(italiano / english / francais)
SOROS / NED / UCRAINA
1. Ucraina, Otpor e nonviolenza. Un commento di Bruno Steri.
2. Links on George Soros' subversion activities
3. People power? Or George power? (Mark Almond)
4. News:
- Soros Foundation: Ukraine 'Battle Between East And West'
- CENTRAL ASIA: Soros Foundation to continue despite setbacks
- Central Asia Speaks: Soros Falls from Grace in Central Asia
5. Altri link:
- Esportatori di rivoluzioni? Ma non fatemi ridere!
- Ukraine, la NED sur la défensive
- L'Ukraine : un modèle pour les relations transatlantiques ?
- Ukraine : l’opposition et le « modèle serbe »
=== 1 ===
COMMENTO DI BRUNO
STERI
Roma, 20.1.2005
Un recente e argomentato libro di Luciano Canfora (La democrazia.
Storia di un’ideologia) ci spiega che l’etimologia del termine
‘democrazia’ riconduce alle nozioni di ‘popolo’ (demos) e ‘forza’
(kràtos): il popolo agisce sui rapporti di forza (talvolta anche
attraverso l’investitura di un princeps, di un principe), fa in qualche
modo violenza allo statuquo, per guadagnare una forma istituzionale che
sottragga potere ai pochi privilegiati, ai ceti forti. Questo è – in
radice e dal punto di vista della sua genesi storica – il significato
di ‘democrazia’. Duole notare che, da Atene ad oggi, tale termine sia
talmente logorato nell’uso da aver addirittura capovolto il suo senso.
Lo possiamo arguire dalla vicenda ucraina, il cui copione ripete quello
già sperimentato in Serbia (ex Jugoslavia) e in Georgia, e che in
sostanza ci fa capire come si “esporta la democrazia” nei paesi
dell’Europa dell’Est; ossia come si estende il dominio e il raggio
degli interessi capitalistici, coniugando nonviolenza, fondazioni e
servizi segreti statunitensi. Ormai tale questione è scomparsa dalle
prime pagine dei giornali, come se fosse stata anch’essa sommersa nel
dramma dell’onda anomala abbattutasi sul Sud-Est asiatico. E invece non
dobbiamo lasciar disperdere i suoi tratti politici essenziali.
Il suddetto genere di “soccorso democratico” ovviamente non
siimprovvisa, richiede un’adeguata organizzazione e ingenti risorse
finanziarie: devono essere mobilitate per settimane intere – giorno e
notte – decine di migliaia di persone e dunque occorre disporre di
cibo, medicine, vestiti, tende per il pernottamento. Il tutto offerto
gratuitamente, dai buoni pasto alle ricariche dei telefonini cellulari.
Come hanno riferito i resoconti giornalistici, Pora – l’associazione
che ha guidato i raduni di piazza a Kiev e organizzato il sostegno al
“democratico” nonché filo-occidentale Yushenko – ha ricevuto cospicui
finanziamenti dall’Open Society Institute del magnate pro-Kerry George
Soros e – per la par condicio – dall’International Republican
Institute, dal National Endownment for Democracy e dall’Usaid (Agenzia
Statunitense per lo Sviluppo Internazionale): solo quest’ultima – e
solo per l’Ucraina – ha devoluto 55 milioni di dollari.
Così, a suon di dollari, viene instaurata la democrazia in Ucraina –
poco importa che lo si faccia, come ha commentato con preoccupazione lo
stesso ‘Corriere della Sera’, al fianco delle croci uncinate dei
neonazisti – allo stesso modo in cui è stato fatto da Otpor in Serbia e
da Kmara! in Georgia, dove le medesime agitazioni di piazza hanno
insediato l’ultraffidabile (per gli Usa, si intende) Mikhail
Saakachvilli.
E’ davvero degno di nota che questi militanti dello “sviluppo
democratico” siano stati addestrati dalla Cia: dicono infatti le
cronache che il colonnello americano in pensione Robert Helvy li abbia
tutti riuniti a Budapest già nel 2000 e li abbia istruiti a dovere. Ma
quel che è più notevole è che il manuale adottato da tutti costoro e
distribuito a Belgrado in migliaia di copie è la Bibbia della
nonviolenza del guru americano Gene Sharp, From Dictatorship to
Democracy. Potenza dello “sviluppo democratico”: la nonviolenza al
servizio della Cia!
Dal suddetto libello sono tratte le 198 tattiche nonviolente pubblicate
– alquanto incautamente – da ‘Liberazione’ a giugno dell’anno scorso e
successivamente presentate come un prodotto del ‘movimento’: uno
scivolone che oggi, possiamo ben dire, appare in tutta la sua
equivocità politica. Così come sarebbe politicamente assai grave, a mio
parere, se iscritti a Rifondazione Comunista partecipassero o
aderissero a iniziative tese a promuovere il suddetto genere di
“sviluppo democratico” targato Cia, quale appunto la cosiddetta
“Tournée dell’amicizia” lanciata dall’ucraino Pora: con la non
esaltante prospettiva di ritrovarsi tra i filosionisti di Pannella e i
“democratici” di Azione Giovani e Forza Nuova.
Secondo l’Economist, prossimi obiettivi del “soccorso democratico”
saranno Russia e Bielorussia, ma pressanti richieste pare arrivino a
questi free-lance della democrazia anche da Venezuela e Cuba. Il quadro
mi sembra sufficientemente chiaro: esso impone ai comunisti di
assicurare un’attenta e costante controinformazione e di alzare il tono
della denuncia politica.
P.S.: Allego, per chi non l’avesse letto, un significativo articolo sul
merito della questione comparso a suo tempo su ‘Il Riformista’ [vedi al
link:
https://www.cnj.it/documentazione/riformista241204.doc
"LA NUOVA GENERAZIONE DI RIVOLUZIONARI. SI SCRIVE PORA O OTPOR, MA SI
LEGGE SOROS. Giovani, nonviolenti e popperiani: hanno cominciato a
Belgrado, vinto in Georgia, dilagato a Kiev." Da Il Riformista del
24/12/2004. ]
=== 2 ===
The Secret Financial Network Behind "Wizard" George Soros (by William
Engdahl)
http://www.questionsquestions.net/docs04/engdahl-soros.html
It-s time for George Soros to visit Armenia and arrange one more
revolution? (by Vasily Bubnov)
http://english.pravda.ru/printed.html?news_id=12482
The 'Sorosization' of the world
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/opinion/columnists/
datelinedc/s_181896.html
New Statesman: Soros is the uncrowned king of eastern Europe (by Neil
Clark)
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=835
GEORGE SOROS, BIG MONEY, THE DRUG CARTELS, AND THE BUYING OF THE
PRESIDENT, 2004
http://www.usasurvival.org/ck091504.shtml
The Dark Lord Soros
by A.M. Siriano - 26 January 2004
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article3072.html
Georgia: Soros Foundation, Foreign NGOs Pay Leaders, 12,000 Officials
(by Keti Sikharulidze)
http://www.messenger.com.ge/issues/0781_january14_2005/news_0781_2.htm
=== 3 ===
http://www.newstatesman.com/
site.php3?newTemplate=NSArticle_World&newDisplayURN=200411290007
People power? Or George power?
Mark Almond
Monday 29th November 2004
Observations on Ukraine. By Mark Almond
George Soros, the billionaire philanthropist, promised to "spend
whatever it takes" to defeat George W Bush. So when the president was
returned to office, he said he felt like retiring to a monastery. Yet
outside America, the missionaries of Soros's lavishly funded Open
Society foundations march in parallel columns with the Bush
administration. Domestic enmities don't stop the two Georges presenting
a united front abroad when it comes to promoting friends and punishing
foes.
A year ago, they jointly helped topple Georgia's president Eduard
Shevardnadze by putting financial muscle and organisational metal
behind his opponents. Now Ukraine has felt the full force of their
displeasure.
Bush's representatives have alleged fraud in the presidential elections
held on 21 November, which ended in victory for the current prime
minister, Viktor Yanukovich, who is regarded as pro-Russian. Meanwhile,
Soros's activists have marched in support of the west's favoured
candidate for president, Viktor Yushchenko, and have provided the
visiting media and election observers with allegations of fraud and
intimidation.
The principal charge is that the official results are at odds with exit
polls run by what western embassies call "independent" polling agencies
(ie, agencies partly paid by western funds channelled through the
embassies). Sound familiar? The exit polls in America's presidential
elections were also wildly out. As Michael Meacher reports (page 22),
the official result in Florida, for instance, was 7 per cent worse for
John Kerry than the exit poll. The Republican senator Richard Lugar was
in Ukraine, but he didn't caution locals against taking exit polls at
face value.
I talked with two exit pollsters in western Ukraine. They stopped every
20th voter and asked how he or she voted. There was no weighting by age
or class. Forty per cent refused to answer. Of the rest, 80 per cent
said they voted for Yushchenko. But things are not so simple. The two
pollsters were also local figures, known as pro-Yushchenko journalists.
Mightn't a Yanukovich voter be shy of stating a preference to them?
Despite allegations about media bias towards the prime minister, you
would hardly have known, from what I saw of local TV channels in
western Ukraine, that he even existed. Even on polling day, Yushchenko
and other public figures were shown voting, but not the prime minister.
And on election eve, the Eurovision Song Contest winner Ruslana and
other pop stars big in Ukraine appeared sporting orange
(pro-Yushchenko) symbols.
One observer, the Tory MEP Charles Tannock, compared Ukraine to
despotic Turkmenistan because Yanukovich was almost unanimously
endorsed by his home region in eastern Ukraine. But then Yushchenko got
votes of 90 per cent or more in western regions. Maybe both candidates
have enforcers in their own regions who can stuff ballots. What is
certain is that western observers never cry foul when a Soros-backed
candidate gets a Saddam-style result. They, like the western media,
prefer the modern fairy tale of "people power": plucky, freedom-loving,
youthful opposition versus slab-faced, ex-communist apparatchiks and
oligarchs.
Western election observers in Ukraine were led by the Labour MP Bruce
George, who was their chief in Georgia last year. His criticisms helped
get the steam up for "people power" there. Yet a few weeks after
Shevardnadze was ousted, he saw nothing odd when the west's favoured
candidate won 96 per cent of the vote to replace him. Generous George
Soros stepped in to pay the salaries of the new president's ministers
and policemen in Georgia. Soros's business partner Kakha Bendukidze
became economy minister.
Does Soros have similar partners-in-waiting for Ukraine? We shall see.
But though they are enemies at home, Bush and Soros always seem to be
on the same, winning side abroad.
This article first appeared in the New Statesman. For the latest in
current and cultural affairs subscribe to the New Statesman print
edition.
=== 4 ===
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc-ny--ukraineelections-
1129nov29,0,1305243.story?coll=ny-ap-regional-wire
Newsday / Associated Press - November 29, 2004
Prominent Ukrainian-Americans express hope for resolution
By RICHARD PYLE
NEW YORK - Prominent Ukrainian Americans expressed
hope on Monday that a high court in Kiev would nullify
the Nov. 21 victory of Prime Minister Viktor
Yanukovych in balloting that opponents claimed was
blatantly rigged in his favor, but they differed on
how it might resolve the crisis.
One expert said that even if the Supreme Court ordered
a new election, there was no guarantee that the
government would agree to give the pro-Western
candidate Viktor Yushchenko another chance.
"The court has ruled in his favor on issues in the
past and the government did not follow through," said
Adrian Hevryk, a representative of the Soros
Foundation, who returned last week from observing the
election in Kiev.
"The government is controlled by Yanukovych and it is
not in his interest. ... What we are seeing here is a
real battle between East and West, and unfortunately
it is coming down on the shoulders of the poor souls
freezing in the streets of Kiev," said Hevryk, whose
organization aims to build free and open societies
around the world.
....
The United States and the European Union agree the
presidential election results were marred by massive
fraud and cannot be accepted. Yushchenko, whose wife
is U.S.-born, says he wants to push the country to
greater integration with Western Europe.
Yanukovych, backed by outgoing President Leonid Kuchma
and Russian leaders, said Monday he did not believe
there was fraud, but "if there is evidence of
falsification, I will agree with this decision" to
hold a new election. He said, however, that it should
be limited to two provinces where it happens he has
strong support. ....
---
SOURCE: ANTINATO @yahoogroups.com
From: Rick Rozoff
http://www.irinnews.org/
report.asp?ReportID=44953&SelectRegion=Central_Asia&SelectCountry=CENTRA
L_ASIA
Irin News.Org - UN Office For The Coordination Of Humanitarian Affairs
- January 6, 2005
CENTRAL ASIA: Soros Foundation to continue despite setbacks
[This report does not necessarily reflect the views of
the United Nations]
ANKARA - The Soros Foundation has said it will
continue its work in the region and has dismissed
suggestions it was suffering from an image problem
with the authorities in Central Asia, where three out
of four of its country-based foundations have
encountered difficulties in their operations.
"I don't really feel it's a public relations problem.
I can't really speculate on the nature of an
authoritarian regime or its reactions," Laura Silber,
senior policy adviser for the Soros Foundation and
Open Society Institute (OSI), told IRIN from New York.
Her comments follow a report by a Turkish newspaper
that Tajik President Imomali Rahmonov had accused some
organisations, and in particular the Soros Foundation,
of acting to destroy Tajikistan's unity.
Rahmonov reportedly raised the issue at the Tajikistan
Democratic People's Party convention, which was closed
to the press, the Istanbul-based Zaman newspaper said.
The text of the president's speech was published in
Tajikistan's Minbari Khalk newspaper, claiming that
the Soros Foundation supported subversive radio
stations and newspapers such as Varorud, Odamu Olam
and Ruzi Nav. He went on to say, "The aim of these
mass circulation media is to destroy the Tajikistan
administration," the 30 December Zaman report added.
But according to Silber, the president later denied
saying this, describing the report as "recycled".
"That's actually not a subject of concern to us,
considering that President Rahmonov himself didn't say
what he is being quoted as saying," the Soros
Foundation official claimed.
However, given recent events in the region, perhaps
more concern is exactly what is needed. Just last
month, a branch of the Soros Foundation in Kazakhstan
was charged with tax evasion by the authorities.
"It seems that the Kazakh government wants to close
down the foundation," Dariusz Zietek, head of the
Soros Foundation-Kazakhstan (SFK), told IRIN earlier
from the commercial capital, Almaty, describing the
event as politically motivated.
According to Kazakh financial officials, a criminal
investigation was opened against the US-based
foundation funded by billionaire Hungarian-born
financier George Soros, after nonpayment of some US
$400,000 in back taxes it owned since 2001, plus some
$200,000 in penalties.
"As far as Kazakhstan is concerned, we're still
holding out hope that the foundation can continue to
operate, although there has been a pattern of
harassment," Silber conceded.
In Uzbekistan, in April 2004, the Soros Foundation,
which aims to promote open societies [....] by shaping
government policy and supporting education, media,
public health, and human and women's rights, as well
as social, legal and economic reform, was forced to
close its operations after the Uzbek authorities
refused to extend its registration, accusing it of
trying to discredit the government's policies.
Such incidents are hardly new for the international
foundation, currently active in more than 50 countries
worldwide. In 1998, the foundation was forced out of
Belarus, allegedly for using funds to finance the
Belarusian opposition, the BBC reported.
Why the Soros Foundation might be facing difficulties
in Central Asia is difficult to say. Some speculate
that the authoritarian [....] governments of the
region might be concerned at the possibility of a
Georgia-type revolution, a bloodless event in which
some believe the Soros Foundation played a role.
....
Meanwhile, the call for real political change in the
region cannot be denied. Just last month, a Kazakh
opposition delegation travelled to Ukraine to study
the methods used by supporters of opposition candidate
Viktor Yushchenko.
According to a member of the delegation, Tolen
Tokhtasynov, the ideas of both Georgia's Rose
Revolution and the Ukrainian protest movement were
finding fertile ground in Kazakhstan ahead of its 2007
presidential election, a Radio Free Europe Report
said.
[For more information on the Soros Foundation see:
http://www.soros.org/about%5d
http://www.newscentralasia.com/
modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1122
News Central Asia (Turkmenistan) - January 7, 2005
Central Asia Speaks: Soros Falls from Grace in Central Asia
Commentary
After Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan has also
voiced concerns about the activities of Soros
Foundation. This completes the quorum.
In rapid sequence, Uzbekistan kicked out Soros,
Kazakhstan issued a back-taxes notice that is likely
to lead to closure of Soros offices, President Askar
Akayev of Kyrgzstan whipped Soros for interfering in
the society and President Imomali Rakhmanov of
Tajikistan told his cabinet of ministers that he
considered Soros a destructive presence for the
society.
Why has the entire Central Asian region united against
Soros, a supposedly philanthropic organization engaged
in grand and noble projects of absolutely the greatest
possible value to the primitive and barbarian
societies of Central Asia?
Here are, very briefly, some of the reasons:
One of the declared aims of Soros Foundation and its
downstream organizations is to create ‘Civil Society’
in Central Asian nations. This noble intention is
quite possibly based on the assumption that Central
Asia is inhabited by barbarians and uncivilized
creatures – ‘natives’ in short.
While treating the Central Asian people as
‘uncivilized’ creatures and their societies as
‘uncivilized’ societies, it would be useful to
remember that Central Asians have no genocide on their
hands. Neither Jews nor Native Americans - ‘Red
Indians’ of not long ago’ - came to the verge of
extinction at the hands of Central Asian people.
One must also not forget that while African Americans
- is *nigger* too embarrassing now? - were struggling
for their basic rights, guests of any colour and
religion were welcome in any Central Asian yurt. Then,
as now, black, white, brown and yellow people broke
bread in the same bowl in this uncivilized part of the
world. The Silk Road never had a colour-coded social
order.
None of the Central Asian countries are civilized
enough to subject their visitors to cavity searches.
People coming from different parts of the world are
not photographed and fingerprinted on arrival. How
uncivilized!
They have still not asked a visiting defence minister
of a friendly country or a serving general of a
‘coalition partner’ to take off their shoes at the
airport, an uncivilized inhibition that needs to be
discarded.
Apart from these obviously uncivil traits, there are
many other drawbacks in the Central Asian societies.
The cradle to grave social network that is not
dependent on the state is something that needs Soros
treatment. There is virtually no need for old peoples
homes because, by default, the youngest child looks
after the parents until their death. It is not a
burden to them; it is honour and pleasure - the
ability to return something of the love and care they
got in their infancy and childhood. It is a clear
violation of civil rights. A civilized society must
send its young to the boarding school and the old to
the old peoples home. Very young and very old are a
hindrance to the process of civilization.
Central Asian women, especially from rural areas, have
the nasty habit of covering their bodies. This
practice encroaches on the civil liberties of men. It
is irritating to see that only hands and face are
naked to the visible eye, I mean, visible to the naked
eye. People cannot develop their full potentials in
societies where acres and acres of female flesh are
not exposed to the environment – and to the lusting
eye.
Unmatched hospitality of the Central Asian people is
another source of concern. A civilized society is
where Sikhs can be mobbed and killed because they
resemble Muslims in appearance, where mosques can be
desecrated and burned, where people can be knifed if
they are coming out of a prayer house of that ‘other
religion’, where it is not safe to travel in the
subway, where jail wardens look the other way when
inmates beat and asphyxiate someone for being ‘weird’,
where hardly anyone knows who is living next door and
where skinheads can proudly practice racial
discrimination.
The trouble is that like most things American, Soros
approach is based on a monochrome template: Black and
white, American society and uncivilized society,
democracy or dictatorship, with us or against us.
The real world, the world where Central Asians live
along with most other nations, is not a cheap joke of
a bored God. It is not black and white. It is fully
alive in all the colours that anyone can perceive or
imagine.
Asserting that there is only one acceptable model of
democracy and that is American model and you better
take it or we would shove it down your throats, saying
that only a certain way of dressing and eating is
acceptable in the civilized world and you must do it
our way or we would force you to do it, propagating
that regime change is the only medicine for all the
ailments of a society, teaching that everything that
exists must be demolished to build something else,
chiding that nothing is right and everything is wrong
is not really the most imaginative way of serving any
people, least of all the Central Asian people who have
a collective heritage of thousands of years of
civilization.
=== 5 ===
Esportatori di rivoluzioni? Ma non fatemi ridere!
02.12.2004 scrive Luka Zanoni
Sono in molti a speculare sulla partecipazione degli ex attivisti di
Otpor nella crisi Ucraina, tanto che la stampa li descrive come
“esportatori di rivoluzioni”. Ma qual è la verità di tutto questo? Ne
parliamo con alcuni di loro
http://www.osservatoriobalcani.org/article/articleview/3684/1/51/
Ukraine, la NED sur la défensive
Dans un article retentissant, diffusé par de nombreux médias
électroniques, Patrick J. Buchanan reprend les informations que nous
avons été les premiers à révéler sur la manipulation de la révolution
ukrainienne par la NED/CIA. Il dénonce le retour aux ingérences des
années 50 et demande la création d'une commission d'enquête du Congrès
sur les agissements de la NED. Nadia Diuk, de la NED, prétend au
contraire que la révolution ukrainienne est spontanée.
http://www.reseauvoltaire.net/rubrique981.html
L'Ukraine : un modèle pour les relations transatlantiques ?
Peter Mandelson présente le renforcement de l'atlantisme comme un moyen
de faire progresser l'indépendance de l'Europe et explique que pour
prévenir tout conflit entre les États-Unis et l'Europe, le meilleur
moyen est d'abattre les barrières commerciales qui les séparent. De son
côté, Robert Kagan voit dans la crise ukrainienne une opération
réussie, fruit d'une coopération entre les États-Unis et l'Union
européenne, un modèle pour l'avenir.
http://www.reseauvoltaire.net/rubrique980.html
Ukraine : l’opposition et le « modèle serbe »
http://www.balkans.eu.org/article4848.html
SOROS / NED / UCRAINA
1. Ucraina, Otpor e nonviolenza. Un commento di Bruno Steri.
2. Links on George Soros' subversion activities
3. People power? Or George power? (Mark Almond)
4. News:
- Soros Foundation: Ukraine 'Battle Between East And West'
- CENTRAL ASIA: Soros Foundation to continue despite setbacks
- Central Asia Speaks: Soros Falls from Grace in Central Asia
5. Altri link:
- Esportatori di rivoluzioni? Ma non fatemi ridere!
- Ukraine, la NED sur la défensive
- L'Ukraine : un modèle pour les relations transatlantiques ?
- Ukraine : l’opposition et le « modèle serbe »
=== 1 ===
COMMENTO DI BRUNO
STERI
Roma, 20.1.2005
Un recente e argomentato libro di Luciano Canfora (La democrazia.
Storia di un’ideologia) ci spiega che l’etimologia del termine
‘democrazia’ riconduce alle nozioni di ‘popolo’ (demos) e ‘forza’
(kràtos): il popolo agisce sui rapporti di forza (talvolta anche
attraverso l’investitura di un princeps, di un principe), fa in qualche
modo violenza allo statuquo, per guadagnare una forma istituzionale che
sottragga potere ai pochi privilegiati, ai ceti forti. Questo è – in
radice e dal punto di vista della sua genesi storica – il significato
di ‘democrazia’. Duole notare che, da Atene ad oggi, tale termine sia
talmente logorato nell’uso da aver addirittura capovolto il suo senso.
Lo possiamo arguire dalla vicenda ucraina, il cui copione ripete quello
già sperimentato in Serbia (ex Jugoslavia) e in Georgia, e che in
sostanza ci fa capire come si “esporta la democrazia” nei paesi
dell’Europa dell’Est; ossia come si estende il dominio e il raggio
degli interessi capitalistici, coniugando nonviolenza, fondazioni e
servizi segreti statunitensi. Ormai tale questione è scomparsa dalle
prime pagine dei giornali, come se fosse stata anch’essa sommersa nel
dramma dell’onda anomala abbattutasi sul Sud-Est asiatico. E invece non
dobbiamo lasciar disperdere i suoi tratti politici essenziali.
Il suddetto genere di “soccorso democratico” ovviamente non
siimprovvisa, richiede un’adeguata organizzazione e ingenti risorse
finanziarie: devono essere mobilitate per settimane intere – giorno e
notte – decine di migliaia di persone e dunque occorre disporre di
cibo, medicine, vestiti, tende per il pernottamento. Il tutto offerto
gratuitamente, dai buoni pasto alle ricariche dei telefonini cellulari.
Come hanno riferito i resoconti giornalistici, Pora – l’associazione
che ha guidato i raduni di piazza a Kiev e organizzato il sostegno al
“democratico” nonché filo-occidentale Yushenko – ha ricevuto cospicui
finanziamenti dall’Open Society Institute del magnate pro-Kerry George
Soros e – per la par condicio – dall’International Republican
Institute, dal National Endownment for Democracy e dall’Usaid (Agenzia
Statunitense per lo Sviluppo Internazionale): solo quest’ultima – e
solo per l’Ucraina – ha devoluto 55 milioni di dollari.
Così, a suon di dollari, viene instaurata la democrazia in Ucraina –
poco importa che lo si faccia, come ha commentato con preoccupazione lo
stesso ‘Corriere della Sera’, al fianco delle croci uncinate dei
neonazisti – allo stesso modo in cui è stato fatto da Otpor in Serbia e
da Kmara! in Georgia, dove le medesime agitazioni di piazza hanno
insediato l’ultraffidabile (per gli Usa, si intende) Mikhail
Saakachvilli.
E’ davvero degno di nota che questi militanti dello “sviluppo
democratico” siano stati addestrati dalla Cia: dicono infatti le
cronache che il colonnello americano in pensione Robert Helvy li abbia
tutti riuniti a Budapest già nel 2000 e li abbia istruiti a dovere. Ma
quel che è più notevole è che il manuale adottato da tutti costoro e
distribuito a Belgrado in migliaia di copie è la Bibbia della
nonviolenza del guru americano Gene Sharp, From Dictatorship to
Democracy. Potenza dello “sviluppo democratico”: la nonviolenza al
servizio della Cia!
Dal suddetto libello sono tratte le 198 tattiche nonviolente pubblicate
– alquanto incautamente – da ‘Liberazione’ a giugno dell’anno scorso e
successivamente presentate come un prodotto del ‘movimento’: uno
scivolone che oggi, possiamo ben dire, appare in tutta la sua
equivocità politica. Così come sarebbe politicamente assai grave, a mio
parere, se iscritti a Rifondazione Comunista partecipassero o
aderissero a iniziative tese a promuovere il suddetto genere di
“sviluppo democratico” targato Cia, quale appunto la cosiddetta
“Tournée dell’amicizia” lanciata dall’ucraino Pora: con la non
esaltante prospettiva di ritrovarsi tra i filosionisti di Pannella e i
“democratici” di Azione Giovani e Forza Nuova.
Secondo l’Economist, prossimi obiettivi del “soccorso democratico”
saranno Russia e Bielorussia, ma pressanti richieste pare arrivino a
questi free-lance della democrazia anche da Venezuela e Cuba. Il quadro
mi sembra sufficientemente chiaro: esso impone ai comunisti di
assicurare un’attenta e costante controinformazione e di alzare il tono
della denuncia politica.
P.S.: Allego, per chi non l’avesse letto, un significativo articolo sul
merito della questione comparso a suo tempo su ‘Il Riformista’ [vedi al
link:
https://www.cnj.it/documentazione/riformista241204.doc
"LA NUOVA GENERAZIONE DI RIVOLUZIONARI. SI SCRIVE PORA O OTPOR, MA SI
LEGGE SOROS. Giovani, nonviolenti e popperiani: hanno cominciato a
Belgrado, vinto in Georgia, dilagato a Kiev." Da Il Riformista del
24/12/2004. ]
=== 2 ===
The Secret Financial Network Behind "Wizard" George Soros (by William
Engdahl)
http://www.questionsquestions.net/docs04/engdahl-soros.html
It-s time for George Soros to visit Armenia and arrange one more
revolution? (by Vasily Bubnov)
http://english.pravda.ru/printed.html?news_id=12482
The 'Sorosization' of the world
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/opinion/columnists/
datelinedc/s_181896.html
New Statesman: Soros is the uncrowned king of eastern Europe (by Neil
Clark)
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=835
GEORGE SOROS, BIG MONEY, THE DRUG CARTELS, AND THE BUYING OF THE
PRESIDENT, 2004
http://www.usasurvival.org/ck091504.shtml
The Dark Lord Soros
by A.M. Siriano - 26 January 2004
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article3072.html
Georgia: Soros Foundation, Foreign NGOs Pay Leaders, 12,000 Officials
(by Keti Sikharulidze)
http://www.messenger.com.ge/issues/0781_january14_2005/news_0781_2.htm
=== 3 ===
http://www.newstatesman.com/
site.php3?newTemplate=NSArticle_World&newDisplayURN=200411290007
People power? Or George power?
Mark Almond
Monday 29th November 2004
Observations on Ukraine. By Mark Almond
George Soros, the billionaire philanthropist, promised to "spend
whatever it takes" to defeat George W Bush. So when the president was
returned to office, he said he felt like retiring to a monastery. Yet
outside America, the missionaries of Soros's lavishly funded Open
Society foundations march in parallel columns with the Bush
administration. Domestic enmities don't stop the two Georges presenting
a united front abroad when it comes to promoting friends and punishing
foes.
A year ago, they jointly helped topple Georgia's president Eduard
Shevardnadze by putting financial muscle and organisational metal
behind his opponents. Now Ukraine has felt the full force of their
displeasure.
Bush's representatives have alleged fraud in the presidential elections
held on 21 November, which ended in victory for the current prime
minister, Viktor Yanukovich, who is regarded as pro-Russian. Meanwhile,
Soros's activists have marched in support of the west's favoured
candidate for president, Viktor Yushchenko, and have provided the
visiting media and election observers with allegations of fraud and
intimidation.
The principal charge is that the official results are at odds with exit
polls run by what western embassies call "independent" polling agencies
(ie, agencies partly paid by western funds channelled through the
embassies). Sound familiar? The exit polls in America's presidential
elections were also wildly out. As Michael Meacher reports (page 22),
the official result in Florida, for instance, was 7 per cent worse for
John Kerry than the exit poll. The Republican senator Richard Lugar was
in Ukraine, but he didn't caution locals against taking exit polls at
face value.
I talked with two exit pollsters in western Ukraine. They stopped every
20th voter and asked how he or she voted. There was no weighting by age
or class. Forty per cent refused to answer. Of the rest, 80 per cent
said they voted for Yushchenko. But things are not so simple. The two
pollsters were also local figures, known as pro-Yushchenko journalists.
Mightn't a Yanukovich voter be shy of stating a preference to them?
Despite allegations about media bias towards the prime minister, you
would hardly have known, from what I saw of local TV channels in
western Ukraine, that he even existed. Even on polling day, Yushchenko
and other public figures were shown voting, but not the prime minister.
And on election eve, the Eurovision Song Contest winner Ruslana and
other pop stars big in Ukraine appeared sporting orange
(pro-Yushchenko) symbols.
One observer, the Tory MEP Charles Tannock, compared Ukraine to
despotic Turkmenistan because Yanukovich was almost unanimously
endorsed by his home region in eastern Ukraine. But then Yushchenko got
votes of 90 per cent or more in western regions. Maybe both candidates
have enforcers in their own regions who can stuff ballots. What is
certain is that western observers never cry foul when a Soros-backed
candidate gets a Saddam-style result. They, like the western media,
prefer the modern fairy tale of "people power": plucky, freedom-loving,
youthful opposition versus slab-faced, ex-communist apparatchiks and
oligarchs.
Western election observers in Ukraine were led by the Labour MP Bruce
George, who was their chief in Georgia last year. His criticisms helped
get the steam up for "people power" there. Yet a few weeks after
Shevardnadze was ousted, he saw nothing odd when the west's favoured
candidate won 96 per cent of the vote to replace him. Generous George
Soros stepped in to pay the salaries of the new president's ministers
and policemen in Georgia. Soros's business partner Kakha Bendukidze
became economy minister.
Does Soros have similar partners-in-waiting for Ukraine? We shall see.
But though they are enemies at home, Bush and Soros always seem to be
on the same, winning side abroad.
This article first appeared in the New Statesman. For the latest in
current and cultural affairs subscribe to the New Statesman print
edition.
=== 4 ===
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc-ny--ukraineelections-
1129nov29,0,1305243.story?coll=ny-ap-regional-wire
Newsday / Associated Press - November 29, 2004
Prominent Ukrainian-Americans express hope for resolution
By RICHARD PYLE
NEW YORK - Prominent Ukrainian Americans expressed
hope on Monday that a high court in Kiev would nullify
the Nov. 21 victory of Prime Minister Viktor
Yanukovych in balloting that opponents claimed was
blatantly rigged in his favor, but they differed on
how it might resolve the crisis.
One expert said that even if the Supreme Court ordered
a new election, there was no guarantee that the
government would agree to give the pro-Western
candidate Viktor Yushchenko another chance.
"The court has ruled in his favor on issues in the
past and the government did not follow through," said
Adrian Hevryk, a representative of the Soros
Foundation, who returned last week from observing the
election in Kiev.
"The government is controlled by Yanukovych and it is
not in his interest. ... What we are seeing here is a
real battle between East and West, and unfortunately
it is coming down on the shoulders of the poor souls
freezing in the streets of Kiev," said Hevryk, whose
organization aims to build free and open societies
around the world.
....
The United States and the European Union agree the
presidential election results were marred by massive
fraud and cannot be accepted. Yushchenko, whose wife
is U.S.-born, says he wants to push the country to
greater integration with Western Europe.
Yanukovych, backed by outgoing President Leonid Kuchma
and Russian leaders, said Monday he did not believe
there was fraud, but "if there is evidence of
falsification, I will agree with this decision" to
hold a new election. He said, however, that it should
be limited to two provinces where it happens he has
strong support. ....
---
SOURCE: ANTINATO @yahoogroups.com
From: Rick Rozoff
http://www.irinnews.org/
report.asp?ReportID=44953&SelectRegion=Central_Asia&SelectCountry=CENTRA
L_ASIA
Irin News.Org - UN Office For The Coordination Of Humanitarian Affairs
- January 6, 2005
CENTRAL ASIA: Soros Foundation to continue despite setbacks
[This report does not necessarily reflect the views of
the United Nations]
ANKARA - The Soros Foundation has said it will
continue its work in the region and has dismissed
suggestions it was suffering from an image problem
with the authorities in Central Asia, where three out
of four of its country-based foundations have
encountered difficulties in their operations.
"I don't really feel it's a public relations problem.
I can't really speculate on the nature of an
authoritarian regime or its reactions," Laura Silber,
senior policy adviser for the Soros Foundation and
Open Society Institute (OSI), told IRIN from New York.
Her comments follow a report by a Turkish newspaper
that Tajik President Imomali Rahmonov had accused some
organisations, and in particular the Soros Foundation,
of acting to destroy Tajikistan's unity.
Rahmonov reportedly raised the issue at the Tajikistan
Democratic People's Party convention, which was closed
to the press, the Istanbul-based Zaman newspaper said.
The text of the president's speech was published in
Tajikistan's Minbari Khalk newspaper, claiming that
the Soros Foundation supported subversive radio
stations and newspapers such as Varorud, Odamu Olam
and Ruzi Nav. He went on to say, "The aim of these
mass circulation media is to destroy the Tajikistan
administration," the 30 December Zaman report added.
But according to Silber, the president later denied
saying this, describing the report as "recycled".
"That's actually not a subject of concern to us,
considering that President Rahmonov himself didn't say
what he is being quoted as saying," the Soros
Foundation official claimed.
However, given recent events in the region, perhaps
more concern is exactly what is needed. Just last
month, a branch of the Soros Foundation in Kazakhstan
was charged with tax evasion by the authorities.
"It seems that the Kazakh government wants to close
down the foundation," Dariusz Zietek, head of the
Soros Foundation-Kazakhstan (SFK), told IRIN earlier
from the commercial capital, Almaty, describing the
event as politically motivated.
According to Kazakh financial officials, a criminal
investigation was opened against the US-based
foundation funded by billionaire Hungarian-born
financier George Soros, after nonpayment of some US
$400,000 in back taxes it owned since 2001, plus some
$200,000 in penalties.
"As far as Kazakhstan is concerned, we're still
holding out hope that the foundation can continue to
operate, although there has been a pattern of
harassment," Silber conceded.
In Uzbekistan, in April 2004, the Soros Foundation,
which aims to promote open societies [....] by shaping
government policy and supporting education, media,
public health, and human and women's rights, as well
as social, legal and economic reform, was forced to
close its operations after the Uzbek authorities
refused to extend its registration, accusing it of
trying to discredit the government's policies.
Such incidents are hardly new for the international
foundation, currently active in more than 50 countries
worldwide. In 1998, the foundation was forced out of
Belarus, allegedly for using funds to finance the
Belarusian opposition, the BBC reported.
Why the Soros Foundation might be facing difficulties
in Central Asia is difficult to say. Some speculate
that the authoritarian [....] governments of the
region might be concerned at the possibility of a
Georgia-type revolution, a bloodless event in which
some believe the Soros Foundation played a role.
....
Meanwhile, the call for real political change in the
region cannot be denied. Just last month, a Kazakh
opposition delegation travelled to Ukraine to study
the methods used by supporters of opposition candidate
Viktor Yushchenko.
According to a member of the delegation, Tolen
Tokhtasynov, the ideas of both Georgia's Rose
Revolution and the Ukrainian protest movement were
finding fertile ground in Kazakhstan ahead of its 2007
presidential election, a Radio Free Europe Report
said.
[For more information on the Soros Foundation see:
http://www.soros.org/about%5d
http://www.newscentralasia.com/
modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1122
News Central Asia (Turkmenistan) - January 7, 2005
Central Asia Speaks: Soros Falls from Grace in Central Asia
Commentary
After Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan has also
voiced concerns about the activities of Soros
Foundation. This completes the quorum.
In rapid sequence, Uzbekistan kicked out Soros,
Kazakhstan issued a back-taxes notice that is likely
to lead to closure of Soros offices, President Askar
Akayev of Kyrgzstan whipped Soros for interfering in
the society and President Imomali Rakhmanov of
Tajikistan told his cabinet of ministers that he
considered Soros a destructive presence for the
society.
Why has the entire Central Asian region united against
Soros, a supposedly philanthropic organization engaged
in grand and noble projects of absolutely the greatest
possible value to the primitive and barbarian
societies of Central Asia?
Here are, very briefly, some of the reasons:
One of the declared aims of Soros Foundation and its
downstream organizations is to create ‘Civil Society’
in Central Asian nations. This noble intention is
quite possibly based on the assumption that Central
Asia is inhabited by barbarians and uncivilized
creatures – ‘natives’ in short.
While treating the Central Asian people as
‘uncivilized’ creatures and their societies as
‘uncivilized’ societies, it would be useful to
remember that Central Asians have no genocide on their
hands. Neither Jews nor Native Americans - ‘Red
Indians’ of not long ago’ - came to the verge of
extinction at the hands of Central Asian people.
One must also not forget that while African Americans
- is *nigger* too embarrassing now? - were struggling
for their basic rights, guests of any colour and
religion were welcome in any Central Asian yurt. Then,
as now, black, white, brown and yellow people broke
bread in the same bowl in this uncivilized part of the
world. The Silk Road never had a colour-coded social
order.
None of the Central Asian countries are civilized
enough to subject their visitors to cavity searches.
People coming from different parts of the world are
not photographed and fingerprinted on arrival. How
uncivilized!
They have still not asked a visiting defence minister
of a friendly country or a serving general of a
‘coalition partner’ to take off their shoes at the
airport, an uncivilized inhibition that needs to be
discarded.
Apart from these obviously uncivil traits, there are
many other drawbacks in the Central Asian societies.
The cradle to grave social network that is not
dependent on the state is something that needs Soros
treatment. There is virtually no need for old peoples
homes because, by default, the youngest child looks
after the parents until their death. It is not a
burden to them; it is honour and pleasure - the
ability to return something of the love and care they
got in their infancy and childhood. It is a clear
violation of civil rights. A civilized society must
send its young to the boarding school and the old to
the old peoples home. Very young and very old are a
hindrance to the process of civilization.
Central Asian women, especially from rural areas, have
the nasty habit of covering their bodies. This
practice encroaches on the civil liberties of men. It
is irritating to see that only hands and face are
naked to the visible eye, I mean, visible to the naked
eye. People cannot develop their full potentials in
societies where acres and acres of female flesh are
not exposed to the environment – and to the lusting
eye.
Unmatched hospitality of the Central Asian people is
another source of concern. A civilized society is
where Sikhs can be mobbed and killed because they
resemble Muslims in appearance, where mosques can be
desecrated and burned, where people can be knifed if
they are coming out of a prayer house of that ‘other
religion’, where it is not safe to travel in the
subway, where jail wardens look the other way when
inmates beat and asphyxiate someone for being ‘weird’,
where hardly anyone knows who is living next door and
where skinheads can proudly practice racial
discrimination.
The trouble is that like most things American, Soros
approach is based on a monochrome template: Black and
white, American society and uncivilized society,
democracy or dictatorship, with us or against us.
The real world, the world where Central Asians live
along with most other nations, is not a cheap joke of
a bored God. It is not black and white. It is fully
alive in all the colours that anyone can perceive or
imagine.
Asserting that there is only one acceptable model of
democracy and that is American model and you better
take it or we would shove it down your throats, saying
that only a certain way of dressing and eating is
acceptable in the civilized world and you must do it
our way or we would force you to do it, propagating
that regime change is the only medicine for all the
ailments of a society, teaching that everything that
exists must be demolished to build something else,
chiding that nothing is right and everything is wrong
is not really the most imaginative way of serving any
people, least of all the Central Asian people who have
a collective heritage of thousands of years of
civilization.
=== 5 ===
Esportatori di rivoluzioni? Ma non fatemi ridere!
02.12.2004 scrive Luka Zanoni
Sono in molti a speculare sulla partecipazione degli ex attivisti di
Otpor nella crisi Ucraina, tanto che la stampa li descrive come
“esportatori di rivoluzioni”. Ma qual è la verità di tutto questo? Ne
parliamo con alcuni di loro
http://www.osservatoriobalcani.org/article/articleview/3684/1/51/
Ukraine, la NED sur la défensive
Dans un article retentissant, diffusé par de nombreux médias
électroniques, Patrick J. Buchanan reprend les informations que nous
avons été les premiers à révéler sur la manipulation de la révolution
ukrainienne par la NED/CIA. Il dénonce le retour aux ingérences des
années 50 et demande la création d'une commission d'enquête du Congrès
sur les agissements de la NED. Nadia Diuk, de la NED, prétend au
contraire que la révolution ukrainienne est spontanée.
http://www.reseauvoltaire.net/rubrique981.html
L'Ukraine : un modèle pour les relations transatlantiques ?
Peter Mandelson présente le renforcement de l'atlantisme comme un moyen
de faire progresser l'indépendance de l'Europe et explique que pour
prévenir tout conflit entre les États-Unis et l'Europe, le meilleur
moyen est d'abattre les barrières commerciales qui les séparent. De son
côté, Robert Kagan voit dans la crise ukrainienne une opération
réussie, fruit d'une coopération entre les États-Unis et l'Union
européenne, un modèle pour l'avenir.
http://www.reseauvoltaire.net/rubrique980.html
Ukraine : l’opposition et le « modèle serbe »
http://www.balkans.eu.org/article4848.html