FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
STOP BY A BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD
Posted on 12/31/2001 4:17:02 PM PST by Orion78
In an earlier Memorandum to the CIA this analyst explained the common Sino-Soviet long range 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.(1)
The present assessment shows 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 'democrat' and 'independent' images which the change in form from the USSR to the CIS and it's individual members has provided so abundantly and the nature of which the West has, so far, failed to comprehend.(2)
The following upgraded strategies may be distinguished:
The first strategy involves the CIS and Russia in particular with 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 in economic cooperation with Russia and the offer to them of lucrative market and investment opportunities in Russia. China can expected to join in this campaign to steal away old American allies by concentration on offering the Japanese various investment opportunities in China.(3)
The 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 gaining control over substantial oil reserves.(4)
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 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.(5)
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.(6)
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 alliances with the CIS using for this purpose old friendships with 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.(7)
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 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 the international relations. The Americans experienced this not so long ago when the 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 of 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' chance in the balance of world power in their favour. 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.(8)
Like we are in a postition to prosecute the USSR and not the other way around. Get a grip.
Prosecute? Here's a grip for youse.
There is a sort of American who cannot
let loose his hatred for the USSR even as
that government no longer exists. It is akin
to hating the Bush administration because
Clinton used the White House as a platform
for treason, thereby ruining it forever.
The danger here is that by refusing to see
Russia as anything but a communist menace,
the reaction of Russians could be to say,
"why bother?" and in fact revert. That makes
the Russophobe happy but does no one
else anything of benefit.
Get a grip. Here we do not confine the former USSR, the reverse is a fact. Do you have your head up your a$$?
Russophobe? Sorry, but you are making racist generalities here. I am just as critical of government purported sinlessness in AMerica as I am in Russia. IS it Russophobic to deplore the fact that millions right now go in the pockets of those bureaucrats who were responsible for Chernobyl (so as to prevent them to start it again, supposedly), instead of going to those who really lost livelyhood in the area? Is that Russophobic to impose a balance of powers and benefits between regular Russians and corrupt bureaucrats?
Of course, for those who side with terrorism and the corrupt terrorist communists who are still confining the rest of the world with their nukes, it must be Russophobic.
Stop prosecuting me with your ill placed hatred. YOu have a problem with me hating the people who are victimizing the world? Well up yours!
In all grave seriousness, given the vast similarities between the mistakes made by the Triple Entente 1919 until WW-II and the ones the West have made since the "fall" of 1989 - 1991, we must consider certain scenarios. Failure to do so would be a horrible disservice to the world.
Folks intent on proselytising their insults without shame nor appologies better think about joining Johnie Taliban's camp.
Was there ever a formal treaty to cover the reputed settlement ending the Cold War? (Answer - no.)
Were the countries who threated the West from 1945 - ? disarmed to a point where they would no longer be a threat? (Answer - no.)
Have Western nations explicitly and deterministically verified what few agreements exist? (Answer - no.)
Have the "former Eastern Bloc" nations continued to arm and economically support other nations who initially turned against the West during the late 70s and early 80s? (Answer - yes.)
Do the Russians actively support and enable the gradual but definite build up of strategic military capabilities of the PRC? (Answer - yes.)
Have the Russians changed a single geopolitical friendship with a single enemy of the USA since 9/11? (Answer - no.)
Have the Russians agreed to oppose the USA in the event of our defending Taiwan against PRC aggression? (Answer - yes.)
Did the Russians sign an historic Axis treaty with the PRC on 7/16/2001, less than 60 days prior to 9/11? (Answer - yes.)
Did the Russians back off from the 7/16/2001 treaty after 9/11? (Answer - no.)
Have our leaders been utter cowards in terms of asking direct questions or demanding real proof of appropriate behavior on the part of the "former Eastern Bloc" ever since 1991? (Answer - yes.)
Are there significant similarities between the ambiguous settlement of 1989 - 1991 and the one that came from the 1918 Armistice between the Triple Entente and the Axis Powers? (Answer - yes.)
Is the settlement of 1989 - 1991 even more permissive and more ambiguous in expectations and enforcement than either the Treaty of Versailles or the Treaty of Locarno? (Answer - yes.)
Have the Russians and other "former foes" of the US from the Cold War engaged in behavior such as hiding weapons, falsifying force levels, and using other nations as venues of both arms development and production?(Answer - yes.)
Did Weimar Germany also do this? (Answer - yes.)
Were the underpinnings of the Third Reich already in place as early as 1923, with wilful participation and full approval of the "republican" Weimar government? (Answer - yes.)
Have we failed to learn from history? (Answer - yes.)
Well, there are other choices. Russia could be a Soviet communist threat on steroids today, fed by a present generation of leaders who were schooled in the Soviet methods of interference and sabotage of independence in the 1960s. These are a new crop of monsters, I fear, who have known no other thing than communist/KGB Soviet techniques of "concordance" to create discord.
Unfortunately I fear these tactics are being implemented before our eyes today. I think Russia might very well be a communist threat to the power 10, and woe to those who ignore the dissidents, the nuke rocket confinements and who do not encourage Russians themselves to have their own government tone down its proselytist and charismatic tone.
Russia needs more of an Orthodox church like humility, a movement to heal the wounds of its true martyrs and dissidents, to reach out for this peace in independent concordance that produces projects in the free, unseen and unfettered privacy of their own people.
I fear that Bush and other liberals are the ones hating Russia back into the USSR, because they snub the martyrs of Russia, they snub the Orthodox church, they snub opportunities to make peace with the Russian people by the necessary bypassing of Russia's leaders to outreach the masses through the church or directly, they snub all that and instead build coalitions with gossipers, neighbor snitches and crooked KGB men in power, seeking the welfare of their peace, instead of providing peace welfare for the Russian people in the war on terror and Jihadic proselytism.
It's as if we hate a free Russia, ironicaly. The lure of free trade and free market unfortunately does not necessarily mean the independent uninterfered concordant privacy necessary for a free future. What is advocated unfortunately is a liberal psychedelic charismatic and discordant trade through imposed "multiculturalism", made of immigrants coming here and there, and school "integrations". Our freedom is a tenuous one too. It's the economy stupid is an arrogance. People only need to be left alone and to avoid the mass hysterias of joblessness and government dependance.
However, I do believe that KGB Major Golitsyn is the real deal. I believe the long-term deception scenario that he described to the CIA during his defection debriefing is happening.
There is a book called "WEDGE: The Secret War Between the FBI and CIA" by Mark Riebling. An online draft version can be found on the author's website http://www.markriebling.com/wedge.html
This book details the problems and rivalries between the FBI and the CIA since its inception. The part concerning Angleton, Hoover, Golitsyn and Nonsenko is as fascinating as it is troubling. I came away believing Angleton and Golitsyn over Hoover and Nonsenko.
Then there are the two books written by Golitsyn. He details close to two hundred global scenarios to watch for. To this date, 94% of these scenarios have come true. This includes the fall of the Berlin Wall. Our own CIA didn't even know it was going to happen until the day it took place, yet Golitsyn detailed it years before.
Golitsyn's story has been confirmed by Czech General Jan Sejna. I cannot remember the name of his book, (maybe Belmont Mark or one of the other gents know it) but in it, he speaks of the same deception scenario that Golitsyn does.
Now all of the above can be coincidences and/or lies made to sell books. I don't believe in coincidences and I trust the judgement of Angleton over Hoover. Angleton spent his career with the best interests of the United States in mind, while Hoover spent his career playing power games and politics.
I reject the idea that Golitsyn is making all this up to sell books (which others have implied). For one, he came to the U.S. in the sixties. He warned us during his debriefing and has continued to write to the CIA every since. He did not write his first book until the 80's. So I think that blows that theory out of the water.
Now maybe I am overly paranoid. However, if anyone actually takes the time to read all of the news article's posted by Orian78, or reads Gertz, Nyquist, Bodansky, Golitsyn, Sejna, Douglas and others, then I think an argument can be made to, at the very least, consider that there is more going on than in the world than terrorism.
As an afterthought, if more people in government were paranoid, maybe 911 wouldn't have taken place. Instead of paranoia, there appears to be institutional arrogance within our intel communities, as well as with the American people themselves. An arrogance that seems to say, "Nothing can hurt us! We're a superpower!"
I blame this on the poor state of education within the US. No one studies history. If we did, we would know that it is filled with the ashes of countries whom thought they could never be defeated.
This is the very reason why I think the deception has been and will continue to work until they are ready to implement.
Maybe I am wearing a tin-foil hat. I don't think so though.
He and his likes do not need no arguments. Arguments is the way to make their deception obvious - that's why they use noises and labels: "tinfoil helmet", "hating Soviet Union back into existence" and so on. Great sound, no substance.
In the meanwhile things foretold by Golytsin more than 10 years ago just continue to happen. He obviously is a specialist in Russian affairs, so the enemy within - American citizens who despise their own country and its values - are not included in his memorandums.
Which does not mean that we, as lay persons, should limit our own awareness.
And we should be aware that it does not matter how the Russian rulers call themselves: czars, General Secretaries, Presidents, Prime Ministers or whatever. World domination is their goal, and the United States the most obvious adversary. They had never shown any worry about the price for reaching it paid in their own subjects' lives... do you imagine they'll pity Americans or any other "foreigners" more?
I really need to do an update on this thread...
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.