the new american-11-19-1995 communism dead

Volume 11, Number 19 NEJltTAMERlCANSeptember 18, 1995

FROM THE EDITOR . 3The "demise of Communism" shocked the world - butnot KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn

OVERVIEW· 4The "liberalization" and "democratization" of the SovietBloc are disinformation ploys designed to beguile theWest into supporting Commun ist objectives

THE "FORMER" SOVIET BLOC . 11In one country after another the story is the same:The "reformers" are "former" hard-line Communists

"POST-SOVIET" RUSSIA . 21A facade of "privatization" and "free enterprise " masksthe fact that Yelts in mainta ins tight control over theeconomy and is amassing dictatorial powers

RATIONALE FOR PERESTROIKA . 25The oppressors have adopted Gramsci 's strategy of"conditioning" their victims to "love Big Brothe r"

SOVIETOLOGY . 29Perestro ika Deception publisher Christopher Storycomments on the significance of Golitsyn

SINO-SOVIET SPLIT . 33Communist dictators have mastered the art of feigninghostility to each other in order to gain Western aid andlead the West into adopting suicidal policies

THE HUMAN COST· 36The Communists continue to rape and kill, even as theypretend to be reformed "democrats"

The myth of the "collapse of Communism" (page 4).

THE CONSPIRACY ABOVE COMMUNISM . 40The Communists have been able to cling to power forover seven decades only because they are part of alarger conspiracy

AID AND TRADE TREACHERY· 47From the Bolshev ik Revolution to the present , Westerncapitalists have assisted their Communist "enemies"

"RESTRUCTURING" THE U.S. . 51Step by step America is undergoing a transformationthat is blurring the distinction between East and West

FIFTH COLUMN . 55This country faced a serious problem of infiltration andsubversion in the '50s - and still does today

AMERICAN HERO . 59Joseph McCarthy was attacked because he was right,not because he was wrong

Cover: Design by Scott J. Alberts; photos by SABA/Defense Dept./UN

FROM THE EDITOR PublisherJohn F. McManus

T he world was stunned when, afterseve n decades of global saber rattling and bloodletting, the Evil Em

pire co lla pse d. Its demise was brou gh tabout, not by invading armies or armed insurrection, but by a speedy success ion of"velvet revolutions" and political conversions. The murderers of millions, their handsstill dripping with blood from the rape ofAfghanistan, suddenly became "democrats,"eager to abdicate tyrannical power and leadtheir people out of bondage . Yet theirchange of heart seemed genuine, since theIron Curtain was lifted and the Berlin Wallwas tom down . The sea-change events werestranger than any fiction, and perhaps lessbelievable.

Speaking of fiction,imagine, if you will, a postNazi Germany headed by"de mocratic reformers"such as Hermann Goeringand Heinrich Himmler.Imagine these "former" Nazi s, who had committedmon strou s cri mes again sthum anity, bein g entrustedwith the affairs of state in thenew "democratic" German y.Imagine, too, an unholy alliance between the triumph antAllies and the "former" Nazi leaders.

That is not the way it happened, of course.In his new book The Perestroika Deception,KGB defector Anat oliy Golit syn explainsthat "After the Second World War the victorious allies correctly applied a denazification programme to eliminate former Nazisand their influence from the institution s andpolitical life of the new Germany." Yet ,Golitsyn continues, "No equivalent decommunisation programme has been applied inthe USSR or Eastern Europe." There alsohave not been any equivalent "Nuremberg"trials for Communist criminals who ruledwith an iron fist. How can this be - unlessthe much-tru mpeted "demise of Communism" is not what it seems?

The "Overview" article beginn ing on thenext page supplies the answer , based on theanalyses and predi ctions of Golitsyn, arguably the West ' s most valuable Sovietdefector. According to Golitsyn: The "liberalization" and "democratization" of the"former" Soviet Bloc are disinformationpl o y s de si gned to beguile th e W e st into su p

porting Communist objectives, includingnot only accommodation and concession butan eventual convergence of nations in a one-

THE NE W AMERICAN / SEPTEMBER 18, 1995

world gov ernment. Viewed in this light ,even so dramatic a development as the reunification of Germany makes perfect sense.Why worry about the temporary "loss" ofhalf a country when the prize is the entireworld?

Fantastic? Not when you examine the evidence. Not when you consider that in his1984 book New Lies fo r Old Golitsyn predicted not only the tearing down of theBerlin Wall and the reuni fication of Germany but many other startling developmentscreating the impression of Communism ' sdemise.

Immediately following the "Overview"article is a survey of "former" Soviet "re

publics" and Eastern Bl occountries (page II ). In caseafter case, as this survey amply demonstrates, the sameold Communist nomenklatura is in charge. Admittedl y, a certain amount of"freedom" is now being tolerated in the la nd of thegulags, but the power structure re ma ins fi rmly inplace. ready to crack downwhenever it serv es Communist purposes. Other ar-

ticles in this issue shed additional light onthe Communist long-te rm strategy of deception, including the fraudulent "privatization"of enterprise in Ru ssia (page 2 1), the"Grarnscian" strategy of capturing a country through "cultural hegemony" (page 25),and the suppo sed Sino-Sovi et split (page33). Yet , even as the Communists presenta more humane face to the world , they cannot abstain from the same terrorist ac tsthey have always committed in the past(page 36).

But if all this is true, how could the Westbe so gullible? Why doesn't the CIA listento Golitsyn? The answer, like so much elsethat is happening in our times, is, onceagain, stranger than fiction. So strange, infact, that we will make no attempt to summarize it here, but invite you to read the article beginnin g on page 40 and - like all ofthe other articles assembled in these pages- judge for yourself.

We frankly hope you will take the time todo so. For if our conclusions are correct,then the survival of our freedoms and civilization is v e ry much at st ak e . •

- G ARY B ENOIT

To order additional copies of this issue at quantitydiscount prices, see tile ad 0 11page 45.

Associate PublisherThomas G. Gow

EditorGary Benoit

Managing EditorDavid W. Bohon

Senio r EditorsWilliam F. Jasper

William Norman Grigg

Washington EditorWilliam P. Hoar

ContributorsHilaire du Berrier

Samuel L. BlumenfeldJames J . DrummeyG. Edward GriffinJane H. Ingraham

Robert W. LeeNeland D. NobelCharles E. Rice

Llewellyn H. Rock well, Jr.Fr. James Thornton

Art DirectorScott J. Alberts

TypesettingSteven J. DuBord

Marketing DirectorSharilyn M. Stanley

Advertising/CirculationJulie DuFrane, Mgr.

Deborah Peltzer, Asst. Mgr.

ResearchThomas R. Eddlem, Dir.

Thomas A. Burzynski

iVEWAMERlCANPrinted in the U.S.A.(ISSN 0885-6540)

THE NEW AMERICAN is published biweekly byAmerican Opinion PUblishing Incorporated,770 Westhill Boulevard, Appleton, WI 54914.Phone : (414) 749-3784. Rates are $39 peryear (Hawaii and Canada, add $9; foreign,add $27) or $22 for six months (Hawaii andCanada, add $4.50; foreign, add $13.50). Airmail rates on request. Single copies: $2.50.plus $2.00 postage and handling for up toeight copies. Over eight copies, add 15% ofdollar total. Copyright © 1995 by AmericanOpinion Publishing Incorporated. SecondClass Postage paid at Appleton, WI and additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Send anyaddress changes to THE NEW AMERICAN, P.O.Box 8040, Appleton, WI 54913.

16- and 35-mm microfilm, 105-mm microfiche,and article and issue photocopies of this publication are available from University Micro

films, Inc., 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor,MI 48106. Phone: (800) 521-0600.

3

oveRVIew

Deadly DeceptionThe myth of the Ileal/apse of Communism IJ

Ten years. What earth-shatteringchanges the past decade hathwrought: the "end of the Cold

War," the "collapse of Communism,"the "devolution of the Soviet Union,"the "liberation of Eastern Europe." Onewould be hard pressed to cite anotherdecade of recorded history that couldlay claim to such monumental "seachanges" and global "transformations."

Ten years ago Russia was still thecenter of the "Evil Empire"; today it isour "partner." In 1985, the Red Army 'slegions occupied Europe's "captive nations," enforced Soviet tyranny, andcarried forth the Kremlin's global imperialist program; today news stories report that the once-vaunted Sovietmilitary is a shambles, barely able to putdown a revolt in tiny Chechnya. A shorttime ago the Soviets were the "enemy"our Armed Forces trained to fightagainst; this past August a couple thousand troops from the "former" SovietUnion and Eastern Bloc countries werewelcomed to Fort Polk, Louisiana forthe first NATO "Partnership for Peace"exercises on U.S. soil.

Coming to AmericaIn 1985 the acronym KGB was uni

versally recognized as the cognomen ofthe most dreaded police-state apparatusthe world has ever known; by July 4th,1994 this agency of terror had been sufficiently "reformed" that FBI DirectorLouis Freeh could journey to Moscowto sign an agreement providing for closecooperation between the two agenciesand rhapsodize over their growing interdependence. "We are united in purposeand spirit," gushed Mr. Freeh followingthe historic signing. "Together, we'reinvincible," Sergei Stepashin, his Russian counterpart, cooed in reply. WithFBI offices now in Moscow and Budapest and others sprouting up in thecapitals of "ex"-Cornmunist countries,reciprocity naturally demands that KGBagents should come to America. Andcome they have , not posing as diplomats, academics, journalists, and busi-

4

The image of the Soviet th reathas been eroded - but not

the threat itself.

nessmen like the hordes of covertKGB agents already ensconced herefor decades, mind you, but as gun-toting policemen walking the meanstreets of the inner cities and the mainstreets of small-town America as"partners" in our new police "exchange" programs.

There is no shortage of pundits toremind us that a few short years agothe world stood at the brink of anuclear Armageddon, with tens ofthousands of Soviet and Americanmissiles poised and ready for "mutually assured destruction." But in anunprecedented triumph of diplomaticthaumaturgy , Presidents Clinton andYeltsin met last year and agreed to retarget the bristling atomic arsenals; instead of aiming at each other's cities,the deadly warheads will henceforth beaimed at the oceans . We have theirpledge on that. There is no way toverify, of course, that the missiles actually were retargeted from missile silosand population centers to Neptune 'sdepths. Or if they were retargeted thatthey weren 't subsequently re-retargeted

again at their earlier marks.But such suspicion and paranoia are

worse than indecorous in the "post-ColdWar world" ; they betray a retrogrademind- set totally out of touch with the"new global realities." After all, we 'retalking about President Boris Yeltsinhere, the hero of the "August Coup"who climbed atop the army tank, "stareddown" the Communists, and brought"democracy" and "free market reform"to Russia . President Clinton and the

THE NEW AMERICAN / SEPTEMBER 18, 1995

Clinton has openly embraced the dictatorial Yeltsin.

powers that be trust him sufficiently toinsist that Ukra ine hand over its nucleararmory to him . Imagine: the leader ofthe Free World arguing for more nukesfor the Kremlin! What a country. Whata world . What a time we live in.

Gorby FeverThe indiv idual most responsible for

this historic "transformation," of course,is Mikhail Gorbachev. A dec ade ago,Gorbach e v leapt fro m obsc urity toworld acclaim; from dutiful CommunistParty apparatchik in Stavropol he hadrisen rapidl y through the ranks to become General Secretary of the Communi st Part y of the SovietUnion , and th en , the firs t"president" of the land of theczars and commissars. Hisc harm, to gether withglas nost and perestroika,swept the globe . Under hiscelebrated leadership, the Soviet air force continued flyin g hundred s of bombingmission s a day in Afghanistan, raining death and destru ctio n on innocentnon combat ants, but thatdidn 't seem to dampen global "Gorby fever" in the least- or prevent the top Communist boss from receivin gthe Nobel Peace Prize , orTime magazine ' s hon or as"Man of the Decade."

Although he was ousted byComr ade Bori s and the Yeltsin claqueof "reformers," his star has not fallen or even dimmed. Indeed, it appears tobe rising to glorious new heights. As theconvener of the Global Forum of Spiritual and Parliamentary Leaders for Human Survival , leader of the Gree nCross/Green Crescent orga nization, anda co-composer of the "Earth Charter" tobe unveiled at the UN's 50th Anni versary this October, he has obviously ascended to the rank of high priest in theglobal green church of Gaia. His Gorbachev Foundati on/USA, boast ing animpressive regi ster of one-world notables, has launched an ambitious "Global Security Project" to produce ablueprint for planetary "restructuring"and "collective security" under "measu res designed to stre ng then th e authority of the United Nations."

This September 27th through OctoberIst, Mikhail and his Gorbachev Founda-


tion will play host in San Francisco to"The State of the World Forum," a dazzli ng assemblage of heads of state ,titans of industry, academic s, and glitterrati , convoked to "Launch a multiyea r proc ess, culminating in the year2000, to artic ulate the funda me nta l[world] pr iorities, va lues and actio nsnece ssary to constructively shape ourcommon future ."

Imagine ThatYes, these are surely wondrous times.

Who could have imag ined a decade agothat the Soviet jugge rnaut which for 70years had rapaciously, savagely, and in-

exora bly spread it s ty ra nnica l gripacross the planet wo uld suddenly dissolve in a series of "velvet revolutions"?Who could hav e fo reseen the rise topower of Gorbache v in Russia and Solidarity in Poland ; the tearing down of theBerlin Wall and the welco ming of former Soviet republics and Warsaw Pactnati ons into the European Union andNATO ; the renunciation and denun ciation of Communism by top Russianlead ers; and the "liberalization" and"democratization" in the Soviet Union?

Who indeed? These developmentswere too fanta stic for any mere morta lto have predicted. Right? Wro ng. Thereis one who accura te ly predi cted theseand man y other ev ents and developments in the Co mmuni st world thathave come to pass. We are referring toSoviet defector Anatoliy Golitsyn, whoseamazi ng prescience comes from his intimate know ledge and unde rstanding of

Soviet strategic deception, a knowledgeand understanding initiated in the mostsecret recesses of the Soviet KGB anddeveloped through his intensive studiesand analyses over the past 35 years.

Anat oliy Golitsyn is very likely themost important KGB officer ever to escape to the West. Over the past threeand a half deca des he has proven timeand agai n the reliability and precision ofhis analysis of eve nts and political developments in the Communist world. Inthe last 15 years alone, his predictionsconcerning the monumental changes inSoviet leadership and policy have provenso uncannily accurate as to defy com-

parison by any other analystor so-called expert. He reli ably forecast the "false liberali zati on " campaigns ofglasnost and perestroika, therehabilitation and elevationof Sakharov, the Sino-Sovietdevelopments, the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, thereunificati on of Germany ,and a great deal more. However, his predictive accuracyis not the only thing that hasset him apart. Contrary toprevailing wisdo m, he hassounded a continuous warn-

ca«: ing that, far from being genu-~oE ine , the ch an ges, splits ,~ reforms, and moderations in~ the Communist wo rld that~ have so enthralled the West

and inspired great hopes for"world peace" are dangerous illusions.

S in ce hi s de fect ion in December1961 , Golit syn has labored with littl esuccess to co nvince We stern intelli gence agencies and political leaders thatthey have been taking their nati on shead long into a deadly trap. Among themany vita l pieces of info rmatio n thatGolitsyn contributed to Western securitythe most explosive was his revelation ofa new , sec ret, long-range Communistoffens ive. He revealed that between1958 and 1960 the Kremlin had carriedout a major reorganization of the KGBunder General Aleksandr Shelepin in order to implement a fantastically elaboratestrategy of deception against the West.

The new offensive would be so desig ned and executed ove r a period ofseveral decades as to completely deceive the West co ncern ing the ve rynature of the Soviet regime and fund amental reali ties of the world Communist

5

Conspiracy, its global apparatus, itsstructure , goals, strategy, and methods.Fictitious divisions, factions, and splits- both within the Soviet leadership andbetween Moscow and its satellites would be fabricated to belie the increasingly unified Communist monolith . Periods of false "liberalization" wouldalternate with "hard-line" crackdowns.

Tightening ControlThe new offensive coincided with ,

and was made possible by, another extremely important development that hadescaped detection by the West: the solving of the "succession problem" by theCommunists. The power struggles in1924 and 1953 following the deaths respectively of Lenin and Stalin, impressed upon Khrushchev and the Sovietleadership the necessity of devising aform of collective leadership which

would obviate another Stalinist dictatorship and the upheaval, weakness, and disunity engendered by a succession crisis.

The period of 1957-60 saw intenseconsultations among the leadership ofthe Communist Parties inside and outsidethe Soviet Bloc. "The process culminated," says Golitsyn, "in the Eightyone Party Congress held in Moscow inNovember 1960. The leaders of alleighty-one parties committed themselves to the program set out in theconference's statement, or - as it issometimes described - Manifesto. "

This document, notes Golitsyn ,"clearly betrays the influence of Lenin'sideas and practice, as does Khrushchev's follow-up speech of January 6,1961. These two basic documents havecontinued to determine the course ofcommunist policy to the present day.They explain in detail how the triumph

of communism throughout the world isto be achieved through the consolidationof the economic, political, and militarymight of the communist world and theundermining of the unity and strength ofthe noncommunist world."

But what of Khrushchev's "removal"from power not long after? That, saysGolitsyn, was one of the early deceptions successfully pulled off under thenew program . Despite the show of infighting, it was, he observes, "a smoothand agreed transfer of power," a "stagedaffair conducted with his [Khrushchev 's] full agreement." And all Sovietleadership transfers since have followedthe same script.

Following LeninHow are such elaborate and con

trolled deceptions possible?Along with restructuring of the KGB

Golitsyn's Amazing Predictio

6

From New Lies for Old (1984):[T]he communist strategists are equipped, in pursuing their

policy , to engage in maneuvers and stratagems beyond the imagination of Marx or the practical reach of Lenin and unthinkable toStalin. Among such previously unthinkable stratagems are the introduction of false liberalization in Eastern Europe and, probably , in the Soviet Union and theexhibition of spurious independence on the partof the regimes in Romania, Czechoslovakia,and Poland .

* * *The creation of Solidarity and the initial pe-

riod of its activity as a trade union may be regarded as the experimental first phase of thePolish "renewal." The appointment of Jaruzelski,the imposition of martial law, and the suspensionof Solidarity represent the second phase, intendedto bring the movement under firm control and toprovide a period of political consolidation. In thethird phase it may be expected that a coalitiongovernment will be formed, comprising representatives of the communist party, of a revived Solidarity movement, and of the church . A fewso-called liberals might also be included .

* * *A coalition government in Poland would in fact be totalitari

anism under a new, deceptive, and more dangerous guise. Accepted as the spontaneous emergence of a new form of multiparty,semi-democratic regime , it would serve to undermine resistanceto communism inside and outside the communist bloc....

* * *If "liberalization" is successful and accepted by the West as

genuine, it may well be followed by the apparent withdrawal ofone or more communist countries from the Warsaw Pact to serveas the model of a "neutral" socialist state for the whole of Europeto follow.

* * *The "liberalization" [in the Soviet Union] would

be spectacular and impressive. Formal pronouncements might be made about a reduction in thecommunist party's role; its monopoly would beapparently curtailed . An ostensible separation ofpowers between the legislative, the executive, andthe judiciary might be introduced. The SupremeSoviet would be given greater apparent powerand the president and deputies greater apparentindependence.

* * *"Liberalization" in Eastern Europe would

probably involve the return to power in Czechoslovakia of Dubcek and his associates . If itshould be extended to East Germany , demolition of the Berlin Wall might even be contemplated .

* * *The European Parliament might become an all European so

cialist parliament with representation from the Soviet Union andEastern Europe . "Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals" wouldturn out to be a neutral, socialist Europe.

From The Perestroika Deception (1995):Behind the mask of diplomatic and political cooperation and

partnership with the United States and Europe, the current Russian leaders are following the strategy of their predecessors and


under Shelepin , the Soviets launched aninte ns ive campa ig n of rese arch intostrateg ic disinformation precedents andtec hniques. Particular emphas is wasplaced on the study of Lenin ' s success ful decade- lo ng dec eption under hisNew Econ om ic Pol icy (NEP). Th eCommunist leadership also showedgreat renewed interes t in Sun Tzu' s TheArt of War, the ancient Chinese treatiseon strategy and deception.

Sun Tzu ' s philosophy was a perfectfit:

All warfare is based on decep tion. Th erefore, when capable,feign incapacity, when active , inactivity. When near , make it appearthat you are far away ; when faraway, that you are near. Offer theenemy a bait to lure him; feign disorder and strike him. When he con-

centrat es, prepare again st him;where he is strong, avoid him ....Pretend inferiority and encouragehi s arrog ance. Keep him understrain and wear him down. Whenhe is united, di vid e him. Attackwhere he is unprepared ; sally outwhen he does not expect you. Tosubdue the enemy without fightingis the supreme skill.

In Lenin ' s New Economic Policy theSoviet leadership had the perfect template for implementation of Sun Tzu' sstrategy. In 1921, faced with imminentcollapse and surrounded by hostile powers increasingly alarmed by his Bolshevik threat, Lenin launched a spectacularreversal. Abandoning his rigid "warcommunism," he adopted a ruse of "cal culated ideological moderation" andfeigned a desire for peaceful coexist-

ence with the West. Lenin ' s NEP welcomed foreign business investments inRussia, permitted private trade and enterpri se by the Russian peoples, relaxedrestriction s on travel , allowed someemigration, toned down the overt terrorof his secret police, and displayed otherfeature s of liberalization.

One major result of the NEP , Golitsyn explains, was that 'T housands ofWestern technicians helped to industrialize the Soviet Union , and Westernfirms built essenti al factories there. It isfair to say that the found ations of Sovietheavy and military industry were laid inthe 1920s with American, British, Czechoslovak, and, after the Treaty of Rapallo(1922 ), German help."

Launched concomitantly with theNEP was another incredible subterfugewith amazing parallels to the currentSoviet perestroika deception: the "Trust."

s of the Soviet Sea Changesworking toward a "New World Order."

When the right moment comes the mask will be dropped andthe Russians with Chinese help will seek to impose their systemon the West on their own terms as the culmination of a "SecondOctober Sociali st Revolution ."

* * *The essence of the strategy is to introduce a calculated and con

trolled false democratisation and to revive a discredited regimeby giving it an attractive aspect and a "human face" .... The impact would in fact be greater and deeper because itwould not be alarming but disarming for theWest.... It might eventually lead to the realisationof the final goal of Soviet strategy, namely theconvergence of the capitalist West with the Communist East on Soviet terms and the creation of aWorld Government as a solution to the arms raceand nuclear confrontation.

* * *[T]he Russians may be expected to provoke an

incident unattributable to themselves involvingthe explosion of a nuclear device somewhere inthe West not excluding the United States. Thepurpose would be to reassert or re-emphasise thenecessity for the American -Russian partner shipnow, and to create pressure for eventual WorldGovernment.

* * *Soviet-American student exchanges have been used to study

the workings of American institutions and to train Soviet expertsin areas which have bearing on the execution of strategy. For instance, Aleksandr Yakovlev, Gorbachev' s key adviser on international policy and the promotion of "pe res troika" in the

THE NEW AMERICA N / SEPTEMBER 18, 1995

American media, studied the media at Columbia University onan exchange programme.

* * *In my view, the [Soviet] strategists created Zhirinovskiy with

two main aims in mind: to forestall the emergence of uncontrolled ultra-nationalism in Russia, and to use the fear of the socalled "Zhirinovskiy factor" for strategic purposes. The West isalarmed by Zhirinovskiy but fails to spot the use that is beingmade of him, for example, by Yeltsin on his recent [1993] visit

to Germany when he referred obliquely toZhirinovskiy when demanding a special placefor Russia within the forum of the Group ofSeven .

* * *The successors to the KGB have no intention

of revealing the whole truth contained in theKGB files but only such half-truths as will enable them to manipulate American public opinion to suit their purposes as described above.Since the Watergate hearings the CIA and the FBIhave destroyed many files and have lost much oftheir counter-intelligence memory .

* * *Several "former" KGB officers visited the

United States to meet and exchange views withtheir CIA counterpart s. The Russian group included a certain Zvezdenkov. The visit was treated

in the US press simply as a public relations affair. It escaped thenotice of the press and apparently of the CIA and the FBI thatZvezdenkov was the man who investigated and sent to his deathPetr Popov, the most valuable agent the Central IntelligenceAgency ever ran in the GRU [Soviet military intelligence]. •

7

In 1921, Lenin' s OGPU, forerunner ofthe KGB, created a false anti-Soviet organization, the Monarchi st Alliance ofCentral Russia, also known as the Trust.Agents of the Trust convinced antiCommunist emigre leaders abroad andWestern intelligence services that theywere part of an extensive anti-Communist underground within Russia whichincluded high-level officials in the Soviet govern me nt and military. Theywere on the verge, they said, of beingable to overthrow the Reds. To prove theTru st' s bonafides, emigre leaders weresmugg led into Russia to witnessco nvincing sham battles and thestage-managed blowing up of police stations by the "underground."

The We stern int elligence services and even the most suspiciousemigres wer e ev entually completely snookered by the massive,intricate decepti on . In 1929 theywere rudely awakened to the factthat they had been duped, when theSoviets pulled the rug out from under the Trust and ended the NEP.

A Lone VoiceSince his defection, Golitsyn has

sought to warn the West that it hasbeen falling for another massivedeception patterned after the Trustand the NEP. Under a sentence ofdeath by the Soviet Union, he hasbeen in deep cove r for nearly 35years. During that time he has submitted a stea dy stream of secretmemoranda to the Central Intelli gence Agenc y, providing a body ofanal ysis on Soviet Bloc developments and Soviet/Communist strat-egy that is unparalleled for depth ,timeliness, and acc uracy . The CIA ' sChief of Counterintelligence from 1954to 1974 , James Jesus Angleton , tookGolitsyn ' s warnings concerning the Soviet long-range program seriously. Healso believed Golitsyn ' s claim that theKGB had succeeded in placing a highlevel mole within the CIA .

However, An gleton and Golitsynnever succeeded in convincing America ' spolitical leaders of the dire danger of theSoviet deception strategy. When Angleton was ousted from the CIA in 1974,Golitsyn lost his most effective and stalwart champion within the intellige ncecommunity. In 1984, Golit syn receivedpermission fro m the CIA to publishsome of the memoranda he had written

8

over the years. The result was a 400page blockbu ster which appeared underthe title New Lies for Old. The reviewers in the Establishment press savagedthe book as "nonsense," "totally inaccurate," and "demented." The history ofthe ensuing decade, however, has provenhis detractors to be the purveyor s ofnonsense, inaccuracy, and dementia,while any honest appraisal of Golit syn ' swork will reveal that he stands withoutpeer in accurately forecasting the tumul tuous changes in the Communist world.

Based on his knowledge of Shele-

Manifestations of convergence:Albanian troops stat ioned at Fort Polk.

pin ' s lon g-range strategy, which helearned of while working in the innercircles of KGB counterintelligence, together with his application of the dialectic and logic of that strategy, Golitsyncorrectly prophe sied the "reemergenceof Solidarity" in Poland, "co nfederationof East and West" Germany, "demolition of the Berlin Wa ll," the rise of false"dissidents" such as Andrei Sakharov,Soviet withdrawal from Afgh ani stanand repudiation of its earlier invas ion,and much more.

Mark Riebling, author of the timel ynew book, Wedge: The Secret War Between the FBI and CIA, says of Golitsyn ' s predictions in New Lies fo r Old:" 139 out of 148 were fulfilled by the

end of 1993 - an accuracy rate ofnearly 94 percent." And Riebling ' s assessment includes only the more promi nent of Golitsyn ' s projections; it doesnot include man y of his more subtleanalyses and foreca sts.

Deception at WorkTho se political leaders caught in the

throes of trying to decide whether theWest should support this Soviet leaderor that are in dire need of reading thechapter in Golitsyn ' s book on "AllegedPower Struggles." 'T he disinformation

effort to keep alive Western beliefin the existence and inevitability ofrecurrent power struggles in theleadership of communist partiesserves several purpose s," Golitsynwrites. A prime purpose for promoting the idea of the exi stence ofcompeting factions within the Soviet Union or other Communiststates, or the existence of rancorous "splits" between Red regimes,he explains, is "to obscure the unity,coordination, and continuity withinthe bloc in pursuit of an agreedlong-range polic y." He continues:

By creating false associationsin Western minds between different communist leaders anddiffer ent aspects or pha ses ofcommunist policy - Khrushchevwith "rev isionism," Mao with"dogmatism," Teng Hsiao-p 'ingwith "pragmatism," Dubcek with"democratization," and Brezhnev with "neo-Stalinisrn" - theWe st can be induced to makefal se deductions about main-springs of communist policy, in

acc ura te prediction s about it sfuture course, and mistakes in itsown responses. The West is morelikely to make concessions, for example, over SALT negotiations, orthe supply of high technology goodsto the Soviet Union or China, if itbelieves that by so doing it willstrengthen the hand of a "liberal"or "pragmatic" tendency or factionwithin the party leadership . Conversely, the West can be persuadedto attribute agg ress ive aspec ts ofcommunist policy to the influenceof hard-liners in the leadership.

The creation of different brands ofCommunism - i.e . Soviet, Chinese,


Albanian, Yugoslav, Rumanian -likewise gave "encouragement to Westernillusions that national sentiment andnational interest were achieving dominance over ideology as the drivingforc e behind the communist world .These illusions would rai se We sternhope s and expectations that, with cautious and selective help and-polificalencouragement, the fissureSin the communi st monolith could be gradually enlarged until the mo'nolith disintegratedaltogether."

A New WarningWit h publication of his most recent

book The Perestroika Deception earlierthis year, Golitsyn has provided an evenmore co mpelli ng and urgen t warning tothe West. Co ntrary to the "facts" repor ted by the Establishment experts andmed ia mavens, the USS R has not "collapsed" and the Communis t Party, theKGB, and the Soviet military have notbeen overthrown or dis so lved. Thesesame structures of Communist power though somewhat remodeled - con tinue to rule , not only in Russia , but inall of the supposedly "independent republics" as well. Russia, the Commonwealth of Independent States, and the"former" East Bloc nations are still runtoday by the same nom enklatura, thesame Communist bos ses who ran thoseunfortunate countries during the ColdWar.

The Perestroika Deception rip s themasks off of the Kremlin' s "Masters ofDeceit" and lays bare their massive subterfuge . Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Shevardnadze, Sakharov, Chebrikov, Walesa,Ligachev, Yakovlev , Pozner, Kozy rev ,Havel, Manescu, Kravchuk, Kuchma,Nazabayev, Primakov, Akayev, et aI.,are adeptly exposed by their own duplicitous words and actions.

Golitsyn warn s that far from ceasingto be an enemy of the United States,Russia is becoming "more formidable,more sophisticated and more dangerousbecause the new design for Communistworld victory is more realistic than theold . The new design can be describedmost succinctly as 'cooperation-blackmaiL ' " This "cooperation-blackmail"alternately involves the Soviet use of"deniable assets" such as North Koreaand Iran or the spectre of "rogue cle ments" or " hard-l ine Communists"gaining control over nuclear armamentsto th reaten U.S . security and world


peace. Golitsyn describes this ploy as" 'cooperate with us or face the prospectof nuclear chaos and conflict. ' The developing situation over North Koreashould be carefully watched with this inmind. The late Kim II Sung was a Soviet Korean. The North Koreans wouldnot have acted in a provocative mannerwithout the concealed support of theRu ssians and of their Chinese comrade s-in-arms from the 1950s."

Golitsyn warns, " It must be revealed,that 'perestroika ' is the result of thirtyyears of preparation by the CommunistParty, the Soviet Government and theKGB under the guidance of the Partyapparatus, that it is not ju st Soviet domestic renewal but a strat egy for 'restructuring' the whole world .... Th eSoviet s are not striving for ge nui ne,lasting accommodation with the Western democracies but for the final worldvictory of Communism.... They inten dto exploit the same illusion to induce theAmericans to adopt their own 'restructuring ' and convergence of the Sovietand American systems using to this endthe fear ofnuclear confl ict."

If Golitsyn is right - and no observerof Soviet affairs ha s come close tomatching the accuracy of his anal ysesand predictions - the Kremlin leadersand their dupes, agents, and co -conspirators in the West have succeeded inpulling off the greatest -deception of alltime. If Golitsyn is correct, glasnost,perestroika, and the enormous " reforms" and upheavals witnessed underGorbachev and Yeltsin were (and are)contro lled decep ti ons calculated andperpetrated to co nvince the people ofthe United States and Western Euro pethat the "Evil Empire" is no more. In reality , the "Soviet threat," according tohis analysis, presents a greater peril tothe world now than at any time in itshistory.

Toward Convergence"Convergence," which sounds rela

tively harmless when bandied about indiplomatic parlance by the talking head son MacNeil/Lehrer, takes on a decidedlygrimmer aspect when its realities arelimned by Golitsyn. "Convergence," hestates with well-earned authority, "willbe accompanied by blood bath s and political re-education camps in We sternEurope and the United States. The Soviet strategists are, counting on an economic depression in the United States

and intend to introduce their reformedmodel of socialism with a human face asan alternative to the American systemduring the depression."

The convergence strategy is alreadywell on its way toward completion. Aprincipal apo stle of convergence, Mr.Gorbachev, ha s been gi ven a primepiece of American real estate for his"foundation" and is accorded the statusof royalty. So viet soldiers are beingtrained at our most advanced militarybases by our elite forces . Soviet KGBofficers are being welcomed into ourpolice forces . Leading Soviet disinformation agents are given prime time todisgorge their slick "human face " propaganda to American telev ision audi ences .

Gol itsyn cites a very important admission by one of the Krem lin's top deception specialists, which exposes theimportance of thi s "human face " artifice . Georgiy Arbatov, writing in theJune 1988 issue of Kommunist, journalof the Communist Party of the SovietUnion (CPSU), stated:

The "image of the enemy" that isbeing eroded has been ... ab so lutel y vita l for the forei gn andmilit ary policy of the United Statesand its allies. The destruction ofthis stereotype . . . is Gorbache v' sweapon.... Neither the arm s race,nor the power blocs in the ThirdWorld, nor the military bloc s, arethinkable without "the enemy," andwithout the "Soviet threat." ... Ofco urse , this weapon is not secret,but it does have enormous power.

It is not the reality of the enemy, thereality of the threat, which is beingeroded, but the image onl y; the threatremains, more real than ever. Diabolical ? Certainly. The Communists haveever shown their demonic capacity tomimic the deceptive techniques of the" father of lies ." As the French poetBaudelaire admonished, "Never forgetthat the devil' s cle vere st trick is to con vince you that he doe s not exi st." Yes,he doe s exist, as do his demonic earthlyminions who continue to use his deceitful wile s to spread their totalitarian empire across the globe under the rubric ofthe new world order. . '

- WILLIAM F. J ASPER•To order Anato liy Golitsyn 's books. see the ad 0 11thenext page.

9

The "Former" Soviet Bloc

Although Communism certainly appears to have collapsed, the nomenklatura remains firmly in place.

C ommunism, we were told , coll apsed throu ghout EasternEurope and the old So viet Union beginning in 1989 ."Democracy," we were told, was in the wind and "reform"

was everywhere. Consider the former Soviet republic of Turkmenistan, where there have been two presidential elections, a parliamen tary election , a national referendum, and where a former AmericanSecretary of State now advise s President Saparmurad Niyazov, wholed his country to independence in 1991. Encouraging indeed until we learn the rest of the story.

Writin g in the Wall Street Journal for April 11, 1995, staff reporter Claudia Rosett noted that President Niyazov has done awaywith the cult of Lenin . That is the good news. The bad is that he hasreplaced it with the cult of himself. Throughout the country statuesof Niyazov "bedeck the streets, districts and collective farms nownamed after him. Mr. Niyazov' s profile, in bronze, adorns the central bank. His face appears on Turkmen bank notes, on billboardsand in the design of hand-knotted rugs." Further, Niyazov "has builtan $82 million marble-floored airport, named for himself," whichhas "no toilet paper in the . .. restroom s, no food in the restaurantand not much traffic on the airfield."

President Niyazov orchestrated the creation of the Red-d ominated Democrat Party of Turkmenistan, the country' s only legallyregistered party. To enhance his credenti als as a "reformer," he hasreportedly urged Communist Party veterans to re-create theTurkm enistan Communist Party and a kindred Peasants' Party. That


way, he can boast of having a "multi-party" system and impress theWest.

Regarding those presidential and parliamentary election s, Rosettrecalls that in "October, 1990, he [Niyazov] ran unopposed to become Turkmenistan ' s first president, winnin g 98.3% of the vote. In1992, runnin g again as the sole candidate, he won with a landslide99.5%. In 1994, apparently tired of campaig ning, Mr. Niyazov helda referendum that extended his term until 2002. He got 99.9% ofthe vote. In elec tions last December for a new 50-seat Parliament,50 candidates approved by Mr. Niyazov all ran unopposed, and allwon." Isn 't democracy wonderful?

Rosett further reveals that Niyazov has retained the consultingservices of former U.S. Secretary of State Alexa nder Haig Jr. (alongtime member of the ubiquitous Cou ncil on Foreign Relations),who for the past two years has come to Ashgabat (the capital) forNiyazov' s birthday (which is also national flag day). Haig has beenhelpin g Niyazov plan a pipeline that, Rose tt states , "would runacross Iran to Turkey and event ually on to Western Europe." TheU.S. governm ent has objected to the scheme, because it "mightleave Europe depending on a pipeline that could be controlled byIran...."

Rosett wri tes th at Ni yazo v "dec ides how lan d wi ll be used andwho may study abroad. He personally contro ls the dollar reservesof Turkmenistan ' s centr al bank. Recently, strapped to pay bills forsome of his large, unprofitable construction projects, he confisca ted

11

Havel (left) insisted Communist Dubcek must be at his side.

75% of the 1994 profits of Tur kmenistan ' s commercia l banks."It is all for the long-range good, however. "In his speeches," ac

cording to Rosett, "Mr. Niyazov has explained that his iron grip ispart of his 'g radual' plan ' to build a democratic state.'"

So it goes in the former republics of what Ronald Reagan termedthe "Evil Empire." Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of this "co llapse" of Communism is the extent to which so many Americanshave been persuaded to believe that leopards who long served theold Soviet and Iron Curtain regimes, and who continue to exercisedecisive power within thei r respective nations toda y, not onlychanged their spots, but transformed into benign pussy cats. Let uslook at additional examples that confirm the old adage that the morethings change, the more they remain the same.

_ ALBANIA

In June of last year, Gannett News Service reported, "Five yearsafter the Iron Curtain fell, ex-Communists are making a comebackin Central and Eastern European states and former Soviet republics." Of the 22 states involved, Albania was described as one ofonly five to "have kept forme r ruling Communi sts from returningto power or from exercising major political influence ." To the contrary, President Sali Berisha, now often described as a fervent antiCommuni st, belonged to the Commu nist Party prior to 1989. Hisgovernment is praised as "democratically elected," yet over 10 percent of the citizenry has fled the country since Communism supposedly ended. The government continues to genera te two-thirds ofthe country's gross domestic product , and most prices remain controlled by the state-owned sector of the economy.

_ AZERBAIJAN

The Communists appeared to have suffered an authentic setbackhere in 1992 when President Ayaz Mutalibov, a Red since 1963 whohad been elected in 1991 (he was the sole candidate), was forcedout of office by an angry citizenry. Abulfez Elchib y was elected toreplace him. A staunch nationalist, Elchiby had a long record of opposition to the Communist Party and had been the nation' s leadingdissident since the 1970s when he was imprisoned for two years athard labor in a rock quarry for his anti-Communist activities. But in June 1993, Elchiby's government wastoppled, and Azerbaijani lawm aker s promptly electedtheir old Communist leader Geidar Aliyev as parliamentary chairman and designated him Acting President. In apresidenti al election held on October 3, 1993, Aliyev received more than 98 percent of the vote. He is a formerKGB General, was First Secretary of the Azeri Communist Party, and was a member of the Soviet Politbu ro during the Brezhnev era.

_ BELARUS

Th e current Supreme Soviet (parli ament), elec ted in1989, is dominated by "former" Communi sts who continue to control the policy-making process. In June of lastyear, Aleksandr Lukashenko became the republi c' s firstelected president. While in high school, he served as secretary of a Young Communist League chapter, and in1982 became deputy director of a collective farm. Threeyears later, he became secre tary of that farm' s Commu nist Party committee.

12

_ BULGARIA

The Union of Democratic Forces, which helped oust the old Communist government and won the 1991 parliament ary elections, heldpower for only II months, after which the coun try was run by (inthe words of a Decemb er 18, 1994, New York Times dispatch)"former communists who provided the guiding hand in the government of the ' non-party' technocrats who ruled from December 1992until September of this year." In last December' s general election,the Socialist (former Communist) Party was returned to power, capturin g an absolute majority in the 240-seat parli ament. SocialistParty leader Zhan Videnov, whom Associated Press described thenext day as "the new face of the Communists who used to rule thisBalkan country," became Premier. He had assumed leadership ofthe "former" Communists in Decemb er 1991 , and prior to thatworked for the Young Communist League.

_ CZECH REPUBLIC

In January 1968, a so-called "libera l" faction with in Czechoslovakia' s Communist Party, led by Alexander Dubcek, temporarilytook control of the country. In his 1984 book New Lies for Old,former KGB agent Anatoliy Golitsyn claimed that it was a carefully-plotted trial run aimed at determini ng if the West would actually fall for the fantasy that a totalitarian Communist country couldspontaneously switch to "democracy" under the leadership of supposed "reformed" Communi sts and their collab orators. Accordin gto Golitsyn, the ploy had been planned in the late 1950s, prior to hisdefection to the West, and was brought to an end without exposingthe supposed "democratization" when, after seven months, WarsawPact troops invaded, ousted Dubcek , and installed a Stalinist regime.Indications that something was fishy included the nonviolent natureof the invasion (Dubcek and his colleagues did not resist) and thefact that neither Dubcek nor his key advisers were executed norgiven lengthy jail terms. To the contrary, Dubcek was given a plushjob as a forestry manager in Bratislava.

Golitsyn predicted in 1984 that the time would come when, aspart of a new phase of Communist strategy , "liberalization in Eastern Europe would probably involve the return to power in Czechoslovak ia of Dubcek and his assoc iates." On December 10, 1989,

THE NEW AMERICAN I SEPTEMBER 18, 1995

hard-line Communist President Gustav Husek resigned , and thatsame day Dubcek and playwright Vaclav Havel (leader of the leftwing of the Civic Forum polit ical movement) announce d that theywould both run to replace Husek. Havel had earlier said of Dubcek:"I will not permit any dark forces to drive a wedge between himand me.... He must be at my side, in whateve r function." Referringto Havel, Dubcek asserted: "We've been together from the verystart."

With in less than a week, Dubcek dropp ed out of the race andthrew his support to Havel. That same day, durin g a nationally televised addre ss, Havel declared: "For 20 years, it was official propaganda that I was an enemy of socialism, that I wanted to bring backcapitalism, that I was in the service of imperialism.... All those werelies." One week later the Communist Party endorse d Havel as interim president and Dubcek as parliamentary chairman. The Federal Assembl y (parliament) unanimously elected Dubcek as speakeron December 28, 1989, and the next day elec ted Havel president.The fulfillment of Golit syn' s prediction was complete.

On February 2 1, 1990 Havel addressed a joint session of the U.S.Congress, durin g which he urged our government to tangibly support political and economic "liberalization" in the So viet Uni on andasserted that most important of allwas th e prosp ect th at th e wo rldwould enter "an era in which all ofus . . . will be able to crea te what yourgrea t Presiden t [Abraham] Lincolnca lled the ' family of man ' " (i .e .,convergence) . The day before, President Bush had hailed Havel as a manof "tremendous mora l courage" andhad moved to clear the way forCzechoslovaki a to receiv e lucrativemost favored nation trade status. Mr.Bush also pledged U.S. support forother Czechoslovakian access to aidfrom internation al financi al organizations, and the Export-Imp ort Banksubs eque ntly anno unced th at itwould beg in subsidiz ing U.S . ex ports to Czechoslovakia for the firsttime since 1946. InSeptember 1990,Czecho slovakia was admitted toboth the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund .

In Jul y 1990, the Federal Assembly re-elected Havel to a twoyear term , whereupon he selected a cabinet that included "former"Communists as premier, foreign minis ter, economic planning minister, and defense minister.

Havel resigned in July 1992, once it became clear that the country would not continue as a federal state. In February 1993, parliament re-elect ed him as the first president of the new Czech Republi c(which had separated from Slovakia on Janu ary Ist). Accordin g tothe July 1994 issue of Background Notes, publ ished by the U.S.State Department, "Full memb ership in the European Union, whichthe government hopes to achieve by the year 2000, is probably thecountry's highest foreign polic y goal."

_ GEORGIA

In 1991, Zviad Gam sakhurdia received nearly 87 percent of the voteto bec ome the first directly elected leader of a Sov iet repub lic .Eduard Shev ardnadze, who would later become Soviet foreign min-


"Former" Communist Shevardnadze (above)replaced Gamsakhurdia (left) in Georgia.

iste r und er Mikh ail Gorbachev, was the republ ic ' s Com mun ist Part y boss at the time.Shevardnadze had earned a reputation for ruthless brutality and had personally author ized thetortur e of pri son ers in Ge or gi an jai ls. Th eWash ingtall Post for Sep tember 6, 1992 reca lled, " In his 13 years as Co mmunis t Partychief [Shevardnadze] was regarded as an aggressive per secutor of nationali sts and dissidents, including Gamsakhurdia." Writ ing in theWashingtoll Times for August 8, 1985, MichaelBonafi eld cited underground documents that

reached the West as early as 1975, indicating that Shevardnadze"perso nally authorize d the torture of prisoners of Georgian jails."Bonafield descri bed how Shevardnadze "set up the spec ial No. 2block of the prison, a slaughterhouse for ' target' prisoners and aplace for the MVD [Ministry of Internal Affairs] hangman' s orgies,where the most horribl e tortures were used : beat ings with iron bars,prodding with steel needles and rods, hanging up prisoners by thefeet ... and so on."

Shevardn adze joined the Communist Party in 1948, graduatedfrom the Party School of the Central Committee in 1951, and in1956-57 became Second , then First, Secretary of the CommunistYouth League. He was named a full member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Georgia in 1958 . From 1965 to1972 he served as Georgia' s interior minister, and in 1972 becamethe republic's Commun ist Party leader. He was appoin ted a nonvoting member of the national Politburo in 1978, became a full voting member in 1985, and was then se lec ted by Gorbach ev to

succeed Andrei Grom yko as foreign minister.On Decemb er 20, 1990, Shevardnadze suddenly resigned as for

eign minister, raising the specter of an "impending dictatorship" due

13

to the incre asing influ ence of "reactionary" forces opposed toperestroika .

Following the failed anti-Gorbachev "coup" in August 1991,President Gamsakhurdia was the only leader of a Soviet republic toopen ly voice the widely held suspicion that Gorbachev had himselffaked the "coup" as part of long-range Marxist strategy. When thenew Comm onwealth of Independent States was formally launchedin December, Georgia was the only republic that refused to join .

Soon, a clamor led by leftist intellectuals began demanding thathe resign. When he refused, heavily-armed opposition forces movedagainst him in December 1991, and in early January he was forcedto flee the capital of Tbili si. During an interview with AssociatedPress on the day of Gamsakhurdia' s departure, Eduard Shevardnadze hailed the military coup as a "democratic revolution," assailed Gamsakhurdi a as a "dictator," and expre ssed "a great desireto particip ate in the creation of a democratic Georgia ."

In October 1992, Shevardnadze was elected to the new post ofparliament chairman, the equivalent of President. The election wascarefully structured to assure his victory and create the semblancethat it was a landslide. He ran unopposed and elections were notallowed in at least six districts considered strongholds of formerPresident Gamsakhurdia. Shevardnadze received 90 percent of thevote, after which he told reporters: "Our people have finally chosenthe democratic path." What he meant by "democracy" became clearon August 6, 1993, when he told Parliament: "My word should belaw for everybody." According to the Autumn 1994 issue of International Currency Review, he has "ruled Georgia with terror andbrutality ever since . . . with the help of special troops or 'bodyguards' trained in secret by U.S. special forces seconded to Georgiafor the purpose."

_ HUNGARY

According to the State Department publication Background Notesfor December 1994, "Hungary's transition to a Western-style parliamentary democracy was the first and the smoothest among theformer Soviet bloc...." The country' s hard-line Communists weresupposedly voted into near obli vion in 1990 when the SocialistParty (formerly the Communist Party) finished a dismal third in parliamentary elections, capturing only 33 seats in the 386-seat nationalassembly. The victor on that occasion was the Hungarian Democratic Forum (HDF), which had been the first opposition party toemerge during Hungary' s supposed "liberalization." Yet, as UnitedPress International reported on December 13, 1989, the HDF itselfwas receiving "support from the highest levels" of the CommunistParty Politburo.

With leftists posing as free market "reformers" in control , theeconomy deteriorated, which paved the way for the return of overtCommun ists who hammer-and-sickled the theme that "democraticreform" had failed. On May 29th of last year, the Communists werereturned to power when the Socialist Party secured an absolute parliamentary majority. The Party then selected its leader , Gyula Horn,as premier. Horn, who was the last Communi st foreign minister before the "collapse of Communism," had been described in a May 7,1994 New York Times pre-election dispatch as "one of Hungary' smost unpopular politicians...." The electorate' s distaste for Hornwas understandable. As the Times reported two days later, Horn"did not run as the prime ministerial candidate of the Socialists, apparently because his background as a member of a Communi st Partymilitia that helped suppress the 1956 uprising provided too much ofa campaign target for his opponents." The Times neverthe lessclaimed that Horn "is considered to come from the reform wing ofthe party."

14

_ KAZAKHSTAN

Here, too, it is essentially business as usual, with "former" Communists firmly in control. President Nursultan A. Nazarbayev, thecountry' s top Communist official prior to independence, was a Gorbachev ally (and Politburo member) who joined the CommunistParty in 1962 and only resigned from its Central Committee in thewake of the contrived 1991 anti-Gorbachev "coup ." He was electedto the presidency after the breakup of the Soviet Union. He was theonly candidate for a term set to expire in December 1996, but onMarch 11th of this year he dissolved parliament and asserted thathe would rule by decree until new elections were held. On April30th, he received more than 95 percent support in a referendum toextend his term until the year 2000 .

Some critics claimed that the extension amounted to a return todictatorship, but Nazarbay ev insisted that it was needed to providestability. The West, including the U.S., reacted with typical limpwristed indignation . As reported by Facts on File for May 4, 1995,"Representatives of the Group of Seven major industrialized nationsboycotted the announcement of the results of the vote." Anythingharsher was out of the question. After all, as the March 30th Factson File had reported, Nazarbayev "supported aggressive economicreform...."

_ KYRGYZSTAN

When President Askar Akayev was elected in 1991, he was laudedas the "first freely elected" president of the republic. In fact, he wasthe only candidate and received some 95 percent of the vote. Coincidentally, 95 was also the percentage of deput ies elected to parliament who were members of the Kyrgyz Communi st Party, whichAkayev himself had joined in 1981.

In 1986, President Akayev was beckoned to Moscow to serve inthe Soviet Communi st Party Central Committee (CPSUCC) Department on Science and Educat ion. In 1987, he was elected vice president of the Kyrgyz Academy of Sciences, and later became itspresident. In 1989, he was elected to the newly created Soviet Congress of People ' s Deputie s and was subsequently selected to servein the Supreme Soviet. In 1990, he became a full member of theCPSUCc.

In the wake of increasing oppo sition to his policies, Akayevscheduled a referendum for January of last year on whether heshould complete his term. More than 96 percent of the voters optedto keep him in office so that he could cont inue his "reform" effort s.In July, he proposed that press freedom be limited in order to haltthe " impunity and immorality" of "anti-democratic" newspapersthat were crit icizing him. In testimony in October 1993 and May1994, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott decla red thatdue to "the political enlightenment of its president and also the boldness of their economic reforms, we're going to do what we can . . .[to] elevate the political profile of our relationship." He describedAkayev as "a true Jeffer sonian democrat. "

_ LATVIA

Latvia is one of the former Soviet republic s which Gannett NewsService claimed in June of last year had "kept former ruling Communists from returning to power or from exercis ing major politicalinflu ence." Yet Anatolij s Gorbunovs, chairman of the SupremeCouncil (parliament), is a former member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and was LatvianCommuni st Party secretary for ideology.


_ LITHUANIA

In March 1990, Vytautas Landsbergis, who had an impressive career-long record of opposition to Communism, became the first nonCommunist to head one of the Soviet republics when he was electedPresident by Lithuania' s national parliament. He defeated Communist Party chief Algirdas Brazauskas by a margin of more than twoto-one. President Brazauskas had been trained as an engineer andworked in construction before becomi ng a state economic plannerin 1966. In 1977 he was appointed secretary of the Lithuanian Communist Party in charge of economic affairs, and in 1988 becameParty boss. In 1990, he and a group of fellow Communists supposedly broke with the Soviets and formed the Democrat Labor Party(DLP) to succeed the Communist Party.

In 1992, Lithuania became the first of a growing list of formerSoviet republi cs or satellites to formally return reins of power tothe old-timers when the DLP captured a solid majorit y of seats inparliament. The new parliament elected Brazauskas its chairmanand acting head of state and, the followin g February, Brazauskasreceived 60 percent of the vote to become the country' s first directl yelected President.

_ MOLDOVA

President Mircea Snegur was elected on December 8, 1991 . Thesole candidate, he mustered 98 percent of the vote. As summarizedin an August 12, 1994 CRS Report for Congress, he "held varioustop Communist Party and government positions before Moldovanindependence in 1991, including president of the Moldavian Supreme Soviet , deputy chairman of the USSR SupremeSoviet, and secretary of theMoldavian Communi stParty Central Committee."

Mold ova ' s firs t parl iamentary elections in February 1993 saw the AgrarianDemocratic Party (ADP),led by Snegur and other"former" Communi sts, finish far ahead of their rivals.Petru Lucin schi of the ADPwas subse quently electedparli amentary speaker. Hewas once a member of boththe Central Committee ofthe Soviet Communi st Partyand the Politbu ro, and wasa first secre tary of the Moldavian Communist Party. Premier AndreiSangheli also has a long record of service to the Communist cause.

_ POLAND

Poland was the first East European country to supposedly throw offthe yoke of Soviet domin ation . The Solidarity labor movement ,which thrus t "a nti-Communist dissident " and current PresidentLech Walesa into the public spotlight, was launched in 1980 aftermonths of nationwide strikes. Founding members of the movementincluded authentic anti-Communists, Communi sts, and collaborators with Communism. According to then-Hungarian CommunistParty First Secretary Stanislaw Kania, there were about one millionCommuni st Party members in Solidarity , includin g 42 of the 200


Walesa (above) is falsely portrayedas the anti-Communist successor

to dictator Jaruzelski (left).

members of the Party ' s 1981 Cent ralCommittee.

In New Lies f or Old, Anatoliy 00Iitsyn charged that Solidarity wa s"suppressed " in 1981 (though notcompletely ) as a maneuver to convince the West that it was an authenticopponent of the hard-line regimeheaded by Prime Minister WojciechJaruzel ski . Golitsyn predicted (in1984) that eventually " it may be expected that a coalition gov ern ment

will be formed [it was] , comprising representatives of the com munist party [there were many], of a revived Solidarity movement [after it was re-Iegalized], and of the church. A few so-ca lled liberalsmight also be included [some were]."

During a series of "round table" negotiations between Solidarityand the ruling Communist government in March 1989, an agreement was reached on major political reform. Early in the negotiations, Walesa agreed to let the Communi sts have 65 percent of theSejm (lowe r house of parliament ) sea ts in the new gove rnment.With Walesa' s blessing, Jaruzelski, his supposed tormenter of lessthan a decade earlie r, was e lec ted president by parli am ent.Jaruzelski bowed out after Walesa was elected to succeed him inDecember 1990.

While negotiations for the new system were progre ssing in 1989,the March 2, 1989 issue of the Soviet current affairs weekly New

15

Times printed an interview with Walesa in which he acknowledgedthat he was not seeking to take power away from the Communists."Let power remain in the hands of the Communists," he said, "butlet it be different. Let it serve the people better, respect the law andbe accountable to society. We are prepared to cooperate constructively with such authorities. "

In the country's first parliamentary elections under the new system, more than 29 parties gained representation in the Sejm. The"former" Communists of the Democratic Left Alliance, and theirPeasant Party allies, captured a mere 93 seats in the 460-seat Sejm.But in September 1993, the Communists were voted back intopower when the two Red-dominated parties secured a two-thirdsmajority in the Sejm, sufficient to override presidential vetoes andperhaps draft a new constitution amenable to their own interests.

Poland's current prime minister, Jozef Oleksy, was previouslyspeaker of the Red-controlled Sejm. He once belonged to the Central Committee of the Polish Communist Party. He replacedWaldemar Pawlak, who resigned as prime minister after losing ano-confidence vote in parliament on March Ist of this year. Pawlak,too, was a "former" Communist.

On August 12, 1994, Minister of Internal Affairs AdrzejMilczanowski, who was brought into government service byWalesa , appointed Marian Zacharski as chief of Poland's civil intelligence agency. Zacharski was forced to step down only five dayslater in the wake of a vigorous protest by the United States. Yearsearlier, Zacharski had been sentenced to life in prison in the U.S.for stealing military secrets for the Soviet Bloc. He was freed in1985 as part of a Cold War spy swap. President Wales a praisedZacharski's "professionalism and many years of experience," butnevertheless called for his resignation because the nominationwould make "Poland' s process of integration with the West moredifficult." The Washington Post reported on September 3, 1994 that"Zacharski will remain in a prominent position in the intelligencesection of the Office of State Security, Poland's civilian secretservice ."

The Post also reminded its readers that Walesa's regime had "allowed and even encouraged Communists to remain in importantpolice and security posts." For instance, "the deputy minister incharge of intelligence in the ministry and the director of the Officeof State Security are former Communist operatives . Zacharski's appointment was just another move in that direction. The man he wassupposed to replace, Janusz Luks, himself a senior intelligence officer during the Communist era, is reported to have been assignedto the Polish Embassy in Washington."

Still , much of the Establishment media continues to portray LechWalesa as "a staunch anti-Communist," a description employed, forexample, by the Associated Press in a recent dispatch .

_ ROMANIA

Despite early attempts to hide the fact, the Communists have ruledRomania without interruption since December 1989, when Communist dictator Nicolai Ceausescu was assassinated. The National Salvation Front (NSF), led by former senior officials of the Ceausescuregime, became the provisional government. Ion Iliescu, a "former"Communist Party official, was named president, a post he still holdstoday. Sham elections were held in May 1991 in which the NSFattained two-thirds of the seats in both houses of parliament, whileIliescu received 85 percent of the presidential vote . He was reelected in 1992.

Though Romania has not been free of the heavy hand of Communism, and has never had a chance to try authentic free marketeconomic alternatives to socialism, some Western media have

16

blamed its present sorry plight on the failure of "democracy" and"the free market" since the overthrow of Ceausescu. Consider, forinstance, a remarkable December 21, 1994 Associated Press dispatch which claimed, "A hungry country sees little difference between democracy and Communist dictatorship," and stated thatRomania's "traditionally backward economy has slipped further inthe free market." Truly, the mind boggles!

_ RUSSIAN FEDERATION

Boris Yeltsin 's authoritarian Red stripes have, in recent months, become increasingly visible to all but the willfully blind. On August18, 1995, for instance, the AP noted the jitters being generated bythe Russian president's close and friendly ties to an increasinglypowerful secret police apparatus. According to the AP, the FederalSecurity Service, as the former KGB is now known after six namechanges since 1991, "is alive, well and making a comeback underthe protection of none other than Boris Yeltsin. Last month, Yeltsinpromoted the chief of the Kremlin guards, a close friend, to headthe Federal Security Service, his latest move to tighten his grip onthe old KGB."

That "close friend," Colonel-General Mikhail Barsukov , was aKGB agent during the Soviet era. The AP dispatch continued tonote, "Many Russians, including opposition politicians, businessmen, bankers, former dissidents - even some of Yeltsin' s top advisers - are jittery about the president's growing ties to the secretpolice." *

The head of Yeltsin' s personal security service, GeneralAleksandr Korzhakov, is another longtime steward of the policestate. Korzhakov , who has been with Yeltsin since 1985, joined theKGB in 1970. His influence with Yeltsin is said to be enormous."To this day," Yeltsin wrote in his recently published autobiography The Struggle for Russia, "he never leaves my side, and we evensit up at night during trips together." He describes .Korzhakov as hisclosest companion of the last ten years.

On December 2nd of last year, Korzhakov had the presidentialsecurity service launch a raid, which has yet to be explained, on theoffices of Vladimir Gusinsky, Russia 's leading banker. Gusinsky isallied with Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov, a potential rival toYeltsin in next year's presidential elections . Soon after the raid,Luzhkov denied he had any desire to run for president, andGusinsky has not surfaced in Russia since early January, when hemoved his family to London. Washington Post correspondent Margaret Shapiro observes that such incidents, among others, "havesparked worries here among pro-reform democrats that Russiacould be heading back toward a police state."

Korzhakov has participated in cabinet-level meetings betweenYeltsin and his ministers, was a member of the Russian delegation to the December meeting of the Organization for Security andCooperation in Europe, and is said to have been responsible forthe appointment last November of Vladimir Polevanov as thecountry's new privatization chief. Polevanov has called for a largergovernment role in industry and a reduction of private involvement.He has suggested that companies sold by the state be re-nationalized and favors policies that will limit the "damage" done byprivatization.

* In December 1993, Yeltsin announced with great fanfare that he was scrapping the hated KGB. "The Ministry of Security , the body which conductedpolitical surveillance of people for nearly 75 years, has been abolished as awhole," he declared. His decree was widely PUblicized, and undoubtedlyserved to further convince many Americans that he was truly committed to thesort of meaningful reforms that could justify further infusions of U.S. foreignaid and other assistance . Less publicized was his action one day earlier in promoting 27 senior Security Ministry officers to the rank of general.


Yeltsin, heroic " foe" of the August coup, is now amassing dictatorial powers.

Earlier this year, Yeltsin signed into lawlegislati on renaming, reorgani zing, andstrengthening the intell igence services . Assummarized in an editor's note in Anatoli yGolitsyn ' s new book The Perestroika Deception, "The Federal Security Servicewas 'empowered' to search homes withoutwarrants, to run its own jail s and indepen dent 'criminal' investigations, to operateunder cover of other officia l agencie s, tobug telephones and intercept mail (with'court permi ssi on ' ), and to operateabroad ." London ' s Sunday Times for April9th quoted Sergei Karaganov , deputy direc tor of the Institute of Europe of theAcademy of Science s and an adviser toPresident Yeltsin, as stating that "Ru ssiais movin g toward a mixed dem ocr at ic ,semi-authoritari an model , with thestrengthening elements of a police state."

In June 1994, under the guise of fighting organized crime , Yeltsin signed a decre e empowering the regular poli ce tohold suspects for up to 30 days withoutcharge, permit police searches of propertyand examination of financial records without a warrant or evidence of a crime , andallow certain crime-ridden cities and district s to be placed under"special control."

Even as American taxpayers are bilked to bankroll what is saidto be the Yeltsin regime's commitment to "reform," old-time Communists are leading Russia' s prosperity parade. For instance, all ofthe plotter s of the apparently contrived 1991 "coup" against thenPresident Mikhail Gorbachev , and the similarly suspicio us parliamentary revolt against Yeltsin in 1993, have been freed. As just oneexampl e of how they are doing, consider the plight of former PrimeMinister Valentin Pavlov, who helped instigate the 1991 "co up."The Washington Post for September 22, 1994, reported that Pavlovis now a prosperous banker living in a $500,000 home and takinghome about $60,000 after taxes (the average Russian ' s annual wageis around $1,200). According to the Post, many others "have madetransitions similar to Pavlov ' s, including others involved in the antiGorbachev coup . Indeed , among the leading businessmen of Russiatoday are many top Soviet-era bureaucrats and party members. One

The statue of KGB founder Felix Dzerzhinsky has comedown, belying the fact that the KGB is still in control.

THE NEW AMER ICAN / SEPTEMBER 18. 1995

recent analysis found that nearly two-thirds of Russia ' s new richhad converted prominent position s under the old regim e into theirpresent lucrati ve niches."

In September of last year, researche rs at the Russian Academy ofSciences released a study that found that more than 60 percent ofthe 580 richest persons in the country were former members of theSov ie t Union's Communist e lite. In the area of banking , forinstance:

• Sergie Rodionov, chairman of one of Russia ' s largest comm ercial banks, headed the bankin g department at the Soviet FinanceMinistry.

• Sergei Yegorov, chairman of the Commercial Banks Association, was once chairman of the Soviet State Bank and head of thefinancial department of the Communist Party Central Committee.

• Nikolai Ryzhkov, chairman of the Tverun iversal Bank, was aformer Soviet prime minister in the 1980s.

Such are the folks with whom Western entrepreneurs are beingencouraged to do business. As Anatoliy Golitsyn advises in a postscript to The Perestroika Deception: "Western industrialists and financiers should reverse their mistaken involvement in joint venture swith the Communists, thereby financing the revival of their mainpolitical adversaries, supplying them ill-advisedly with new technology, and wasting time and money on operations that will ultimately be taxed to death , confiscated , or both."

And make no mistake about it, the possib ility of expropriationexists in virtually all of the "former" Communist countries, including those deem ed most "reformed," and crackdowns of a Tian anmen Square type are not out of the question in some instances. TheNew York Times for July 3, 1995 quoted an unidenti fied Western

;ij ambassador as saying that there are already "many cases of Russiani joint venture partners turning on their Western partners and trying~ to seize the businesses" and that "these cases involve officials offjj the Government." And Peter Charow, executive director of the;:>~ American Chamber of Comm erce in Moscow , told the Tim es, "AQ)

fj, lot of Government agencies have been taken off the state budgetand must find ways to support themselves. Foreign companies areoften seen as ready prey."

17

As noted earlier, the law that established and empowered the Federal Security Service authorized the FSS to run its own prisons. Thegulag mentality is not only surviving, but thriving. Last fall , William Cohen of the Colorado-based Center for Human Rights Advocacy led a group of U.S. and European legal experts who visitedRussia to examine the country's criminal justice system. A dispatchfiled in mid-October by Scripp s Howard News Service reporterHolger Jensen summarized their findings . Among other things, "thelegal system is still largely controlled by Commu nist-era bureaucrats," with the most serious human rights violations taking placein Russian jails, where "suspects are held for month s, sometimesyears, under barbaric conditions before they go to trial."

Russian procurators (as prosecutors are called) usually assumethat anyone arres ted is guilty. Jensen reported that they "will go toany lengths to obtain a confe ssion . So conditions in the pretri al detention centers are deliberately made worse than they are in the prisons and labor camps where convicted felons are sent after theirtrial s." Suspect s "are routinel y starved, beaten and depri ved of contact with their familie s," and some "confess to crimes they didn 'tcommit just to get out of the awful detention centers."

In its annual assessment of human rights around the globe , released in February, the State Department noted that thousands ofRussians have been illegally arrested , and that prisons often stopfeeding inmates for months at a time, relying instead on relatives toprovide food. Also, a jury system has yet to be introduced in 80regions of the country. Confirming the findings of the Cohen team,the State Department report found that suspects are routinely denied access to attorneys, and are beaten into confess ing by procurators who win rewards for closing cases promptl y.

_ SLOVAKIA

_ UKRAINE

From December 199 1 until July of last year the second most populous of the former Soviet republ ics was ruled by its first directlyelec ted Pre sident, Leonid M. Kravchu k. He was the co untry' sformer Communist Party chief for ideology. Kravchuk kept the governme nt, industry, and agriculture in the hands of his fellow Communist apparatchiks. In the July 1994 electio n he was defeated bycurrent President Leonid D. Kuchma, who was once director of theSoviet Union's largest miss ile factory .

In October, Kuchm a announced a program of economic reformswhich, mimicking Lenin, he called his "new economic policy." Itwas publicized in the West as evidence that he was a true-blue reformer deserving of massive infusions of Western aid and the support of Western businessmen . Kuchm a has claimed, "Withoutinternational aid, we will fall like a house of cards." The aid wasquick in coming, and not merely from the internati onal lending institutions to which the U.S. contributes heavily. On November 22,1994, the Washington Times reported that "President Clinton todaywill make Ukraine the fourth -largest recipient of U.S. foreign aidwhen he raises taxpayers' donati ons to $900 million , including a$30-million-to-$50-million program to build free houses for formerRed Army soldiers." During a briefing for reporters on November2 1st, according to the Times, "a senior administration official explained that the U.S.-Ukrainian relationship under Mr. Clinton wasroc ky at first but has been bolstered by the July elec tion of Mr.Kuchma , a reformer."

The Ukrai nian prime minister , Vitaly Masol , was the SovietUnion 's top economic manager.

_ UZBEKISTAN

- R OBERT W. L EE

If the same standard by which "reformed" Communists and theircollaborators have been judged in recent years had been in effec t atthe end of World War II, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini , HidekiTojo, and their henchm en could have survived and prospered bysimply tearing insignia from their uniforms and pledging their devotion to a new world order predicated on "reform," "democracy,"and "co nverge nce" with the Allied nations.

It would have been foolish to fall for such preposterou s claimsby supposedly repentant "fo rmer" fascis ts. Why, then, believe suchbogus claim s when they emanate from self-professed "former"Communi sts? •

President Islam A. Karimov was elected president in 1991, receiving 86 percent of the vote after severely curtailing the activities ofall opposition parties. He had opposed his country's break with theSoviet Union, claiming that Uzbekis tan was not ready for either"democracy" or a market economy.

As in Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, a referendum was arrangedto provide a lop-sided endorsement of an extension of Karimov' spresidential term . An April 29, 1995 Associated Press dispatchnoted that the "lop-sided figures in those referendums were reminiscent of the turnouts reported in Soviet-era one-party votes."

On Decemb er 25, 1994, in the countr y' s first parliamentary elections since the apparent demise of the Soviet Union, the DemocraticParty (former Communist Party) captured more than 70 percent ofthe seats. As noted by Facts on File for February 9, 1995: "Foreignobservers said Karimo v had allowed the election because he wantedto at least claim that Uzbekistan had a multiparty democracy."

Premie r Vladimir Meciar is a "fo rmer" Communist whose partyfinished first (garnering about one-third of the vote) in the 1992elec tions . Wr iting in the No vemberlDecember 1994 issue ofForeign Affa irs (flagship publ ication of the CFR), Anne Applebaum , deput y editor of The Spectator, described Meciar as "a Moscow-train ed apparatchik." In March of last year, Meciar wasremoved from office followin g a no-confidence vote in parliament,but was return ed to the post after his party won Slovakia ' s firstnational elections later in the year. Facts on File for October 6, 1994reported that Meciar "was fierce ly oppo sed to Western-style economic reform, foreign inve stment and the privatization of stateenterprises...."

In March 1992, the defen se and security committee of what wasthen Czech oslovakia' s Slovak republi c issued a report, which parliament accepted, accusing Meciar of collabora ting with the StB(the former secre t police) durin g the pre-independence era . According to Facts on File for April 2, 1992, the "report contended thatMeciar had worked for the StB under the code name 'Doctor' andthat he had promoted former StB loyalists while interior minister[of the Siovac republi c], and that he had used information in theStB files against his political enemies."

_ TAJIK ISTAN

From 1991 until he was forced from office in September 1992,Tajikistan' s president was Rakhman Nabi yev. a former Communi stParty first secretary. In November of that year, the current president , Imamali Rakhmonov (a Nabiyev supporter) , became actingpresident. As noted by Facts on File for April 17, 1995, the govern ment continues to be "led by former communists."

* * *

18 THE NEW AMERICAN / SEPTEMBER 18, 1995

"POST-SOVIET" RUSSIA

The New Statism

Privatization CharadeIn 1992, the Yel tsin government is

sued vouchers that enabled all citizensto "bid for shares" of small - and medium-size companies; this move washailed as the beginning of a Westernstyle, private-property, individual-ownership economy. But it was nothing ofthe kind . Not a kopeck changed hands .These companies continue to be keptafloat with government subsidies andare run by government bureaucrats;many are obsolete and worthless andshould have been razed instead of "sold"(but are kept in existence in order toeliminate unemployment, which, ofcourse, is only a capitalist condition).Many Russians sold their vouchers(worth about 21 cents each ) to "former"Communist Party apparatchiks; an un-

I t was an unforgettable moment. TheSoviet Union had disintegrated andZbigniew Brzezinski, a member of

the world-government-promoting Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission , had taken to theairwaves. "Communism is dead!" he declared triumphantly. That was in 1991.Ever since, this obituary has been soconstantly and convincingly repeatedthat most Americans believe it must beso. Overnight, without a shot fired, as ifon signal, the frightful Soviet monolithmiraculously vanished . Not only wasthe system dead, but Boris Yeltsin, inaugurated before an enormous red flagbearing the hammer and sickle, turnedout to be a "democrat" as well as a budding Milton Friedman, needing onlytens of billions of Western capitalistdollars to put democracy and a free market in place. To prove his sincerity,Yeltsi n promised sweeping economicreforms. Heading the list was privatization , the end of state-owned industryand agriculture.

"Transition" EconomyInsiders in the U.S. from the Presi

dent on down rushed to Yeltsin's support. For the past four years theirconstant litany has been that the Sovieteconomy is in "transition to a free market," that reforms are on track , and thatjust another few billion dollars will turnRussia into a carbon copy of the UnitedStates. Unfortunately, this is pure makebelieve. The reality is radically differentfrom the image, for Russia is stilldrowning in an ocean of harsh government controls, a monstrous and corruptbureaucracy, crushing taxation (58 percent over $8,000 and a 23 percent valueadded tax), and rampant inflation froma central bank out of control. Whatpasses for an economy is still a massivewelfare scheme of subsidies flowing toindustries and collective farms, all ofwhich owe trillions of rubles to eachother while the government owes billions in back pay to workers. This year 'sgrain harve st is the worst in 20 years,the growth rate is negative, the infra structure is rotting , the environment isserio usly polluted , and poverty, lack of

-r-r rr- ..e "" A AACOIr't> 1\, / .C::F P TF M B ER 18. 1995

Billboards in Moscow: A facade of " free-market reforms" and " transit ion tocapitalism" mask the fact that the economy is thoroughly controlled by the state.

medical care, alcoholism, and a low life known amount of industry "ownership"expectancy are the norm. thus passed into their hands. Other

There is nothing new about any of vouc hers ended up in "investmentthis . It is the inevitable chaos and suf- funds" that turned out to be scandalfering inflicted by any command econ- ously criminal and defrauded an unomy, in which there is no way to know known number of owners of their shares.what should be produced, or how much In an unknown number of cases, theof it, or what the price should be. But government retained over 50 percent ofthe question is: Why haven 't 87 billion the shares. None of these figures areWestern dollars made a dent in turni ng available, yet we're told that this "privathis around? Let us see. tizat ion" created 40 million sharehold

ers and cha nge d the "ownership" of14,000 companies.

This Russian kind of "ownership" islike nothing we in the West associatewith the word. We understand propertyownership to mean an unrestricted rightto a thing: to possess it, use it, disposeof it, and exclude everyone else frominterfering with it. The so-called Russian "ownership" means none of thesethings. It has not freed the economy oneiota or improved the deplorable standard of living of the ordinary Russian.This farcical "ownership" hardly evenqualifies to be called fascist, meaningprivate property ownership smotheredby government controls. Basically, thevoucher "privatization" program canonly be called a charade, perpetrated forInsider purposes which we will come topresently.

2 1

Fatal EnterpriseWhat about the great awakening of

the entrepreneurial impulse which hasbeen so well publicized? That individuals will rush to trade and make a profitwherever even a tiny opportunity existsis universally true. Rus sians are nodifferent. Yeltsin has allowed Soviet socialism (the economic system of Communism) to crack just enough to temptthe most venturesome into tiny businessventures, mostly retai ling. Photos ofsmall kiosks in Moscow give the properimage abroad; what we can 't see is thatthey have no effect whatsoever on theoverall socialist economy. Nor can wesee the oppressive regulations and taxesthat force many of these private enterprises to operate illegally in the underground economy in order to survive.

Many small entrepreneurs literally donot survive; their enterprise turns out tobe fatal. We must remember that Russiais primitively lacking a fundamentalrule of law. What is it like to live in sucha country? Weare just beginning to geta close look at some current Russianways, such as the Russian mafia - or"roof' - that every Russian must paytribute to. These muscle-men take thelaw into their own hands and provide"protection" all the way up to contractmurder, which is common. Hundred s ofsmall entrepreneurs were murdered lastyear alone. It is not clear whether this isthe Ru ssian idea of competition orwhether this is simply another way inwhich Yeltsin can claim to be movingtoward private enterprise, yet not let itget out of hand. No one really knows ,since the line between the mafia and the"authorities" has become so blurred thatit is often a case of going to the policeand discovering they are the criminals- hardly a new role.

But the pitifully small shop owner isnot the only one who lives dangerously.Russia ' s wealthiest entrepreneur, Vladmir Gusinsky, was forced to flee to London after his private security force ofabout 1,000 men was attacked by armedmen from President Yeltsin 's own security guard! Gusinsky owns a bank withthe appropriate name of MOST and apparently is a Russian Rothchild to themayor of Moscow, a reportedly bitterfoe of Yeltsin. But if the ability to stagea small war plus the power of the ruthless mayor aren 't enough to enable aman to remain in his homeland, we getan idea of the extent of the bureaucratic/

22

criminal nomenklatura that rules at thetop in a brutal system of omnipotentcontrols through connections, extortion,bribery, and murder. This reality makestalk of "transition to a market economy"utterly laughable.

Recent events compri sing the secondstage of "privatization" do nothing tocontradict this assessment. When thevoucher stage ended last June , it wassupposed to have been followed by asecond stage, selling stakes in stateowned enterprises for cash. This soundedmore real. But, surpri se! This step wasput on ice by the Duma , which then revised selling procedures, making it impossible to buy. But Yeltsin, mind you,would have none of this backs liding.Brushing aside parliamentary obstacles,he authorized by presidential decree theselling of state enterprises for cash andthe handing over of greater control toforeign investors . This , he said, was inorder to "bring Russia into the globaleconomic system."

But by May of this year stage two hadbeen scrapped. Evidently the Insiderswho gave the order to sell slipped up onrealizing that Russian citizens are holding about $30 billion in savings and arebecoming more sophisticated. The plannow is for a bank consortium to lendbillions to the government and receiveas collateral state shares in a number oflucrative enterprises. This means large- sometimes controlling - blocks ofshares in oil, telecommunications, andmetallurgy companies retained by thegovernment after the first "privatization ." One of the participants is Citi bank; we do not know if other NewYork banks are involved since all thenames have not been disclosed. Thebanks will receive both interest (rate undisclosed) and commissions . At the"end" of the loan, the shares will revertto the government, which will then sellthem on the market.

The Big PrizeMeanwhile, foreign (mostly Ameri

can) investment in Russian industry differs radically from the Russian kind.This means real ownership and realmoney, usually not the investor's ownbut a loan or grant from U.S. taxpayersthrough about 12 different governmentagencies. Here we come to the realreason for the sudden phenomenon ofprivatization. Still scarcely developed,the enormous natural resources of the

former Soviet Union have been kept onthe back burner all these years by the Insiders' perpetuation of Communism,which by its very nature cannot producea viable economy. Now our corporateand banking Insiders are moving in forthe big payoff. As privatization made itpossible for Gorbachev and then Yeltsinto lift prohibitions on foreign investment, the gold rush was on. The "behemoth" industries are what the Insidersare after; the prizes are oil, gas, gold,coal, diamonds , and copper.

Thi s "development" is being superimposed on a country utterly lacking inrudimentary institutions, especially afunctioning ru le of law, as we havealready noted . Our corporate Insiders,always operating above the law, are getting a taste of what it means to be on thereceiving end. Yeltsin, a brutal Communist functionary in his previous incarnation, is almost more than a match for theInsiders ' own cupidity.

Three years ago, Big Oil couldn 'tsign up fast enough for joint ventures inthe region 's rich oil fields . Chevron,which landed the huge Tengiz oil fieldin Kazakhstan and has already invested$1 billion , can't get the oil out of thecountry. Yeltsin 's promise to allowChevron to build a pipeline throughRussia to the Black Sea has evaporated;instead, Russia and Kazakhstan are permitting an oil consortium of their ownto build the pipeline without Chevron .The consortium is proposing that Chevron pay the full cost of the pipeline inreturn for a 25 percent stake. Chevronhas refused and has slashed its 1995spending for Tengiz by 90 percent. Inwhat can only be called poetic justice,Chevron is now getting its fill of theabominable nature of those Communistsit financed to power in Angola .

Texaco is faring as badly . Its $45 billion deal to drill for oil in the RussianArctic hit a slight snag when a Russian"production association" suddenly demanded a 50 percent stake in the profits. Companies have paid hundreds ofmillions of dollars in export taxes thatmaterialized after contracts were signed.In spite of original assurances of pipeline access out of Russia for 100 percentof production, producers are down to 60percent, while 55 percent of exportsmu st go to former Soviet republicswhere the price is fixed at two-thirds ofthe world price.

This is almost amusing. Yeltsin is


It stands to reason that it doesn'ttake upwards of $100 billion dollars

to Itbuy" freedom. All it takes isthe definitely cheap process of getting

government off the people's backs.

socking it to the companies as much ashe dares without risking a cut-off of billions in aid. But he is playing with fire .The Insiders may have other plans forhandling Yeltsin, as we shall see.

Yeltsin "Reform"With the promised free market still

nowhere in sight, what about the "emerging democracy" our billions are supposed to be funding? Isn 't Yeltsin thefirst "democratically approved" pre sident ? Here's how that happened. Without doubt, the phony "hard-line" coupattempt against Gorbachev in 1991(when "reformers" stopped tank s withtheir bare hand s) was staged in order to"end Communism" and catapult Yeltsinto fame as the leader ofthe "resistance" to the"die-hard" Communists.We know this becausethe defeated die-hards,who were thrown intoprison , have all beenfreed and are back in political life . Immediatelyassuming the ab solutepower of presidentialdecree, Yeltsin prom-ised to push through radical free marketreforms and to "share power" with the88 regions of Russia.

But instead of reform s, Yeltsin commenced a contrived struggle with parliament, blaming it for "holding upreforms." What a charade! But overcoming this "threat to transition" gaveGeorge Bush an excuse to provide $ 1.2billion, the IMF $ 1.04 billion, and theWorld Bank $600 million in direct aidto Yeltsin. By the end of 1992, annualfinancial aid was approximately $ 11 billion ; almo st half ($5.3 billion) was being used to pay interest on Russia ' scombined sovereign (owed to nations)and commercial (owed to private banks)debt of over $70 billion. This is how theNew York megabanks collect billionsout of our pockets; it explains one reason why the aid must be kept flowing.

The rea l struggle between Yeltsin andparliament is one for power, such as theshelling of the Russian White House.What did Yelt sin gain from that? Heasked for a vote of confidence from thepeop le. In spite of the tight ly controlledstate-owned media that pictured him asa sensitive, famil y man, it took a gross lyfalse count to give Russia its first "democratically approved" president. To show

rrus t: " e:1A! LJAA1=Rlr.A/\/ / 8FPTEMBER 18, 1995

their faith in Yeltsin as the "only hope"for realizing the "transition," the G-7 nations approved $28 billion in further aid,even as it was revealed that Russian enterprises had parked hard currency assetsof $25 billion in world bank accounts.

The "democratically approved" Yeltsin then moved quickly to tighten hisgrip by annulling by decree most of the88 regional councils, to which he hadpr omised " power shari ng ." (This isanalogou s to Bill Clinton annulling allthe state legislatures). His regional appointees, quaintly called "democrats" inspite of what looked like old-time Communist brutality, stifled all anti- Yeltsinopposition. Next came a new constitution, which greatl y expanded Yeltsin ' s

already formidable powers. Congressapproved another bloodletting of $2billion to Yeltsin and $3 billion for aninternational privatization fund for business investment, wh ile the IMF pro vided another $3 billion.

As Yelt sin' s brutal war against thebreakaway republ ic of Chechnya wounddown this spring, the seizure of about2,000 Russians as host ages by Chechenforce s in southern Russia led to an episode that gives further insight into how"democracy" works in Russia. In themiddle of the cri si s, Yeltsin left thecountry to attend the G-7 summit inHalifax, giving Prime Minister VictorChernomyrdin, a "former Communist,"a chance to upstage him by end ing thecrisis. The war had been extremely unpopular in Ru ssia ; public approvalswung to Chernomyrdin and the Dumaseized the excuse to pass a vote of noconfidence in Yeltsin ' s government anddem and the firing of respon sible ministers. Anywhere else, this would havebeen the end ; but not in Russia , thanksto Yeltsin's 18-month-old con stitutionwhich makes the vote nonbinding on thepre sident. A second vote of no-confidence failed, probabl y because Yeltsinsacked three ministers the night before.

Yeltsin himself is untouchable - exceptby the Insiders. With the media suddenly calling Yeltsin "unpopular" andthe Communi st functionary Chernomyrdin emerging as a "statesman," the Insiders may be planning another spectacularchan ge at the top . But, there is no difference between one jailer and another.

The New PhaseIs the Cold War over? Definitely; that

fraud served its purpose and has beenscrapped for the new pha se of "comradeship." Is Soviet Communism dead?Hardly. That has never been the intent.It has cracked a little , but only enoughto tolerate (howev er temporarily) asmattering of an equally pernicious type

of command economycalled fasci sm . The Insiders aren 't fussy aboutwhich brand of statismthey finance . It suitstheir purpose by whatever name - soc ialism,fasci sm, democratic socialism, corporate statism - all meaning thesame thing: a commandeconomy controlled by

them selves or their puppets. Wasn 't itDavid Rockefeller himself who told usthat he didn 't care what politic al systema country has as long as he could dobusiness there ? The one type of economy the Insiders abhor is a competitivefree market, the only kind they can 'tcontrol.

In Russia, the Insiders have set themsel ves up in private monopolies inpartnership with a government still essentially Communist, confident they cancontrol that government with our dollars. The elaborate myth of "flourishingdemocracy" (so termed by RichardNixon) and "transition to free enterprise" has been necessary in order tocreate a rationale for the dollar flow .What those dollars really are financingis the perpetuation of a brutal statist dictatorship over the Russian people, however much Communism blends withfascism.

It stands to reason that it doesn 't takeupwards of $ 100 billion dollars to "buy"freedom. All it takes is the definitelycheap proces s of getting government offthe people ' s backs . Of course the Insiders know this. That' s why it is not happening in Russia. •

- J ANE H. I NGRAHAM

23

RA TIONALE FOR PERESTROIKA

"Gramscian" Strategy at WorkShould the doctrines of Karl Marx

succeed in subj ugat ing all ofmankind, their triumph will prob

ably owe as much to an obscure Ital ianMarxist theorist named Antonio Gramscias to Lenin , Stalin, Trotsky , Mao, andthose other men who loom so large inhi story and in the public mind . Although Gramsci never held any position of power in any government,received no recogni tion dur ing hisown lifetim e comm ensurate with hiscontributions to the Marxist cau se,and spent the last decade of his lifein one of Mussolini ' s pri sons, dy ingin 1937 at the age of only 46, hisshrewd assessme nt of human psychol ogy makes his ideas amo ng themost powerful on the globe today.

The Bolsheviks did not come topower in Russia by an uprising of theworkers and peasants, as is oft enthought , but by a coup d'eta t, orchestrated by a tightl y discipl ined Marxist cadre. Communism did not co meto power in Eastern Europe by revolution, but throu gh the imposition ofthat sys tem by a conquering RedArmy, against the wishes of all butthe tiniest minority of workers andfarmers. In China it came to powerthrough civil war, aided by the Soviets and pro-Communist elements inthe West. Communism ha s neverachieved power by mean s of popularsupport, but always by brute force orsubterfuge. Looking back on the 20thcentury, it is clear that Marx was wro ngin his assumption that most workers andpeasants ar e inclined to revolu ti on .Moreover, open sponsorship of unprecedented levels of violence, coercion,and repression by the Communists ge nerated militant opposition against themthroughout the non-Communist world.

Workers' LoyaltyAntonio Gramsci was a brilliant stu

dent of philosophy , history, and languages. One of the most crucial insight sgiven by this education was that Com muni st hopes for spontaneous revolu tion were illuso ry. Marxist ideologueswere, he asse rted, beguiling themselves.

In the Gramscian view workers and

peasant s were not, by and large , revolu tion ary incendi ari es desi rin g the destruc tion of the o ld wo rld. Most hadloyalties beyond , and far more powerfulthan, mere class consideration s, eve n inthose instances where their lot was grimand oppressive. Faith in God and loveof famil y and country were among these

Gramsci: Society's collective mind must betransformed for Commu nism to dominate .

ove rriding alleg iances. Such attractiveness as Co m munism mi ght posse ssamong the working classes was dim inished by Communis t brutaliti es and byheavy-handed totalitarian methods. Stirring up the aristocratic and bourgeoisclasses, these negati ve attributes wereso alarming that militant opp osition orga nizations arose everywhere . All ofth is readily apparent to him , Gramsciturned his outstanding mind to analyzing and solvi ng the problem.

The civilized world, he dedu ced , hadbeen thoroughly saturated with Chri stianity for 2,000 years and this remainsthe dom inant phil osophical and moralsys tem in Europe and North America.That system has become so thoroughlyintegrated into the daily lives of nearl yeve ryo ne, including non-Christians, that

it form s an almost impenetrable barrierto the revoluti onary civ ilizati on Marxists wish to crea te. Attempting to batterdown that barri er proves unproductive,since it only dri ves counter-revolutionary force s underground and makes thempotentiall y menacing. Therefore, inplace of the frontal attack, how much

more advantageous and less risky itis to ca pture the ene my's soc ietyfrom within, to transform the society'scollec tive mind gradua lly from itsformer Christian outlook into onemore congenial to Marxism.

Gram sci also insisted that allianceswith non-Communist lefti st groupswo uld be essentia l to Communistvictory. In our time, these would includ e femini st groups, extremist environmental organizations, so-calledcivil rights movements, anti-policeassoc iations, internationalist-mindedgro ups, lib eral church denomination s, and so forth. Th ese groups ,along with openly Communist organizations, could together crea te aunited front working for the tran sformation of the old Christian culture.

What Gramsci propo sed , in short,was a renov ation of Communi stmeth odology and a strea mlining andupdatin g of Marx ' s antiquated suppositions and conclusions. Let therebe no doubt that Gramsci' s vision ofthe future was fully Marxist and that

he accepted the validity of Marxism 'sovera ll worldview . Where he differedwas in the process for achiev ing thatvision.

Ald ous Huxl ey' s Brave New World ,a cla ssic study of modern despotism,contains a line that epitomizes the concept that Gramsci tried to convey to hispart y comrades : "A reall y efficient totalit arian state would be one in whichthe all-powerful executive of poli ticalbosses and their army of managers control a popul ation of slaves who do nothave to be coerced, because they lovetheir servitude ." A similar idea appearsin George Orwell' s famed book 1984, inwhich one of the characters says, "Weare not content with negati ve obedience,nor even with the most abject submission. When finally you surrender to us,

TI-l~ !l/~W AMFRICAN I SEPTEMBER 18, 1995 25

itA really efficient totalitarian statewould be one in which the all-powerfulexecutive of political bosses and theirarmy of managers control a populationof slaves who do not have to be coerced,

because they love their servitude."

it must be of your own free will. We donot destroy the heretic because he resists us.... We convert him, we capturehis inner mind, we reshape him." Whileit is impro bable that Huxley or Orwellwere familiar with Gramsci ' s theories,the idea each conveys of free personsmarching willingly into bondage is nevertheless consonant with Gramscianthinki ng.

Culture ControlGramsci believed that if Communism

achieved "mastery of human consciousness," then labor camps and mass murder would be unnecessary. How does anideo logy gai n such mas-tery over patterns oftho ug ht inc ulcated bycultures for hundreds ofyears? Mastery over theconsciousness of thegreat mass of peoplewould be attained ifCommunists controlledthe organs of culture chur ches, ed ucation,newspapers, magazines,the electronic media,music , the visual arts,and so on. By winning "cultural hegemony," to use Gramsci's own term,Communism would contro l the deepestwe llspri ngs of hum an thou gh t. Oneneed not control all of the informationitself if one can gain control over theminds that assimilate that information.In such conditions, serious oppositiondisappears: Men indeed "love theirservi tude ."

Co nserva tive-minde d people havehad difficulties dise ntangling the paradoxical events of the past ten years inEastern Europe, following the rise ofGorbachev and Yeltsin. However, Gramsci helps us to understand what has happened. First we see the adoption by theCom munists of a less militant, less aggressive faca de, one that avo ids openterror, mass shootings, concentrationcamps, and the like . In contrast, Com munism now shows a "human face. "Most political prisoners are free and opposition groups exist, at least ostensibly.The government leadership talks endlessly about its commitment to democratic procedures and free enterpriseeconomics. The: old KGB has been outwardly transformed from a terroristicweapon for internal control into a Western-style intelligence agency . Mean-

26

while, only "former Communists" holdpower, and the most powerful agenciesof cultural hegemony remain firmly inCommunist hands.

Thu s, the subtler, Gramscian kind ofComm unism maintains its hold on thecountries of the former Soviet Unionand Soviet Bloc. Using innocuous nameslike "democratic socialism," it managesto secure election victories that wouldnot have been possible for the older,more brut ish Communist Party. It reapstens of billions of dollars in Wes tern aidand succeeds in convincing many formerly astute anti-Communists that "Communism is dead ." But despite outward

appearances, neit her Communism norits dream of world conquest is, in truth,dead. Its old enemies, the United Statesand the Western all ies, remai n primetargets. And beca use Gramscian methods work equally well in all societies,they have been turned on the West withdevastating results.

Step by StepThe first phase in achievi ng "cultural

hegemony" over the West is the undermining of all elements of traditional culture by demoralization. Churches arethus transformed into commercializedpolitical clubs , with the stress on "socialj ustice" and egalitarianism, with worship reduced to trivialized entertainment, and with age -o ld doct rinal andmoral teachings "modernized" or di minished to the po int of irrelevancy.Genuine education is replaced by radi cal permissiveness, with gutted curricu la and radically lowered standardstypifyi ng most educational institutions.The mass media are fashioned into instruments for manipulation and for harassing and discrediting traditionalinstit utions. Morality, decency, and oldvirtues are ridiculed without respite.Culture becomes a vehicle for "destroy-

ing ideal s and . . . presenting the youngnot with heroic examples but with deliberately and aggressively degenerateones, " as theologian Haro ld 0 .1. Brownput it several years ago .

Marriage and fami ly are continuouslyattacked and subverted. Marriage is portrayed as a plot by males to perpetuatean evil system of domination over females and children. The family is depicted as a dangerous institution whereviolence and exploitation are the norm .

After 20 or 30 years of such conditioning, society is dramatically alteredand demoralized. That leads to the nextstage , destabilization, lasting from two

to five years. During thisphase , a power strugg ledevelops between the"prog ressive" forces andthose trying to upholdthe old order of things.However, since the demoral ization phase dispossesses the old orderof its chief sources ofstrength, tra ditiona listefforts are frequentlyconfused, disorganized,and bogged down in tran

sitory, extraneous issues. Political lifeslides inexorably towards mob rule aspassions are intensified and polarizationincreases . Cr ime statistics shoot upward, disorder is rampant, and government becomes ever more impotent. Thefinancial markets grow increasinglyunstable.

Destabilization finally brings anarchy, creating the crisis phase lastingseveral months. By that time, most citizens long for order, stabi lity, and security . Communism then steps forward,promising everything for which thepeop le hunger, and seizes power. Thatlast phase, the assumption of power, theGramscians call "normalization."

The obliteration of all memory of theold civilization makes possible the creation of a wholly new civi lization. FewEastern Europeans retain any memoryof what existed before Communism.Likewise, the older America of unregulated lives, honest government, cleancities, crime-free streets, mora lly edify ing entertainment, and a family-orientedway of life is no longer vivid in theminds of many Americans. Both examples bear witness to the effectivenessof Gramscian methods. •

- FR. JAMES THORNTON


SOVIETOLOGY

Dispelling DisinformationT his is Part One of an interview

by William F. Jasper, SeniorEditor of THE NEW AM ERICAN,

wit h Christopher Story, editor of theLondon-based Soviet Analyst, an intelligence commentary, and editor of ThePerestroika Deception by Anatoli yGo litsyn, the Soviet defector and famous author of New Lies for Old. Theinterview was conducted on August 161995 in the Presidio , San Francisco,outside the headquarters of the Gorbachev FoundationlUSA.

Q. Why did you start publishin g SovietAnalyst, and how does that publicationdiffer from other sources conce rnedwith Soviet Russia, Communism, etc?A. Soviet Analyst had been publ ishedsince 1972 by a group of people in London with long-established connectionswith the British Foreign Office. Aroundmidsummer 1991, they approached me,knowing that I might be interested inbuying the paper , and revealed that theywanted to sell it. Their reasoning wasthat "it was all over"; the Soviet Unionwas finished. Interestingly, they thoughtthis we ll before the "Aug ust co up,"which took place on August 19, 199 1.

Since these people had Foreign Office connections, they had essentiallyreflected the Foreign Office line . At thetime, the Foreign Office was busily recognizing the alleged political "independence" of the Soviet Republics, one byone , and generally appeared to be doingeverything possible to reinforce the illusions of "change" which were beingstaged by the Soviet strategis ts in pursuit of their objec tives. We have inherited old issues of Soviet Analyst goingback to 1972, from which it is very clearthat Soviet Analyst was an "arm's length"vehicle for Foreign Office opi nionabout the Soviet Union. In acq uiri ngthis title, I saw an opportunity to counterdisinformation about Soviet developments . We started publishing SovietAnalyst in November 1991, stressing theSov iets' Leninist use of strategic deception, and exp laining it to our readers.We started fro m the assumption thatthere had been no true discontinuity .Hence Soviet Analyst differs from prob-

T' sr- 'lew II AACQ/r J1l\/ / '::;FPTFMBER 18. 1995

ably all other publications in that ouranaly sis show s that the apparent "Breakwith the Past" is a deception, and that"perestroika " and post- "perestroika"represent further stages of the LeninistWorld Revolution.Q. From Oxford to Stanford to theRand Corporation to London, Paris andBerlin , there are hordes of So vietologists and Soviet def ectors who arebusily informing the West about what is

Story in front of Gorbachev Foundation.

"really happenin g" in the so-called"former" Soviet Union. You have singledout the wo rk of the Soviet defectorAnatoliy Golitsyn. Why do you think heis unique?A. Go litsyn is probably the most important Soviet defector ever to ha vereached the West. The reason for this isthat he revealed the details of a long range deception strategy of which theWest previousl y ha d no knowledge .When debriefed, he emphasized, as hehas done ever since, that becau se of hisbackground of working within the "in ner KGB" - a super-secret strategicplanning department of which not evenordinary KGB officers were aware he was uniquely qualified to inform theWest about Soviet strategy. One of thesuperficial criticism s frequently made

about Golit syn is that he has been "outof the loop" since defecting to Finlandwith his wife and daug hter in 196 1, sohow could he possibly know what wasgoing on? People who say this reveal afailure to understand Golit syn's significance, and what he has to offer theWest.

In summary, Golitsyn ' s importance isthat, unlike all other defectors, Golitsyndiscusses and elaborates upon So vietstrategy . By contrast, defectors likeOleg Gordievsky discuss mundane matters concerning the manner of their "es cape" from the Soviet Union, perhapsreve aling valuable operational information in order to gain the confidence of(in Gordievsky' s case) Britain ' s MI6,before inserting strateg ic disinformationin their output. Golitsyn is different. Hehas spent his years in the West explaining patiently that the So viets followLenini st strategic principles, and are engaged in a dead ly long-term war agai nstthe West. The Soviet revo lutionarieshave followed Lenin ' s advice to "workby other means."Q. If we examine Golitsyn :s recordsince 1961, do we have reason to placefa ith in his analysis and his analyticalmethods?A. At a superficial but easily explainedlevel , Go litsyn 's public fame deri vesfrom the fact that in 1980, he completeda work called New Lies for Old, whichwas in fact publis hed in 1984. This bookcontained explicit predictions concerning the future course of Soviet strategy,which events subsequently proved tohave been correct. In his rece nt book,published in 1994, entitled Wedge: TheSecret War between the FBI and CIA,Mark Riebling explained that after carrying out a careful analysis of Goli tsyn 's predictions in New Lies for Old,he had found that out of a tota l of 148falsifiable predictions, 139 had beenverified by 1993 - "an accuracy ratingof 94%." This achievement place s Golitsyn in a league of his own , putting mostother observers to shame.Q. And the predictions he made concerned very significant, "earth-shattering " developments...A. Golitsyn' s main predictions included

29

details of the forthcoming false liberalization of the whole of Eastern Europe ,followed by similar developments in theSoviet Union . He predicted the removalof the Berlin Wall, the unification ofGermany, the restructuring (if not abolition) of NATO . He even went so faras to specify that a "Break with thePast" process would start in East Germany, with the opening of its borders as it turned out, to neighboring Commu nist countries. That was quite remarkable : Golitsyn knew that the processwould start in East Germany; and it did.Q. For 34 years, Golitsyn has remainedin hiding. He has never been seen inpublic; his whereabouts are a closelyguarded secret. Meanwhile, other defectors are conducting national tours,appearing on television, or writing inthe press . I recently saw Yuri Svets onC-Span, hawking his new book dealingwith his KGB activities while stationedin Washington. Is Golitsyn's secrecy a reflection ofhis prudence, or ofparanoia?A. Well, those who seek to discredithim routinely accuse him of paranoia.That is, of course, a mistake. Golitsynwas condemned to death in 1962, afterSemichastniy, then head of the KGB,had formally asked the Party for its approval that he should be liquidated. ASoviet defector who I am advised is reliable, reported to me that he had seen abook on display in the Lubyanka [KGBheadquarters] in Moscow, listing thenames and details of Traitorsto theMotherland, complete with photographs.Golitsyn features in this book, whichstates that those listed are to be reportedor killed . Obviously, it is highly significant that, unlike KGB officers who havebecome prominent in the West such asthe "two Olegs " - Oleg Gordievsky(who told Mrs . Thatcher how wonderful Gorbachev was) and KGB GeneralOleg Kalugin - Golitsyn remains under deep cover. It is significant that wedon't know where he is, and that I havenever spoken to him (he correspondswith me exclusively through intermediaries). If he can't present himself openly,and cannot live a normal life, there mustbe a reason for it.

The smear that he is paranoid doesnot provide a rational explanation. Hisbooks are not paranoid; they are writtenin moderate, carefully constructed language. To accept the lie that he is paranoid, it would be necessary to believethat a man who writes so carefully and

30

rationally, nevertheless chooses to livein disguise, with a new identity and personality , out of direct contact with thosehe wishes to influence, and subjectshimself to open-ended inconvenience inliving out his paranoia. This scenario ismanifestly absurd . In The PerestroikaDeception, Golitsyn clearly acknowledges that his life is in danger . If this isso, it proves that he is a living threat tothe Soviet strategists - since he has revealed the essence of their long-rangestrategy . Incidentally, Golitsyn explainsthat a strategy differs from a policy inthe following respect: Whereas a policyis overt, a strategy contains within it asecret maneuver or dimension which isnot revealed, the purpose of which is toensure the realization of the strategy.Q. And Golitsyn's moderate, caref ulpredictions in New Lies for Old havebeen amply validated by the course ofevents in recent years , as we have seen.A. Absolutely correct. New Lies for Oldis an outstanding predictive document- which of course suggests that the sequel, The Perestroika Deception, provides further significant guidelines forunderstanding Soviet strategy today andhow it will evolve in the future.Q. Were you surprised when Golitsyncontacted you?A. I was very surprised . What happened was that after we had been publishing Soviet Analyst - re-angledtowards the truth - for six months, andexplaining.insuccessive issues that theSoviets were engaged in global strategicdeception operations, I received a letterdated May 1992 from Anatoliy Golitsyn , enclosing a few pages from hisMemoranda to the Central IntelligenceAgency. The letter began as follows:

I have read few recent issues ofSoviet Analyst with great interest. Itseems to me that you have goodgrasp of Soviet strategy whichprobably causes them some concern.... I do not want to alarm youand I do not want to discourageyou from [the] excellent courageous line you are taking in yourpublication. But I want to warn youon personal basis to be careful inyour contacts.

I cite these extracts from the letterbecause it proves that Golitsyn ap proached me, not the other way around(I would not have known where to be-

gin) . This is important, in the light, forinstance, of an article by William Safirewhich appeared on July 10th in the International Herald Tribune , which accused me of being an "acolyte," andalso stated, as matters of fact , that"Anatoliy Golitsyn, the longtime Sovietdefector ... turns out a newsletter in theUnited States, Soviet Analyst, and I amon his mailing list." This mis- or dis-information - Soviet Analyst is publishedby my firm - seems to have been intended to implicate Golitsyn in any mistakes which I might inadvertently makein successive issues of Soviet Analyst.The International Herald Tribune hassince agreed to publish a letter from mecontaining an appropriate correction.

By trying to portray me as an "acolyte ," Safire, who has "connections,"sought to convey the impression that Iam a "follower" of Golitsyn, who basically reproduces what he says andwrites . But as I have explained, the defector approached me, not the other wayaround. The significance of all this isthat Golitsyn is not alone in havingreached the conclusion that the Soviet!Russian strategists and implementersare all Leninist revolutionaries.Golitsyn'senemies would like it to be thought thatthe only analyst who holds this view isGolitsyn himself, and that he is in a minority of one.

In his first letter to me, Golitsyn alsowrote that "I think of sending youthrough my lawyer more extracts frommy memos to CIA for possible publication in Soviet Analyst after this year'sUS presidential elections." I spent the.summer and fall of 1992 wonderingwhy he had made his decision to sendme further Memoranda, dependent uponthe outcome of the 1992 presidentialelection. After Clinton was elected, sureenough , we received a huge parcel (inearly December 1992) containing wellover 100 pages of his Memoranda to theCIA. It became apparent that Golitsynfelt that Clinton 's election necessitatedthe publication of these Memoranda;and in his cover letter dated December1992, he authorized me to quote fromthese documents in Soviet Analyst. InMarch 1993, it was agreed that I wouldedit the complete file of Memoranda tothe CIA for publication. The PerestroikaDeception is the consequence of our

collaboration. •

This interview will be continued in the next issue ofTHE N EW A MERICAN.


SINO-SOVIET SPLIT

"Splitting" Lenin's Heirs

"Scissors Strategy"The most memorable application of

the "good communist. bad communist"routine came about as a result of the socalled "Sino-Soviet split " in the early1960s. According to the conventional

Khrushchev and Mao established early deception of Sino-Soviet split.

Just prior to the Clinton Administra- Warren Christopher visited Vietnam totion's decision to extend diplomatic sign a diplomatic accord and open arecognition to Communist Viet- new United States embassy. According

nam, the familiar cast of foreign policy to the New York Times, the Vietnamese"experts" insisted that Vietnam should regime received promises of "trade andbe cultivated as a "strategic partner" tax treaties, most favored nation status,against Communist China. One of the and investment incentives" from Chrisbest summations of this position was of- topher. But Christopher did not neglectfered by New York Times columnist the "bad" Communists in Beijing. AfterThomas L. Friedman, who wrote , "The opening the Hanoi embassy, ChristoUnited States and its Asian allies need pher went immediately from Vietnam toto stick with a combi nation of engage- Red China to assure Beijing's murderment and hidden containment [toward ous regime that the United States wouldChina] .... That means . .. establishing continue the "one-China" policy whichfull diplomatic relations with Vietnam recognizes Red China's hegemony over- now - because as China' s historical Taiwan.enemy, Hanoi is one of the strongest Thus , the charade continues. The U.S.counterweights to Beijing." foreign policy establishment insists that

In the weeks leading up to recognition we must cuddle up to the "good" Comof Vietnam, the U.S.-China relationship munists in order to present a commonbecame strained. China professed of- front against the "bad" Communists.fense over the U.S. decision to grant However, when the dust settles, it beTaiwan's president, Lee Tung-hui, a comes clear that U.S. policy has been tovisa to attend a college reunion. The support both the "good" and "bad"Chinese also imprisoned U.S. citizen Communist regimes.Harry Wu , arrested and expelled twoU.S. Navy attaches for espionage, andcontinued arms sales to Pakistan andIran. In the meantime, Vietnam s u ddenly found itself elevated to the statusof a "good Communist" regime.

On August 5th, Secretary of State

THF NFW AMERICAN / SEPTEMBER 18, 1995

wisdom, Red China under Mao Tsetung became ideologically disenchantedwith the "reformist" Soviet Union underKhrushchev; this alienation blossomedinto a full-scale divorce when the SovietUnion refused to help China acquirenuclear capability. Soviet economic andtechnical advisers were expelled fromChina in 1960, beginning a political andideological rivalry of the two Communist powers which eventually eruptedinto a 1969 border war.

However, according to Anatoliy Golitsyn, the truth is that the Sino-Soviet"split" was a strategic deception intended to advance Communist objectives. In his 1984 book New Lies forOld, Golitsyn, a former KGB staff officer with detailed knowledge of thestrategic and diplomatic designs of theCommunist leadership, described theSino-Soviet relationship as an exampleof the "scissors strategy": "Each bladeof the communist scissors makes theother more effective. The militancy ofone nation helps the activist detente diplomacy of the other."

There is a third element to this deception: The complicity of the U.S. foreignpolicy establishment. In the early 1960s,establishment diplomacy favored an entente with the "reformist" Soviet leadership over the "hard-line" ChineseCommunist regime; this inclinationcontinued into the early 1970s. Nevertheless , strategic cooperation betweenthe Communist superpowers remainedconstant. In February 1963, for example, Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev told a reporter from the AssociatedPress that cooperation between RedChina and the Soviet Union had continued despite the supposedly decisive"split" in 1960.

The Red Chinese leadership offeredsimilar recognition of the continuingSino-Soviet alliance. One significant acknowledgment was embedded in aMarch 1966 statement in which the Chinese government rejected an invitationfrom Moscow to attend a Soviet Communist Party convention. After offeringtoken criticism of the ideological transgressions of the Soviet Communists, theRed Chinese government dispelled any

33

notion that it regarded the Soviets asgenuine antagonists:

[T]he great peoples of China andthe Soviet Union will eve ntuallyswee p away all obstacles and uniteon the basis of Marxism-Lenin ismand proletarian internationalism....The Soviet people may rest assuredthat once the Soviet Union meetswith imperial ist aggression andputs up reso lute resistance, Chinawill definitely stand side by sidewith the Soviet Uni on and fightagainst the comm on enem y.

The Party LineThe triangular diplomacy involving

the U.S., the Soviets, and the Chinesewas often remini scent of Orwell ' s 1984 ,in which three antagonistic superpowerswere always at "war" with each other.In Orwell ' s allegorical perpetual war ,alliances among the three antagoni stswere always in a state of flux, with lastweek ' s mort al enemy becoming thi sweek ' s "noble ally ." Th e Establi shment ' s party line regardin g America'srelations with the Russians and the Chinese was similarly protean, as was therhetoric issuing from the two Communist regimes.

With the Nixon Administration's disastrous decision to open diplomatic relations with Communist China in 1972 ,the ers tw hi le "hard-liners" in Chinasuddenly became America' s geo-strategic allies in an effort to contain the Soviet Union, which had previously beencast in the "good Communist" role . In1973, Henry Kissinger introduced the"one China" policy, which held that theCommunist rulers in Peking officiallyrepresented all Chinese, including theresidents of Taiwan . Thi s policy wasforti fied by the Carter Administration ' soffic ial recogni tion of Red China in1978. It has been followed faithfully bythe Reagan, Bush, and Clinton Administrations, and was recently endorsed byHouse Speaker Newt Gingrich .

During the Administration of noted"anti-Communist" Ronald Reagan, RedChina became a favo red recip ient ofAmerican milit ary and economic assistance. In 1984, President Reagan issueda decl aration that milit ary assistance toRed China would " s tre ng the n th e secu rity of the United States and promoteworld peace." Later that year, durin g asix-day visit to what he referred to as

34

"so-called Communist China," Reagansigned a number of economic, cultural,and development accords with Beijing'sbutchers. Direct military sales from theUnited States to Red China began in1985.

Golitsyn observ ed these de velopments with mounting dismay. In a March1989 memo to the CIA , he renewed hiswarning that "China is a tactical, not astrategi c partner of the United Statesand a tactical, but not a strategic 'enemy' of the Soviet Union":

Communist China was one ofthe principal architects of the Communists ' long-range strategy. TheSino-Soviet "split" was a commonstrategic disinformation operationto secure the successful preparationof their common strategy of "restructur ing." The [Ru ssi an] andChinese leaders have continuedtheir secret strat egic coordinationthrough a division of labor. ... ForChina is destined to become a pri mm}' Soviet partn er in the futureWorld Government towards whichMoscow and Peking are j ointlyproceeding. [Emphasis added .]

The geo-strategic "scissors strategy"has regional applications as well. JustinYu, a contributing editor for the Chinese-language publication World Journal who has diligently followed theChinese/Russian relationship, told THENEW AMERICAN that Russia and China"are very close allies , and always havebeen, despite the personality conflict between Mao and Khrushchev and someminor ideological di sagreements. TheMaster Plan of the Sino-Russian relationship is still very much in effect, particularly with respect to Japan , Korea,and Taiwan."

According to Yu, the combined pressure of Russia and Chin a is used to extort economic aid and other concessionsfrom Taiwan, which has prospered under a relatively free economy. Notwithstanding Taiwan ' s history of resoluteanti-Communism, the embattled islandrepublic is becoming more dependentupon Communi st China ' s "benev olence ," in no small measure because ofU.S. economic, technological, and military a ssistance to Beijing.

Furthermore, Yu note s, the domesticleadership in Taiw an has been indoctrinated in the same lethal fallacies that

have guided the American foreign policyestablishment: "[Taiwanese] PresidentLee [Teng-hui] , like almost all of thecurrent leadership of Taiwan, was educated at liberal schools in the UnitedStates. He received a scholarship fromthe CIA to study at Cornell. " As a result, 'T aiwan has been changed from astrong anti-Communist government intoa major supporter of the CommunistPRC [Peoples' Republic of China] ."

Consolidation and MergerAs Golit syn has pointed out, the ulti

mate strategic objective served by theSino-Soviet "split" is the creation of asocialist world government. Towardthat end, Communists in Beijing are collaborating with internationalists in theUnited States and elsewhere to create anAsian economic bloc which would bedominated by Communist China .

By ending Taiwan's 43-year-old stateof emergency on April 30, 1992, President Lee effectively conceded that unification with the mainland Communisttyranny is all but inevitable . HongKong, of course , will be claimed byCommunist China on July 1, 1997 .Once consolidated under Beijing' s control , the three nations would composewhat the Tril ateral Commission 's Triangle Paper #45 refers to as the ChineseEconomic Area (CEA). The Tril ateralCommission document explains that theCEA will eventually be subsumed intothe Asi an-Pacific Economic Community (APEC), which is itself to be a subsidiary of a managed globa l economy.

During a May 1994 visit of a Republican delegation to Beijing, an Americanofficial asked Mo Xi usong, the viceChairman of the Chi nese CommunistParty : "Is the long-term aim of the Chinese Communist Party still world Communi sm?" Mo replied, "Yes, of course.That is why we exist." This candid reiteration of the Lenini st and Maoi st ambition of global Communist victorywould have proven indige stible to thosewho have been lured into accepting theidea of a "reformist" China which hasbeen our "strategic partner" against theSoviets since 1972. But Mo 's statementis hardl y surprising to those who understand the long-term strategy pursued byCommunist tacticians in both Chin a andRussi a - and the role C ommunist a im splay in the grand de sign for global"convergence." •

- WILLIAM NORMANGRIGG

THE NEW AMERICAN / SEPTEMBER 18. 1995

THE HUMAN COST

20th Century Human SacrificeD ominant Western "intellectu

als" are con sistent - con sistently pro-Red. With a United

Nations women's right's conference tobe held in Communist China despite theregime' s policy of forced sterilizationsand abortions, and with Beijing dropping missiles close by Taiwan, HenryKissinger has warned against " isolating " the Communist Chinese. Thereseems little that Beijing can dothat would deter Kissinger fromcozying up to the regime; afterall, following the TiananmenSquare massacre, Kissinger alsodefended Deng Xiaoping andcriticized the students who werethe target s.

Even terror and mass murderhave been routinely excused .During the final stages of collectivization and Mao ' s horrific"Great Leap Forward," apologist(a kind term) Edgar Snow wrotethat everything that was happen ing was spontaneous, voluntary,and successful in modernizingthe country and improving productivity . Of course, most authorities say this effort cost atleast 20 million lives. Others putthe figure in the world's greate strecorded famine at 27 million.Chen Yizi, a former Chinese official now at Princeton 's Centerfor Modern China, pegs GreatLeap Forward deaths at some 43million.

Leap of DeathProfessor R.I . Rummel of the Univer

sity of Hawaii, an expert on genocideand mass murder (which he terms "democide") gauges that the Chinese Communist Party probably killed 35,200,000 ofits own people between 1949 and 1987,putting the risk of being killed by theReds at almost one out of every 20 men,women , and children. Internally circulated figure s from the Tigaisuo, or System Reform Institute that was led byformer Cornrnuui st Party c h ief Zhao

Ziyang, records the total number ofdeaths due to Chinese Communism atan astonishing 80 million . Numbers

such as these are hard to grasp. Considera telling personal incident, however,from a document for internal use by topCommunist Chinese. During the GreatLeap Forward, in the Fengyang Countycommune, one Chen Zhangying and herhusband Zhao Xizhen "killed and boiledtheir 8-year-old son Xiao Quing and atehim." Other gruesome epis odes arelisted.

The Communist barbarians have butche redtens of millions in their quest for power.

Responsibility for such heinous actscan be laid at the feet of the same MaoTse-tung who was lionized by most ofthe Western pre ss. Edgar Snow andOwen Lattimore were high on the list ofthose who were gushingly pro-M ao ashe was grabbing for and later consolidating power.

The story is fam ili ar. Cruelties ofCommunism have been ignored , ridiculed, and downplayed by the influenti al in the m c d i a w h c n it was m o st

crucial that the truth be told , a patternrepeated in Russia, China, Cub a, Vietnam, Cambodia, and elsewhere.

Red Chi na , Now and ThenDid you, for example, see on televi

sion the July testimony of several Chinese women (brought to congressionalhearings in handcuffs since they are dueto be sent back to Red China), tellingfirsthand stories about forced abortions?Of course not. Yet a sobbing Mrs. HuShuye, for instance , told about 30 or 40individuals from the people ' s commune

who came to her home and"dragged her up for an abortion"when she was six months pregnant. She was "bleeding sobadly" she could not be sterilizedat the time, so five months afterher child was aborted officialsreturned and carted her off forsterilization.

The Red Chinese occasionall yadmit their brutalities amo ngthemselve s. One Hsieh Fu-chih,minister of public security, reported of the production leadersin a rural county whose ten brigades, in a single day, murderedall tho se with "bad" person aland family backgrounds - including " landlords, rich peasants, counterrevolution aries, badelements, and rightists and theirchildren, including babies." Arrests have been made , as is thewont of those who wish to increase terror, for arbitrary if not

~ ridiculous reasons - such as~ when scratching one's back with:::J Mao 's little red book co st a term

of 15 years.Harry Wu, recentl y freed once

more from custody in Red Chin a, hasshown that the bad old day s are stillhere , with recent exposes of abuses inthe camps where goods are often madefor the West. His 1994 autobiographyBitter Winds is at times moving , in otherplaces quietly horrifying - depictinghungry political prisoners fighting overan old bone, perhaps human; thousandsof mounds of bodies buried outside onecamp , which Harry saw after he helpedbury a c ampmatc w ho dicd in his arms;

vici ous rope tortures reminiscent ofNorth Vietnamese treatment of American prisoners of war; and his own long


Woman mourns the loss of her son: The Chechnyan people haveexperienced firsthand the horrible blight of Commun ist barbarism .

stay in a "confinement" cell measuringsix feet , by three feet, by three feet.

Wu ' s revelations about the sale of human organs from executed inmates ofthe laogai (China's "reform through labor" sys tem), with some of said bodyparts being taken from living prisonerswithout consent , were this spring reinforced by an eyewitness. A former ranking public security officer named GaoPei Qi gave detail s to a congressionalhearing in May - just before PresidentClinton once again gave most favorednation trade status to Beijing.

Case after case of abuse is listed inAsia Watch' s Anthems ofDefeat: Crackdown in Hunan Province, 1989-1992.The book specifies some of the grislytorture methods used , such as electric"reaming," in which a baton is appliedto the body 's most sensitive parts . Theshackleboard is used routinely, in whichprisoners are handcuffed to a low-lyingwooden door with a hole cut into it forbodily function s. And there are a variety of cruel "games" of torture in "strict"regime units," such as the "GoldenChicken Standing on One Leg," wherebya prisoner has one arm cuffed to the opposite-side foot , with the other armchained high above his head. As TangBoqiao recollects, "the prisoner is left tostand on only one leg, and when exhaustion sets in the leg buckles under him,thereby wrenching his arm socket."

Moscow's Massacres"Wherev er the oppressors re si st ,"

railed Karl Marx, "they must be slaughtered ." "Contempt for death must spreadamong the masses," said Lenin , "andthus shall ensure victory. The ruthlessextermination of the enemy will be theirtask." Stalin sent a coded telegram toleaders of the Party and NKVD in 1939,putting the stamp of appro val on torture ,saying that the "Party Central Committee considers that physical pressureshould still be used obligatorily, as anexception applicable to known and obstinate enemies of th e people , as amethod both ju stifi able and appropriate." In 1956, Khrushchev told the 20thParty Congress (as if they needed toknow) that Stalin had favored tortureand terror: "The questioning of Stalin'sterror, in turn, may lead to the questioning of terror in gt:l1cral. But Bolshevi smbelie ves in the use of terror. Lenin heldthat no one was worthy of the nameCommunist wh o did not believe in

THF N FW AMERICAN I SEPTEMBER 18, 1995

terror. ..."U.S. leaders did business with all of

these master terrori sts, and their successors, who also did not shrink from using horrendou s methods to stay inpower. More modern techniques included the use of drugs on politic al prisoners and othe r abuses in hospitals,including the "roll-up," in which a patient is swathed in tightly-wound wetcanvas, hardly able to breathe; this becomes wor se as the canvas dries anddraw s tighter. That' s not all past tense:Chechen s will tell you that Moscow' smen, even if they don 't call themselvesCommunists today, rival the Stalinistswho deported virtua lly the entire nationof Chechnya.

Professor Rumm el gives the Sovietstop billing as mass murderers, puttin gthe death total attributable to its Communist Party at a lmos t 62 million.Ukrainian s by the mill ions were starvedpurposely; there was the Great Terror,murders of Trotsk yites and others inforced-labor camps, deportati on andmass deaths of the Bait s, and man yothe r epi sodes th at acco unt for thi smind-numbing death toll - more thanfour time s all the battle death s worldwide during World War II. It is more,notes Rummel, "than the total numberof deaths (nearly 34 million) from allthis centurys intern ational. civil, guerrilla, and liberation wars, including theRussian civil war."

Ma ss killing in the Ukrain e in the

'30s, according to the man who draftedthe Genocide Convention (Rafael Lemkin), was a deliberate act of genocide ofroughly the same order of magnit ude asthe Holocaust of Jews. Six to seven million are estimated to have been starvedto death in a man-made famine, mostlypeasants. (The supposedly rich "kulaks,"who were targets of collectivization,were those who may have owned two orthree cows .) These numbers repre sentliving people. Consider just some of thelitany as described in Robert Conquest ' sThe Harvest of Sorrow:

Ten years wa s given for the"theft" of potatoes. A woman wassentenced to ten years for cutting ahundred ears of ripening corn , fromher own plot , two week s after herhusband had died from starvation.A father of four got ten years forthe same offence. Another womanwas sentenced to ten years for picking ten onions from collective land.A Soviet scholar quote s a sentenceof ten years forced labour withoutthe right to amne sty, and confiscation of all property, for gatheringseventy pounds of wheat stalk tofeed the family.

On it went. A woman in PoltavaProvince, who was seven month s' pregnant, "was caught plucking spring wheal,and beaten with a board , dying soon afterwards. In Bil' ske (in the same Prov-

37

ince), Nastia Slipenko, a mother withthree young children whose husbandhad been arrested, was shot by an armedguard while digging up kolkhoz potatoes by night. The three children thenstarved to death."

Vasily Grossman, in Forever Flowing,compares Ukrainian children to those inthe Nazi death camps. Their heads were"like heavy balls on thin little necks,like storks, and one could see each boneof their arms and legs protruding frombeneath the skin, how bones joined, andthe entire skeleton was stretched overwith skin that was like yellow gauze.And the children's faces were aged, tormented, just as if they were seventyyears old. And by spring they no longerhad faces at all . Instead, they had birdlike heads with beaks, or frog heads thin, wide lips - and some of them resembled fish, mouths open. Not humanfaces." This resulted from deliberateCommunist policy.

Individual horror stories are endless,sometimes capricious. Avraham Shifrin,who spent ten years in Soviet laborcamps, told U.S . senators about a prisoner in a lumber camp who chopped offhis own hand and had it put with thewood so those on the outside wouldknow of the pitiless conditions underwhich it was cut. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn , in The Gulag Archipelago, cites amacabre case of a man who got a tenyear sentence because he was the firstat a gathering to stop applauding Stalin.Robert Conquest, in The Great Terror,cites the case of a former timber officialwho was arrested and forced to confessthat he had ordered too little timber cutto keep the woods intact for formerowners whose rights he wanted to restore; after being released early from histen-year sentence, he was rearrested andmade to confess that he had ordered toomuch harvested so that the forest wouldbe ruined.

Reports from Chechnya this yearshow that human-rights violations continue: A hospital burnt to ashes and anair strike on an orphanage are amongthose noted in a near-buried State Department report - the same Foggy Bottom that supports the Yeltsin regimethat perpetrated the atrocities . Therewas a quick mention (then into thememory hole) of the Russian army'sturning guns on civilians in a besiegedtown of Samashki , near Grozny , thecapital of Chechnya. As Russian and

38

Chechen families huddled in a cellar,troops tossed in grenades, according toeyewitnesses. Another witness saw Russian soldiers pour gasoline over a fatherand daughter and set them ablaze. Aftera "tsk, tsk" or two, the West went backto business as usual.

Other Communist OffendersCuban and Chinese Communists have

a number of similarities, among whichis the fact that both came to power whenthe United States embargoed the armsof their opponents. Both have deliberately targeted the U.S. with a narcoticswar (Chou En-lai admitted as muchhimself); Cuban Vice Admiral AldoSantamaria-Cuadrando told a cargo shipcrew with $10 million of narcoticsbound for America: "We are going tofill Miami completely with the drugs sothat more young Americans will die."Both have used forced labor and terroron their people and lied about it.

One of the most graphic personal descriptions of life in Castro's jails is thattold by Armando Valladares in AgainstAll Hope , where he recalls the cries offellow inmates on the way to executionscalling out , "Long live Christ the King!Down with Communism!" - which sounnerved the guards that they finallygagged the pri soners before killingthem. Brutality by Castro's guardsmatches any in Communist annals, including repeated urine and feces "baths"of prisoners, illustrative of the degradation possible when sadism rules .

A shelfful of accounts by former U.S.POWs attests to the cruelties of Hanoi'sthugs, though one of the worst torturerswas actually a Cuban called "Fidel" who swore to one American that hewould continue the agonies until theAmerican had spoken against his country, his President, his family , and hisreligion. The bouncing back of theAmericans is a remarkable testament.There was Jeremiah Denton, forced intoa recording session, blinking out T-OR-T-U-R-E in code so the homefrontwould know (When Hell Was in Session); Red McDaniel offering prayers inhis cell for the Vietnamese who were allbut killing him by inches (Scars andStripes); Everett Alvarez Jr., the firstU.S . pilot shot down and a captive forover eigtu years, relating the " ne w s bulletins" POWs were brutalized into making, but purposely mispronouncing HoChi Minh's name as "President Horse-

S*** Men" (Chained Eagle).Vietnam's Communists were also

mass murderers. According to a formerforeign minister, there may have been asmany as 2,500,000 who passed throughthe "reeducation" camps after "peace"arrived, with one estimate that 200,000died or were killed in such hellholes.Post-war executions numbered somewhere between 100 ,000 (so thoughtNguyen Cong Hoan, an official of thepost-war government) and 250,000.Nguyen Van Canh, in Vietnam UnderCommunism, catalogues: beheadingsand other executions designed to humiliate; a Buddhist leader (who had opposed Diem) crippled by 16 months in atiny underground hole where only a fetal position was possible; and a Catholic priest shackled for more than fourmonths because he was caught trying toteach English to other prisoners.

In Vietnam today, says the Puebla Institute, religious repression continuesagainst this most religious people. "Thechief victims of these brutalities are theethnic Christians . . . the independentBuddhists who have few proponents inthe West, and the members of the [indigenous] Cao Dai and Hoa Hao religions." Despite Hanoi 's holding backaccounting of our own POW/MIAs (information we know they have), Mr.Clinton ha s rewarded Vietnam withtrade and, most recently, diplomaticrecognition.

Cambodia's Khmer Rouge murderedperhaps two million, some for merelywearing glasses. Haing Ngor, in A Cambodian Odyssey, includes an eyewitnessaccount of a pregnant woman tied to atree and sliced open by an interrogator;the fetus was removed, tied by a string,then hung on the eaves with others.Even Khmer Rouge torturers might fallto torture - if they didn't apply themselves enough or , conversely, were tooquick about their work.

* * *Countries and names differ, but re

sults are the same. As Lenin once put it(while criticizing the Paris Commune of1871 for not being violent enough), "ifthe victorious party does not want tohave fought in vain, it must maintainthis rule by means of the terror which itsarm s inspire in the revolutionaries." Thehuman cost due to those who followed

his directives is nearly incomprehensible but incontrovertible. •

- WILLIAM P. HOAR


THE CONSPIRACY ABOVE COMMUNISM

Method Behind the Madness

CFR's Haro ld Pratt House: Headquarters of an" invisib le government" in the United States.

"I t has been sad," writes Sovietdefector Anatoliy Golitsyn inthe foreword to his new book ,

The Perestroika Deception, "to observethe jubilation of American and WestEuropean conservatives who have beencheering 'perestroika ' without realizingthat it is intended to bring about theirown political and physical demise. Liberal support for 'perestroika' is under standable, but conservative supportcame as a surprise to me."

For one who studied and workedwithin the inner sanctum of Soviet intelligence and who risked his life towarn the West about the Kremlin's program of strategic deception, it must besad indeed, and maddening, to witnessthe rush to destruction. "I was appalled," he says , "that 'perestroika' wasembraced and supported by the UnitedStates without any serious debate on thesubject."

The Game PlanIn his groundbreaking 1984 book,

New Lies for Old, Golitsyn laid out , inmeticulous detail and with devastatingclarity, the diabolical nature of the coming perestroika offensive - which he hadlearned about in his capacity as an eliteKGB officer 25 years earlier! The strategy called for ongoing deception operations of fantastic scope which would sogull and disarm the West that it wouldeventually "converge" with the "reformed" Communist regimes in a worldgovernment.

"In 1984 I thought that, in the eventof Western resistance to Soviet strategy,the scenario of convergence betweenthe two systems might take the next halfcentury to unroll," he says in his newwork. "Now, however, because theWest has committed itself tothe support of 'perestroika'and because of the impact ofthe misguided and euphoricsupport for it in the Westernmedia, convergence mighttake less than a decade. Thesword of Damocles is hanging over the Western democracies, yet they are obliviousto it."

"I believe in truth and the power ofideas to convey the truth ," says Golitsyn, and he expresses the hope that hisbook will help the people of the West tosee the dangers before them "and to recover from their blindness." If it iswithin the power of a book to do that,then there is certainly none better thanhis for that daunting task .

No one better apprehends or moreclearly explains the dialectic, the planning framework, and the operationalmethods of the Communist deceptionstrategy than Golitsyn. We emphasizeCommun ist because there apparently isa vital dimension of the deception strategy which has eluded his otherwise excellent grasp of this entire subject.

An example of this gap in understanding we are referring to can befound in Golitsyn's secret memorandumto the CIA of January 4, 1988, whichcomprises one of the chapters in ThePerestroika Deception.After brilliantly exposingthe treachery and disinformation involved in Gorbachev's visit to the UnitedStates, Golitsyn suggestedeight actions the CIAshould take to counteractthe perestroika offensive.Number eight reads: "Invite the National SecurityCouncil to consider having this assessment pub lished in Foreign Affairsthrough its editor, Mr.William Hyland, underthe anonymous cover of'a KGB defector' alongthe same lines as the article by Ambassador Kennan which was published

in 1947 and attributed to 'X.''' It is asuggestion he made again the followingyear in his lengthy analysis memorandum of March 1989.

To those familiar with Foreign Affairs, it is not surprising that the defector's innocent request went unrequited.As the flagship journal of the worldgovernment-promoting Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), it has been theleading promoter of perestroika, glasnost, and convergence in the West fordecades. Time magazine has called Foreign Affairs "the most influential periodical in print." Unfortunately, that isan apt description. As the mouthpiece ofthe powerful CFR, it not only speaks toand for America 's "ruling establishment," but , to an incredibly shamefuldegree, frames the issues and dictatesthe bounds of acceptable debate on economic and foreign policy matters in thissupposedly free republic .


Five of the six members of the ReaganAdmini stration ' s Nati onal Sec uri tyCouncil to which Golitsyn referred were(or had been) CFR members - GeorgeBush, Alexander Haig, Caspar Weinberger, David Jones, and William Caseyas was Foreign Affairs editor Willi amHyland , a former aide to Henry Kissinger (CFR), another leading perestroikaapostle. So was George F. Kennan, author of the celebrated "X" article whichlaunched Truman ' s ph ony "co nta inment" policy. As were some 200 additional key members of the ReaganAdministration, including virtually allof his top State Department officials.

Invisible GovernmentIndeed, CFR members have

so dominated every Administrati on - whether Democrator Republican - from FDR upto the present that the CFR hasoften justl y been called our" invisible govern ment." TheCFR has played a central rolein some of the most disastrousdeci si on s and poli cies th athave aided totalitarian Communism and threatened theFree World ' s security. A shortlist of some of the most significant of those policies and decisions would include:

• President Roosevelt ' s diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union in 1933.

• Launching of the U.S. Export-Import Bank in 1934 tohelp facilitate trade with theUSS R.

• U.S. Lend-Lease aid to save theUSSR from the Nazis and make her aworld power.

• "Los ing" China to the Communistsby our support for Mao and our under mining of Chian g Kai-shek.

• Pre sident Eisenhowe r' s "bridgebu ild ing" ai d to the Soviets in th e1950s.

• President Johnson' s "peaceful coexistence" in the '60s.

• Pre sident Nixon ' s "de tente" andJimmy Carter ' s "human rights" in the1970s.

• The Reagan-Bush concepts o f" linkage" and "engagement" in the1980s.

Decade after decade , as Communistregimes were racking up a body countof over 100 million and enslaving bil-

lions more, the CFR policy makers devised one excuse after another to ju stifythe suicidal and unconscionable transfers of credit, technology, and other assistance which allowed these bankruptregimes to continue their tyrannic al oppression. And Foreign Affairs has beenthe leadin g organ that has "sold" thesetreacheries to Congress and the American public.

A recent case in point was an articleby Paul D. Wolfowitz (CFR), formerambassador and De fen se Undersecretary, and now dean of the Paul H.Nitze School of Advanced InternationalStudies at Johns Hopkins University, in

Gorbachev: Still a "convinced Communist."

the January/February 1994 Foreign Affa irs entitled "Clinton ' s First Year. ""President Clinton was right, of course,to back President Yeltsin strongly in lastfall' s crisis," wrote Wolfowitz. "Therewas no alternative to Yeltsin at the timethat offered any hope for the success ofdemocracy in Russia. The United Stateshas a huge stake in that success and inthe continuation of Russia ' s generallymoderate foreign policy." Moreover,said Wolfowitz , "The end of the ColdWar has made cooperative action throughthe United Nati ons newl y feasible inmany cases by eliminating the threat ofa Soviet veto...."

The m essage is clear: Keep the aidspigot flowin g to our comrades in Moscow and step up the program to "empo wer" the UN and fur ther entangle

U.S. forces in its global "peacekeeping"operations.

"Rediscovering" Karl MarxBut an even more telling and alarm

ing message is to be found in an articleby historian John Lewis Gaddis (CFR),past president of the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations, inthe same issue of Foreign Affairs. Entitled 'T he Tragedy of Cold War History," the Gaddis essay commenceswith a paean to Marxist historian Will iam Appleman Williams and asks rhetoric ally , "what was the Cold War allabout?" His answer is intere stin g and

significant, in that it reflectsthe regnant Establi shment wisdom : "Given what we know ofthe Soviet Union ' s internal fragility . . . given persuasive evidence that an internati on alcommunist monolith never really existed ; given all of thesethings, what exactly was thethreat to American interestsanyway?"

Reading Gaddi s one is notsure. Noting that Stalin was not"a normal, everyday, run -ofthe-mill statesmanlike head ofgo vernment" and that hi scrimes were "horrifying" - an

«: amazing discovery that "liber~ als" worldwide have recently~ stumbled upon - Gaddis criti m cizes those who failed to seei the evil in Stalin, Mao and the~ "brutal romantics" who were

their "clones": "Kim II Sung,Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, Fidel

Castro, Mengi stu Haile-Miriam, BabrakKarmal, and many others."

"History for a long time was on theirside, and then it ceased to be ," saysGaddi s. "We need to under stand why."And where shall we turn for this understa nding? Why, to Marx , of course.Mind you, Gaddis is not suggesting thatwe study Marx to better understand thepernicious doctrines that drive the totalitarian ideologies and policie s of our collecti vist foe s. Not at all. Rather, thi sCFR luminary sugges ts we "follow another piece of ad vice from WilliamAppleman Williams, which is that werediscover Karl Marx." Gaddis explains:

It was Marx, more than anyoneelse, who alerted us to the fact thatthere are long-term "substructural"

THE NEW AMERICAN / SEPTEMBER 18, 1995 41

forces in hi stor y, and th at theyshape modes of economic production, forms of political organization,and even social consciousness....

We have neglected Marx' s approach to history....

Marx , it seems, had mixed uplinear with cyclical processes inhistory , and that was a substantialerror indeed. But it does not invalidate his larger insight into the existence of tectonic forces and therole the y play in hum an affairs .That insight might well serve as astarting po int fo r a reconsideration, not just of the Cold War, butofthe twentieth century as a whole.[Emphasis added.]

To longtime followers of the CFR 's"party line," this ringing endorsement ofMarx coming from the hallowed halls ofPratt House is not surprising. It was thefounder of the Council, Colonel EdwardMandell House, after all, who called for"socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx."Wh at we are witnessing now is the"convergence" of East and West at theruling elite level, in preparation for total convergence in the near future.

A Convinced CommunistConsider , for example, Gorbachev' s

"Churchill" speech of May 6, 1992 inFulton , Missouri , wherein he called for"global government" under the UnitedNations; it reads as if it were lifted fromthe pages of Foreign Affairs (which itprobably was) . Consider also the following state ments of Mikh ail Gorbachev, former General Secretary of theCommunist Party and "President" of theSoviet Union, taken from his speechesand his book, Perestroika. These certainly are well known to the "best andthe brightest," the CFR "wise men"; yetthey have either hidden them or haveexplained them away because they donot comport with the false images ofGorbachev, Russia, and "peres troika"now being foisted on the Americanpublic :

• "In October 1917, we parted withthe Old World , rejecting it once and forall. We are moving toward a new world,the world of co mmunism. We shallnever turn off that road."

• " W e will proceed to w ard bette r so

cialism rather than away from it."• "I am now [June 1990] , just as I've

always been , a convinced communist.

42

It ' s useless to deny the enormous andunique contribution of Marx, Engelsand Lenin to the history of social thoughtand to modern civilization as a whole."

• "The concept, the main idea, lies inthe fact that we want to give a new leaseon life to socialism through perestroikaand to reveal the potential of the socialist system...."

• "I am a communist, a convincedcommunist. For some that may be a fantasy. But for me it is my main goal."

• "Today we have perestroika , the salvation of socialism, giving it a secondbreath, revealing everything good whichis in this system."

• "We are carrying forth a MarxismLeninism freed from layers of dogmatism, staleness and short-sightedconsiderations."

Gorbachev' s own words and deedsabundantly confirm to any sentient being exactl y what Anatoliy Golitsyn hassaid: Gorbachev is no "liberal," no reformer. He is a dedicated MarxistLeninist carrying out the Communistlong-range strategy of convergence. Inhis recent essay, "New Priorities for theWorld ," he declares "it is increasinglyclear that the ideological foundations ofthe Western world are becoming outdated." Note that it is the ideologicalfoundations of the Western world - notthe Ma rxist world - which are "becoming outdated."

"Global Brain Trust"Odd, it might seem then, that this un

reconstructed Communist with oilycharm would be anointed by the CFREstablishment to lead a "global braintrust" in a spectacular star-studded summit with eminent capitalists to shape the"common future" of the planet. But onlyodd to those unfamiliar with the convergence game plan.

"The State of the World Forum ," saysthe propagand a release for the Gorbachev Foundation extravaganza set forSeptember 27 - October 1, 1995 in SanFranci sco, "is the launching of a multiyear initiative - a citizen's global braintrust." This gathering of the august willlaunch "a multi-year process, culminating in the year 2000, to articulate thefundamental priorities, values and actions necessary to constructively shapeo ur com mon future ." This humble andunprepossessing convocation, entitled"Toward a New Civiliz ation: Launchinga Global Initi ati ve ," will utili ze the

"consensus-building process" to addressthe "major themes of today ' s complexand interdependent world."

Stripped of its Aesopian dialectic, theconference is a thinly veiled call forcon vergence and world government.But don 't take our word on that; takethe word of Jim Garrison, the Gorbachev Foundation's executive director.In a lengthy and highly illuminatingcover article ("One World Under Gorby") in the May 31st - June 6th issue ofSF Weekly, a liberal-left San Francisconewspaper, Garrison spill s the beans."Over the next 20 to 30 years, we aregoing to end up with world government ," he says. "It's inevitable." He expands : "What' s happening right now asyou break down the Cold War , what isemerging now is ethnic identities. Youare going to see more Yugoslavias,more Somalias, more Rwandas, more[Timothy] McVeighs and more nervegas attacks. But in and through this turbulence is the recognition that we haveto empowe r the United Nations and thatwe have to govern and regulate humaninteraction...." (Emphasis added.)

Of course, the invitees to this "fivedays of round tables and global mindmeld" are the types who wield sufficientpower and influence to cause or exaggerate the "turbulence" necessary to justify "world go vernment" through an"empowered" United Nation s.

Co-chairing thi s forum with Gorbachev are: Askar Akaye v, president ofKyrgyzstan and "former" CommunistParty leader ; Oscar Arias, president ofCosta Rica ; Tansu Ciller, prime minister of Turkey; former U.S. Secretariesof State James A. Baker and GeorgeShultz; Maurice Strong, billionaire industri ali st and chairman of the EarthCouncil ; media mega-magnate TedTurner; and Desmond Tutu , every terrorist's favorite archbishop .

Among the 350 luminaries from 48countries expected to grace this rarefiedfirmament are: George Bush and Margaret Thatcher; Worldwatch presidentLester Brown; New Age gurus FritjofCapra, Willis Harman, Deepak Chopra,Robert Muller, and Matthew Fox; ANCterrorist Thabo Mbeki; Microsoft wizard Bill Gates; media mogul RupertMurdoch; futuri sts Alvin Toffler andJohn N aisb itt; Archer Daniels MidlandCEO Dwayne Andreas; Esalen founderMichael Murphy; motivation superstarTony Robbin s; Al Gore , Ralph Nader,


-,

,)

II ••• we shall use our grant-makingpower so to alter our life in the United

States that we can be comfortablymerged with the Soviet Union."

Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carl Sagan, JohnDenver, Vaclav Havel, Theodore Hesburg h, Ti mothy Wirth, Max Karnpelman, and Alan Cranston .

Head y atmosphere; one could getdizzy. But why waste time with riffraff,right? "I have always enjoyed peoplewho are influential leaders as opposedto people who are followers," Garrisonca ndidly confided to SF Weekly, " Inaturally gravitate towards higher partsof the pyramid rather than the lowerparts." Naturally. Which is why the globalist, draft-dodging, radical anti-n ukeactivis t Garrison is probably the perfectpick to direct the Gorbachev Foundation/USA. Directing the Moscow headquarters of the foundation is GeorgiyShakhnazarov, who played an importantro le in the leadershi p of the Ce ntra lCommittee of the Communist Party ofthe Soviet Union and ispresident of the RussianAssociation of PoliticalSciences.

So what does Gorbyenvision? A top priority,he says, is "the adoptionby the United Nationsand the national governments of a Code of In-ternational Environmental Law.""Creating non -governmental commissions of 'wise men ' to consider the roleof mass media" and "developing a globalconsciousness" are also important priorities. To this end, "World politics shouldembrace the task of spiritual renewal."How? Comrade Gorbachev would "setup a kind of United Nations Council ofElders, comprising the most highly respected scho lars and pub lic leaders."And like his "wise men" commissions,this "Council of Elders" would, nodoubt, closely resemble the globalistideologica l complexion represented athis San Francisco Summ it.

Foundation FundingAnd how does a poor, unemployed

Soviet apparatchik like Gorbachev comeup with the wherewithal to run a transcont inen tal foundation and throw a confabulat ion of such magnitude? Thefirst step involved a visit to some otherfounda tions. The New York Times reported on May 13, 1992: "Mikhail S.Gorbachev met yesterday in Manhattanwith leaders of some of the nation'smost richly endowed private foundations , enlisting their support in setting

TWC w:::w ilhA>:RIr.AN / SEPTEMBER 18. 1995

up his own American-style presidentiallibrary with a goal of $74 million indonations."

"'I found him to be exuberant andhighly animated, just brimming withideas,' said David Rockefe ller, Jr.,chairman of the Rockefeller BrothersFund, after the hour-long meeting whichwas held at the Wa ldorf Asto ria . Thefoundations included those establishedby the Rockefeller, Carnegie, Mellon,Ford and Pew families ...."

Which brings us to a very importantpart of the perestroika/convergencestory first revea led nearly 45 years ago.In 1952, the U.S. House of Representatives established a formal committee toinvestigate the activities of several ofthe large tax-exempt founda tions whichhad beco me not orious for providingfunds to individuals and organizations

identified with Communism and socialism. It may be recalled that Alger Hiss,the notorious Soviet spy, had been givena plush job as president of the powerfulCarnegie Endowment in 1948. He hadbeen chosen for that position by theEndowment's chairman John FosterDulles, a founder of the CFR and protege of the Marx ist Colonel House. Likemany others in the CFR cabal, Dullescultivated an anti -Communist rep utation .with cheap rhetoric that completelybelied his actions.

In 1953, the committee's top investigator, Norman Dodd, was invited to theNew York City headquarters of the FordFoundation by the foundation's presi dent, H. Rowan Gaither.

At that meeting, Gaither brazenly toldNorman Dodd that he and others in thephilanthropic field who had worked forthe State Department and other federalagencies had for years operated under acarefully thought-out plan emanatingfrom the White House. As related byDodd , here is how Gaither put it:

The substance of them [directivesfrom the White House] is that weshall use our grant-making power

so to alter our life in the UnitedStates that we can be comfortablymerged with the Soviet Union.

Dodd was understandably shockedand asked Gaither if he would repeatthat statement under oath before thecommittee in Washington. To whichGaither rep lied, "This we wo uld notthink of doing." Within months the CFR"wise men" had exercised their considerable muscle within the Congress andthe investigative committee was soontermi nate d. And the foundations havecontinued - and have expanded, diversified, and accelerated - their subversive activities to this day .

A Larger ConspiracyIn 1966 Robert Welch, the founder of

the John Birch Society, published an es-say entitled The Truth illTime . In it, he stated that"the Communis t moveme nt is only a tool ofthe total conspiracy ."And he pointed to NewYork and Washington asthe real seat of the conspiracy 's power, apply-ing a reliable rule: If you

want to know who the boss is, see whosigns the check. It was Western money,especially funds taken from Americantax payers, that was keeping Communism alive and enabling it to domin atescores of nations. And it was that largerconspiracy above Communism whichhad a death grip on our own governmentand on many of America's instit utions(media, foundations, academia, etc.) .

Others were beginning to see throug hthe deception too. In his book, The Naked Capitalist. former FBI official andpolice chief W. Cleon Skousen recounted a conversation he had with Dr.Bella Dodd, who had been a high-levelmember of the U.S. Communist Party."I think the Communist conspiracy ismerely a branch of a much bigger conspiracy!" she told him. Dr. Dodd explained that she first became aware ofsome mysterious superleadership rightafter World War II when the U.S . Communist Party had difficulty getting instructions from Moscow on several vitalmatters requir ing immediate attention.The American Communist hierarchywas told that any time they had an emergency of this kind they should contactanyone of three designated persons at

43

Robert Welch explained that the "Communistmovement is only a tool of the total conspiracy."

the Wald orf Towers. Accordin g to Dr.Dodd, whenever the Party obtai ned instructions from any of these three men,Moscow always ratified them.

"What puzzled Dr. Dodd ," Skousenrecords, "was that not one of these threecontacts was a Russian. Nor were any ofthem Communist s. In fact , all threewere extremely wealthy American capitalists." "I would certainly like to findout who is really running things," saidDr. Dodd. Many others would like toknow also . But the concept of super-richcapitalists and Communist dictators andrevolutio naries - supposed arch-enemies - collaborating in schemesfor g loba l co nques t see ms tomany people so totall y incongruous as to defy belief. Yet the proofis overwhelming.

The Armand Hammer documents recently released from theSoviet archives, for exa mple, confirm what this magazin e had reported years ago : That th ebillionaire "capitalist" had been aSoviet agent for decades and hadhelped finance the CommunistParty . But othe rs ev en mor ewealthy and more powerful hadpreceded him . The late ProfessorCarroll Quigley, in a section of hismonum ental history, Tragedy andHop e, wri tes concernin g " thelinks between Wall Street and theLeft, especi ally the Communists.""Here the chief link," says Quigley, "was the Thomas W. Lamontfamil y." Quigley calls Lamont , apartner of J.P . Morgan, "the mostinfluential man in Wall Street," andnotes that government files "show TomLamont, hi s wife Flora, and his so nCorliss as sponsors and financial angelsto almost a score of extreme Left organi zati on s, including the Communi stParty itself." Other examples abound.

One way to explain this apparent contradiction is to reduce the shared motivation of these seeming enemies to thesimplest of term s: lust for power. Wesee this same motive force - au gmented with greed and political ambi tion - at work in other co nspiraciesinvolving "arch-enemies." As, for example, in Colombi a, Pan ama, Mexico- or our ow n country, for that matter- w here the top law enforcement offi-cials turn out to be co-conspirators withthe Mafiosi and drug lords they aresworn to oppose . While not a co m-

44

pletely adequate analogy, it provides ahelpful frame through which to view thecrim inal and amoral actio ns of the Insider globalist elites and their Sovietco llabora tors.

Obviously these cons pirators, like allcriminals, strongly prefer that their darkdeeds not be exposed to the light of public scrutiny.

Which is why Foreign Affairs willnever publish Anatoliy Golit syn ' s expose; the perestroika deception is theirconfidence game as well as the Kremlin' s. So too, it goes with the rest of themajor media, which has been brought

within the CFR orbit over the past fewdecade s. In a rare example of candor,the Washing ton Post 's Rich ard Harwoo d, in hi s co lumn of October 30 ,1994, entitled "Ruling Class Journalists," revealed the ex tent of the CFRlockup on the media. Harwood admittedtha t CFR members " are the neares tth ing we have to a ruling es tablis hment in the United States," and that inthe CFR ' s circles of power "journa listsget cheek and jowl with the establishment. "

"The preside nt is a member ," Harwood notes. "So is his secretary of state,the deputy secre tary of state, all five ofthe undersecretaries ...." And on and onhe g oes, through a litany of the CFRmembership roster in the Clinton Administration. "What is distinctively modernabout the council these days," Harwood

continues, "is the considerable involvement of journalists and other media figures, who account for more tha n 10percent of the memb ership." He mentions the CFR ' s new president , LeslieGelb , who "fo r many years was a reporter and columnist for the New YorkTimes," and "Stro be Talbott of Timemagazine, who is now President Clinton ' s ambassador at large in the Sla vicworld."

The CFR stranglehold is astonishing:'T he editorial page editor, depu ty editorial page edi to r, ex ecutive editor,ma naging editor, foreign editor, na

tional affai rs ed itor, business andfinancial editor and various writers as well as Katharine Graham,the paper ' s principal owner, represent The Washington Post in thecouncil ' s membership," observesHarwood. Ditto, he notes, for theother media giants: the New YorkTimes, Wall Street Journ al , LosAngeles Times, NBC, CBS , ABC,et al. Mos t revea ling was this admi ssion : "They do not merelyan al yze and interpret fo reig npolicy for the United States; theyhelp make it."

The CFR not only promulgatesits globalist treachery through itsj ournal , books and co nferences,and its influ ence in the CFR-runmedia, but it conducts a veri tableshuttle service between New York,Washington, Moscow, Beij ing, andother Communist capit als to coordinate the convergence strategy.

Golitsyn not ed one of thesemeetings in his The Perestroika Deception: "During his recent visit to Moscow, [Zbigniew] Brzezinski , the formerNatio nal Security Adviser in the CarterAdmi nis tratio n, met le ad in g Sovietstrategists, including Yakovlev, an expert on the manipulation of the Westernmedia, and advised them on how to procee d with 'pe restroika.' Furthermore,Brzezin sk i deli vered a lecture on thesame subject to the Soviet dipl omats atthe High Diplomatic Academy!"

But Br zezinski (CFR) is no mere"dupe." He fully understands the deception in which he is taking part. As domany of his globa list CFR co llaborators. We are not confronted here withmere stupidi ty; we are faced with treason and conspiracy at the highest levelsof our gove rnment and society. •

- WILLIAM F. J ASPER


AID AND TRADE TREACHERY

Building an EnemyThe Pentagon, government agen

cies, and certain internationalfirms are deliberately beefing up

the People's Liberation Army in Communist China. Even while Red China,according to the Clinton Administration, has been violating an arms controlagreement by maintaining an offensivebiological weapons capability, part ofthe Administration's massive outpouring of cooperation and technology transfer with Beij ing includes a deal to sellgas turbine engines that, used in cruisemissi les, are capa ble of carrying a biologica l warhead about a thousand miles .

U.S . export controls for Beij ing,Moscow, and other unworthy regimeshave been diluted so much that theyhardly exist. In June, for another instance, the White House declared that itwas in our national interest to allow theCommunist Chinese to have cryptographic items that had previo usly beenun der sus pension. Giving advancednuclear technology outright to the manicregime in North Korea is another egregious fulfillment of Lenin ' s prophecythat capitalists would become "deafmute blind men ." "They will extendloans," declared the first Soviet dictatorin 1922, "which will provide us with theequipment and technology we lack andwill thus help rebuild our military industry which we need to launch subsequent vic torious attacks against oursuppliers . In other words, the capitalistnations will always work to preparetheir own suicide."

This apparent madness of bolsteringthe Communists who would love tobury us has been going on since beforethe Bolsheviks came to power. Worsethan merely giving aid and comfort tothe enemy (which the U.S. and otherWes tern powers have long done), thesupposed top capita lists have virtuallycreated that enemy as a significantforce. Some pretend that, say , RedChina has only the best intentions forAmerica. "We don 't think of them as anenemy," said a Pentagon official to theLos Angeles Times last October, "andthey shouldn 't think of us as an enemy."This is in response to posturing thatformer Soviet agent Anatoliy Golitsyn

TUe;: Me;: W il AA~Rlr.AN / SEPTEMBER 18. 1995

referred to as "calculated ideologicalmoderation" (and which was used bythe Soviets during the New EconomicPolicy period in the 1920s). Yet, in thecase of the Red Chinese, there is littlepretense of moderation. They are providing nuclear technology to dangerousnations (while lying to the U.S. aboutit), lobbing missiles off Taiwan's coast,and massively building up their military. Russia has also been asserting herpresence in many of the same areas thatthe Soviet Union did. And, make nomistake, Moscow and Beijing are cooperating in assorted ways, including militarily .

A Base for the BolsheviksThe story of Lenin 's insertion into

Russia with the aid of the German Genera l Staff is reasonably we ll-known.This is hardly the whole story (whichwou ld take much more room than isavailable here). There was also aidfrom the "Bolshevik banker, " OlofAschberg, owner of Stockholm's NyaBanken , as well as New York and otherU.S. connections.

In November 1917, top Wil son adviser "Colonel" Edward Mandell Housemoved to forestall attempts against the

e li.. CREATORS SYNDICATE, 1W:

new revolu tion aries who had overthrown an allied government. He instructed the President on how to dealwith the press , advising that any intimations that "Russia should be treated asan enemy" should be " suppressed."Woodrow Wilson went further. As hisbiographer Jennings Wise remarked:"Historians must never forget that Woodrow Wilson, despite the efforts of theBritish police, made it possible for LeonTrotsky to enter Russia with an American passport." Jacob Schiff (accordingto his own grandson) spent millions tohelp in overthrowing the czar and raising the Bolsheviks. The Warburgs, ofGerman and U.S. banking circles, weredeeply involved in bankrolling thefledgling Reds.

Historian Antony Sutton popularizedsome of these findings in books including Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, National Suicide: Military Aid tothe Soviet Union, and The Best EnemyMoney Can Buy - invaluable aids forrecognizing how the evil empire cameinto being. Then there is the late CarrollQuigley, professor at Georgetown, whoblew the whistle on some related machinations: In Tragedy and Hope, Quigley(who agreed with many of the aims of

47

the participants) described how theHouse of Morgan, for example, tookover the domestic left in the U.S., andhow the "international financial coterie"worked with the Reds here and abroad.Monopoly "capitalists" and international Communists have more in common than it seems on the surface.

One of the links between Wall Streetand international revolution was onemillion dollars from William BoyceThompson to be used for Bolshevik propaganda; Thompson , as Dr. Suttonnotes , "was a director of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, a large stockholder in the Rockefeller-controlledChase Bank, and a financial associate ofthe Guggenheims and the Morgans...."The revolution was also to be spread:French Premier Georges Clemenceau' spapers reveal that yet another WallStreet figure , "Colonel" Raymond Robins of the Red Cross , "was able to senda subversive mission of Russian Bolsheviks to Germany to start a revolutionthere." The Spartacist uprising in Germany in 1918 was one result.

Continued Soviet AidDuring 1921-25, some $37 million in

machinery and equipment from the U.S.was shipped to the USSR , though thenew regime was not recognized diplomatically by Washington . Americaninvestments included Standard Oil 'sconcession, gold mining, and electricalequipment from the International General Electric Company.

Stalin, according to a State Departmentreport by Ambassador Averell Harri man (who himself got a manganese concession in the USSR), remarked in 1944that "about two-thirds of all the large industrial enterprises in the Soviet Unionhad been built with United States helpor technical assistance." That was noexaggeration. Even before Lend-Leaseduring WW II, aid was massive. Mackeeof Cleveland essentially rebuilt "Gary,Indiana" at Magnitogorsk in the Uralsfor smelting, much as Ford built the"Detroit of the USSR" in Gorki. (AsAntony Sutton observed, GAZ trucksthat were built at Gorki by Ford latercame down the Ho Chi Minh trail. Tanksfor Hanoi that were supplied by the Soviets operated on American chassis).

The pride of the Soviets during itsfirst Five-Year Plan was the largest hydroelectric installation in the world atDnieprostroi. But it was built under the

48

direction of Colonel Hugh Cooper ofthe U.S., who had created the WilsonDam at Muscle Shoals, Tennessee.Other U.S.-assisted projects includediron and steel centers in Sverdlovsk andNijni Tagil , huge works in Stalinsk andin Siberia, Batum's oil refineries, andthe Ural Asbestos Works.

Military AssistanceTreason and espionage were involved

with Moscow's getting an atomic bomb,a story in its own right. But how manyknow that, because of an arrangementwith General Dwight Eisenhower, theSoviets were able to cart entire intact VIs and V-2s from the U.S. zone in Germany behind the Iron Curtain providing the base for their satellite program? The Russians gloated over thishaul. Drinking in celebration, one lieutenant colonel shouted: "What foolsthese Americans are! " Vaunted MiGairplanes were reproduced from German and British (Rolls-Royce) technology; MiG-ISs looked so much like U.S.planes during the Korean War it becamea source of confusion.

The Poltava-class ships that transported the weapons that helped bring onthe Cuban Missile Crisis were built inDenmark and approved for sale to theSoviets by our State Department. During the Vietnam War, when HaiphongHarbor was finally blockaded in 1972,the Pentagon revealed the Soviet materiel gushing into North Vietnam. Sovietmateriel? As M. Stanton Evans noted inClear and Present Dangers:

One photo shows the Soviet cargoship Michurin steaming towardHaiphong, with Soviet ZIL 130cargo trucks and ZIL 55 dumptrucks on deck. Others show SovietT-34 and T-54 tanks, Soviet MiG17s, and Soviet 122 mm field guns- items that also turned up in theMiddle East in the fall of 1972. Allthese items of aggression, as it happens, originated in the United Statesand other Western nations. Thecargo ship Michurin so graphicallyexposed by the Department of Defense photo is powered by a dieselengine designed and built in theUnited States and features a hullconstructed in the United Kingdom.

Diplomacy by Henry Kissinger helpedarrange for the U.S. to build the Kama

truck plant (the world's largest) for theSoviets; vehicles from there were laterused to invade Afghanistan. Kissinger,recall, was brought to prominence bythe Rockefellers, and Rockefellers'Chase Manhattan bank (with David thenas chairman) was the largest financier ofKama. Kissinger didn't discuss thatwhen he said that the U.S. and USSRshould be seeking to "spin a web ofvested interests." He did argue that allthe strategic arrangements (which so favored the Reds) were justified: "Byacquiring a stake in this network of relationships with the West, the SovietUnion may become more conscious ofwhat it would lose by a return to confrontation." Yet, despite hostility, Moscow never did get cut off.

It was a NATO ally, recalled Dr.Miles Costick in The Strategic Dimension of East- West Trade, that sold theheat-seeking U.S. Redeye missile to theSoviets, which was then used as the basis for SAM-7s that shot down U.S. aircraft during the Vietnam War. The U.S.itself - despite widespread criticism,even from the Pentagon - providedMoscow with technology for precisionball bearings (from Bryant ChuckingGrinder Company of Vermont), neces sary for missile guidance systems. After that, the Soviets deployed thousandsof MIRV warheads against the U.S.(Russia's missiles, despite propagandafrom Moscow and Washington, can stillretarget us in minutes, without ourknowledge.)

Another telling episode involved aSoviet effort to acquire U.S. accelerometers, gravitational devices used in missiles and aircraft. The FBI prevented asale and thwarted Soviet espionage attempts to get such devices. But shortlythereafter, an expert from the Soviet'sKalinin Polytechnical Institute was permitted to examine how the equipmentwas made. Sutton wonders why theState Department allowed this Sovietengineer into the U.S . "to study themanufacture of accelerometers only afew months after another Soviet nationalhad been foiled by the FBI in attempting to purchase an accelerometer?"

Another major deal was made, aidedby corporate lies and over conservativeobjections, for semiconductor manufacturing by Control Data Corporation.Similar accounts could be related aboutacquisition of nerve gas, merchant marine vessels , aircraft, armored vehicles,


u.s. military plane delivers aid to "post-Soviet" Russia.

now-Defen se Secretary William Perryhas promoted grea ter U.S. military coopera tion with Beijing ; j us t that hasbeen happening under both Dem ocraticand GOP adm inistrations. Mere monthsafter the Tiananmen Square massacre,Red Chinese military officers were allowed back into the U.S . to re sumework with Grumman's ma ssiv e modernization of Red China ' s F-8 fighterplane s. Top Chinese were allowed lastyear through Lawrence Livermore National Labor atory (w here during the1980s an espionage opera tion aided RedChina in producing its fir st neutronbomb).

Last Octob er, as th e Los AngelesTimes reported on February 23 , 1995 ,"the U.S. aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk anda Chinese nuclear submarine squa redoff in international waters off China inan enco unte r th at demon strat ed thegrowing poten tial for naval confl ict between the two countries . Althou gh noshots were fired, the captain of the KittyHawk dispatch ed aircraft to track theChinese vesse l with anti-s ubmarinewarfare devices, and China respondedby scrambling jet fighters. Later , a Chi nese official warned that China ' s mili tary will have authority to shoot in anyfuture incid ent s." What was the vigorous response? DoD sa id Wash ingtonand Beij ing would talk more to set upprocedures to prevent such incidents.

Thi s summer, to indicate displeasurewith Washington , Beij ing awarde d amult i-billion doll ar contract to DaimlerBen z' s Mercedes unit to build mini vansand engines, a deal which Chrysler andFord Motor have sought. AG Siemens ispart of a consortium trying to buildpow er plants for Beijing. U.S . firms,which are being played off agai nst suchco mpa nies by Beij in g, are apply ingpr essure for more Ch inese bu siness.(Frequently this turn s out to be less thanpromised; China' s government-run "family car" proj ect , for instance, is bein gpushed from next year into the next century , a senior Communist offici al said inJuly.)

In short, the pattern begun even before Lenin arr ived at Finland Station inPetrograd still pr oceeds. The "deafmut e blindm en" - and those pullingthe strings behind the scenes - prepare the We st fo r a passage betweenScylla and Charybdi s: suicide or loss ofsovereignty. •

WILLIAM P. H OAR

sho t at those in the U.S . who mightthink otherwise. M eanwhile , despiteRussia' s massive indebtedness, the International Monetary Fund (whic h enjoys disproportionate U.S. backing) hasapproved a $6.8 billion loan to Russia .Red China last year bought 26 of Mo scow' s most advanced fighter jet, the Su27 . And, reported the Washington Postin July, Beijing is trying to make its ownfighter, "a clone of a U.S.-built F-16given to Chin a by Pakistan" - whichhas rec eived missi le technology fro mBeijing in vio la tio n of arms -contro lagreements.

Looking with concern at Beijing ' smoves has been Al Santoli : "Boastingthe large st land army in the world ,China 's military factories - equippedwith American technology bought atbargain-basement prices - are producing imp roved-accuracy long-range ballisti c mi ssil es and Han-class nuclearattack submarines . China' s dea l to buy22 top- of-th e-l ine diesel -powered submarines from Russia over the next fiveyears, combined with recent deli veriesof Chinese missile s and Russian submarine s to Iran and the ongoing con struction of a new generation of Russiannuclear-powered att ack submarines,will dramaticall y alte r the globa l balance of power." Red China, of course,enjoys a huge trade surplus with theU.S., which has increased from $7 billion five years ago to about $40 billi onthis year.

Ever since the Carter Administration,as the Los Angeles Times has reported,

A Repeated PatternEven the Wall Street Journal, no op

ponent of trade with Reds, acknowledges that the new Russian Empire isreclaiming the bulk of the former SovietUnion . Mo scow is moving on otherfront s, too . For in stance, Ru ssia andSouth Africa (where the Communist-ledAfric an Nati on al Con gress has takenove r the government) have signed a defense-cooperation pact, calling for morepowerful engines for Pretoria ' s fighteraircraft. The deal was signed in Moscowby South Africa ' s Defense Minister JoeModise , former commander of the terrorist wing of the ANC.

Last year, Russian Prime MinisterVictor Chernomyrdin visited Red Chinawith vows of deeper economic ties andmore mil itary cooperation. This Ma y,Defense Minister Pavel Grachev helpeddeli ver on the promi ses. Chin a ' s primeminister, Li Pen g, in Moscow in Jul ysaid : "Russia and China are two greatnati on s th at cannot allow anyone toteach them how to live and work" - a

and other mil itary-related items.Furthermore , much th at passes as

"peaceful" technology is a ru se. According to for me r Pol ish inte ll igenceofficer Dr. Michael Checin ski , what appears beni gn may not be : "Eve ry machine, device, or instrument importedfrom the We st is sent to a special ana lytic group. Their job is not only to copytechnical solutions but to adapt them tothe specificatio ns of So viet militaryproduction ."

~a.5l ' --':C-== =c

~o

THE NEWAMERICAN / SEPTEMBER 18, 1995 49

"RESTRUCTURING" THE U.S.

How Free Are We?

Our "sweet land of liberty" is gradually being subverted.

N ame the country in which thefollowing oppressions are thelaw of the land:

o Government seizure of business,home, bank account, or personal property without due process.

o Forcible entry and search of privateresidences by government agents without a warrant.

o Prohibitions on the use of privateproperty without compensation - inthe name of the "common good."

o Prohibition on growing as muchwheat, corn, cotton, peanuts, or tobaccoas you choose on your own land.

o Prohibition of any religious object,picture, book, prayer, or music on thepremises of a public school.

o Prohibition of any speech, gesture,or action pertaining to gender, race,ethnicity , or sexual preference thatmight create a "hostile work environment."

o Prohibition of an employer askingabout a job applicant's disability, medical condition, or handicap.

o Prohibition of wording in classifiedads mentioning any kind of religious,gender, sexual, ethnic, racial, or educational preference.

The country referred to above couldwell be Cuba, China, Burma, Russia, orsuper-socialist Sweden. But it is not. Toour everlasting shame, it is our ownUnited States of America, the countrywe grew up celebrating in song as the"sweet land of libe rty ." How and whyhave our sweet liberties been transformed into the ugly prohibitions listedabove?

We can better understand what wehave lost when we realize that the storyof mankind has been a perpetualstruggle to be free - free from the coercion of other men who call themselves"the government." In almost all timesand places man 's freedom has been conspicuously absent. No matter what theauthority over men has been called Divine Pharaohs, Divine Right of Kings,socialism , Communism, fascism, Nazism, or People 's Republic - it alladded up to the same thing : control ofthe many by the few , with resultingstagnation, poverty, suppression of ere -


ativity, and loss of human dignity.The stunning break with past history

- the real miracle - occurred righthere in our own country 200 years agowhen a Constitution was written thatheld government within explicitly statedbounds with its proper functions spelledout, beyond which it was not to step.The Constitution 's Bill of Rights iswritten in the negative, not defining thepowers the federal government has overus, but rather the powers it does nothave. Previous governments, from thebeginning of time , assumed all powersexcept for those rights or privilegesgrudgingly granted to the people. It follows that what government grants, government can , and does, take away .America's great gift to mankind is theidea that we are "endowed by our Creator" with certain unalienable rights,which no mere government can alter orabolish. Thi s is the single most important step forward for the good of mankind since the birth of Christ.

Fruits of FreedomEuropeans, born and bred to central

ized controls, sniffed at this idea ofstrictly limited government and Godgiven rights and said it was much tooweak to ever work. They were wrong.

Because of this "weak" form of government, this country experienced thegreatest flowering of creative ability, ofeconomic and technical progress, of thegreatest good for the greatest numberthat has ever been known. Millions fromall over the world flocked to our shores.Our standard of living became the envyof the world. Since it was not a functionof government to support the peoplewith their own money, taxes were minimal and a man kept the fruits of his labor to use as he saw fit, leaving him freeto innovate. And innovate he did , supplying a product or service whereverthere was a demand and an opportunityto make a profit. Out of this grew ourfree enterprise system. The ordinaryconsumer became king of the marketplace, pa ssing a verdict upon everyproduct simply by buying or not. Thismiracle of the free market, this conceptof government kept within bounds, isour great American heritage.

Today thi s heritage is unrecognizable . Our freedoms are perishing underassault from their natural enemy, government. It is dismal indeed to reflectthat while it took thousands of years toachieve the American miracle of individual freedom, it has taken little morethan half a century to undo it. Within

5 1

living memory , those principles thatmade freedom possible have been discredited and discarded to the point ofremaining unknown to younger generations . How did it happen? The weaponwas the alien ideology of collectivism,beginning with Franklin Roosevelt'sNew Deal. The method was gradualism.Little by little Americans were seducedby our Congresses, Presidents, courts,media, and especially by our intellectuals into giving up their birthright of liberty for a mess of government handoutsand "protective" controls that wouldhave revolted our Founding Fathers .Too few noticed the fatal price beingpaid in lost freedoms.

Today we have a Constitution thathas been stood on its head. Judges havefound "interpretations" and "penumbras" that have gradually transformedour institutions and granted the federalgovernment precisely those powerswhich that document prohibits . Thereach of those powers is enormous. Weare at the point where government regulates almost everything and harms everything it regulates . An army of federalbureaucrats (now outnumbering allthose employed in manufacturing) isworking at anyone time on more than5,000 new omnivorous regulations thatare eating the heart out of freedom at acost of more than $500 billion per year,or over $5,000 per household.

But this monetary rip-off pales besidethe losses in production, innovation, jobcreation, and standard of living inflictedby this regulatory stranglehold. MiltonFriedman recently illustrated how thegrowth in the regulatory state has beena major factor in the decline of our economic growth during the past 25 years .As Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society"entitlements and Richard Nixon's proliferation of agencies increased thenumber of Federal Register pages published annually to 20,000 in 1969,60,000 in 1975, and 87,000 in 1980, ourgrowth rate sank from a high of 4.6 percent (pre-Johnson) to a low of below 2.0percent in 1979. Federal agencies nowpublish over 200 pages of new rulingseach business day.

The real cost of regulations has to bemeasured by the chains that come withthem. Nothing is too small for the bureaucrats to overlook as an excuse forshoving people around and showingthem who is boss . Thousands of peopleare made criminals by each administra-

52

tive ruling that transforms ordinarybehavior into a felony. Anti-discrimination edicts have made crimes out ofpersonal preferences, such as when aWisconsin woman advertized for a "mature Christian handyman" as a tenantand was forced to pay $8,000 in legalbills and fines for sexual and religiousdiscrimination. Or when a Californianewspaper chain went bankrupt afterbeing sued for running an ad includingthe words "adults preferred."

Assault on PropertyWe Americans today must obey 30

times as many laws as Americans hadto obey at the turn of the century . It isaxiomatic that the larger governmentbecomes and the more it spends, themore coercive it will be. Of special concern is the government's many-prongedassault on private property rights, forhere we have the dividing line betweencitizen and State, the fountainhead of allother rights. Sovereignty over our ownproperty has given way to government's"right" to seize it through asset forfeiture laws, endangered species laws,wetland laws, urban renewal laws, andnumerous others .

No one is safe from forfeiture laws,originally meant for seizing the assets ofbig-time drug dealers. Mere gossip cancause police to seize your home, car,boat, plane, or even the cash in yourwallet. Corrupt police have used thislaw to confiscate valuable land or homesthey covet, or that belong to people theyhate, for police departments keep a largepart of the booty they seize. Since 1985,over 200,000 Americans have had theirproperty seized; it is expensive and difficult to get it back, even after one hasbeen found innocent.

The wetlands provisions of the CleanWater Act, originally meant to applyonly to navigable waterways, has beenperverted by the U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers (chief destroyer of wetlands),the EPA, and Presidents Bush and Clinton to apply to any part-time puddle orclean fill on one's own lot. The 1989Federal Manual for Identifying Wetlands, which claimed jurisdiction overthe property of hundreds of thousandsof American landowners, was written insecret in violation of the Federal Administrative Procedures Act, which requires public notice and comment beforea regulation becomes law. The newdefinition doubled the amount of wet-

lands in the U.S. and the number of convictions for environmental "crimes." Inone instance, naturalist Bill Ellen wassent to prison for constructing a wildlifesanctuary after obtaining 38 government permits; under the new definitionhe became a polluter because the duckshe attracted generated waterfowl fecalmatter.

Or you may fall victim to the absurdities of the Endangered Species Act,which has been exaggerated to a criminal extent. Thousands of people havelost the use of their land or their livelihood because of a bird, a fish, or a snail,while "ecosystem management" is locking up millions of acres of private land.

These land grabs are taking place inthe best totalitarian fashion - no compensation for owners . We used to thinkthis was just a Third World disease. Weused to have something called the "takings" clause in the Fifth Amendment.Adding insult to injury, these victimsmust pay taxes on land they can't use.

Cost of Free SpeechEqually as serious as the attack on

property is the assault on free speech,one of our most cherished rights and,like property, fundamental to our protection against tyranny. From small beginnings in the workplace that outlawedracial, ethnic, religious, or sexual speechthat creates a "hostile environment," thegovernment's idea of what is politicallycorrect to say has exploded into otherareas, especially the college campus .Students are being publicly chastised,fined, forced to attend "sensitivity" lectures, or even expelled for speech thoughtto be offensive by any member of a"victim group" (women, homosexuals,Hispanics, blacks, etc.). Somehow these"victims" are immune to punishment fortheir own verbal abuse of white malesdead or alive, not to mention all ofWestern civilization.

Another variety of muzzling is practiced by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), guilty of many crimesagainst the pocketbooks and health ofthe public through its rigid control ofdrug and medical-device development.For years the FDA has sought to controltobacco as an addictive drug . With thehelp of Bill Clinton it has finally comewithin sight of victory. Notice the steps:First, the cover, smoking by minors (safeground, since everyone condemns it).Next, the FDA declares cigarettes to be


We Americans today must obey 30tim es as many laws as Americans had

to obey at the turn of the century.It is axiomatic that the larger

government becomes and the more itspends, the more coercive i t will be.

a drug based on its own research. President Clinton then instructs the agency topropose rule s to curtail the sale, distribution, and advertising of cigarettes tominors . Since this is a good cause , whatis wron g with all this? Everything. Thi sis one of tho se areas the Constitutionleave s to the states; most states alreadyprohibit cigarette sales to minors. TheFDA has no authority. The ban on advertising on non-tobacco goods such ascap s is unconstitutional. The order forthe tobacco industry to spend $150 mil lion on tele vision commercials againstsmoking by minors is an illegal tax .

None of this will work; after 20 yearsand billions of dollars the governmenthas failed to stop fifth graders from buying drugs right on mostschool grounds. Aboveall , who can doubt thatthe FDA's agenda is toeventually outlaw allcigarettes? No matterwhat one' s personalopinion about smokingmight be, one must hopethe tobacco industrywins this battle. If thegovernment can preventus from choosing tosmoke because it is not good for us, whycan 't it prevent us from eating cheese orred meat or refu sing to exercise? (Whocan forget the photos of thou sands ofChinese citi zens exercising in unison?)

Without doubt it can be demonstratedthat not a single one of the mammothfederal bureaus that eat out our substance does us anything but harm. Topay for this burden of government theaverage American had to work unti lMay 6th this year just to pay his federaltaxes. This is the latest Tax FreedomDay ever, due to the 1993 Clinton taxhikes. But that is hardly the end of therip-off. The costs of all those thousandsof regul ations, plus the state and localtax levies, are keeping us working fortwo more months - until July 9th!

Yes, Americans spend more than halfof every year working for government!There is no figure more telling of wherewe stand as free men and women. Weare more indentured than the serfs of theMiddle Ages !

Right t o LifeWith our liberties now seriously

eroded, what about our inalienable rightto life itself? The FBI at Ruby Ridge


and the ATF/FBI at Waco seem neverto have heard of it. The appalling extermination of the lives of persons foundguilty of no crime set a terrifying newprecedent of brutality and governmentpower grossly out of control. The ATFhas been establishing its brand of terrorin additional ways. Dressed in blackflak suits and masks and with machineguns drawn, these "courageous" publicservants have been breaking into homesin the middle of the night on suspicionof illegal arms possession and brutallymaltreating the inhabitants, causing onewoman to have a miscarriage and instantly killing another with taxpayer-financed bullets. The victims were provedinnocent in those cases. Indeed, target-

ing innocents is part of the terror. It tell sus that this could happen to anyone.

None of these outrages casts as wide anet of totalitarian controls as the terrorism prevention act now being stampededthrough Congress. This monstrous billwould accelerate the tran sformation ofour form of government from one withsupposedly limited powers to one withunlimited powers, including one of themost frightful - the use of the militaryagainst the people. With Mr. Clintonquickly blaming "hate speech" - definedas criticism of government - as respon sible for the violence in Oklahoma City,does this mean that conservative talkshow hosts or writers may be prosecutedunder the extraordinary new powerscontained in this ill-considered bill withits strong overtones of a police state?

This short overview has been able totouch on only a smattering of the prohibitions that are increasingly smotheringus. What do they all add up to? If weforget the trees and look at the forest,we see a profound metamorphosis taking place whereby we are becomingmore and more similar to the collectivist governments that have made the 20thcentury one of the most repressive in all

history. Each prohibition of our rightshas had its counterpart in either fascismor Communism, some almost uncannilyso . As public housing for the poor isbuilt next to $200,000 homes to satisfythe socialist dictates of HUD and federal judges, who can forget the openingscene in the film Dr. Zhivago, when hereturns home immediately after the Bolshevik takeover to find his home occupied by peasants who inform him, "It' sonly just! "

Thi s perversion of justice and invention of "rights" that cancel the legitimaterights of others was basic to the brutalSoviet system; it has now come toAmerica under the guise of affirmativeaction, civil rights, and politically correct

speech and thought. Onthe other hand, the thousands of regulations andprohibitions from theEPA, the Fish and Wildlife Service, OSHA, andnumerous others on theuse of property are inthe fascist mold of titular ownership lackingthe right to use one 'sproperty as one chooses.Fascism is , in fact,

"smarter" than socialism (governmentownership of business, industry and agriculture), for when the economy goesdown the drain, as it must, the government can blame the greedy capitalistowners and emerge unscathed. We arelosing control over our lives and propertyto a web of minute, all -pervasive rulesand regulations that constantly restrainus from acting in our own interest.

Orwell's PigsAt the same time that this transforma

tion to the alien idea of all -powerfulgovernment is proceeding here at home,the former Soviet bloc countries areloosening the chains binding their peopleand pre senting at least a facade of increasing liberties, thus becoming "morelike us." Their economic opening toprivatization is taking on the same lookof fascism that is appearing here, in areal-life enactment of Orwell's pigs becoming more like men, and men becoming more like pigs. Eventually, of course,it became impossible to say which waswhich. But unlike Animal Farm, the final chapter of the real-life enactmenthas not been written yet. •

JANE H. INGRAHAM

53

FIFTH COLUMN

Reassessing the "Red Scare"I n the early 1940s, Senator Ed John

son of Colorado, accused by a leftleaning press of "seeing Commu

nists under the bed," quipped: "Maybeyou've got a point. Last night, I lookedunder my bed and guess what I saw?"That accusation, a liberal media ploythroughout World War II and the ColdWar, was used to ridicule those whofought widespread Soviet espionage andsubversion. Informed anti-Communistswho persisted in making the facts knownwere dismissed as either paranoidor as fascist tools . The campaignof vilification and cover-up beganin the early 1920s and continuedover the decades, no matter howoverwhelming the evidence thatCommunists throughout the worldwere witting agents of the mostcruel dictatorship history hasknown.

Until Lenin and the Bolsheviks,in a bloody coup d'etat, overthrewthe legitimate government of Alexander Kerensky and , in an evenmore bloody civil war, began thesystematic liquidation of morethan 25 million people, the Communist Parties in the United Stateswere a tatterdemalion congeries ofsquabbling radical sects. Thischanged in the early 1920s whenthe Third International (the Comintern), Moscow's holding company fororganizing world subversion, took overwhat eventually became the CommunistParty of the United State s of America(CPUSA). John Reed, the "idealist" author of Ten Days That Shook The Worldand hero of the "revolution," returned toAmerica with $1 million in cash , a tremendous sum in those days, to pull together a viable party which would be anarm of Comintern and a recruiting basefor the Soviet espionage apparat.

Tip of the IcebergArmand Hammer - son of Julius

Hammer, a Communist functionary andfriend of Lenin - began a career as aKremlin agent which eventually madehim a powerful oil tycoon. His role wasto smuggle and sell in the U.S. valuableworks of art seized from the Tsarist

government, from the Russian Orthodoxchurch, and from the Russian middleand upper classes - converting theminto desperately needed foreign exchange, from which Hammer got hispercentage. At the same time, Amtorg,presumably a company to encouragetrade with the USSR , was set up in NewYork to serve as a center for Soviet espionage and subversion, as liaison withthe CPUSA, and as a conduit for the"Moscow gold" which liberals and pro-

The exposure of Alge r Hiss demonstratedthe ser iousness of Soviet subversion.

fessional intellectuals vociferously denied existed . The open Party itself,never able to recruit more than 100,000members, became the butt of jokes andcriticism, as the Kremlin meant it to be.

But it was the tip of an iceberg whichbelow water level became one of thegreatest espionage and policy-influencingoperations in history - an undergroundParty which grew into a powerful forcein the educational establishment, in thegovernment, and in the arts and sciences. It controlled sub-Cabinet members, high-ranking government officials,members of Congress, and spies in every branch of the bureaucracy and in allof the nation's security forces with theexception of the FBI and the Office ofNaval Intelligence (ONI). During thewar years, it established a courier service between FDR and the head of the

CPUSA. The cell at the New York Timeswas at one time so large that it published a newsletter for its members. Inbook publishing, a cell made up of editors from major established firms metregularly to sabotage the work of antiCommunist writers. And the underground apparatus created a secretpropaganda network, involving press,radio, and later television, that could,and frequently did , destroy or totallyneutralize those who exposed Soviet in

filtration and espionage operationsin the West.

"Agents of Influence"In 1923, Felix Dzerzhinsky,

who organized the Soviet secretpolice, reported to the Politburo inthe Kremlin that " responsibleworkers of the OGPU [in time theNKVD and the KGB] are detailedto all diplomatic and trade mis sions of the USSR abroad. Thetotal strength of the Foreign Department of the OGPU is 1,300."By 1938, that modest departmenthad grown into an army of some9,000 highly trained "masterspies," almost 200,000 subordinates, and 500,000 novators, or informants. At the same time, theSoviet secret police was recruitingwhat it referred to as "agents of in

fluence" - people like Harry Hopkins,one of FDR's most powerful advisers,and other ranking New Dealers. On alower level were spies and policy corrupters like Alger Hiss (head of theState Department's Office of SpecialPolitical Affairs and Secretary-Generalof the San Francisco Conference whichwrote the UN charter) and AssistantTreasury Secretary Harry Dexter White(later executive director of the International Monetary Fund) . The infiltrationof the State Department was so thorough that the "Red China Lobby" wasable to deliver mainland China to MaoTse-tung, who was described in officialDepartment documents as "the ChineseGeorge Washington."

In 1933, FOR negotiated the recognition of the Soviet Union with MaximLitvinov, who solemnly promised to


end all Soviet espionage and clandestineactivities in the United States. Yet at thevery time that he was signing the protocol which established diplomatic relations , Litvinov was meeting withcl andestine operatives of the GRU/NKVD to set up a new table of organization for the infiltration of U.S . institu tions and government. By 1938, ArthurAlexandrovitch Adams , an "old Bolshevik," was sent to the U.S. to coordinateoperations for the NKVD and the GRU,the military intelligence arm of the RedArmy . Part of the Adams mission wasto salvage the spy ring that WhittakerChambers had run - an apparatu swhich included Hiss and White, amon gothers in important government service.But Adams' major mission was to coordinate other espionage activities whicheventually focused on the theft of America's atomic bomb secrets. With WorldWar II in the offing, the infiltration of the

U.S. military and the West ' s scientificestablishment was given high priority.

That infiltration, of course, includedthe Office of Strategic Services (aSS),the predecessor of the CIA , as I foundout to my sorrow. A gunner first clas sin anti -aircraft artillery, I was inductedinto ass for "a mi ssion hazardousabove and beyond the call of duty" being dropped behind the Italian lines tomake contact with guerrilla groups. Butbefore my training was completed, Iwas forced out because - and ass wasquite frank about it - I was too antiCommunist, in an agency which had enlisted the Communist officers of theSpanish Civil War ' s Abraham LincolnBrigade and included important Sovietspies like Noel Field.

It is not necessary to review thetestimony and disclosures in 1948 ofWhittaker Chambers which led to theconviction of Alger Hiss for perjury in

denying part icipation in a major Sovietspy ring . A year earlier, a congressionalcommittee had heard testimony on theinfiltration of Hollywood. Ten Communists in the movie industry were brieflysent to prison for contempt of Congress.But anti-Communists like screen writerMorrie Ryskind, executive producerJames Kevin McGuinness, and actorAdolphe Menjou - all of whom hadtestified against the Communist apparatus in Hollywood - found themselvesbanished from films , some permanently.

Gouzenko DefectionThe defection of Lt. Igor Gouzenko,

the code clerk in the Soviet Embassy inOttawa, gave the world the first realglimpse of the vast world of the Kremlin ' s espionage operations. For Gouzenko brought out with him documentsthat disclo sed the nature and success ofseveral spy rings which had infiltrated

The Ames Case: "Nothing Less TIronically, in June of this year the National Security Agency released a small batch of the "Venona" intercepts - decoded secret Soviet transmi ssion s collected in the I940s - which showconclu sively that the Rosenbergs were indeed the "atom spies"they were accused of being. More importantly, the VENONA releases also revealed that many of the "over 200" other KGB and

GRU agents mentioned in the intercepts were never identified. Farfrom being paranoid, Angleton ,Golitsyn, Senator McCarthy, andother anti-Communists undoubtedly understat ed the espionageand subversion threat.

The per spective offered in excerpts below from Anatoliy Golitsyn 's new book , The PerestroikaDeception. provides a much-needed

~« balance to the dubiou s analysis of~ the Ames tragedy being furni shedco by liberal media:~ • 'T he Ames case confirms that

the KGB won the intelligence war.The victors in an intelligence war

control information and disinformation: the losers lack accurateinformation and take their decisions on a fals e basis. The Amescase shows how blind and bankrupt is the American policy of aidto the ' new' regime in Russia. Such aid permits the new KGB tofinance and expand their intelligence activities and to be moregenerous in paying their agents in the United States and Europe.American dollars would be more wisely spent on improving thequality of the United States' own intelligence services, leaving

II '! '

Ames in custody: the damage had been done.

A ldrich Hazen Ames. Traitor. Murderer. Sellout. KGBMole. How many CIA agents and double-agents paidwith their lives because of his treason? How many vital

secret s did he betray? The total extent of the damage Ames' betrayal cost the West may never be known.

Other questions beg to be asked: How many other moles likeAmes have burrowed into sensitive positions? What is being doneto discover them and prevent similarly devastating losses? How doesthis square with the "new" Russiathat is our "pa rtner" and whichsupposedly "re formed" the nasty"old" KGB?

Inc red ibl y, the men who aremost vindicated by the Ames caseand the str ing of spy scanda lswhich preceded it are now beingblamed for the disaster. The floodof books and articles on the Amescase disgorged by the Establ ishment press and publi shing houseshave almos t uniformly accuse dformer CIA counterintelligence chief James Angleton and KGBdefector Anatol iy Golit syn for the CIA ' s failure to detect Ames 'treachery. Angleton and Golit syn are smeared aga in with thecharge that their "paranoia" and their "witch hunt" for a KGBmole in CIA crippled the agency .

Many of those making the charges are the same who have fordecades held that Alger Hiss, the Rosenbergs and other Sovietagents were innocent victims of "anti-Communist hysteria."


the Ameri can , C an adian, and Briti shato mic bomb project and passed on tothe Soviet U nion its sec re ts and its blueprints. These documents provided evidence fo r th e a rres t of to p nuclearph ysicists like Klau s Fuchs and the spyring he aded by Julius Rosenberg andfamil y. Then an editor of Newsweek, Iwas the firs t newsman Gouzenko wouldtalk to. He had much to say about the extent of Soviet espionage and subversion.

"T he re are ," h e told me in 1953,"eight espionage gro ups operating in theUnited States - e ight groups aboutwhich I have positive kn owl edge. Thereare others that I sus pect, or where w ha tI kn ow is based on talk I heard, suc h asthe identity of your Al ger Hi ss. That information was passed on to British Intelligence and to some of your people- but much of it has disappeared fromthe files of MI-6 and I ha ve learned thatlittle is being done by your gove rn ment

which has tied the FBI' s hands." Swear ing me to sec recy - an oath I kept untilafter his death - he told me that LesterPearson, then Can adian fo reign mini sterand later prime min ister, was tryin g tohave him deported to the Soviet U nio nand certain death. " Pearson," he said," is nash " - in Ru ssi an , a term used bythe Soviet secret police to de scribe animportant agent who technicall y wasnot a Party member.

I saw Igor G ouzenko o nce m ore ,whe n I returned to C an ada on a mi ssionfo r a key th ou gh undesignated Intelligence group which had given me a longlist of questi ons to as k him on Sovietencoding and de codin g methods. Whenwe had fini shed, I sa id, " You mustha ve been asked these qu estions manytimes. You were the code expert at theSo vi et Embassy. " He answered bitterly . " No , never. The re are so manythings I have ne ver been as ked abo ut.

Even the Mou nt ies have been told notto let me vo luntee r informatio n - andthose who get too friendly w ith me aretran sfe rred."

Not man y months later, I was si ttingin the offic e of Louis Nichol s, de factosecond-in-com mand of the FBI. News week had assign ed me to do a take-ou ton the open and underground Communist Party, and Nichols was gi ving asmuch as he could from FBI fil es. "W ehave solid informati on of eight Sovietespionage groups operating in the UnitedSt ates - and indicatio ns that there areothe rs ." he sa id. "Evide nce of the infiltrati on of govern ment and of the privateand acade mic sector is there - in somecases en ough fo r legal ac tion, but we arenot being allowed to act."

We were living every day then withthe tireless invest igations of the SenateInternal Security Subcommittee - met iculou s and detailed e xposure, b y

an an Intelligence Pearl Harbor"the KGB with no alternative but to pay their agents in roubles ."

• "It remains to be established whether the agents whose identities Ames disclosed to the Russians were genuine agents of theCentral Intelligence Agency, or whether they were themselvesRussian-controlled."

• "Penetration of the CIA by the KGB in the late 1950s compromised genuine CIA agents such as the GRU Lieutenant-Colonel Petr Popov. Accordingly, the CIA failed to understand thesignificance of the new political strategy which had been developed for the entire Communist bloc and movement, includingChina, when it was adopted in 1958-60. Penetration also explainswhy the Agency failed to detect the political disinformation employed in support of the new strategy in its initial phase, and whyit failed to realise that new models for the structure of Communist societies were envisaged as replacements for the existing Soviet Communist model. As far as the USSR was concerned, theofficial intention to carry out such a change was publicly announced to the world by the Twenty-Second CPSU Congress inNovember 1961 which called for the replacement of the conceptof the 'dictatorship of the proletariat' by the model of the 'stateof the whole people .' "

• "The Central Intelligence Agency's penetration by Ames, andpossibly others - we shall see - contemporaneously with theintroduction of 'perestroika' in the 'former' USSR, explains theabsence of genuine secret intelligence reaching the Agency onthe subject. It explains why the CIA did not foresee 'perestroika,'why it did not detect the deception behind it.. .."

• "Deprived by Ames, and possibly others, of genuine secretintelligence concerning internal Russian politics , US policymakers have continued to accept uncritically the interpretation ofevents projected by open sources including the Russian and

THE NEW AMERICAN I SEPTEMBER 18, 1995

Western media and, in particular, by the expert communicatorsspawned by Arbatov's Institute for the Study of the USA andCanada."

• "The Ames case has provided a conspicuous reminder of theKremlin's veiled but continuing hostility towards the UnitedStates and its institutions, and of Russian determination to dominate them. It is extraordinary that the US Administration hasmanaged to ignore the political implications of the Ames case continuing to claim success for its Russian policy and conducting business as usual with the Kremlin as if the Ames case, andits ominous implications, were of no significance."

• "The former Director of Central Intelligence, Mr. WilliamWebster, placed it on record that, because of the changes whichhe thought had taken place in the USSR, the Agency now reliedto a much greater extent than previously, on Russian official andpress sources. This rash decision was .. . mistaken.

"The Ames case has shown that the 'heirs' of the KGB continued successfully to implement the KGB's operations to penetratevital centres of the US Government.. ..

"For the intelligence professional, the Ames case was nothingless than an intelligence Pearl Harbor which proved beyond allquestion that Russia remains the main adversary of the CentralIntelligence Agency ."

• "Instead of bragging that they won the 'Cold War' - in fulfillment of Sun Tzu's warning that an adversary's objectiveshould be to 'pretend inferiority and encourage the enemy's arrogance' - the United States must belatedly understand that it' lost' the Cold War , as soon as the West began to offer enthusiastic support for the 'perestroika' deception, and to regard it asserving the Wests best interest s." •

- WILLlAM F. JASP ER

57

We are learning now that the largestestimates of the extent of Soviet

subversion and espionage in the UnitedStates understated the case.

Counsel Robert Morris, of how the Institute for Pacific Relations (IPR) andother affiliated groups, working clo selywith Chinese Communist agents, hadsuccessfully engineered the victory ofthe Communists on mainland China .Working hand-in-glove with the IPRand acting as liaison with the State Departme nt was Owen Lattimore, perhapsthe mos t important and most effectiveof the "agents of influence" working forthe Krem lin . Yet , when Senator JosephR. McCarthy zeroed in on him , the antianti-Communist propaganda apparatusin the media and in the academic establishment mounted a campaign in Lattimore 's defense that exceeded in venomand decibels the efforts on behalf ofAlger Hiss.

"Greatest Plot in History"In 1963, The Greatest Plot in History:

How the Reds Stole the A-Bomb, waspublished. This was then,and is now , the mostcomplete account of anespionage operation covering two continents andthree countries. In re searching the book, Ihad: the full cooperationof the FBI ; unpublishedexecutive sess ion hear-ings of Senate and House committeehearings ; secret reports and memoranda; books and articles by and aboutthose involved in the Manhattan Projector in Counter-Intelligence operations;900-plus pages of the Grey Board investigation of J. Robert Oppenheimer (atreasure trove of information ignored byother writers); the confessions of someof the atom spies; and the assistance ofAdmiral Lewis Strauss, then head of theAtomic Energy Commission, and MajorGeneral Leslie R. Gro ves, head of theManhattan Project. Gro ves frankly admitted to me that he had his suspicions .about Oppenheimer' s affinity for theCommunist Party but kept him on because he considered him essential and "safe" so far as the Nazis wereconcerned.

If the book was to be faulted, it wasfor never going beyond what could beproved in a court of law. Oppenheimer'srecord - his monthly contributions of$ 150 a m onth to the CPUSA, his association with known Soviet agents, andhis refu sal to report incidents pointingto espionage by his Los Alamos associ-

58

ates - were noted in the book but nocharges were made of direct participation in "the greatest plot in history. " Yetthe book was violently attacked in suchpublications as the Bulletin of AtomicScientists and ignored or brushed off bythe major media. Since the "collapse" ofthe Soviet Union and the "end of theCold War," the opening of some, thoughfar from all , KGB and Com intern filesha s revealed that Opp enhei mer wasmore than a passive onlooker, and that- even ifhe did not actually pass on information to the Soviets - he encouraged others to do so.

In the earl y 1950s, there were someefforts by the government and by elements of the private sector to clean outthe Augean stables of Communist espionage, infiltration, and infl uence. Thefederal loyalty-security program andthe creation of the Subversive Activities Control Board led to a few firings

and many quiet re signations. In theimmediate postwar era, members of theElizabeth Bentley cell - among them"graduates" of the Harold Ware cellwhich Whittaker Chambers had ex po sed in 1948 to no effect - weretransferred by Alger His s, against thedirect orders of Secretary of State JamesF. Byrnes, to the United Nations, wherethey were relatively safe from investigation and prosecution . Some reluctant and half-hearted efforts weremade to reduce Communist influencein Hollywood, but most of the Holl ywood Ten returned to work, some under false names . But whatever wasachieved in exposing Communist infiltration was attacked as "fascism," "witchhunting" - and "anti-Semitism," thedirtiest co unter-charge of all since itimplied that mo st Communists wereJews.

Julius and Ethel Ro senberg werebrought to trial for atomic espionage,and their convic tion an d execu tio n wastreated by the liberal/left as if it werepart of the Holocaust. Yet Julius Rosenberg had not only been a part of the A-

bomb conspiracy, he had also been theleader of a spy ring in the Army which,among other achievements, had given tothe Soviet s the secret of the proximityfuse (one of the Air Corp 's most guardedand precious secrets). This was discovered by the Senate Permanent Investigations Subcommittee, when it washeaded by Senator McCarthy.

Lynching of McCarthyBut all action against Communist in

filtration, subversion, and espionagecame to a halt with the condemnationand political lynching of Senator MeCarthy. One by one, the Senate andHouse investigating committees ceasedtheir operations and were shut down.The voluminous and historically valuable files of the Senate Internal Sec uritySubcommittee disappeared, and someresearch libraries hid or des troyed published congressional hearings.

Beginning with the1960s , almost every Soviet defector broughtinformation of KG Bmoles in the Central Intelligence Age ncy. Butthose within the CIAwho sought to root themout fo und themselvesisolated or fired - and

the result was the Aldrich Ames casewhich, except for the lives he ended andthe damage he did to national security,was almost a comedy of bureaucratic ineptitude, and worse. We are learningnow - through the memoirs and disclosures of former KGB officials, the research of Ame rican scholars not afraidof being attacked as "witch-hunters,"and the pub lication by the CIA of the"Venona intercepts" (the record of KGBcommunications between the U.S. andMoscow ) - that the largest estimates ofthe extent of Soviet subversion and espionage in the United States understatedthe case.

We must ask ourselves who are mos tguilty for Communist cr imes againsthumanity: The Soviets and their Communist co -conspirators ; or the secretsympathizers whose ideological twistedness and disdain of their country ledthem to "explain ," "ju stify ," and openthe gates to its cle ar and present enemies? This . more than an examinationof the past, should be foremost in theminds of Americans. •

- RALPH DE TOLEDANO


AMERICAN HERO

Remembering Joseph McCarthy

McCarthy: Targeted for destruction because of aggress ive anti-Communism.

A s a frequent guest on radio andtelevision programs, I have often been asked to comment on

the career of former Wisconsin SenatorJoseph McCarthy. In response I have always requested those raising the subjectto offer an opinion about the senator before I gave mine. In nearly every case , Ihave been informed that McCarthy wasan irresponsible demagogue who recklessly charged innocent people withsubversion or worse, and who ruined thelives of many decent Americans.

When I am faced with accusationsagainst Senator McCarthy, I simply askthe accuser to name some of the individuals the Senator supposedly harmedunjustly. During scores of instancesstretching back over more than 20 years,the only response I have ever received(the usual response has been dead silence) has been something about Holly wood screen writers. My response, then,is that each of the famous "HollywoodTen" was found to have had numerousties to Communist activity , but thatthese findings were issued by the HouseCommittee on Un-American Activities,not by Senator Joseph McCarthy. Because those revelations came from aHouse Committee and Joseph McCarthy was a senator, there is no possibility that he could have been involved.

The truth of the matter is that JosephMcCarthy was never guilty of thatwhich the popular historical account accuses him. As M. Stanton Evans wrotein Human Events for May 16, 1987:

The hardest thing to find in thehistorical record is the case ofsomeone whom McCarthy claimedon the factual record to be a Communist or security risk, who turnedout on subsequent information notto be one.

Truth the OppositeSenator McCarthy's first public

charges about security risks in the StateDepartment were delivered February 9,1950 during a speech in Wheeling. WestVirginia. The previous fall, three menhad shown up at his office with a 100page report detailing dramatic Commu-

nist penetration into the Department.Studiously avoiding public identification of any of the questionable individuals whose subversive records he nowpossessed, McCarthy focused on thenumber of cases involving securityproblems (and later referred to them bycase number). Returning to Washington, however, he immediately faced abarrage of demands from Democraticcolleagues that he "name the names."Completely contrary to the image created about this much-maligned man, herefused to do so until such time as eachwas confronted and had a chance to defend himself.

In one heated exchange, DemocraticMajority Leader Scott Lucas of Illinoistold his fellow senators, "I want him toname those Communists...." In responseMcCarthy said, "[I]f I were to give allthe names involved, it might leave awrong impression. If we should labelone man a Communist, when he is not aCommunist, I think it would be toobad ."

The Senate promptly convened a special panel under the chairmanship ofSenator Millard Tydings to investigateMcCarthy's charges. However, the committee made no investigation of theState Department but degenerated into acircus of interruptions and heckling di-

rected at McCarthy. All names submitted by McCarthy to the Tydings Committee were cleared.

But it was McCarthy who was provedright. One of the celebrated cases broughtto attention by McCarthy involved StateDepartment official Owen Lattimore.Cleared by the Tydings Committee in1950, he was later investigated by theSenate Internal Security Subcommittee,which declared in 1952 that "OwenLattimore was, from some time beginning in the 1930s, a conscious articulateinstrument of the Soviet conspiracy."Similar findings from other governmentagencies about John Stewart Service,Philip Jessup, and other individualscompletely corroborated Senator MeCarthy's allegations.

Worthwhile EffortsAfter the Repub licans won control of

the Senate in the 1952 elections, MeCarthy fell heir to the chairmanship ofthe Permanent Investigations Subcommittee. No longer required to rely onpublic speeches to warn the Americanpeople about Communist subversion,he began conducting public hearingsabout disloyalty and incompetence ingovernment.

The record of this committee showsthat it held 169 public and closed hear-

<~~ "i.' .. • ff .


ings and interrogated more than 500witnesses. McCarthy's worthwhile efforts bared extensive waste and mismanagement in the Voice of Americaorganization, exposed sufficient Communist penetration' of the GovernmentPrinting Office to have 77 persons removed from this sensitive governmentoffice, demonstrated Communist penetration of key defense plants, and revealed Communist espionage activitiesat the top-secret radar facilities locatedat Fort Monmouth, New Jersey.

It was while he was investigating theCommunist presence at Fort Monmouththat Senator McCarthy shifted his primary focus from Communists in government to those who were shieldingCommunists in government. The committee 's investigations had demonstrated that Communists were activelyworking within the Fort Monmouthcomplex. One Communist, an Armydentist named Irving Peress, had beenpromoted to the rank of major even after his Communist affiliations had beenexposed.

McCarthy naturally wanted to knowwho authorized such a ludicrous promotion. When he revealed his intention tosubpoena members of the Army Loyaltyand Screening Board, high officials ofthe Eisenhower Administration met inWashington to devise a plan to stopMcCarthy. That meeting was held onJanuary 21, 1954 in the office of Attorney General Herbert Brownell. Thosepresent included U.S. Ambassador tothe UN Henry Cabot Lodge, Deputy Attorney General William Rogers, WhiteHouse Chief of Staff Sherman Adams,and Army Counsel John Adams.

It was John Adams who had matterof-factly mentioned the January meeting while being questioned about laxsecurity at Fort Monmouth. But whenpressed for details about what had transpired, he claimed that he was unable tosupply any further information becauseof instructions from superiors. Supportfor Adams ' refusal to cooperate thencame from President Eisenhower who,on May 17, 1954, issued an ExecutiveOrder forbidding employees of the Defense Department from testifying aboutany matter whatsoever. Eisenhowerdressed up his outrageous decree in awealth of constitutional verbiage, but,ponderous wording aside, it amountedto as devastating an attack on the constitutional doctrine of checks and bal-

60

ances as had ever been issued by anyone in government service.

The Eisenhower order swept a greatdeal of information under a rug , andstopped McCarthy from pursuing thosewho were shielding Communists whenhe knew that these individuals actuallyposed an even greater threat to Americathan most of the actual Communists .Immediately, stopping McCarthy completely became a prime endeavor forsome members of the Senate.

Condemned By PeersOn July 30, 1954, Vermont Senator

Ralph Flanders introduced a resolutionformally accusing McCarthy of conductunbecoming a member of the Senate.Flanders ' measure grew to include 46separate charges. Utah Senator ArthurWatkins was assigned by the Senate tochair another panel to investigate MeCarthy, the fifth such investigation targeting the senator.

After two months of hearings, theWatkins committee recommended thatMcCarthy be censured on only two ofthe original 46 counts, the other chargesbeing shown to lack any substance. Butthe final two charges were completelybaseless as well. They were: 1) the senator had "failed to cooperate" in 1952with a Senate Committee investigatinghim; and 2) the senator had "tended tobring the Senate into dishonor and disrepute " and had impaired the "dignity"of the Senate by characterizing one ofthe investigatory bodies looking into hisactivity as the "unwitting handmaiden"of the Communist Party.

The first charge stemmed from MeCarthy's failure to respond to the "invitation" of the 1952 committee headedby Wyoming Senator Gillette to appearbefore it. Never in Senate history hadany member ever been disciplined in theslightest for declining an "invitation" toappear before any of its bodies. Buteven worse, McCarthy was invited toappear via a telegram sent to his Wisconsin office. Dates suggested for theappearance were November 22nd, 24th,or 25th . At the time the telegram wassent, McCarthy was in northern Wisconsin hunting deer and the committeeknew it.

The second charge saw men with fargreater offenses against the "dignity" ofthe Senate hurling accusations and invective against McCarthy. Author James J.Drummey reported in THE NEW AMERI-

CAN for May 11, 1987 that during thevarious moves to stymie McCarthy anddisparage his work, a variety of senators"had accused McCarthy of lying underoath, accepting influence money, engaging in election fraud, making libelous and false statements, practicingblackmail, doing the work of the Communists for them," and other unsavoryactivities. None of these were accurateand, therefore, each was worthy of condemnation by the full Senate.

Nevertheless, on December 2, 1954the Senate voted 67 to 22 to "condemn"McCarthy on the two counts.

Former Communist Party leader LouisBudenz, who witnessed Communism'sevil from inside the movement, said thatthe condemnation of McCarthy openedthe door "to intimidate any person ofconsequence who moves against theconspiracy." McCarthy was made theirtarget, said Budenz, "because theywanted to make him a symbol to remindpolitical leaders in America not to harmthe conspiracy or its world conquestdesigns."

The essential point here is that MeCarthy was made such a symbol, not bythe Communists with whom Budenzhad long associated and was now condemning, but by 67 of his own Senatecolleagues. None of those 67 had everbeen accused of being a Communist byanyone. Obviously , the conspiracyagainst America involves much morethan just the Communist Party.

Joseph McCarthy died on May 2,1957. At a special memorial service inthe Senate on August 14, 1957, SenateMajority Leader Lyndon Johnson, whohad voted to condemn McCarthy, stated:"There was a quality about the manwhich compelled respect, and even liking,from his strongest adversaries. [He] hadstrength ... had great courage ... haddaring ... [and] had a rare quality whichenabled him to touch the minds andhearts of millions of his fellow men."

If we can 'ignore for a moment that itwas Lyndon Johnson who said this, wecan see many of the reasons why MeCarthy had to be destroyed. He had thecapability of leading the Americanpeople on a crusade against a vile conspiracy. His leadership was desperatelyneeded at the time. Of McCarthy it canjustly be stated , "For once in the U.S.Senate there was a real man. May Godhelp us to find more!" •

- JOHN F. McMANUS


the new american-11-19-1995 communism dead

Documents