The New Russian Threat
This July 1993 Report reached our office just in time for publishing. It is must reading for all who want to know the truth about Russia and its real intentions regarding the U.S.A. and the rest of the world.
by C. B. Baker
Despite the so-called “collapse of Communism,” almost every state inside the old U.S.S.R. is still under Communist and KGB control. Behind cosmetic political name changes, the new Russian government is continuing a series of hostile and threatening actions, including deadly electromagnetic zapping of Americans.
Russian Investigation Into American
Russian President Boris Yeltsin told the U.S. Congress that he would help locate U.S. prisoners of war held captive by the old Soviet Government. But nothing has come from that speech. The 12/30/92 Washington Times reported: “Russia is sabotaging efforts by a team of U.S. investigators probing the fate of American POW’s who reportedly had been held in the Soviet Union and the inquiry may be halted. Russian spy agencies have played ‘a spoiling role’ in the entire U.S. effort, says a Dec. 10, 1992 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Moscow.”
“The successors to the KGB and military GRU were singled out in the cable for refusing to provide the investigators with direct access to files and with interviews of officials and former officials who could assist the probe. Russian officials have provided only begrudging official admissions of indirect involvement with the Korean War POW/MIA’s and official denials of any involvement with Vietnam POW’s.”
A few months later, a more blatant Russian cover-up on U.S. POW’s was unearthed. Harvard-based researcher, Stephen J. Morris was studying files in the Russian archives when he discovered a revealing document that proves Vietnam lied to the United States about the number of war prisoners it held. As soon as news of this document became public in the U.S.A., Morris was cut off from the archives.
“The Russian government dismissed the archivist who allowed Morris to read the file and informed Morris that he no longer will have access to the Moscow files.” (4/25/93 Washington Post)
Thus, at the very time that President Clinton is pushing billions of dollars in new U.S. foreign aid to Moscow, the Russian government is wrecking efforts to find American prisoners of war.
KGB Changes Name
and Continues Operations
On June 1, 1993, Radio Moscow reported: “The Russian security service continues working without a clear-cut regulation of its activities. It defines its own goals and priority tasks.” This was the conclusion drawn by the international conference in Moscow, whose theme outlook was “KGB — Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow.”
The 5/31/93 Washington Times described the two-day seminar which included scholars and former KGB officials. Before the official breakup of the Soviet Union, “the KGB orchestrated the election of hundreds of Soviet lawmakers, many of whom remain in office.” Researchers charge that the KGB’s successor (MBRF) is still a threat.
The 4/17/92 Washington Times reported: “There is increasing evidence, say competent Russian Western Russian analysts and Russian democrats, that the security police remain powerful and are becoming even more so today, despite dismantlement.
“A recent Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty analysis of KGB recidivism in Russia, cited the evidence for today’s ‘undiminished power’ of the state security organs. The Russian Federal Ministry of Security (MBRF) was recently strengthened ... The Yeltsin Administration, despite promises, has yet to create any institutionalized in-house supervision of the Russian MB.
“This means that 500,000 officials and former (or extant) informers function today as a separate entity, going about their business largely as before (the breakup of the Soviet Union) ... According to Argumenty I Fakty (Russian periodical), the curriculum of one of Russia’s several KGB schools, the Higher School of the MBRF in Moscow, remains largely unaltered from the old days ...”
“Ninety percent to 95 percent of middle-ranking KGB officers remain in the same positions as before the August, 1991 coup attempt, according to a recent defector.” The leader of the August, 1991 coup, KGB General Vladimir Kryuchkov, stated in an interview with the TASS news agency that the new state security organizations formed in Russia, following the breakup of the old U.S.S.R., are far more powerful than the old KGB.
The 2/8/93 U.S. News & World Report stated: “Russian President Boris Yeltsin ... has cultivated the former KGB and even strengthened its authority. As a result, former KGB officers (who are among Russia’s best-educated and best-connected citizens), are in the vanguard of Russia’s budding capitalist class — to the chagrin of democratic reformers and the consternation of Western counterintelligence agencies, which wonder if the annuitants have really severed their ties to their old employer.
“... The Moscow magazine Stolitsa reported last year that 75 percent of the employees of new Russian Stock and Commodities Exchange Center are former KGB officials.”
It is this gang of KGB-Capitalists that will reap the rewards from President Bill Clinton’s new foreign aid.
U.S. News continued: “A renewed sense of confidence permeates Lubyanka (the old KGB headquarters). After the 1991 coup attempt, KGB officers desperately sought to distance themselves from their Communist roots. Now officers of the security ministry are once again calling each other ‘Chekisti’ — a name that harks back to the Bolshevik secret police, the Cheka, a KGB forerunner.
“Yeltsin’s Government has fired only about 400 KGB officers (from the old U.S.S.R. regime) and the MB still employs about 135,000, many with unsavory pasts... The old tone is creeping back into the MB’s pronouncements and behavior. Security Minister Victor Barannikov (a former Soviet Interior Ministry official) pledged at the December 1992 Congress of People’s Deputies that his ministry will thwart ‘subversive activities of Western secret services’ and their ‘attempts to turn Russia into a sort of raw materials appendage and assume control over its nuclear potential.’
“Barannikov’s speech brought no rebuttal from Yeltsin, with whom the security minister has a close personal relationship. In Moscow, Barannikov is known as Yeltsin’s close drinking buddy.”
The new SVR Russian foreign intelligence service has been split off from the KGB and is directed by Yevgeniy Primakov, a diplomatic specialist under former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. The 1/25/93 Washington Times reported that Primakovs top adviser is KGB Lt. General Vadim Kirpichenko, who started his KGB career under Stalin and served as “one of the highest-ranking intelligence officers under the Brezhnev and Andropov regimes at a time when the KGBs foreign branch was carrying out some of the Soviets’ worst excesses against the West.”
In December 1992, the so-called “new” Russian Intelligence service “celebrated not the first anniversary of its founding by Boris Yeltsin, but its 72nd under Lenin.” That celebration documents that, despite the attempt to create a new public relations image, “there has been no change at all.”
The 10/21/92 Washington Times reported: “Russia signed a secret agreement with China (in September 1992) restoring ties between the two countries’ intelligence services that were broken off in 1959, according to U.S. government officials.” U.S. intelligence officials also report that Moscow is selling advanced missile technology to Red China. “The secret intelligence pact involved GRU military intelligence service and the SVR.”
|The Present war against Croatia and Bosnia. During two years of war, tens of thousands have lost their lives in Croatia and Bosnia. There are more than 100,000 wounded and over one million refugees. More than 150,000 people, mainly women and children and elderly of Croatian and Muslim origin are still held in concentration camps by the Serbian aggressors.|
Andrei Malgin, editor of the Russian magazine Stolitsa said “Mr. Yeltsin made two unforgivable errors after his coup victory in 1991. He made the decision to build a new type of Russian society on the basis of the existing nomenklatura (Communist bureaucracy) and he did not dissolve the KGB,” (1/17/93 Washington Times).
Reds Still In Charge
In March 1992, a parliamentary investigation into the role of the military, secret police and Communist Party during the abortive August 1991 coup, was halted by order of Russian Parliament President Ruslan Khazbulatov. The chairman of the commission, Lev Ponamarev, said the investigation “found that most of the current corps of former soviet generals supported the coup, and are still in positions of authority within the armed forces of what is now the Commonwealth of Independent States.” The investigation was opposed by President Yeltsins own director of the new Russian SVR, Yevgeniy Primakov, (3/31/92 Washington Times).
Parliament President Ruslan Khazbulatov gave an interview that appeared in the 4/26/93 Time Magazine. He admitted: “Entire sections of the former Communist Party Central Committee simply drifted into the President’s (Yeltsin’s) administration, together with their archives, safes, and even their telephones. Under the guise of working for a democratic president, they are simply restoring the old Communist Party ways.”
The 1/27/93 Washington Post described life in rural Russia, in Morshansk: “The same Communist bosses, who for decades ran the farms and factories, remain, and for the most part, comfortably ensconced.”
“‘At lower levels, the old elite are just too strong,’ said Mikhail Shishov, the mayor of the town of 50,000. ‘This is the defeat of the democrats. The Communists still control all levels ...’ At the local level, the entrenched Communist Party elite are trying to keep their wealth and prevent any new private competition in farming or new enterprises.”
The newspaper reported that reform-minded mayors such as Shishov say that “When Yeltsin appointed a thin layer of reformers to administer local governments a year or more ago, he left the old (Communist Party) elite in charge of collective farms, big factories, and legislatures at every level. They brake the agrarian reforms.”
The 12/6/92 New York Times reported that the Russian Parliament voted to maintain the old Communist hammer and sickle as the country’s official seal.
In November 1992, President Yeltsin “personally announced his decisions not to cut the military budget and to increase military procurement by 10 percent. Behind that decision, may lie Yeltsin’s tacit consent to meet the military’s demand for more forceful Russian Army intervention outside Russia, including the Baltics, where Russian refusal to withdraw its troops has become one of the most bitter complaints against Moscow,” (11/27/92 Rowland Evans & Robert Novak column).
The 3/31/93 Washington Post reported: In an interview appearing in Pravda, official newspaper of the Communist Party, President Yeltsin stated that the Communists “should be treated with respect, as any other political party. And we should work with them.” Yeltsin has made a great retreat from the days immediately following the August 1991 coup when he ordered the banning of the Communist Party.
Yeltsin “said that he makes a distinction between orthodox party members, with whom he still would not have dealings (his enemies, who rioted in the streets of Moscow, holding pictures of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin as their hero) and a more ‘realistic’ group” (New World Order conspirators) “that recently organized independently.”
Hostile and Threatening
The Russian magazine Ogonek reported that there are now 27 closed cities involved in strategic weapons production. The secret installations were described in the 6/3/93 Washington Times. Many of these cities are located underground, encased in granite. New strategic weapons are developed there.
To make sure that no Western arms treaty inspections gain access, “President Boris Yeltsin signed legislation closing 16 regions and cities throughout the country, involved with production of radioactive materials and mass destruction weapons. Of the 755,000 employees in those closed regions, between 1,500 and 2,000 are scientists, the remainder is comprised of technicians and workers.”
On December 12, 1991, the U.S. Congress appropriated $400 million to dismantle, store, and destroy the Soviet weapons of mass destruction. Why did Yeltsin act to expand the secrecy of strategic weapons design and production facilities, if the present Russian government is “converting” its strategic forces into “peaceful” non-defense production, as they claim?
The Washington Times asked: “Why are those Russian scientists and technicians in the hidden cities not engaged in dismantling strategic weapons, as mandated by the July 1991 START (arms control) Treaty? How will they store the more than 50 tons of plutonium from the warheads in the worlds largest nuclear arsenal?”
The 2/5/93 Washington Times reported that President Yeltsin “criticized efforts to convert Russia’s vast arms sector to the production of civilian goods.” He stated: “I am worried that, with such conversion, after a while we will have to organize production of spare parts for military equipment from scratch.”
The 5/5/93 Aviation & Space Technology Magazine reported on “a continuing surge in Russian space operations.” Western defense analysts had mistakenly believed that Russia had abandoned its military spy operations. “But during the first quarter of 1993, Russia launched 12 new, unmanned military spacecraft,” along with six so-called “civilian” missions. “The Russian military space surge began in late 1992,” at the very time that the Western media was claiming that the Russian military had collapsed.
“The 18 Russian space missions compare with eight for the U.S. during the period ... The new Russian activity shows the former U.S.S.R. retains a surprisingly potent military space capability.”
The 11/15/92 Washington Times reported that U.S. counterspies insist that Russian spy “operations against the United States have shown little decline,” following the collapse of the former U.S.S.R. Western intelligence agencies report that “Russian spying is on the rise around the world.” After a superficial name change and reorganization, Russian spying is more threatening than ever.
“The new spy agency is called the SVR, for Sluzhba Bneshny Razvedki Rossiy, or Foreign Intelligence Service of Russia. It was formed in early 1992, after the KGB was officially disbanded in the wake of the August 1991 coup.”
A U.S. counterintelligence official says, “We’re very concerned about the number of SVR intelligence officers. The number is way beyond what we consider to be acceptable, given the kinds of relations they (the Russians) want.”
“Other foreign spying is done by the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence agency. General Fedor Ladygin, a hardliner, was recently appointed as the new director of the GRU. The GRU military intelligence service remains ‘extremely aggressive’ in spying,” U.S. counterintelligence officers say.
More Hostile Acts
Russian submarines are continuing the Soviet Navy’s practice of violating Sweden’s waters. The 2/4/93 Washington Times reported that the Swedish government has strong technical evidence, from identical sonar patterns to the earlier Soviet submarine intrusions. In October 1991, a Soviet sub carrying nuclear missiles ran aground near a strategic Swedish military base. Swedish waters were also considered a safe launching area for the missile-carrying submarines in the event of a nuclear war.
Swedish military experts are “perplexed over why the Russians... would continue to provoke Sweden and risk even a minor military confrontation,” (3/8/93 New York Times).
Shortly before the November 1992 U.S. Presidential election, President Yeltsin announced that Russia was halting the withdrawal of its troops from Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, (3/13/93 Human Events).
The 6/5/93 Washington Times reported that Sergei Karaganov, a member of Boris Yeltsin’s Presidential Advisory Council urged in a December 1992 journal of Russias foreign ministry that Russia use the ethnic population issue in the Baltic States as a pretext for continued Kremlin domination.
The article suggested that Moscow “should prepare its public and international organizations for the possibility of applying economic sanctions, or using force if necessary.”
The 8/22/92 issue of the British publication, The Economist reported that Russian Defense Minister General Pavel Grachev called the four-year timetable for Russian troop withdrawal from Germany, “Defeatist”. Given the growing power of the military hard-liners in Moscow, there is increasing suspicion that the Kremlin may continue to leave large numbers of troops inside Germany long after that four-year period expires.
Yeltsin Not in Control
of Russian Military
The Economist described how Yeltsin is bowing to pressure from the Russian military: “Recent appointees have been such hard-liners as Colonel-General Viktor Dubynin as chief of the general staff, and Colonel-General Boris Gromov” as deputy defense minister. Gromov once served as Soviet commander in Afghanistan. He later served as deputy to Boris Pugo, the Soviet Interior Minister who helped to stage the August 1991 coup.
As Pugo’s deputy, General Gromov was automatically involved in the planning of the putsch. It was thus, very revealing when Boris Yeltsin (an alleged target of the 1991 coup) subsequently appointed General Gromov to the powerful post of Russian Defense Minister.
The 4/5/93 U.S. News & World Reports stated: “The Russian General Staff has the technical ability to decide who has nuclear authority. The General Staff has the technical ability to launch a nuclear-tipped missile without Yeltsin’s approval.” Russia has 25,000 to 30,000 nuclear weapons.
The 10/28/92 Evans and Novak column reported that the Russian military “is on the verge of ignoring arms control agreements. In the ‘joint understanding’ guiding the uncompleted START II strategic arms control treaty, Moscow agreed to eliminate all 308 of the dreaded 10-warhead SS-18s on the dubious — and unacceptable — proposition of stripping them down to a single warhead.”
American officials who attended a closed conference in Moscow returned convinced that “Hard Liners have lain low the past year (following the 1991 coup) for one reason: To get what they could out of the United States.”
Secret Russian Biological Warfare
The 8/31/92 Washington Post reported that the U.S. and Britain are worried that the Russian government may not have fulfilled a promise to shut down the Soviet Union’s extensive program for making germ weapons: “Underlying U.S. concern is the suspicion that the highly secret former Soviet program is not yet fully under President Yeltsin’s control, and that elements of it have been hidden by Russian military officials who want to keep parts of the program intact ... A high-level Soviet defector claimed that Moscow engaged in systematic deception on biological warfare issues throughout the 1980’s.
“The defector revealed that for the first time, Moscow had not just one, but two biological warfare programs. Besides the obviously military-run program that had provoked longstanding U.S. concern, the government was also conducting secret germ weapons research in the civilian Biopreparat facilities.” The charge was denied by former Soviet President Gorbachev. But Russian President Yeltsin admitted to U.S. President Bush in February 1992 that “the Soviet military had violated an international treaty, negotiated in 1972, barring development, production or stockpiling of toxin and biological agents and any weaponry to deliver them.
“A confidential report, prepared in spring, 1992 at Yeltsin’s direction by a retired Russian general, Anatoly Kuntsevich, revealed that the military had illicitly developed aerial bombs and rocket warheads capable of carrying deadly anthrax, tularemia and Q fever biological warfare agents... Yeltsin responded to Kuntsevichs report by issuing a decree in April 1992 ordering such work halted and its funding halted.”
The Soviet defector’s information “provoked anxiety about the size of the biowar program and how far (the Soviets) had gotten in producing weapons carrying deadly viral strains that may be resistant to vaccines.”
The 2/1/93 Newsweek Magazine reported that the Soviet Union’s biowar program involved “a vast operation employing 25,000 people at 18 or more Research and Development facilities, six production plants and a major storage complex in Siberia. The goal was to take known pathogens and alter their genetic structures to make them resistant to western drugs.” The Soviet defector, Vladimir Pasechnik, was a microbiologist who had firsthand knowledge of the enormous biowar program aimed against the West.
“Pasechnik maintains that a Soviet program to develop a genetically engineered, dry form of Superplague, resistant to antibiotics, dates from 1984 and was a top priority.” Newsweek reported that “Offensive-Biological-Weapons work continued inside the Biopreparat System, even after Yeltsin’s edict,” that ordered the closing down of all Russian biowar facilities.
The 6/24/92 syndicated Evans & Novak column reported: “The Russian generals are still covering-up frightening advances in biological warfare technology.” Russia is producing “the dread germ warfare agent, mycotoxin, which causes Immunosuppression — dysfunction of the central nervous system, coma and death.”
“The powerful Russian military also appears engaged in treaty-bashing on strategic nuclear weapons. U.S. intelligence believes that a brand new mobile missile known as Fatboy, similar to, but shorter than, the SS-25, is now under full time production in Votkinsk. U.S. officials believe that Russia’s rocket command, continuing what the Soviet Union started, may be aiming at a force of more than 1,000 of these missiles” under a START loophole.
In December 1992 CIA Director Robert Gates stated: “The Russian military operated outside civilian control in building biological weapons” and in other areas. (12/2/92 Washington Times).
Pictured above the ruins of the Catholic Cathedral in Mostar. So far the Serbs have deliberately destroyed 800 churches in just a couple of years in their war against religion.
Continuing Threat from Moscow Seen
in New Russian Military Doctrine
The 9/25/92 Washington Times reported “British and American experts say recent military appointments and the publication of a new context for Russia’s military doctrine show that the old Soviet thinking still permeates the attitudes of the new generation of Russian military leaders, led by the Defense Minister Pavel Grachev.”
“‘They present an unbelievably unreconstructed argument, in which the West is implicitly the enemy,’ says a British military Sovietologist.”
The Spring 1993 Orbis Magazine carried an article from the May 1992 Military Thought (the main theoretical journal of the Russian Armed Forces), on the subject of Russia’s new military doctrine: The Russian military asserts its right to maintain control over the former captive nations of Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia:
“Russia would be completely justified in requiring the recognition by the Baltic countries of Russia’s right to free access to seaports.” Describing the reconstitution of the old Soviet empire, the Military Thought article stated: “With respect to the C.I.S. (Commonwealth of Independent States) countries, all commonwealth states are in the sphere of Russia’s vital interests.”
Orbis Magazine commented: “A striking civil-military consensus exists within Russia concerning the current requirements for Russia’s national security. This consensus reflects a continuing, disproportionate emphasis on military power as a prerequisite for establishing Russia’s place in the international System.”
Orbis said that it is unlikely that there will be “a reduction of military appropriations to a level that would be commensurate with Russia’s economic ranking in the world. Thus, the current consensus includes an insistence on maintaining superpower status.”
“... The current civil-military consensus also includes an image of future war based on the development and deployment of advanced conventional munitions, directed-energy weapons” (Tesla-Scalar electromagnetic weapons), “space-based strike weapons and anti-ballistic missiles, and third-generation nuclear weapons.”
“The Russian leadership has offered no suggestion that an arms control regime should prevent the development of these systems. On the contrary, military-technical progress is viewed as a phenomenon that ‘cannot be stopped’.”
The 10/27/92 Washington Post reported: “A scientist who objected to what he calls Russia’s ongoing development of chemical weapons has been jailed for allegedly revealing state secrets... The arrested scientist, Vil Mirzayanov, had earlier stated in an article appearing in the Moscow News that Russia has been pursuing research on a new, more toxic chemical weapon.” Such research “runs counter to” the public statements of President Yeltsin, who has urged a global ban on such chemical armaments.
Mirzayanov reported in September 1992 that the new Russian chemical weapon is “More toxic than anything in the U.S. arsenal. The new weapon was tested in early 1992 in Uzbekistan,” (now allegedly an “independent” nation). If the U.S.S.R. really has broken up, how can Russia get away with testing such deadly weapons in another nation?
New Russian Anti-Satellite
The 8/17/92 Aviation Week & Space Technology Magazine contained a close-up photograph of a Russian MIG-31 jet fighter with an anti-satellite (ASAT) weapon. The 9/24/92 Washington Times stated: “For years, the Soviets have been calling for a ban on anti-satellite weapons, arguing that space should be weapons-free. As recently as January 29, 1992 Russian President Yeltsin called for a ban on ASATs.”
“Despite that public posture, Russia appears to have developed two different kinds of anti-satellite weapons, while the United States has none... Even as Members of Congress fought to prevent the development of a U.S. ASAT, Soviet engineers were secretly designing a new air-launched ASAT that was almost a carbon copy of the U.S. F-15 ASAT ... An important question today is whether Mr. Yeltsin can control the hard-liners in his government who are determined to continue the new weapons programs. There is growing evidence that he cannot.”
Russia Deeply Involved In Bosnian War
The 8/10/92 U.S. News & World Report stated: “The Russians, despite promises of neutrality, are quietly supplying Serbian forces with fuel, military hardware, and spare parts. Most of the material is sent by rail through Ukraine and Romania. Earlier this year, the Russian representative on the U.N. Security Council joined the West in voting to impose an embargo against Belgrade (Serbia).”
The 2/22/93 Washington Times reported: “There’s plenty of solid evidence that Russians already are involved on the Serbian side. Russian equipment, arms, planes and much else continue to flow into Serbia, as do so-called ‘volunteers.’ Today, Russians are helping to man planes in the Serbian Air Force.”
“Russians in Cossack uniforms have been observed fighting in Bosnia. The newspaper Moscow News, ... wrote that two training centers have been established in Moscow and in St. Petersburg, run by dissident officers ...Two new volunteer brigades are being established in Moscow, one of them is manned with Afghan war veterans.”
The newspaper reported that the Russians appear to be “engaged in building a Naval Base in Montenegro on the Adriatic Sea” — an action that has long been one of the worst fears of NATO.
Massive U.S. taxpayer-funded foreign aid for Moscow, will actually subsidize the genocide in Bosnia.
Collapse of U.S.S.R. Planned as Method
for Phoenix-Like Revitalization of Red Empire
The 10/16/91 Washington Post carried a revealing article by Soviet expert Dimitri Simes. He reported: “A remarkably candid KGB domestic analysis, made available to me, predicted in part that ‘the collapse of the system (that outlived itself), cleared the path for establishing a strong authoritarian regime in our country in a moderate national-democrat wrapping.’ Such a regime, said the KGB document: ‘will be able to more effectively (and with greater flexibility) rebuild the union and to give new impulse to the nation’s development’.” This report was published before the December 1991 “collapse” of the old U.S.S.R. The long-term KGB plan to work with politicians like Boris Yeltsin was thus revealed.
The so-called “market economy” in Russia, was actually planned by the Communist Party. The 2/13/92 New York Times reported: “A month before the failed August 1991 coup attempt, Soviet President Mikhail S. Gorbachev signed a document authorizing the Communist Party to put its money into small enterprises, joint stock companies, private banks and other capitalist ventures, according to testimony at a Russian Parliament hearing.”
“The document, disclosed by the Russian Deputy Prosecutor, Yevgeny K. Lisov, confirmed a trend as Communist Party functionaries scurried to shelter themselves and their money from a conversion to a market economy.” The Communist Party funds amounted to $50 billion, 60 tons of gold, 150 tons of silver, and 8 tons of platinum.
The purpose of this Communist Party plunge into capitalism was to continue the power of the Party elite, after the staged “collapse of Communism.” The 4/15/93 Washington Times reported: “Children of the nomenklatura (the Communist elite) have their own businesses. They have their own credit cards. The Gorbachev-era Communists opened the system in the interests of the Party elite and not in the interest of the whole population, because they saw it as a way to make a lot of money for themselves.” Only 2 to 3 percent of the population is benefiting from the new Communist-created, alleged ‘market system.’ The rest of the Russian population is too poor to participate.
It is this tiny two to three percent nomenklatura-Mafia elite, that is benefiting from U.S. foreign aid.
The remarkable 1992 book, Russia’s Secret Rulers: How the Government and Criminal Mafia Exercise Their Power, by Lev Timofeyev (published by Knopf), documented how the Russian Mafia had strong ties to both hard-line Communists as well as their political opponents in the democratic movement.
Timofeyev obtained a Communist Party Central Committee document, dated August 23, 1990 (a full year before the 1991 coup). The document provides evidence that the Communist Party was preparing to go underground. In line with V. I. Lenin’s New Economic Policy (NEP) tactics of taking two steps forward and one step backward, the Communist leadership realized that they could not modernize the nation without a humongous amount of Western capital. The Party leaders also knew that Western governments and businessmen would be reluctant to pour such vast new amounts of money into a heavily indebted Bolshevik system. Timofeyev stated:
“The term ‘wild privatization’ has gained currency in Russia to describe the spontaneous effort of yesterday’s apparatchiks to seize as much for themselves as possible and turn it into private property ... Prikhvatizatsia is not primarily a matter of financial maneuvers by individual Party bureaucrats. The fact is that long before the collapse of above ground Communist Party structures in August 1991, apparatchiks were carefully planning political action to preserve the maximum of power in secret Party structures.” The Central Committee document states:
“... The following measures should be taken immediately in order to secure conditions for the launching of commercial and foreign economic activity by the Party: ... Preparation of proposals to create some new ‘interim’ economic structures (foundations, association, etc.) with minimal ‘visible’ ties to the Central Committee, which could become focal points of the invisible Party economy.”
“Immediate preparations of plans for using anonymous organizations to mask direct links to the Party when launching commercial and foreign economic Party activity; in particular, consideration of the possibility of merging with already functioning joint ventures, international consortiums, etc., through capital investment.”
“Consideration of ways and means of establishing a bank controlled by the Central Committee with the right to conduct hard-currency operations, the investment of the Party’s hard-currency reserves in international firms controlled by friends of the Party (abroad).”
“Creation of a consulting firm ... without direct links to the Central Committee apparat, for the practical organization of economic cooperation and provision of Brokerage Services for foreign economic activity of various Party Organizations and the commercial firms of Communist Parties abroad.”
Timofeyev commented: “The old Party apparatus has deeply concealed its underground structure.” Criminal prosecutors who started an investigation in October 1991, “found more than a hundred commercial Communist Party enterprises in Moscow and about six hundred all told throughout Russia. Among the direction of these shadowy Party firms are people who have substantial influence in the current legitimate government.”
“... President Yeltsin is surrounded by yesterday’s nomenklatura apparatchiks, just as President Gorbachev was before him ... They are the same provincial Communist Party committee secretaries, making the same efforts to influence the President... In each of the new states of the former U.S.S.R., the power structures are genetically connected to the structures of the past, to the Communists.”
“To be credible and effective, a deception should accord, as far as possible, with the hopes and expectations of those it is intended to deceive. Since the Communist strategists were aware, especially through knowledge of the Bilderberger Papers that the West ardently desired the disintegration of the Communist bloc, they could anticipate that the projection, to the outside world, of a fictitious disintegration of the bloc would be advantageous provided always that it was accompanied, in parallel, by an actual (but partially concealed) implementation of the long-range policy of strengthening the bloc.”
Golitsyn correctly predicted what has happened in the new Russian government: KGB-planned changes “will make possible the introduction of controlled political opposition, which will provide the basically totalitarian regimes with a convincing impression of fundamental change and a semblance of democracy.”
The fact that the 75 percent of the people who are now involved in the Moscow Stock & Commodities Exchange are from the KGB is a vivid demonstration of the accuracy of Golitsyn’s long-range forecasts.
Communist Bosses Maintain Red Dictatorships
Throughout the Old U.S.S.R.
The 9/28/92 Time Magazine stated: “Hardly anyone in the former Soviet republics is openly advocating a return to Communism — by name. But in some countries, the Communists who now call themselves Socialists have given up hardly any of their control, of economic, political, and social life.”
An example of continuing Communist control was described in the 2/13/93 Washington Times: “Visitors to Belarus note few changes for the better in the post-Soviet era ... The parliament is completely dominated by former Communists, and regularly flouts democratic procedures ... Belarus is very much a nation in chains. It is the most militarized state in the former Soviet Union. Its secret police are not only active, but work openly with the former KGB in Russia.” Requests for free elections on petitions signed by more than 500,000 people have been totally ignored.
The 2/13/93 New York Times described the continuing Communist domination of the former Soviet republics in Central Asia, that are now allegedly “independent countries: “Uzbekistan is engaged in a sweeping political crackdown on dissent, banning demonstrations and arresting opposition leaders ... In Uzbekistan, open repression is the order of the day.”
“In Turkmenistan, the Communist system has scarcely changed at all. Even in Kazakhstan, potentially the richest country in the region, the leadership is putting economic development far ahead of political change.”
Shortly after the breakup of the U.S.S.R., Islamic fundamentalists overthrew the Tajikistan Communist dictatorship. Moscow then sent in Russian troops to restore the Communists to power. (5/22/93 Washington Times)
The events in Tajikistan offer absolute proof that the present Russian Army continues to fight for Communism. The 2/5/93 Washington Post stated: “Old guard Communists determined to preserve their power and privileges in this former Soviet republic have gained the upper hand in a brutal civil war that has sent political tremors throughout Central Asia. Soviet hammer-and-sickle flags flutter from tanks roaring through the streets of Dushanbe two months after the Communist forces reclaimed power.”
The struggle to restore the Communists to power resulted in 40,000 dead and hundreds of thousands of refugees. The Russian army supplied the Red Tajik forces with tanks and Communist-controlled Uzbekistan “supported the Tajik Communist forces with helicopter gunships, tanks and ground troops.”
To prevent the anti-Communist opposition forces from receiving aid from freedom fighters in Afghanistan, “Russian President Boris Yeltsin has promised to send 2,000 additional troops to help patrol the border.”
The 5/22/93 Washington Times reported that Russian Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin said that some former republics of the U.S.S.R. now want to join the Russian Federation: “One of those states is Tajikistan.”
The 2/11/92 Washington Post reported: “It is now known that the KGB infiltrated the independence movements and democracy parties that sprang up around the Soviet Union during the Gorbachev liberalization.” “Since many of these parties have now come to power, it means that KGB agents and informers are represented in the highest levels of government” throughout every East Bloc and former U.S.S.R. republic.
After Lithuania regained its independence, the Lithuanian Independence Party was sabotaged from within by long-time KGB moles in the Party organization. As a result of that KGB sabotage, the nationalists lost the last election and the Communists were returned to power.
Ukraine is still under a Communist totalitarian dictatorship — with its hand out for U.S. foreign aid. The 10/24/92 Washington Post stated: “Events in this post-Soviet nation have taken on an unsettling familiar tone lately. Police wielded batons against student hunger strikers demonstrating for reform. President Leonid Kravchuk, threatened to deport any foreigners who criticize him. Collective farms that failed to fulfill their quota of the state plan had electricity cut off. Laws to start privatization of state property were shelved.
“‘There are no reforms in Ukraine,’ said Vyacheslav Chornovil, a leading Ukrainian nationalist and one of the governments most prominent critics.
“Across the former Soviet Union, former Communist bureaucrats or their nationalist successors seem unable or unwilling to abandon the centralized economic system and authoritarian traditions left them by Soviet rule.”
The 5/15/93 New York Times reported: “Nine of the 15 former Soviet republics signed a declaration of intent to form an economic union to try to restore cohesion to their ruptured relationships ... Even Ukraine, which has been the most prickly about any encroachment of its new sovereignty, signed the declaration.”
Foreign Aid Insanity
On June 17, 1993, the U.S. House of Representatives approved President Clinton’s $2.5 billion foreign aid package to the states of the former Soviet Union. Commenting on the Western, taxpayer-funded aid, the 5/1/93 Economist Magazine reported that the real size of the aid package is $43 billion. Part of Clinton’s foreign aid will subsidize Russian military housing. This U.S. taxpayer support, will allow Moscow to divert military housing funds into its continuing increases in spending on strategic weapons.
Clinton’s foreign aid package for Russia also includes a $500 million private enterprise fund which will help the businesses set up with KGB, Communist Party and Mafia funds. The tens of billions of dollars in previous Western loans and foreign aid have always helped perpetuate the power of the Communist elite.
“Russians are asking what happened to the $24 billion that was promised them last year... Only a little more than half of the $24 billion was actually delivered.” (4/4/93 New York Times)
“Some Russians are convinced that most aid has either been stolen or diverted by the Russian ‘Mafia’ (which has numerous ties to the KGB) for private gain. Russian Vice President Aleksandr V. Rutskoi charged that 60 percent of the aid has been siphoned off by ‘commercial structures’.” Most of the present day large “commercial structures” in Russia were set up with Communist Party, KGB or Mafia funding.
Much of U.S. aid to the old U.S.S.R. went through the U.S. Agency for International Development (A.I.D.). Many of the New World Order Gang were able to exploit foreign aid to Moscow for their own interests. The 3/29/92 U.S. News & World Report stated: “During the Bush Administration, A.I.D. selected the Citizens Network for Foreign Affairs, a Washington-based nonprofit organization, to administer a $44.5 million program teaching Russians agribusiness techniques. Critics charge that the Citizens Network is little more than an agribusiness trade group with influential advisers, Henry Kissingerand former Defense Secretary, Frank Carlucci among them.
Thus, previous U.S. foreign aid to Russia, ended up funding the giant Trilateral-allied corporations: Most of the $44.5 million will go to Citizens Network backers like Con-Agra, Monsanto, and Cargill. These U.S. companies were already doing business in Moscow, however, without a whit of help from A.I.D. and no taxpayer money.”
The total insanity of sending more aid to Russia is seen in Russia’s refusal to collect its own debt. Yeltsin blamed his ministers for doing little to “retrieve the $146 billion owed to Russia by debtor nations. The foreign debt owed to Russia is nearly twice the amount of Russia’s own debt to western nations,” (2/5/93 Washington Times).
The 5/16/93 New York Times reported: “Since last December, Russia has failed to meet interest payments on $4.2 billion of U.S. agricultural credit guarantees. It is now $600 million in default. Russia has also failed to pay more than $200 million owed to 57 American companies.”
President Clinton’s foreign aid package for Russia includes support for a $6 billion fund to stabilize the value of the ruble. The 5/20/93 Washington Times reported:
“The Central Bank of Russia would be allowed to borrow from the stabilization fund. The bank would then sell U.S. dollars and other foreign currency it borrowed in exchange for rubles, thereby temporarily reducing the supply and increasing the value of the ruble. Alas, the stabilization fund has an Achilles heel. There is no effective means of restraining the Central Bank of Russia from printing rubles by the trillions and sending them out the back door, as it sells foreign currency by the billions at the front door. The likely result is that the Central Bank will dissipate the stabilization fund and be unable to repay the money it borrowed, leaving the American taxpayers as much as $3 billion poorer.”
The 3/19/93 New York Times carried a very important article titled: “Stop Wasting Aid to Russia,” written by Sergei N. Khrushchev, son of the late Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, and former Soviet industrial manager (who is now a research scholar at Brown University). Commenting on the new foreign aid package proposed by President Clinton and other G-7 Western leaders, Khrushchev stated:
“... The reformers themselves cannot agree what needs to be done. As things stand now, foreign aid... would most likely disappear without a trace into secret accounts that Russian bureaucrats and industrial managers hold in Western banks.” (Thus, Clinton’s new aid to Russia, will end up as another taxpayer subsidy for the big banks.)
“In essence, they (Clinton and the other G-7 leaders) called for continued pumping of money into Moscow’s bureaucratic structures, a completely futile policy, as demonstrated by the experience of recent years. Credits extended first to Mikhail Gorbachev and then to Boris Yeltsin have yielded no detectable positive result. The (‘taxpayers’) ‘money has vanished, without a trace, leaving behind only the problem of repaying Russian debts’.”
Note by Editor of The Fatima Crusader:
Due to lack of space, about 1/4 of this article had to be cut. To get a complete and unabridged copy of this article by C.B. Baker, see below.
|Complete unabridged copy of this article by C.B. Baker is available for $4.00 each to U.S.A. or $4.60 each to Canada from Youth Action News, P.O. Box 312, Alexandria, VA 22313. Foreign Orders: Youth Action News is not sold or distributed outside of the U.S.A. and Canada. All Canadian orders must be paid by international Postal money orders only. No foreign checks or currency accepted.|