|Quote; "For decades, the right-wing elements in the German
state never had the opportunity to cooperate with a major party that
shares its views. Now they do. |
For hundreds of civil servants, the rise of Alternative for Germany has presented an opportunity to engage in more right-wing political activities than would have been possible only a few years ago. A senior public prosecutor in Berlin, a judge in Dresden, as well as police officers and teachers across the country: For all of them, supporting the party serves as the bridge between the functioning state apparatus and the far right.
Very often, the party’s members draw connections between their profession and what they take to be the necessity of right-wing activism. They spread rumors of the government’s secret commands to prioritize anti-right policies over the solving of crimes committed by refugees or the “left-green indoctrination of students” in public schools. Their conspiracy theories have not diminished with their proximity to power. The future is a dark one when a right-wing party surges and finds sectors of the state full of “classic civil servants.”" Go to: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/03/opinion/chemnitz-maassen-afd-far-right.html
Quote; "Since World War II, Yugoslavia--prized by both sides--has been molded by the forces of Cold War. |
Early in the first Reagan administration, the U.S. escalated the Cold War with an aggressive, secret strategy to undercut the Soviet economy, destabilize the USSR, and ultimately bring about the collapse of Communism. (1) In 1985, then-Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick dubbed this new strategy, which went well beyond containment, "the Reagan Doctrine." (2)
At about the same time, according to recently declassified documents obtained by CovertAction, the U.S. adopted a similar strategy toward the countries of Eastern Europe, including Yugoslavia. In September 1982, when the region seemed stable and the Berlin Wall had seven years to stand, the U.S. drew up National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) 54, "United States Policy toward Eastern Europe." Labeled SECRET and declassified with light censorship in 1990, (3) it called for greatly expanded efforts to promote a "quiet revolution" to overthrow Communist governments and parties. While naming all the countries of Eastern Europe, it omitted mention of Yugoslavia.
In March 1984, a separate document, NSDD 133, "United States Policy toward Yugoslavia," was adopted and given the even more restricted classification: SECRET SENSITIVE. When finally declassified in 1990, NSDD 133 was still highly censored, with less than two-thirds of the original text remaining. (4) Nonetheless, taken together, the two documents reveal a consistent policy logic.
The "primary long-term U.S. goal in Eastern Europe" as described explicitly in NSDD 54 was "to [censored...] facilitate its eventual re-integration into the European community of nations." (5)
Since the Eastern European states could not have been "reintegrated" into "the European community of nations" as long as they remained under Communist rule, the basic U.S. goal required removal of Communist governments. The implication of ending Soviet influence extends to the more cautiously worded remnants of NSDD 133. The goal of "U.S. Policy [toward Yugoslavia]," it states, "will be to promote the trend toward an effective, market-oriented Yugoslav economic structure...[and] to expand U.S. economic relations with Yugoslavia in ways which benefit both countries and which strengthen Yugoslavia's ties with the industrialized democracies." (6)
Thus, the basic U.S. objective for Yugoslavia was much the same as for Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, the GDR, Hungary, Poland and Romania: a capitalist transformation. The list of policy instruments described in NSDD 54 to promote change in Eastern Europe may help fill in some gaps in the more highly censored Yugoslavia-specific NSDD 133. The mechanisms included most-favored-nation status, credit policy, IMF stewardship, debt rescheduling, cultural and educational exchanges, information programs, high-level visits, and restrictions on diplomatic and consular personnel. (7) Even in this document, some items were completely or partially deleted in the declassified version.
Today, the revelations in the two documents may seem banal. It should be remembered, however, that for many years, the government felt the need to keep secret even the more overt means of pressuring for change. Furthermore, significant parts of U.S. policy in the region, particularly in Yugoslavia, remain secret even today. Covert policies, which undoubtedly were implemented, are not usually discussed at any length in a National Security Decision Directive.
The U.S. and Yugoslavia's Internal Crisis
The existence of a separate document for Yugoslavia reflects that nation's special relationship with the U.S. After Yugoslavia left the Warsaw Pact in 1948 over disagreements with Stalin, the West saw it as a buffer state against Soviet expansionism. When the Soviet Union made threats against it in the early 1950s, Yugoslavia asked the U.S. for help and quietly undertook "certain military obligations" towards the West in the event of a conflict with the Soviet Union. (8) The agreement included a commitment to "protect northern Italy from penetration by Soviet troops based in Hungary." (9) According to a knowledgeable Yugoslav analyst, the "alliance with the West," along with expanded educational, diplomatic and commercial ties, "forced Yugoslavia Communists to open up to Western cultural and political influences." (10)
During the post-war years, Western aid--amounting to several hundred billions of dollars, most of which came from the U.S.--helped to create a boom in Yugoslavia. And, although Yugoslavia remained poorer than most of the countries of the industrialized West, the relatively equitable distribution of the fruits of industrialization carried much of the country out of poverty. By the end of the 1980s, Yugoslavs were better off than most people in Portugal, Spain, Turkey, and parts of Greece. That economic success was crucial in diminishing regional and ethnic tensions.
Thus, the Yugoslav socialist experiment was generally viewed as successful, even in the West, both for its economic progress and for the unity which Marshall Tito brought to an ethnically diverse state.
Yugoslav planners, however, strove to combine structural change with rapid economic growth. And that policy was costly; it created a large trade deficit and weakened the country's currency. The oil crises of 1973-74 and 1979 exacerbated Yugoslavia's problems. (11) By the early 1980s, the country faced serious balance of payments problems and rising inflation. As usual, the IMF, in the name of financial rectitude, stepped in and prodded the Yugoslav authorities to slow growth, restrict credit, cut social expenditures, and devalue the dinar. Although the trade deficit was reduced and the balance of payments showed a record surplus by 1970, (12) the IMF "reforms" wreaked economic and political havoc. Slower growth, the accumulation of foreign debt--and especially the cost of servicing it--as well as devaluation, led to a fall in the standard of living of the average Yugoslav.
The economic crisis threatened political stability. Not only did the declining standard of living undermine the authority of the country's leaders, it also threatened to aggravate simmering ethnic tensions.
The 1980 death of Marshall Tito--the one leader whose authority could hold the country together--plunged Yugoslavia into a dual crisis. And without leadership, the economic crisis suddenly become more difficult to resolve.
Moreover, since Yugoslavia was linked to the world capitalist economy, it had suffered the same economic stagnation that affected Western Europe and North America during the 1970s. When the Reagan administration's supply-side economic policies precipitated a recession in 1981-83, the effects were felt everywhere, not least in Yugoslavia.
It is hardly surprising that Yugoslav planners found it difficult to arrest economic decline in their own country. Some observers claimed that the inability of the economic system to respond to the 1980s crisis demonstrated the failure of the Yugoslav model of socialism. While there is some truth to the charge that the system was rigid, Yugoslavia's troubles were caused first and foremost by the transmission of the Western economic crisis to those countries on the edge of Europe which were closely linked to the West by aid, trade, capital flows, and emigration.
The uneasy U.S.-Yugoslav alliance persisted throughout 1980s. Because of Yugoslavia's unique "buffer" position, the U.S. had a special stake in its stability. Despite discomfort with its communist "ally," the new Reagan administration preserved the relationship, hoping to benefit from the developing instability in Yugoslavia in order to install a more amenable government.
In the late 1980s, three factors suddenly altered the dynamics of the U.S.-Yugoslav relationship. Yugoslavia began to suspend its market-oriented "reforms." The Cold War ended and Yugoslavia was no longer so useful. And a newly united Germany, staking out a larger role for itself in Europe, demanded that the Bush administration adopt the German policy of working for the "dissociation," that is, the dismantling, of Yugoslavia." Go to: https://www.tmcrew.org/news/nato/germany_usa.htm for full article. *All italics mine (also see "The #Euromerta" below).
|Quote; "as we have examined elsewhere on this blog the formation of an Eastern
European Union would break the back of the Now Actively Treacherous
Oligarchy ("NATO"), that has come to ascendancy and dominates the body
politic and help establish the principles of independence and
emancipation benefiting all the significantly (currently marginalised
and ignored), ethnically and culturally divergent regions in the union.".."|
for both Macron and Merkel; "a house divided against itself cannot
stand" and both will have problems forming a European force whilst the
Wider Europe dominates the agenda. The Wider Europe is NATO's Europe,
Trump is simply reasserting the U.S State Dept.'s interests in the
region and demonstrating the true nature of the NATO-ised agenda. I am
forced to admit to a certain amount of wishful thinking on my part
concerning the withdrawal of NATO from the European Theatre (and "drama"
it certainly is now-a-days if not actual soap-opera), but as I am not
(and never have been), in favour of the expansion of the European Union I have no interest in continued adherence to the NATO-ised narrative,
Macron and Merkel are, however, hoisted by their own petard with regard
to this issue as both will find that if they don't embrace the notion of the formation of an Eastern European Union ("EEU"), the removal of the parasite that is NATO will prove very difficult indeed. |
Putin's involvement in the funding and promotion of separatist and nationalist groups is designed to weaken NATO's power-base but an EEU would undermine this strategy and lend credence to more moderate patriots (whose voices should be heard), within the Eastern European states who do not feel that it is necessary to resort to fascism in order to protect either their cultures or ethnic identities.".."“We should work on a vision of one day establishing a real, true European army,” Merkel told MEPs during her speech, drawing applause – and booing – in the chamber.
Although Merkel left open how such a step could materialise in practice, she backed the forming of a European rapid reaction force and a common arms acquisition policy. According to a previous French proposal, a small group of states could go forward and build up a powerful intervention force for crisis operations, for example in Africa.
Echoing Macron’s catch-phrase of a “European army”, she also made a huge step towards Paris. Only last week, the French president argued for more European strategic autonomy when urging that the EU should be able “to protect itself with respect to China, Russia and even the United States.”"..
"Although her position represents a trend of Europeans answering calls by US and NATO to enhance their capabilities, Merkel clarified: “This is not an army against NATO, it can be a good complement to NATO.”* Go to: https://www.euractiv.com/section/future-eu/news/in-strasbourg-merkel-brings-european-army-one-step-further/
for full article.
*Italics mine. This exemplifies the double-think Merkel has always indulged when it comes to Germany's position in Europe; "Ah chancellor it was ever thus but surely if one learns from history one does not repeat the mistakes of the past!"".."it seems that the balance might have been TTIP-ed by the increasing intransigence (at least as far as the U.S is concerned), shown by of most of (esp. mainland), Europe by its policy of the non-acceptance of less regulated produce such as genetically modified foods and chemically and/or pharmaceutically "enhanced" produce from America finding their way on to the shelves, such opposition to the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership may well have been the issue that weighted the scales in favour of electoral intervention by the Trump/Farage/Mercer/Johnson/Putin alliance and the machinations of the "home-grown" talents of Cambridge Analytica."".."These people simply exploited an already unstable Europe though as the Wider European Adventure had already stretched the tolerance of both the former E.U's member states' domestic populations and economies further than either was comfortably able to tolerate" (also see; ""Sophie's Choice" -again-. #Brexit #EUReferendum #VoteYes #VoteNo Montage" go to: http://www.arafel.co.uk/2016/06/sophies-choice-again-brexit.html Quote; ".... Why should not The Poles (who "don't like" the Germans and consistently produce the lowest turn out of any E.U nation in European elections), the Western Ukrainians (bye bye Crimea!), and the other recently assimilated Eastern European States attend to their own affairs? Such would surely be both socially and financially better for all of us.
Take the debacle over the Shengen agreement. Really Mr.Major? Your country's citizens got nothing out of that, is Europe only for the businessmen then? It seems so (quote; "The free movement of persons was a core part of the original Treaty of Rome" go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schengen_Agreement ). One would think that it would be the job of our country's "liberal-left" to point out the "diminishment of persons" that not becoming signatories to the Shengen Agreement represented but noooo as so often where European politics is concerned there was a terrible silence in the "oppositional barn"").
So how to resolve the impasse? The simply expedient of a third choice (as should also have been presented to the British people with regard to our recent referendum on electoral reform by including the option of proportional representation on the ballot papers), whereby Britain would choose not to rejoin unless a process that would reform the current structure by fostering the creation of an Eastern European Union (consequently addressing the issues of the wider union and the influence of NATO), was entered into by all member states, might well give a truer representation of the electorate's wishes and concerns and encourage real debate on the nature of the union that people wish to see, such would surely better serve the interests of democracy."" Go to: https://www.arafel.co.uk/2018/09/thepopularvotegiving-people-real-choice.html
"omerta" concerning discussion of the true nature of The Yugoslavian
conflict and the economic, social and political consequences of "The
Wider European Union" that is so rigidly adhered to and enforced by The
European Media applies to R.T and Al Jazeera as-well (whose collusion
indicates both the true extent of the omerta's influence and it's
source). Russia's behaviour
(and that of the westernised arab states), which is similar to that of
America with regard to foreign and domestic policy dictates that such
should be the case, for just as it is not in N.A.T.O's interest to
encourage stability in the middle east it is not in Russia's to
encourage the formation of an Eastern European economic and political
community (whatever did happen to ours?), Russia's embrace of monetarist
values and "laissez-faire" ensures that her foreign policy decisions
are taken solely in order to maximise short term profits for a small
group of people in just the same way as are those of the member states
of N.A.T.O"...."For those of us who were
conscious during the process of the "Sophie's Choice" of a referendum
on electoral reform that the post Yugoslavian Conflict British
electorate were encouraged to accept as a true expression of their
democratic freedoms the notion that a transcendent N.A.T.O does not control
the economic, political and social direction of our country is
ludicrous (is it not Mr.Ashdown?). Cameron dances the nationalist tune
but he does not "pay-the-piper" yet whilst the anti-European
lobby postures pro-Europeans (and this is true throughout Europe and
beyond), simply refuse to accept the idea that "The European Adventure" has been hijacked by imperialist brigands" Go to: https://www.arafel.co.uk/2013/02/the-european-ometa.html|
"The Poles (bless 'em), to whom we owe a great deal, would surely have been better served (as would we), if the E.U's unconsidered expansion to the very borders of Mother Russia had not taken place. The Germans who -virtually- single handedly destroyed the fabric of The United Nations by recognising an independent Croatia having done so then colluded with America (again? go to http://www.emperors-clothes.com/articles/carr/carr.html -Edit 21/11/10-), to point missiles up Putin's nose*." Go to: https://www.arafel.co.uk/2012/06/whats-that-coming-over-hill.html
Quote; "The fact that this situation has now worsened (re:
NATO involvement in the Ukraine and the State Dept's continuing
presence/influence in Europe), should give the clue as to the causes of
the U.K's current "State of Khaos". Those forces within the European
Union which are pushing for the federally administrated fascism of the
Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership ("TTIP"), and the
"Nato-isation" of Eastern Europe have no interest in democracy
such as that represented by the exercise of their rights of
self-determination by the "European" Electorate (or anyone else come to
that)! That any politician or any commentator should have considered
that entering into a vote on independence for the Scottish People
without first determining how Scotland (and the rest of the U.K), would
cope economically and continue to trade with the rest of The World
should the vote be "Yes" is clearly asinine. Or is it? Not if you depend
for your power-base on anachronistic institutions which are anathema to
the "modern" (community centred), democratic process it isn't! Perhaps
Alex Salmond felt powerless against The Eurasian State but does this
excuse his seeming lack of ability to go "toe to toe" with The
Euro-fascists on the issue of currency union? Certainly the
fire-breathing Euro-dragon has become a formidable and heavily armed
opponent for any single postulant or squire." Go to: https://www.arafel.co.uk/2014/09/the-omertas-blind-spot.html|
Quote; "Sheremet, 44, was a Belarusian
journalist and TV host who has been working outside of Belarus for a
long time. He used to work in Russia as TV host and journalist before
moving to Kyiv around five years ago.|
Sheremet hosted a morning show on Radio Vesti. According to the radio's website, the journalist was heading to the radio's office to host his show when the car exploded." Go to: https://www.arafel.co.uk/2016/07/ukrainethe-regime-tightens-its-grip.html
Quote; ""Before becoming Ukraine’s Finance Minister last December, Natalie
Jaresko collected $1.77 million in bonuses from a US-taxpayer-financed
investment fund where her annual compensation was supposed to be limited
to $150,000, according to financial documents filed with the US Internal Revenue Service this year.|
The near 12-fold discrepancy between the compensation ceiling and Jaresko’s bonuses, paid in 2013, was justified in the IRS filing from the Jaresko-led Western NIS Enterprise Fund (WNISEF) by drawing a distinction between getting paid directly from the $150 million US government grant that created the fund and the money from the fund’s “investment sales proceeds,” which were treated as fair game for extracting bonuses far beyond the prescribed compensation level.
Using this supposed loophole, Jaresko and some of her associates enriched themselves by claiming money generated from US taxpayers’ dollars while avoiding any personal financial risks. She and other WNISEF officers collected the bonuses from what they deemed “profitable” exits from some investments even if the overall fund was losing money and shrinking, as it apparently was in recent years." Go to: https://www.arafel.co.uk/2015/11/the-omertas-pay-off.html
|Quote; ""Either/or democracy is the dalliance of the totalitarian"" Go to: https://www.arafel.co.uk/2016/06/sophies-choice-again-brexit.html|| |
|Quote; "North and South? You might just as well say, "beat the w*ps!" Surely
returning the Grecians their marbles would be an anti-imperialist act
(for it is the imperialists who have championed "The Greater Europe's"
unconsidered eastern expansionism -is it any wonder that; "The centre cannot hold"?-)? Please see; "Sophie's Choice (again)", go to: https://gkhales.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/sophies-choice-again-brexit.html" Go to: https://www.arafel.co.uk/2017/03/squaring-circles-intersectionalities.html|
|Quote; "Our problems are causing schism...it seems to this observer that the
media is failing in its duty to point out America's responsibilities at
this time..the Left (because of its attitudes towards Europe -and Shengen-,
re: The Scottish Vote etc.), are poor Europeans and as a result
consistently fail to properly represent our financial interests to the
U.S!" Go to: https://www.arafel.co.uk/2015/09/nature-abhors-vacuum-re-eu-refugee.html|
With the help of historians and contemporary witnesses, the three-part documentary 'The Balkans in Flames' examines the disintegration of the former Socialist Federation of Yugoslavia. The #Balkans in Flames 7.20pm, Wednesday 18 - Friday 20 November" Go to: https://twitter.com/PBSAmerica/status/1326226617069285376