq. The Democratic rank and file to this day still does not flinch about it even though it was broadcast over mainstream media. We still have no apologies from Clinton. His only regret about US interventionism was expressed for his not gotten the US involved in the middle of a machete war in Rwanda. Of course, he would not have been involved in it himself. He is too dainty for that. There was no threat coming to the United States from Rwanda. So it doesn’t seem to matter to him that such an intervention would have been unlawful. It seems he was more afraid of history painting him a racist than to unlawfully spill blood. Obama brags he is good at killing and he is. I think it is murder. I

        So it doesn’t seem too difficult to get a Democrat to shed blood. Their main opposition early on in the century was the hated “isolationists”especially in the GOP. Ron Paul did well to remind us of the Robert Taft wing of the GOP. They were effectively destroyed by the eastern (leftist) Rockefeller wing of the GOP. Although somewhat in the retreat under Reagan when a big influx of Christians came into the party on account of abortion. But Rockerfellard were revived by the former Democrats like the war-monger Bill Bennet and the Christians duped and co-opted by these Chrsitian leaders into accepting international interventionism as part and parcel of patriotism. These former Democrats, along with the neocons, destroyed Robert Taft conservatism.

        The Democratic Party has insisted, now since 1973, that we should be allowed to snuff out 50,000,000 plus innocents in the womb. This pattern of ruthlessness on the part of left wingers makes it difficult for me cut them any slack when dead bodies are strewn about. They are evidence widespread moral depravity. And the only street cred all of this information sends my way is that they are criminals at heart.

        As for LBJ, the “social” programs you mentioned are unconstitutional. They are unconstitutional even when corrupt courts say they are not. That is why I used the word lawlessness at the end of my post in reference to LBJ’s programs. I want our leaders to obey the Constitution.

        As for composition, i have learned that the written word represents and stands in for the spoken word. And as a former run-on sentence maker myself, I have learned not panic when my many thoughts are separated by a period. There is a means to keep related ideas together: the paragraph. The paragraph keeps related ideas in the same vicinity. You should trust the reader more with it.

        You have many vital things to say. They are best heard when it flows easier from your pen or keyboard and to our eyes, hearts, and minds.

        I admire people who figured out these bad guys long before I did. I sense that you are one. I wore the blinders for a long time and I am playing catch up. I congratulate you for exposing evil doers. But, as is common with our species, we can greatly err in that pursuit. I have erred when I backed Bush. I was GOP. But the minute I saw the lies and the death, I immediately changed course and left the party.

        I left the GOP once they started mass murdering people overseas. Because the whole purpose of my joining them in the first place was to stop the mass murder of abortion within our own border.

        • Army of Addicts

          I say, cram as many ideas into a sentence as possible…..and let God sort them out…..:D

          • Libertybelle

            LOL @ cramming


    THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF UKRAINE is the sole body of constitutional jurisdiction in Ukraine. The Law of Ukraine “On the Constitutional Court of Ukraine” adopted on October 16, 1996 sets forth that the task of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine is to guarantee the supremacy of the Constitution of Ukraine as the Fundamental Law of the State throughout the territory of Ukraine.

  • Brockland, A.T.

    Ugh. Have to agree with Libertybelle, the article is too rushed and poorly written.

    Also, Mr. Hugh Smith described the situation better as banksters needing to monetize Russia’s natural wealth into more debt. Buying it all through cheap privatizations doesn’t really describe the full intent.

  • Aug 17, 2015 The Aftermath of the Battle for Marinka (Extra Scene from ‘Ukraine’s Failed Ceasefire’)

    On June 3, forces of the Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR) attacked the Ukrainian-controlled town of Marinka, around half a mile west of the rebel stronghold of Donetsk. The assault came three months after the signing of the second ceasefire, agreed in Minsk between the DNR and the Ukrainian government after the collapse of the first truce in early January.

    • Laura Green

      A distorted information !!! Same method of falsification from Ukrainian criminals .

  • zeev kirsh

    this article is off.

    capital and wealth is built on manufacturing and the ability to make things.

    ALL empires must go through a phase of accumulating wealth/capital before their currency is worth anything.

    the finance insurance and money changing based ‘industries’ are just large sectors based on abstracting the value of THE TIME VALUE OF MONEY——-which is itself the time value of accumulated capital.

    zimbabwe has banking and insurance and finance in the form of totally worthless notes. money is not money. a dollar is not a dollar. financial industries in one place are not simply a mimic and copy industry somewhere else.

    as the chinese have accumulated real wealth and capital this provides opportunity for the expansion of yuan denominated financial and insurance sectors.

    the ‘mature’ phase could be described as one in which empires usually see the rise of money changing based busienss models. but that DOES NOT MEAN the wealth is based on changing money.

    the wealth is based on learning how to build and create new things. the military industrial complex , for example, is a GREAT source of innovation and wealth. this is true IN SPITE OF THE FACT that runaway military spending bankrupts ALL countries over time.

    the underlying activites that build value are those that build real tangible things. the miltiary builds armies, and usually a great military builds technologically enabled armies. this is how empires are created. trade of tangible things and technological knowledge are part of this building process.

    money is just a very simple abstract tool. the simplest poorest countries like zimbabwe can have ‘money’ and more established players will have ‘money ‘ as well.

    the innovation in money, digital money and newer non-physical forms of cash are perhaps a ‘technological’ advance that is a big deal in the west.

    companies like m-pesa using cell phones developed in the west and built in china—-running software created in france———–are enabling the fast and routine spread of money changing and transmission in africa at extremely low cost ( but not necessarily low price) . ———can be argued to be an example of money technology making great contributions to society.

    that said, the role of money is simply to transmit value, just as the role of insurance is to redistribute risk (at a great premium) . money cannot create value directlly , nor can insurance. there is a cost to using money and insruance and a benefit. the supposed benefits do materialize but sometimes they do not. those supposed benefits are the resulting positive consequences of investment and risk redistrubution. sometimes you don’t get much out of your investments. and sometimes your premiums are far more painful to you than the benefit of knowing you won’t have to take risk of disaster.

    it’s hard to say. but in high inflation and over regulated times like ours, it becomes apparent that a mature society can become rotten as it become more defined by money chanigng and over inssuring and over inflating of money———at the EXPENSE of major slowdown in manufacturing and physical creation of wealth and capital.

    • Brockland A.T.

      Sort of agree, except the part where the MIC is a great source of innovation and wealth.

      The MIC is a great funneler and redistributer of wealth created by civilian industry, to the few at the top of the MIC. Not only monetary wealth, but wealth of skills and expertise. As such, however innovative and wealthy it may be, the MIC operates at a loss.

      As the civilian economy falls to MIC parasitism, the military economy eventually falls with it because the civilian economy is the real source of wealth and innovation.