The Guardian January 23, 2002


A 56-year-old strategy

by Jared Israel and Nico Varkevisser

The attack on Yugoslavia and the kidnapping of Milosevic are not random 
events. They constitute a new phase of the "anti-Eastern" strategy, which 
Washington has pursued for more than five decades. That strategy had two 
parts: Part one was the break up of the Soviet Union  achieved in 1991. 
Part Two is the reduction of the Republics of the former Soviet Union from 
nations to devastated territories, small protectorates under the domination 
of the US and its junior partners.

Washington has openly pursued this strategy since the end of World War II, 
when it created the CIA, in large measure from General Gehlen's network of 
Nazi operatives, agents and contacts in Western, Eastern and Southern 
Europe.

Part One of the strategy went into high gear in 1979. At that time it was 
articulated by Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser, Zbigniew 
Brezinski.

It was the reason for the US proxy war against Afghanistan, during which 
Washington and its allies created and nurtured the phenomenon of Islamist 
terrorism, which now plagues the former Soviet Union, the Balkans, Algeria, 
and the rest of the planet.

In the West, it is considered politically correct to ascribe the breakup of 
the Soviet Union to an inevitable "revolution" brought about by internal 
decay.

Yet it is well known that most Soviet citizens (perhaps 70%) opposed the 
break-up of the Union. How can a "revolution" that is opposed by most 
people be inevitable?

Alexander Zinoviev was a leading Soviet dissident. Here's what he says: 

"The fall of communism has been transformed into the fall of Russia. The 
Russian catastrophe was deliberately planned in the West. I say this 
because I was once involved in these plans which, under the pretext of 
fighting an ideology, in fact prepared the death of Russia."

Washington and Western Europe (NATO) contrived to exhaust the Soviets 
economically (e.g., the Afghan war and the arms race), bribed and otherwise 
seduced many of its officials, demeaned its ideology, and used other means 
to bring about the Soviets' so-called internal collapse.

In the 1980s, knowing that the destruction of the Soviet Union was near, 
the US mobilised Germany and England and launched the attack on Yugoslavia, 
which went into high gear with the externally-engineered secession of 
Slovenia and Croatia in 1991, precisely when the Soviet Union was being 
destroyed.

Washington launched this attack because crushing Yugoslavia, and especially 
the passionately independent Serbs, is the key to pacifying the Balkans. 
And the Balkans is the strategic southern flank of the former Soviet Union.

Washington goes for world conquest

There were plenty of problems with the former Soviet Union, but these are 
grossly distorted by politicians and propagandists in the West. For 
example, a year ago, in an article called Living with Russia, 
Zbigniew Brezinski, a strategist of US Imperial rule, explained the 
existence of grave poverty in Russia as follows:

"The painful reality is that the communist experiment has bequeathed to the 
Russian people a ruined agriculture, a retarded and in many places 
primitive social infrastructure, a backward economy increasingly facing the 
risk of progressive de-industrialisation, a devastated environment, and a 
demographically threatened population."

The reality is that since the 'fall' of communism, draconian policies, 
dictated by Washington through the International Monetary Fund, have 
methodically laid waste to the economies and social service-structures of 
these countries.

In the Soviet Union, apartments, childcare (available 24-hours a day), 
medical and dental care, public transportation and vacations were either 
free or subsidised so working people could afford them. Higher education 
was not just free; students were paid stipends if they maintained good 
grades.

The finest cultural achievements, such as the great Bolshoi Ballet, were 
enjoyed by ordinary people. Admission to the Bolshoi was a pittance and 
transportation was organised so that working people could attend.

In Soviet society, differences in wealth existed but they were nothing like 
those that exist in the West or that have come to exist in the former 
socialist countries.

Imperial hypocrisy

It is under Western guidance that the Soviet Union's great social 
protections have been destroyed during the past decade.

Perhaps the greatest failing of the Soviet Union was its non-democratic 
character  non-democratic in the profound sense of not relying on the 
political thinking and action of ordinary people. Instead a highly 
centralised bureaucracy was the source of all political motion.

Imperial strategists like Mr Brezinski recognised this flaw, saw that if 
they could penetrate and corrupt this structure they could bring down the 
Soviet Union before the people could be mobilised to resist. Which is 
basically what happened.

But the Soviet Union has been broken up, and with it the restraining force 
of Soviet power. Washington and its European allies are now trying to force 
most of the world's people, that is those living outside North America and 
Western Europe, into neocolonial status, that is, into desperate poverty.

The model is Kosovo

In the Balkans we see Washington's policy at its harshest. In a recent 
speech delivered to soldiers at the giant US military base in Kosovo 
(called, with pompous arrogance, Bondsteel) George Bush Jr described 
Kosovo as the US model for progress in the Balkans.

This progress has meant rule by the gangster-fascists of the KLA; it has 
meant that politically unreliable people  ethnic Serbs, "Gypsies", Slavic 
Muslims and anti-fascist Albanians  are demonised in the media even as 
they are driven from the province, while those who dare to remain in Kosovo 
live in constant terror, their homes reduced to prisons. This is all 
documented.

What Washington has done to the Serbian province of Kosovo it is now trying 
to do to Macedonia and the rest of Serbia. If Washington is successful in 
Serbia, Macedonia and other Balkans states, it will have created the stable 
southern flank it needs to escalate the "low intensity wars" (Washington's 
term) that it is already fighting on many fronts against the former Soviet 
Union.

Yugoslavia shows what Washington hopes to accomplish in the former Soviet 
Union, writ small.

First Yugoslavia was broken up, as the former Soviet Union had been broken 
up. In the process, Washington re-created precisely the same fascist power 
blocs that the Nazi's relied on during World War II, especially clerical-
fascists in Croatia and fanatical Islamists in Bosnia.

Now NATO is using quisling governments installed in Belgrade and Skopje, 
and fascist-secessionists, mobilised behind the slogan "Greater Albania" 
which Washington has encouraged for over a decade, to pulverise the 
remains, to neutralise the powerful Yugoslav Army, and to physically 
devastate those populations in Serbia, Macedonia and elsewhere which have 
historically resisted Imperial domination and whose hearts are drawn to the 
East.

If Washington succeeds in "pacifying" the Balkans in this fashion, it will 
try to duplicate the process throughout the former Soviet Union: reducing 
populations inclined to resist US rule to terrorised slaves ruled by local 
fascists (conveniently labelled victims of oppression by the pro-NATO 
media) and all of it dominated by the US and its allies, especially Germany 
and England.

The anti-Russian onslaught already partly in place

If the new Empire consolidates its power in the Balkans, the former Soviet 
Union's southern flank, the attacks on Russia would increase a hundred-
fold. There would be direct NATO intervention from the south and from bases 
in the Baltic states, from certain former Warsaw pact countries, and 
increased attacks from a few NATO-controlled former Soviet Republics.

This would be justified by an all-out Western media campaign, posing 
imperial conquest as an attempt to curb humanitarian abuses. At the same 
time, Washington would escalate various internal attacks, employing:

* Fifth Column forces already in place, organised by George Soros' boys and 
by US and European agencies (e.g., the National Endowment for Democracy) 
throughout the former Soviet Union;

* Western-inspired attacks by fascist Islamists (it is notable that some of 
the Chechnya terrorists are now fighting as Albanian rebels in Macedonia); 
and

* Traitorous betrayals by officials corrupted through the military and 
economic penetration of the former Soviet Union by Washington and its 
allies.

What would the "Kosovo-ising" of the former Soviet Union mean for the 
world?

Firstly, Washington and its allies could engage in the most extreme plunder 
of the vast resources of the former Soviet Union.

Secondly, with its position consolidated in the former Soviet Union, 
Washington could proceed with full force against the great Asian nation-
states, trying to break up China and India into numerous small 
protectorates.

This is Washington's dream.

Does this policy serve the interests of ordinary people in North America 
and Western Europe? Quite the contrary. Unchecked, it poses the gravest 
risk of worldwide nuclear war.

The resistance by Milosevic and the Serbian people to NATO's expansion into 
the Balkans, their attempt to awaken the great Russian bear, which was 
stunned by the breakup of the Soviet Union, is of the greatest importance 
to humanity  East and West.

By refusing to cooperate with NATO's Hague unTribunal, President Milosevic 
has, in one brave stroke, sent an electrifying call for resistance 
throughout the world. As a refugee from NATO's attack on Afghanistan wrote:

"I just saw Milosevic [on TV]. He told this criminal Western kangaroo court 
that he doesn't recognise them. So I wish there was a lot more of those 
guys, like Milosevic."

The gentleman is correct. We do need tens of thousands of people like 
Milosevic. That is why the unTribunal is doing everything it can to force 
Milosevic to drop his defiance and cooperate with their inquisition.

If the Russians and other people of the former Soviet Union can regroup, 
achieve unity and create popular movements with a Milosevic-type policy of 
national unity based on social justice  a policy that defends the nation 
by mobilising the overwhelming majority of people for social justice  if 
the Russian and other Soviet people can do this, they will not only be 
protecting themselves, they will once again be protecting the world, 
including the people of the US.

* * *
Nico Varkevisser is Vice Chairman and Media Coordinator of the Milosevic Defence Committee. Jared Israel is Editor of Emperor's Clothes. Acknowledgements: Emperor's Clothes. For further reading visit their website: http://www.emperors- clothes.com

Back to index page