Great inspiration about the power personal integrity can exert far beyond the individual level:
Slavoj Zizek: Should Donald Trump get the Nobel Peace Prize?
The title of the article is
Should Donald Trump get the Nobel Peace Prize? Yet, you selectively highlight Sophia Karpai with the caption:
"Great inspiration about the power personal integrity can exert far beyond the individual level", with no further commentary or opinion, on the rest of the article? Like Youlik expressed, I have the same question: "
I don't know what you wanted to illustrate with this article. For me, this is a vivid example of lies and Russophobia, flourishing in the Western cultural and media space."
When questioned on your motives, you sidestep the question, by resorting "to questioning RT's integrity and motives for publishing the article":
"On the other hand, this article was published on "RT" so are you saying "RT" is actually an anti-Russian organization--kept in disguise by an entire drama of the U.S. Government harassing it and constricting its operation?" ... a reflection, on your part.
In my opinion, you chose a weak platform, by dragging RT into the narrative and directly questioning Youlik with
"so are you saying"
when Youlik suggested, to be exact - encouraged
"you to read about the author, and ask yourself the question: who would need this "Professor" where he is a Professor, if he would not write such fabrications?"
For one, RT is one of the few news organizations, who try to remain "neutral and informative" by presenting opinions from both sides and offering "a legal disclaimer" at the end, denoting "opinions expressed reflect the author" and do not represent RT.
As for the author of the article,
Slavoj Zizek, he is a liberal radical leftish democrat, who has been in and out of Politics.
See here:
Slavoj Žižek biography, Life, Political life
And here:
Slavoj Žižek, Academic life, Public life
BTW,
a Hat-tip to you, Youlik 
for being knowledgeable and well versed in Soviet and Russian History! We have a lot to learn from the Russians. At this moment in history, the Russians are at the forefront - of offering "Peace and Stability to the World" - if we would only stop our aggression long enough, to listen and hear what they are offering, in a Diplomatic compromise for Peace.
Looking at the article, as a whole, there might be some subtle hints, as to why RT chose to publish the article? I generally look at an article like this - as being subliminal or suggestive of something on a deeper level.
In reference to the
Doctor's plot in the article, "
Sophia Karpai was the head of the cardiographic unit of the Kremlin Hospital in the late 1940s. Her (accidental) misfortune was that it was her job to take twice the electrocardiogram of Andrei Zhdanov, days before Zhdanov's death, due to heart failure. The first ECG, taken after Zhdanov displayed some heart problems, was inconclusive (a heart attack could be neither confirmed nor excluded), while the second one surprisingly showed a much better picture (intraventricular blockage disappeared, a clear indication that there was no heart attack)." Karpai was blamed and arrest for Zhdanov's death, claiming she falsified the data. Many of the doctor's were also arrested and eventually, under brutal conditions (falsely) confessed but Karpai stayed steadfast with the truth.
In reference to Close shave in the article, it describes a situation during the Cuban missile crisis and "a naval skirmish between an American destroyer and a Soviet B-59 submarine off Cuba on October 27, 1962. The destroyer dropped depth charges near the submarine to try to force it to surface, not knowing it had a nuclear-tipped torpedo. The submarine was authorized to fire if three officers agreed. The officers began a fierce shouting debate over whether to sink the ship. Two of them said Yes and the other said No." "A guy by the name Arkhipov said NO.
In both references above, a new Cold War was averted. In Arkhipov case, a cooler head prevailed - over repulsive reaction to hit back. In Karpai's situation, not submitting to false testimony (and signing on the dotted line) nullified a conspiracy plot - to bring the Soviet Union into another Cold War.
I'm not entirely sure, what
Slavoj Zizek is trying to suggest with his narrative of President Trump and getting the Nobel Peace Prize, other than to suggest - Trump is in a position and at the threshold of bringing about a New Cold War? The exact same thing - Russia has been warning about and "advising" against - as far back as 2014:
Tue 18 Nov 2014 - Putin says West is Provoking Russia into New Cold War as "spies" Deported
Putin says west is provoking Russia into new cold war as ‘spies’ deported
Russian President denies fanning tensions and says NATO expansion in Europe has been ‘geopolitical game changer’.
Vladimir Putin has suggested to a German interviewer that the west is provoking Russia into a new cold war. The airing of
the interview, which was recorded by the German channel ARD in Vladivostok last week, followed Russia’s tit-for-tat expulsions of German and Polish diplomats, as well as the deportation of a Latvian accused of spying.
Asked whether the accusatory rhetoric between Moscow and Washington and a noticeable increase in Russian displays of military strength near western countries points to a new cold war, Putin said two rounds of NATO expansion in central and eastern Europe had been “significant geopolitical game changers” that forced
Russia to respond.
20 February 2015 - The new Cold War: Putin issues chilling new threat as Nato chief says tensions with Russia could end in 'all out conflict'
The new Cold War: Vladimir Putin issues new threat | Daily Mail Online
Military chiefs have warned that Britain has entered a new Cold War with Russia, as Vladimir Putin threatened anyone who tried to pressure his country.
December 22, 2017 - Trump, Putin and the New Cold War
Trump, Putin and the New Cold War
When President Donald Trump met Angela Merkel last March for the first time, the German chancellor had Russia on her mind. Allegations about the Russian intervention on Trump’s behalf in the U.S. presidential election were swirling around Washington—and Trump had done nothing to allay the concerns of Russia’s neighbors that he planned to forge ahead with a new opening to Vladimir Putin, the Kremlin strongman he has so openly admired. He had never really backed away from his public bashing of NATO, either. The American security pact with Europe had survived for seven decades, since its creation in the aftermath of World War II as a counterbalance to the Soviet Union. But Merkel and many others now wondered if NATO could outlast the twin assaults of a Russian leader who had long viewed it as enemy No. 1 and an American president who publicly branded it as “obsolete.”
So Merkel came prepared. Briefed on Trump’s short attention span and his preference for visual aids over long written memos, she brought a handout to her Oval Office meeting: a map of the Soviet Union from 1982, with an overlay showing all the countries within those borders where Putin’s Russia is active today. “Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Moldova, Belarus, and Ukraine—he is either trying to get those countries back into his realm or, if he’s not able to, he at least makes sure those countries are totally unattractive to the West,” said an official familiar with the German presentation. Those states, of course, were all part of the Soviet Union until its abrupt collapse in 1991—a seismic event that Putin has called “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the twentieth century.”
April 28, 2018 - Diplomat warns NATO's 'Cold War' policy towards Moscow threatens European security
Diplomat warns NATO's 'Cold War' policy towards Moscow threatens European security
NATO is acting towards Russia based on the Cold War schemes, but Moscow will find a response to these risks and ensure its security, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko said in an exclusive interview with TASS.
Touching on NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg’s statement that Russian-NATO relations are neither the Cold War nor partnership, the high-ranking diplomat said: "The point is that in its relations with Russia NATO starts relying on the Cold War schemes and attempts to project force towards Russia, advances military infrastructure and deploys additional contingents close to our borders."
The diplomat warned that this seriously worsens regional and European security and creates additional risks for Russia. "NATO cannot but understand that we will find answers to these risks so that in any turn of events our legal interests [primarily the country’s defensive capacity] are effectively protected," Grushko, Russia’s former envoy to the alliance, stressed.
"We have all the necessary military and technical potential to do this convincingly and effectively, and to show NATO countries that their steps on the eastern flank are a waste of time and efforts," Grushko noted. "This does not enhance security of those countries which participate in this, but only creates an extra threat for them."
"If NATO is seriously interested in de-escalation and creating new tools for preventing a dangerous military activity, and also to avoid a misperception of what is happening and each other’s intentions, in the first place NATO should call for restoring normal military contacts, which should be systemic," the high-ranking diplomat and former Russian envoy to the alliance stressed.
Russia is not appointing its envoy to NATO as a result of the policy carried out by the alliance towards Moscow, he added.
"This is also the result of policy which NATO has conducted towards Russia," the diplomat said.
Grushko served as Russia’s Permanent Representative to NATO from October 2012 until January 2018. After his appointment as the deputy foreign minister the post of the Russian envoy to NATO has been vacant.
"It sounds rather paradoxical when, on the one hand, NATO declares Russian diplomatic staff reduction and simultaneously voices the wish to hold a new session of the Russia - NATO Council," the deputy foreign minister affirmed. "So, in this case NATO is just sawing off the branch it is sitting on." Grushko said that tools are needed to conduct dialogue, "and Russia’s permanent mission to NATO is the very tool to secure this dialogue."
He noted that Russian diplomats’ expulsion negatively affected the operation of Russian foreign missions. "A diplomatic profession is chiefly about communication," the diplomat continued. "It is they [diplomats] who should keep uninterrupted contact between foreign ministries and work with the parliament and public opinion. Cutting these ties is beneficial for those who want to live in an imaginary personally designed world."
"Without diplomats and constant political dialogue it would be very hard to both build real politics towards each other and strive for the harmonization of interests and implementation of common European projects," Grushko said.
NATO ministers of foreign affairs confirmed preparations for a Russia - NATO Council session and the intention to continue the Alliance’s dual-track policy on Russia - "deterrence and dialogue" - after a meeting in Brussels on Friday.
May 5, 2018 - US-Russia tensions strengthen: All NATO forces go out into the Atlantic
US-Russia tensions strengthen: All NATO forces go out into the Atlantic - Fort Russ
“The return of large-scale rivalry and resurgent Russia requires NATO to focus again on the Atlantic to ensure specific support and demonstrate a strong and credible deterrent effect,” said a Pentagon spokesman. NATO’s new command will be the axis of cross-Atlantic security, he added, according to Guardian.
This decision reflects the growing concern within Europe and NATO about Russia’s increased military presence and patrols in the Atlantic. Under the new plan, the US will establish the headquarters of NATO’s new administration in Norfolk, Virginia.
The outline of this plan was adopted at the NATO Defense Ministers’ meeting last February, as part of a wider effort on maritime safety and on the communication lines between Europe and North America. “We have seen a much more decisive Russia, a Russia that has for years invested heavily in its defense capabilities, modernizing them, not only with conventional but also with nuclear powers” NATO, Yves Stoltenberg.
At the same time, he pointed out that the new Atlantic administration would be critical, so that the Alliance could give an “answer”.
At the same time, the US Navy returns the Second Fleet, merged in 2011, to cut costs. It will oversee the forces – ships and aircrafts – on the east coast and the northern Atlantic and will be responsible for maritime operations in the region.
The resumption of the Second Fleet suggested a study that had been made after two US Navy shipwrecks, with over 17 dead, the previous year.
Translated from Crash Magazine Online
