The Bear Is Back: Russia’s Middle Eastern adventures

For decades, serious students of the Soviet Union and Russia have had one enduring credo: Watch Yevgeny Primakov. Since his days as the USSR's chief Middle East hand in the 1970s and 1980s, the wily KGB spymaster has been an accurate barometer of the Kremlin's strategic priorities, as well as Moscow's most adept practitioner of geopolitics. During the 1990s, as foreign minister (and subsequently as prime minister) in the government of Boris Yeltsin, Primakov championed a zero-sum foreign-policy approach toward the Middle East and Central Asia that was so successful that it earned a moniker: "The Primakov Doctrine."

So when Primakov, now head of the Russian chamber of commerce, launched a very public diplomatic tour of the Middle East in mid-February, Russia watchers sat up and took notice. The high-profile, week-long trip took the former premier to Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan, where he found rapt audiences for his public pronouncements of Russian solidarity.

Primakov's diplomatic full-court press, however, is only the latest sign of a growing Russian retrenchment in the Middle East. Under the guidance of President Vladimir Putin, the Kremlin is reviving efforts to reestablish a regional role at the expense of American strategy.

Telltale indicators of Russia's activism are everywhere. In late January, Syrian president Bashar al-Assad embarked upon a diplomatic visit to Moscow designed to upgrade the historic strategic ties between the two countries. Assad's consultations with Putin yielded a mutual commitment to closer cooperation between the Russian government and its "most important partner" in the Middle East. As part of this public reengagement, the Kremlin gave Damascus a much-needed economic shot in the arm, agreeing to write off almost three-quarters of Syria's $13.4 billion Cold War-era debt. The two leaders also began negotiations regarding the sale of an array of advanced missiles to the Baathist state in a deal that officials in Israel have warned could significantly alter the regional military balance in Syria's favor.

Russia is also dipping its toe into post-Arafat politics in the Palestinian Authority. In late January, on the heels of Assad's visit, the Kremlin played host to new Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas. During his two-and-a-half-day visit to Russia, Abbas was warmly received by a slew of government officials, including President Putin, foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, and Boris Gryzlov, the speaker of Russia's lower house of parliament. The new Palestinian leader, for his part, brought with him a consistent message: that Russia should increase its involvement in Palestinian politics, and in the mediation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Most recently, the Kremlin has formulated plans to break into the Saudi arms market. The Russian government is said to be finalizing its first major defense accord with the House of Saud — one that, if implemented, would mark "a landmark event in Russian arms exporting," according to Russian defense industry experts. News of the impending deal comes on the heels of a recent arms agreement between Russia and Morocco, the first between the two nations since the fall of the Soviet Union.

Then there is the issue of Iran. Despite mounting international concern over the nuclear ambitions of Iran's ayatollahs — and repeated entreaties from Washington and European capitals — the atomic ties between Moscow and Tehran are still going strong. Construction on the centerpiece of Russo-Iranian nuclear cooperation, the massive 1,000-megawatt plutonium reactor in the southwestern Iranian city of Bushehr, was officially completed in October of 2004. Final negotiations are now underway for fuel deliveries to the plant, which Western officials worry could yield weapons-usable plutonium and critical know-how that would accelerate Tehran's quest for the bomb. Russian officials, however, have gone even further, publicly hinting that they might be willing to build a series of additional nuclear reactors for the Islamic republic.

Moscow's renewed maneuvers in the Middle East have everything to do with ideology. Over the past year, Putin's increasingly authoritarian governing style has succeeded in eliminating any semblance of serious domestic opposition to the Kremlin, giving the Russian president virtual carte blanche to formulate foreign and defense policy. Worse still, this growing political mandate has been mirrored by the revival of unhealthy notions of Russian greatness and geopolitical opposition to the United States.

Whether these ideas actually benefit Russian national interests in the long term remains to be seen. But for the United States, the Kremlin's counterproductive policies in the Middle East — and the corrosive ideology underpinning them — are becoming harder and harder to ignore.

— Ilan Berman is vice president for policy at the American Foreign Policy Council in Washington, D.C.

Inside Story: World Report

July 1994

The SHADOW Behind the Middle East Peace Conference

Since at least 1931, international Communism has sought to conquer the Middle East through the "pan-Arab" movement.1 According to plans, individual Arab nations would be "liberated" from colonial rule, then fused into a united Arab regional government-a precursor to world government. Strategically, the Middle East contains such vital assets as the Suez Canal and oil reserves, and provides access to the Mediterranean Sea as well as to three continents.

Naturally, the formation of the state of Israel in 1948 began interfering with Communist plans. Thus the Communists quickly set about to destroy that Jewish nation. The pro-Soviet Nasser regime of Egypt created the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in 1964, and placed in its leadership such recruits as Yasser Arafat, a veteran of the Com-munist revolution in Algeria.2 The PLO's mission: sponsor revolutions to overthrow the non-Communist governments of Israel, Iran, Turkey, and the Arab nations.

But after five wars and three decades of revolution, the Communists could see by 1989 that the frontal approach would not soon topple Jerusalem. At that point, the Soviet Bloc switched to a new strategy of deception. By faking the death of Communism, Moscow has finally opened the door to its victory. And behind its newly-accelerating drive to eliminate Israel stands its architect, the latest head of the Soviet secret police.

His name is Yevgeniy Primakov.

The shadow is cast...

By the end of the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the Soviets could see that Israel would never be defeated through direct conflict. Despite early successes while invading Israel's buffer zones in the Sinai and the Golan Heights, Syrian and Egyptian forces soon found themselves in full retreat. Realizing that Israel would first have to yield its occupied territories before it would become militarily vulnerable, the Soviets chose a new tactic known as the "Phased Plan."

The PLO officially adopted this plan in June, 1974.3 Phase 1 would involve pressuring Israel to withdraw from its territories, upon which the PLO would establish a People's Republic of Palestine. In Phase 2, the heavily-armed Communist state would serve as the launching point for a Soviet-backed invasion of Israel.

How could Israel be induced to surrender strategic land-to the PLO, no less? The Communists decided to call for a "peace conference" between Israel, the Arab states, and the PLO. The catch, moreover, was that the Soviet Union would co-sponsor the talks. Such an international conference would pit Israel against all other participants, heightening pressure for concessions.

Soviet official Andrei Gromyko started the process in 1973, offering to open diplomatic relations with Israel in return for a peace conference. The Israelis first refused, but the damage inflicted by the Yom Kippur War changed their minds. In late 1973, Israel agreed to international talks in Geneva, Switzerland. The Soviets co-sponsored the meeting, though still refusing to recognize Israel diplomatically. Only the PLO was not officially allowed to participate.

Henry Kissinger played the key role in furthering Soviet aims. Israeli journalist Matti Golan reported that, during the first few days of the Yom Kippur War, while the Communist governments of Yugoslavia, Algeria, Libya, Iraq, and the Soviet Union were resupplying Egypt and Syria,4 Kissinger had delayed the emergency shipment of U.S. arms to Israel. Then, once Israel had regained its military balance and scored decisive victories, he went behind the Israelis' backs and negotiated a ceasefire directly with the Soviets. Nor was this difficult for him; as Soviet ambassador Anatoliy Dobrynin later revealed, the Soviets had quietly appointed Kissinger as their representative at the same time that he was representing the United States.5 Kissinger then pressured Israel into accepting the ceasefire, which returned portions of the Sinai peninsula to Egypt.

By 1977 the Soviets were trying to restart the Geneva talks, this time in an expanded format. Yevgeniy Primakov appeared on the scene, albeit secretly, to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin. Primakov again dangled the promise of Soviet diplomatic relations, this time in exchange for Israel allowing the PLO into the Geneva talks. Begin refused.6

Later that year, the Soviet timetable was temporarily thrown off by the Camp David peace accords between Egypt and Israel, which were negotiated directly between the two parties. Never-theless, the Soviets moved patiently forward, gradually preparing the noose with which to hang Israel.

Primakov was ascending the ranks of Soviet power, gradually taking control of Middle East policy. By 1983, he had become Vice President of the World Peace Council (WPC), an internationally active front for the Soviet KGB founded in 1950.7 Its president was Romesh Chandra, a Central Committee member of the Communist Party of India. But the real power resided in the hands of the Soviet KGB officer at Chandra's side. The WPC not only organized the disarmament movement in the West, but also served as a center for Soviet coordination of terrorist groups around the world, including the PLO.8 At that same time, Primakov held the post of Deputy Chairman of the Soviet Peace Committee,9 which worked out of the same Moscow office as the Soviet Afro-Asian Solidarity Committee. These groups have operated as conduits through which the KGB sends weapons and other logistical support to the PLO.10

Primakov was busy implementing Soviet policy toward Israel. In September, 1982, the Soviet Union made the first official call for an international Middle East peace conference, to negotiate for a PLO state in the Israeli territories.11 Soviet influence at the United Nations led that organization, unsurprisingly, to endorse the call in 1983. Echoing the Soviets, the U.N. called for "the Palestine Liberation Organization, the representative of the Palestinian people, to participate... in all efforts, deliberations and conferences on the Middle East" for "the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in Palestine."12 Under Primakov's growing power, Communist parties throughout the world soon joined in the chorus.

...and lengthens...

By the time Mikhail Gorbachev was taking over in 1985, the Soviet government was openly boasting that a Middle East peace conference would be one step on the road to "the ultimate triumph of communism everywhere."13 Primakov was quickly moving into the center of Soviet power, close to Gorbachev himself. Working with the Central Committee's International Department, Primakov led an elite group of Communist strategists in redesigning and accelerating the Soviet drive to destroy Israel. Gorbachev did not even participate in its design, according to foreign minister Eduard Shevardnadze.14

To put his newly-formulated theory into practice, Primakov assumed the role of "special envoy" for Gorbachev during the Persian Gulf crisis in late 1990. He used that position to travel the Middle East, drumming up support for a peace conference to negotiate over Israel's territories.15

In fact, he had already been mobilizing every available tool of diplomacy, revolution, and war to intensify the pressure on Israel. In 1987, he told the Lebanese publication Hawadith that Israel would have to attend, and allow the PLO to participate in, an international meeting before the Soviets would restore diplomatic relations. He visited the capitals of Arab states, using every bit of Soviet influence to push the Arabs into joining the call.16

In 1988, he brought Soviet advisors to Syria as part of a massive drive to arm that Communist satellite, preparing it for a state of war and placing an ominous military threat on Israel's northern perimeter.17 Revolutionary action in the West Bank and Gaza Strip was meanwhile instigated by the PLO, the Palestinian Communist Party, and Islamic Jihad starting in December of 1986-a full year before the intifada was officially recognized and named.18

Analyzing the prospects for forcing Israel into peace talks, Yasser Arafat could boldly declare in 1987 that "there is now for the first time an actual international consensus on the question of an international conference on a Middle East settlement" [emphasis in original].19 But despite the growing momentum, Israel itself persistently refused to enter such loaded talks. Primakov needed one more element to complete the push: a war.

The perfect man for the job was Saddam Hussein, longtime dictator of the Communist government in Iraq. Since the Iraqi-Soviet Friendship Treaty of 1972, the Iraqi secret police and military had become mere extensions of their Soviet counterparts.20 The majority of Iraqi weapons were Soviet-supplied, and five to six thousand Soviet "advisors" ran the Iraqi state from within.21 Primakov himself presumably supervised the Soviet arms shipments to Iraq leading up to, and during, the 1990 invasion of Kuwait. After Iraq set in motion the Gulf crisis, Primakov visited Hussein as Gorbachev's representative. According to British intelligence analyst Christopher Story, Primakov told Hussein to demand an international conference between Israel and the PLO as a precondition to leaving Kuwait.22 Hussein obeyed, and after the Persian Gulf War had ended in 1991, Hussein's demand was adopted by the Bush administra-tion. Finally the Israelis could no longer resist the political heat, and attended the conference in Madrid, Spain, that October.

Primakov had completed stage one in the drive to destroy Israel.

...until darkness falls.

The Soviet Union, mainly through its KGB strategist Primakov, had carefully designed and executed the entire Middle East peace conference since 1973. Thus the "death" of Communism in 1989, and especially the "breakup" of the Soviet Union in 1991, should have ended the entire process. The whole edifice of delicately applied pressure, fragile alliances, and Communist deception should have disintegrated, leaving the PLO isolated and impotent. Most importantly, Primakov and his fellow Communist leaders should have had to flee Russia to avoid prosecution, as happened to Nazi criminals after World War II.

In fact, the exact opposite chillingly materialized. Upon seizing power in the new Russia, Boris Yeltsin promptly reorganized and expanded the KGB, making it more powerful and active than ever before. Top Communists retained their positions, and all Soviet policies continued as before-except in a newly accelerated mode. What of Primakov? He was immediately promoted, becoming Director of the Foreign Intelligence Service, the main arm of the new KGB. This places him in charge of an estimated 500,000 agents worldwide, operating in Europe, the United States, the Middle East, and elsewhere.23

Primakov quickly laid to rest any notions that the various Soviet republics or Eastern European nations would be allowed any independence from Moscow. At a December, 1991, press conference, he openly admitted that his agency was exercising its powers "to maintain a common military, economic and central intelligence network among the Republics of the former Soviet Union."24 Tens of thousands of secret police officers from East Germany and other Eastern European nations had already been incorporated into the KGB during the 1989 changes.25

At a press conference in late 1993, Primakov confirmed the warlike attitude of the "former" Soviet Union by warning NATO that he and his fellow Soviets might assume a new military posture toward the West at any time. Polish defector Zdislaw Rurarz described a follow-up question from a reporter:

Primakov was asked whether his presentation of the issue was in any way endorsed by President Boris Yeltsin. Surprisingly enough, he said that there was no need for that!26

Despite Yeltsin's membership in the Soviet Communist Party since 1961, even he serves as a mere figurehead.27 He takes his orders from the likes of Primakov and the rest of the KGB leadership, all of them hardened Communists following long-term strategy.

In the Middle East, this is being translated into a PLO victory over Israel. The alleged collapse of Communism has thrown anti-Communist forces in the West into disarray. No longer recognizing where PLO terrorism or the drive for a peace conference come from, confused anti-Communists in all countries have abandoned political opposition to such Soviet moves-effectively turning over the political arena to the left. Now that the Communists can move rapidly without significant resistance, Israel is finally yielding control of the West Bank and Gaza Strip to the PLO. And Israeli Prime Minister Ytzhak Rabin has since offered to give away to Golan Heights to Communist Syria.

Unless Americans and Israelis wake up soon, Soviet forces will be dismantling the remains of a neutralized, demoralized Israel.n

references

1 Agwani, M.S., Communism in the Arab East, Asia Publishing House, New York, 1969, p. 15.

2 Rees, J., "Why Americans must oppose the P.L.O.," The Review of the News, Oct. 17, 1979, p. 41.

3 Netanyahu, B., A Place Among the Nations, Bantam Books, New York, 1993, pp. 219-226.

4 Sadat, A., In Search of Identity, publisher unknown, 1978, pp. 253, 255, 264, 267; Bard, M.G. and Himelfarb, J., Myths and Facts, Near East Report, Washington DC, 1992, pp. 77-78.

5 Allen, G., Kissinger: The Secret Side of the Secretary of State, '76 Press, Seal Beach, Calif., 1976, pp. 71, 78.

6 Story, C., "Business as usual in the Middle East," Soviet Analyst, Jan. 1992, p. 15.

7 Ibid., p. 18.

8 Rees, J., Ed., The War Called Peace, Western Goals, Alexandria, VA, 1982, pp. 8-9.

9 Story, Op cit., p. 18.

10 Barron, J., KGB Today: The Hidden Hand, Reader's Digest Press, New York, 1983, pp. 264-265.

11 Davydkov, R., Ed., The Palestine Question, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1984, p. 23.

12 Ibid., pp. 235-248.

13 Petrenko, F. and Popov, V., Soviet Foreign Policy: Objectives and Principles, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1985, pp. 155, 186.

14 Story, C., Op cit., p. 19.

15 The New York Times, Nov. 17, 1990, as cited in Story, C., Op cit., p. 14.

16 Story, C., Op cit., p. 19; Ramati, Y., Global Affairs, Spring 1989, as cited in Story, Op cit., p. 17.

17 Story, C., Op cit., p. 20.

18 "Palestine: Appeal for solidarity," political statement by the Palestinian Communist Party, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Information Bulletin, March 1987, pp. 39-40; Schiff, Z. and Ya'ari, E., Intifada, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1990, chapter 2 and pp. 101-105, 198-202.

19 Arafat, Y., "We are optimistic," World Marxist Review, Sept. 1987, p. 49.

20 al-Khalil, S., Republic of Fear, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1989, pp. 12, 66.

21 Wagman, R., "Did Soviets aid Iraq?", San Gabriel Valley Tribune, Sept. 5, 1990; Lee, R.W., "Our Soviet 'Ally'," The New American, March 12, 1991, pp. 22-23.

22 Story, C., Op cit., p. 15.

23 MacAlvany, D.S., "Russian strategic deception: The 'new' Communist threat," The MacAlvany Intelligence Advisor, Jan., 1994, pp. 20-22.

24 Story, C., Op cit., p. 13.

25 MacAlvany, D.S., Op cit., p. 22.

26 Ibid., p. 22.

27 Ibid., p. 12.

TapTheSource/FearGodNotMen/GIJoel Propaganda

Propaganda	Truth
Putin is a communist	Putin has implemented a flat tax of 13%, got rid of the Sales tax, set the corporate tax at 24%, cut the VAT in half, cut 1/3rd off the payroll tax. He has cut back on government size (shrinking government). He has put up 20% of Russian land for sale, the government is in the process of divesting of the remainder of its shares in various companies. There has been judicial reform to a sitting jury from a triumvirate of judges. There has also been a total reform of the banking center, in order to make it transparent.
Russia and China are allied to destroy the US	Russia has recently passed up China for an oil export route and choose instead Japan. China had to turn to Iran. Russia is rearming in Siberia, while she arms India with over 400 new tanks, a wing of new aircraft, two nuclear submarines and an aircraft carrier to intercept Chinese shipping. Russia has armed S.Korea with T-90s, armed Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam and Kazakhstan. Russia has attempted (by itself and through the US) to arm Taiwan also. The majority of weapons sold to China are aimed at the US navy, to which China will not be able to catch up for at least another generation.
Russia trains with China to destroy the US/West	This year alone, Russia has had joint maneuvers with Japan & S.Korea and then again with the US and UK off the Chinese Coast.
There is a Putin pandering mafia after me.	There is a dedicated group of Freepers who are out to expose this propagandist's lies and distortions, for which he has already been banned twice.
If you are against me you must be a (take your choice) A. communist, B. Putin lover, C. Russian Orthodox, D. Russian, E. Delusional, F. All of the Above	G. None of the Above. You must be a lover of truth and a hater of yellow journalism, empty conspiracy theories and plain propaganda.
The FSB/Russians are behind all the terrorism, including the theater and Beslan.	Only someone blind or shilling for Islam would on a continuous basis shift blame away from the terrorists and onto the victims.
Russia is giving Iran nukes.	Wrong. Russia is providing a civilian nuclear reactor with a contract to return spent rods. Do most of us agree with this? No, we are against this. Is this nuclear weapons technology? No. Our allie Pakistan with the assistance of our Most Valued Trading partner China are giving Iran missile and bomb technology.
Russia, and Putin in particular, hate Israel and wish to destroy it.	Wrong. Russia is Israel's second closest allie and trading partner and provides Israel with most of its oil and sells it weapons technology.
Putin is an Atheist, a hater of Christ.	Putin was baptized as a child, a regular church goer and has proven his faith on numerous occasions.
Russia supports Islamic terrorism.	Wrong. The Soviet Union supported socialist Arab revolutionaries/terrorists like the Palestinian People's Liberation Front. Modern day Russia does not support these groups. Our allie Saudi Arabia is the number one backer of all major Islamic groups.
Putin is a dictator	Putin was popularly elected with over 70% of the vote, a mandate. He functions within a constitution. True Parliament is dominated by pro-Putin right wing parties, also elected freely. The various right parties received over 83% of the vote.
Putin hates Bush.	Putin has been Bush's loudest cheerleader, louder and in front of Sharon, Blair or Berlusconi
Putin is moving to grab power through selecting governors.	The governors still have to pass the local Oblast's Parliament's review (that's province). Further, England, Italy and France all have the same systems.
Robert W. Lee another TapTheSource writers are credible.	Hardly, most like Mr. Lee, belong to the John Birch society, an organization steeped in conspiracy theories.
Yeltsin's declaration of open borders is a hollow one for Soviet citizens, who still cannot leave their country. Even travel outside the Soviet Union is heavily restricted, regardless of the Soviet republic	Typical propaganda leveled by TapTheSource or his articles. Anyone without a criminal warrant can leave at will, so long as the receiving nation will issue a Visa.
The Secret Soviets are still in charge and everything is part of their plan.	Lets take this lunacy to its full extent: The Soviets in their diabolic mysterious master plan allowed the Warsaw pact to collapse, the countries to open up and half of them to join NATO (I guess to corrupt NATO from within, regardless that it is those new NATO members that support America now and most of old NATO that is against America, lets ignore that fact). They allowed the Soviet Union itself to fall apart, some of which is also now part of NATO. They allowed the military to degrade, trade secrets to be sold or stolen, Chinese immigrants to come in mass into southern Siberia. Most of their bases to shut down. The economy to dive and only grow again under Capitalism freer then America's. They further allowed the young to not even know who Lenin was, for Islamics (who are all pawns of the Soviets, you see) to attack Russia on a daily basis. All this so that once America was the only apparent supper power, had its military in 120+ nations they could do what? Spring their surprise offensive? Materialize the great invasion army from outer space or outer Mongolia? Or marry enough American men to convert them (think body snatchers) into 5th Columnists and take over the US from inside? (of course that more people then ever voted Republican is also part of their master and evil plan). As a matter of fact, everything that happens that makes this theory look ludicrous for the past 15 years, well that's just part of the brilliance of their master plan. Oh and did we mention that they were obviously able to make Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr. into a bunch of idiots who could not see into their plan. So either this is all BS, or every American expert in the government and politician is an idiot and we as a nation are a bunch of idiots (except for the members of the John Birth Society, the only masters of the illuminate able to see this grand Jewish .. erg .. Russian conspiracy.
Russia is a dirt poor country.	Russia ranks, according to the CIA World FactBook GDP: purchasing power parity - $1.282 trillion (2003 est.), which places it just behind (now ahead) of Italy, the world's 7th largest economy. Explaining Purchasing Power Parity
Anna Politkovskaya is a reputable Russian journalist who is fighting Putin's facism.	Hardly. Anna Politkovskaya is an opportunist and a leftist. Having become a "political" refugee in the early 1990s, she now has FRENCH citizenship, writes for the socialist La Monde and the socialist Novaye Gazeta. She has staged several of her own "assassination" attempts to better her street credits while meeting constantly with Chechin and Al Quida terrorists and writing gushing love stories of them. Further, anyone who thinks that just because she hates Putin she is pro Bush, you couldn't be more wrong. She is in league with the devil incarnate, Soros, and hates Bush as much. A leftist is a leftist, but judge for yourself and read her views of Bush and the CONSERVATIVES of AMERICA. COWBOY FRIENDS (Praise for Moore)
Russia is a nation that only relies on oil.	A total lie, mostly spread by Wahhabi islamic Saudi Arabia and various NeoCons who favor US investment to Facist (and pro-Islamic) China. Read here about the state of the Russian economy that is now returning as a major industrial and IT power. Russia competes directly with India on IT and has had manufacturing climbing at an incredible rate. Financ e Ministry to work on debt payment schedule Budget surplus higher than planned Person al incomes rise in Russia Most state enterprises to be privatized by 2007 Genera l Electric plans to invest $200m in Russia Person al incomes up in September Data on industrial production posted Russia 's foreign trade reported Gov 't considering airfield privatizations Russia posts increase in industrial production Russia 's foreign debt reaches six year low Russia 's debt to drop to 23% of GDP Russia leads in GDP growth Export s to play more important role in Russian economy
Ion Mihai Pacepa is a credible source.	Ion Mihai Pacepa was a 2-Star General in the Romanian KGB. The man made a career of upholding the second worst dictatorship Cecescu, in the Warsaw Pact, second only to Stalin's SU. He spent some 30 years building this murderer's power base. Obviously Pacepa was smart enough to read the writing on the way and see the end coming. He "defected" and now makes money writing books and articles. He never stood trial for his evil crimes, after the Romanian Revolution, even as his former master was executed.
The dramatic rise of oil prices, in April-September 2002, gave Kremlin new chances for survival.	Only if one ignores the 6-7% growth rates of 200 & 2001 and the tripling of revenues from the 13% flat tax in 2001.
Russia greatly expanded military supplies to China; in January-August 2002, the two countries concluded weapons supply contracts	Moscow is in the business of selling weapons, second largest after America. Thus, when China, rich with American cash from the giant trade deficit, ordered weapons from Russia, Israel and France. Russia did not give away "supplies" but sold weapons systems. They also sold weapons systems to India, Indonesia, South Korea, Kazakhstan, Greece, Cyprus, Malaysia, Thailand and a host of other nations.
During August and the first half of September, Russia\x{2019}s Defense Ministry and Foreign Ministry made a series of tough anti-Georgian statements, using as a pretext "the presence of Chechen terrorists in the Pankisi Gorge" (a small valley in Georgia bordering Russia). In the beginning of September, Russian bombers made a strike in Georgian territory.	The Pankisi Gorge is an area about half the size of W.Virgina, covered in some of the highest mountains and some of the deepest valleys of the world. Mostly unpopulated and forested, it is used as a training base for Islamics. Recently those none existent islamics perpetrated Beslan and Baseyov himself stated or boasted that he is allied to President Sakaashvili, president of Georgia and a Soros puppet. The strikes were made at early dawn by SU-25s, an impossability for Russia, since to reach it, it's closest SU-25s would have to have taken off and flow at night. Being a second rate SU, after the SU-33s, it is a day light capable only fighter/bomber. Georgia, on the other hand, has built several SU-25s with Israeli assistance that have state of the art night capabilities. Furthermore, no hard proof of the bombing was ever presented by the Georgian government, only recycled photos from 5 years prior.
And on Sept. 11, Putin himself threatened Georgia with a heavy military strike if the Georgian government didn\x{2019}t meet Russia\x{2019}s demands. Again, Washington protested, again with no results.	This was in response to a demand that Georgia stop granting visas, protection and support to Chechins, Arabs and other Islamics in the Pankisi Gorge and was limited to Russia stepping into that territory itself. This, after Georgia's only and now formally independent TV Station reported the presence of the terrorists, embarressing then President Shevernadze.

This is an ever growing list to bring the truth forward and fight the lies of these propagandists and Allah cheerleaders.

September 20, 2004

No Peter the Great:
Vladimir Putin is in the Andropov mold.

By Ion Mihai Pacepa

Vladimir Putin looks more and more like a heavy-handed imitation of Yuri Andropov — does anyone still remember him? Andropov was that other KGB chairman who rose all the way up to the Kremlin throne, and who was also once my de facto boss. Considering that Putin has inherited upwards of 6,000 suspected strategic nuclear weapons, this is frightening news.

Former KGB officers are now running Russia's government, just as they did during Andropov's reign, and the Kremlin's image — another Andropov specialty — continues to be more important than people's real lives in that still-inscrutable country. The government's recent catastrophic Beslan operation was a reenactment of the effort to "rescue" 2,000 people from Moscow's Dubrovka Theater, where the "new" KGB flooded the hall with fentanyl gas and caused the death of 129 hostages. No wonder Putin ordered Andropov's statue — which had been removed after the Soviet Union's collapse in 1991 — reinstalled at the Lubyanka.

In the West, if Andropov is remembered at all, it is for his brutal suppression of political dissidence at home and for his role in planning the 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia. By contrast, the leaders of the former Warsaw Pact intelligence community, when I was one of them, looked up to Andropov as the man who substituted the KGB for the Communist party in governing the Soviet Union, and who was the godfather of Russia's new era of deception operations aimed at improving the badly damaged image of Soviet rulers in the West.

In early 2000, President Putin divided Russia into seven "super" districts, each headed by a "presidential representative," and he gave five of these seven new posts to former KGB officers. Soon, his KGB colleagues occupied nearly 50 percent of the top government positions in Moscow. In a brief interview with Ted Koppel on Nightline, Putin admitted that he had stuffed the Kremlin with former KGB officers, but he said it was because he wanted to root out graft. "I have known them for many years and I trust them. It has nothing to do with ideology. It's simply a matter of their professional qualities and personal relationship."

THE NATIONAL POLITICAL PASTIME
In reality, it's an old Russian tradition to fill the most important governmental positions with undercover intelligence officers. The czarist Okhrana security service planted its agents everywhere: in the central and local government, and in political parties, labor unions, churches, and newspapers. Until 1913, Pravda itself was edited by one of them, Roman Malinovsky, who rose to become Lenin's deputy for Russia and the chairman of the Bolshevik faction in the Duma.

Andropov Sovietized that Russian tradition and extended its application nationwide. It was something similar to militarizing the government in wartime, but it was accomplished by the KGB. In 1972, when he launched this new offensive, KGB Chairman Andropov told me that this would help eliminate the current plague of theft and bureaucratic chaos and would combat the growing sympathy for American jazz, films, and blue jeans obsessing the younger Soviet generation. Andropov's new undercover officers were secretly remunerated with tax-free salary supplements and job promotions. In exchange, Andropov explained, they would secretly have to obey "our" military regulations, practice "our" military discipline and carry out "our" tasks, if they wanted to keep their jobs. Of course, the KGB had long been using diplomatic cover slots for its officers assigned abroad, but Andropov's new approach was designed to influence the Soviet Union itself.

The lines separating the leadership of the country from the intelligence apparatus had blurred in the Soviet satellites as well. After I was granted political asylum in the United States in July 1978, the Western media reported that my defection had unleashed the greatest political purge in the history of Communist Romania. Ceausescu had demoted politburo members, fired one-third of his cabinet, and replaced ambassadors. All were undercover intelligence officers whose military documents and pay vouchers I had regularly signed off on.

THE MAKING OF A DICTATOR
General Aleksandr Sakharovsky, the Soviet gauleiter of Romania who rose to head the Soviet foreign intelligence service for an unprecedented 15 years, used to predict to me that KGB Chairman Andropov would soon have the whole Soviet bloc in his vest pocket, and that he would surely end up in the Kremlin. Andropov would have to wait ten years until Brezhnev died, but on November 12, 1982, he did take up the country's reins. Once settled in the Kremlin, Andropov surrounded himself with KGB officers, who immediately went on a propaganda offensive to introduce him to the West as a "moderate" Communist and a sensitive, warm, Western-oriented man who allegedly enjoyed an occasional drink of Scotch, liked to read English novels, and loved listening to American jazz and the music of Beethoven. In actual fact, Andropov did not drink, as he was already terminally ill from a kidney disorder, and the rest of the portrayal was equally false.

In 1999, when Putin became prime minister, he also surrounded himself with KGB officers, who began describing him as a "Europeanized" leader — capitalizing, ironically, on the fact that he had been a KGB spy abroad. Yet Putin's only foreign experience had been in East Germany, on Moscow's side of the Berlin Wall. Soon after that I visited the Stasi headquarters in Leipzig and Dresden to see where Putin had spent his "Europeanizing" years. Local representatives of the Gauck Commission — a special post-Communism German panel researching the Stasi files — said that the "Soviet-German 'friendship house'" Putin headed for six years was actually a KGB front with operational offices at the Leipzig and Dresden Stasi headquarters. Putin's real task was to recruit East German engineers as KGB agents and send them to the West to steal American technologies.

I visited those offices and found that they looked just like the offices of my own midlevel case officers in regional Securitate directorates in Romania. Yet Moscow claims Putin had held an important job in East Germany and was decorated by the East German government. The Gauck Commission confirmed that Putin was decorated in 1988 "for his KGB work in the East German cities of Dresden and Leipzig." According to the West German magazine Der Spiegel, he received a bronze medal from the East German Stasi as a "typical representative of second-rank agents." There, in those prison-like buildings, cut off even from real East German life by Stasi guards with machine guns and police dogs, Lieutenant Colonel Putin could not possibly have become the modern-day, Western-oriented Peter the Great that the Kremlin's propaganda machine is so energetically spinning.

Indeed, on December 20, 1999, Russia's newly appointed prime minister visited the Lubyanka to deliver a speech on this "memorable day," commemorating Lenin's founding of the first Soviet political police, the Cheka. "Several years ago we fell prey to the illusion that we have no enemies," Putin told a meeting of top security officials. "We have paid dearly for this. Russia has its own national interests, and we have to defend them." The following day, December 21, 1999, another "memorable day" in Soviet history — Stalin's 120th birthday — Putin organized a closed-door reception in his Kremlin office reported as being for the politicians who had won seats in the Duma. There he raised a glass to good old Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili (Stalin, meaning "man of steel," was the dictator's nom de guerre).

Days later, in a 14-page article entitled "Russia on the Threshold of a New Millennium," Putin defined Russia's new "democratic" future: "The state must be where and as needed; freedom must be where and as required." The Chechens' effort to regain their independence was mere "terrorism," and he pledged to eradicate it: "We'll get them anywhere — if we find terrorists sitting in the outhouse, then we will piss on them there. The matter is settled." It is not.

SCAPEGOATING AND CONSOLIDATING
On September 9, 2004, Chechen nationalists announced a $20 million prize on the head of the "war criminal" Vladimir Putin, whom they accuse of "murdering hundreds of thousands of peaceful civilians on the territory of Chechnya, including tens of thousands of children."

For his part, President Putin tried to divert the outrage over the horrific Breslan catastrophe away from his KGB colleagues who had caused it, and to direct public anger toward the KGB's archenemy, the U.S. Citing meetings of mid-level U.S. officials with Chechen leaders, Putin accused Washington of having a double standard when dealing with terrorism. "Why don't you meet Osama bin Laden, invite him to Brussels or to the White House and engage in talks, ask him what he wants and give it to him so he leaves you in peace?" Putin told reporters in Moscow.

Then Putin blamed the collapse of the Soviet Union for what he called a "full scale" terrorist war against Russia and started taking Soviet-style steps to strengthen the Kremlin's power. On September 13, he announced measures to eliminate the election of the country's governors, who should now be appointed by the Kremlin, and to allow only "certified" people — that is, former KGB officers — to run for the parliament.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, its people had a unique opportunity to cast out their political police, a peculiarly Russian instrument of power that has for centuries isolated their country from the real world and in the end left them ill-equipped to deal with the complexities of modern society. Unfortunately, up until then most Russians had never owned property, had never experienced a free-market economy, and had never made decisions for themselves. Under Communism they were taught to despise Western democracy and everything they believed to be connected with capitalism, e.g., free enterprise, decision-making, hard work, risk-taking, and social inequality. Moreover, the Russians had also had minimal experience with real political parties, since their country has been a police state since the 16th century. To them, it seemed easier to continue the tradition of the political police state than to take the risk of starting everything anew.

But the times have changed dramatically. My native country, which borders Russia, is a good example. At first, Romania's post-Communism rulers, for whom managing the country with the help of the political police was the only form of government they had ever known, bent over backwards to preserve the KGB-created Securitate, a criminal organization that became the symbol of Communist tyranny in the West. Article 27 of Romania's 1990 law for organizing the new intelligence services stated that only former Securitate officers "who have been found guilty of crimes against fundamental human rights and against freedom" could not be employed in the "new" intelligence services. In other words, only Ceausescu would not have been eligible for employment there. Today, Romania still has the same president as in 1990, but his country is now a member of NATO and is helping the U.S. to rid the world of Cold War-style dictators and the terrorism they generated.

Russia can also break with its Communist past and join our fight against despots and terrorists. We can help them do it, but first we should have a clear understanding of what is now going on behind the veil of secrecy that still surrounds the Kremlin.

— Ion Mihai Pacepa, a former two-star general, is the highest-ranking intelligence officer to have defected from the Soviet bloc. His book Red Horizons has been republished in 27 countries.

http://nationalreview.com/comment/pacepa200409200814.asp

==OIL

THE AXIS OF OIL: China and Russia find a new way to advance their strategic ambitions

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=5200&R=C42B312ED

Also...

Taken from Anatoly Golistyn’s book “Perestroika Deception”, 1995 (pp. 149-151)

Memorandum to the CIA: March 26, 1992

GEOPOLITICAL STRATEGIES OF RUSSIA, THE ‘COMMONWEALTH OF INDEPENDENT STATES’ AND CHINA…

In an earlier Memorandum to the CIA this analyst explained the common Sino-Soviet strategy of convergence with the West and the intended exploitation for the purposes of this strategy of the new openings arising from the ‘reformed’ political structure of the former USSR and the emergence of the alleged ‘democrats’, ‘non-Communists’ and ‘independents’ who are running it.

The present assessment show how, because of Western ignorance of and confusion about the strategy underlying ‘perestroika’ and because of Western political and economic support for the so-called reform of the Soviet system, the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) has been successfully installed and has begun to carry out concrete new geopolitical strategies within the framework of the long-standing overall Communist strategy of convergence.

These strategies are still being guided and coordinated by the same Soviet strategists who have simply shifted away from the use of the old worn-out ideology and the familiar but obsolete patterns, to the exploitation of geopolitical factors and of the new potentialities of the ‘reformed’ Communist system. The common feature of these geopolitical strategies is the manipulation and use of the ‘democratic’ and ‘independent’ images which the change in form from the USSR to the CIS and its individual members has provided so abundantly and the nature of which the West has, so far, failed to comprehend.

The following upgraded strategies may be distinguished:

THE FIRST STRATEGY involves the CIS and Russia in particular dealing directly with longstanding American allies like Germany and Japan and causing their allegiance to be shifted away from the United States towards economic and political alliance with the CIS and especially with Russia.

To this end Russia is exploiting American economic rivalry with Germany and Japan, together with the large-scale involvement of Germany and Japan in economic cooperation with Russia and the offer to them of lucrative market and investment opportunities in Russia. China can be expected to join in this campaign to steal away old American allies by concentrating on offering the Japanese various investment opportunities in China.

A SECOND UPGRADED STRATEGY involves the use of the new ‘independent’ Muslim states in the CIS to establish and develop economic and political cooperation with the fundamentalists in Iran and elsewhere in the Muslim world.

According to this assessment the much-advertised feud between the Armenians and the Azerbaijanis of Turkish descent in Nagorno-Karabakh may be a tactical ploy to involve Turkey, Iran and other Muslim countries in support of eventual alliance with Azerbaijan and other Central Asian Muslim states in the CIS. This strategy takes into account the growing power of the fundamentalists and the possibility of their gaining control over substantial oil reserves.

A primary objective of the strategy here is to achieve a partnership with the fundamentalists in Iran and Algeria and to replace the present American-Oriented rulers of Saudi Arabia with fundamentalists. The opening in Saudi Arabia of a Russian Embassy and the probable opening of Embassies by Muslim states of the CIS (read: Russian puppet governments) should be seen, not only as an attempt to extract a few extra Saudi Billions, but as part of an offensive to bring about a political reorientation in that country.

Chinese Muslims can also be expected to play an active role in promoting alliances with the fundamentalists. The supply of missiles to Iran by the Chinese should be looked at in the context of this strategy.

THE THIRD STRATEGY is to facilitate a shift of the emerging regime in South Africa from the Western sphere of influence towards close economic and political cooperation and alliance with the CIS using for this purpose old friendships with the leaders of the African National Congress and the South African Communist Party with which it is effectively merged. One can expect that the offensive to facilitate such a partnership will become more active and more visible than ever, after the ‘reforms’ in the CIS and South Africa have stabilized.

THE FOURTH STRATEGY is that of using and manipulating the changes in the former Soviet Union to bring about, in the longer run, radical changes in relations between the United States and Israel, in the political power structure in Israel itself, in Israel’s position in the Middle East and in world opinion towards Israel.

The fact that the new leaders in Russia have promised the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Germany, the Baltic countries and Poland, and that they are insisting on a seven-year term for the strategic arms reduction treaty being negotiated with the United States, are indications that the Russian strategists have their own timetable. This is not based on what is going to occur in the CIS according to the optimistic expectations of Western observers, but rather upon the Soviet estimate of the time needed for the strategies described above to take effect. The possibility that the United States will lose valuable allies during this period is not something new. There is nothing permanent in international relations. The Americans experienced this not so long ago when they “suddenly” lost Iran.

The vulnerability of the United States arises from the fact that its basic premises, assumptions and perceptions about the present and future Russia and the CIS are wrong. Where the United States sees golden opportunities, it is in reality facing traps set for it by the Soviet long-range strategists. The impact on the United States of the successful execution of these strategies would be devastating.

The loss of old allies and the loss of oil reserves, following the equally catastrophic loss of South Africa, would result in the re-emergence of the CIS and China as stronger adversaries, and in an ‘irreversible’ change in the balance of world power in their favor. The United States would be weakened and divided and the pressure for the impetus towards convergence of the CIS and China with the United States on Sino-Russian terms would be intensified.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.