• February 2015
    M T W T F S S
    « Jan   Mar »
     1
    2345678
    9101112131415
    16171819202122
    232425262728  
  • Pages

  • Marginalia

  • Accumulations

Veja | Fourth Estate or Fifth Column?

"They knew everything"

“They knew everything”

Author: J. Carlos de Assis

Brazil is the target of a conspiracy designed to destabilize the Dilma government in the guise of a campaign to combat corruption.http://

It has many of the same characteristics of the so-called Arab Spring, the difference being that in the Mideast cases, the regimes were entrenched dictatorships, whereas ours is a vulnerable democracy. Since it is untenable to encourage a coup in favor of a democracy that already exists, the pretext used is the battle against corruption connected with the Lula and Dilma governments.

Persons of good faith believe this sort of theory constitutes jumping to conclusions. I myself am inclined to reject conspiracy theories as well, but only so long as the evidence allows me to. In this article, I will try to present evidence of a conspiracy underway in Brazil, using as my principal reference the American foreign policy magazine “Foreign Affairs”, which can hardly be criticized as anti-American. My point of departure is a pair of essays in the September/October issue about the crisis in Ukraine and the 40 years since the Chilean coup.

Regarding Ukraine, the magazine states quite clearly that the crisis there is the fault of the West, or rather, of the United States. It results from the ambition of NATO, led by the Americans, to expand its borders to the East, incorporating nearly all the states of the former Soviet Union, one after another.

In 1999, for example, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland joined the organization. Despite the constant protests of the Russians, in 2004 it was the turn of Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lituania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. In 2009, it was the turn of Albânia and Croatia.

These incororations violated formal conditions established with Gorbachev during the process of reunifying Germany, in which Russian approval was a key element. Russia responded with merely formal protests, however, in part because it was itself internally fragmented and in part because it had no border with these countries absorbed into NATO, except for the smallest Balkan states. In 2008, however, NATO announced its intention to incorporate the border nations of Geórgia and Ukraine, effectively surrounding Russia.

No Russian leader would, or will ever, accept this advance on Russia’s own back yard. much less a strategist of the stature of Putin. When the president of Georgia, favorable to joining NATO, decided to reincorporate the rebel provinces of Abkhazia and Ossétia do Sul, Putin immediately invaded them, making it clear that he would not accept Georgia, a border state, as a NATO member, unless it was broken up. In the same vein, a Russian newspaper reported, Putin let Bush know that “if Ukraine is absorbed into NATO, it will cease to exist.”

“Foreign Affairs” paints a realistic picture of what occurred from that point on in Ukraine. In the process of creating a “democratic” atmosphere favorable to inclusion in the EU — a step along the path to NATO membership — the U.S. spent US$ 5 million since 1991 to support opinion-making institutions in the country — according to Victoria Nulan, assistant secretary of state for Europe and Eurasia — in order to create for Ukraine “the future it deserves.”

One think tank in particular, the National Endowment for Democracy, promoted more than 60 projects to undermine the stability of the legitimate, pro-Russian Yanukovych.

http://www.ned.org/where-we-work/eurasia/ukraine

NED chairman Carl Gershman made no bones about the objective of this movement. In an interview with the New York Times, he declared that “the choice of Ukraine to be integrated into Europe will accelerate the death of the Russian imperialism that Putin represents.” More explicitly, he said that the Russians “also faced a choice,” and that Putin could find himself on the losing side, not abroad but inside Russia.” Puti n reacted to such provocations by invading Crimea and holding a referendum on its annexation by Russia.

I am transcribing passages of this long article because I believe that we Brazilians deserve a press and an electronic media that provide impartial reporting on what is happening in Ukraine.

Our own establishment media is more pro-Anerican, in many circumstances, than the U.S. media elite. But what I want to emphasize is that the American government has a clear strategy behind its domination of world affairs and is willing to pay any price, even if that price includes the institutions and lives of other peoples, to achieve its strategic objectives.

It is at this point that we begin to examine contemporary Brazil. The U.S. has revived the Cold War and elected Russia as its strategic enemy, while Russia, still a nuclear superpower, is the only force capable, along with China in the economic sphere, of rivaling them. And here we, the Brazilians, have the audacity to approach Russia and China as part of the BRICS coalition, creating an alternative for global development, both economic and political.

For those who wish to extend the embrace of NATO to the Ukrainian plains, this is a major task, considering that Brazil and South Africa are considered to be reasonably well-behaved back yards of American power.

If in order to eliminate the risk of closer ties with Russia it were necessary to destabilize the Brazilian government, appealing to the existence of some fictional tolerance of corruption, as occurred in Ukraine, the U.S. will not come begging with hat in hand.

The Americans have powerful allies here in Brazil, serving as loyal fifth-columnists. For some reason, they tapped Dilma’s phone!

In Chile, meanwhile,  according to documents declassified after 40 years of the coup that toppled Allende, it is now proven, as “Foreign Affairs” reports, that the coup and the assassination of Allende were orchestrated from Washington under the baton of Henry Kissinger. It began with the assassination of the anti-coup General Schneider, paid for by the CIA, and throughout the entire plotting process it counted on support from the daily “El Mercurio”, which received US$ 11 milhões (adjusted) from the CIA.

“Veja” magazine, as we all know, is passing through financial difficulties. Could this be the time to ask who is underwriting its infamies in a(nother) bid to destabilize the Brazilian government? Brazil is the target of a conspiracy designed to destabilize the Dilma government in the guise of a campaign to combat corruption.

It has many of the same characteristics of the so-called Arab Spring, the difference being that in the Mideast cases, the regimes were entrenched dictatorships, whereas ours is a vulnerable democracy. Since it is untenable to encourage a coup in favor of a democracy that already exists, the pretext used is the battle against corruption connected with the Lula and Dilma governments.

Persons of good faith believe this sort of theory constitutes jumping to conclusions. I myself am inclined to reject conspiracy theories as well, but only so long as the evidence allows me to. In this article, I will try to present evidence of a conspiracy underway in Brazil, using as my principal reference the American foreign policy magazine “Foreign Affairs”, which can hardly be criticized as anti-American. My point of departure is a pair of essays in the September/October issue about the crisis in Ukraine and the 40 years since the Chilean coup.

Regarding Ukraine, the magazine states quite clearly that the crisis there is the fault of the West, or rather, of the United States. It results from the ambition of NATO, led by the Americans, to expand its borders to the East, incorporating nearly all the states of the former Soviet Union, one after another.

In 1999, for example, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland joined the organization. Despite the constant protests of the Russians, in 2004 it was the turn of Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lituania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. In 2009, it was the turn of Albânia and Croatia.

These incororations violated formal conditions established with Gorbachev during the process of reunifying Germany, in which Russian approval was a key element. Russia responded with merely formal protests, however, in part because it was itself internally fragmented and in part because it had no border with these countries absorbed into NATO, except for the smallest Balkan states. In 2008, however, NATO announced its intention to incorporate the border nations of Geórgia and Ukraine, effectively surrounding Russia.

No Russian leader would, or will ever, accept this advance on Russia’s own back yard. much less a strategist of the stature of Putin. When the president of Georgia, favorable to joining NATO, decided to reincorporate the rebel provinces of Abkhazia and Ossétia do Sul, Putin immediately invaded them, making it clear that he would not accept Georgia, a border state, as a NATO member, unless it was broken up. In the same vein, a Russian newspaper reported, Putin let Bush know that “if Ukraine is absorbed into NATO, it will cease to exist.”

“Foreign Affairs” paints a realistic picture of what occurred from that point on in Ukraine. In the process of creating a “democratic” atmosphere favorable to inclusion in the EU — a step along the path to NATO membership — the U.S. spent US$ 5 million since 1991 to support opinion-making institutions in the country — according to Victoria Nulan, assistant secretary of state for Europe and Eurasia — in order to create for Ukraine “the future it deserves.”

One think tank in particular, the National Endowment for Democracy, promoted more than 60 projects to undermine the stability of the legitimate, pro-Russian Yanukovych.

http://www.ned.org/where-we-work/eurasia/ukraine

NED chairman Carl Gershman made no bones about the objective of this movement. In an interview with the New York Times, he declared that “the choice of Ukraine to be integrated into Europe will accelerate the death of the Russian imperialism that Putin represents.” More explicitly, he said that the Russians “also faced a choice,” and that Putin could find himself on the losing side, not abroad but inside Russia.” Puti n reacted to such provocations by invading Crimea and holding a referendum on its annexation by Russia.

I am transcribing passages of this long article because I believe that we Brazilians deserve a press and an electronic media that provide impartial reporting on what is happening in Ukraine.

Our own establishment media is more pro-Anerican, in many circumstances, than the U.S. media elite. But what I want to emphasize is that the American government has a clear strategy behind its domination of world affairs and is willing to pay any price, even if that price includes the institutions and lives of other peoples, to achieve its strategic objectives.

It is at this point that we begin to examine contemporary Brazil. The U.S. has revived the Cold War and elected Russia as its strategic enemy, while Russia, still a nuclear superpower, is the only force capable, along with China in the economic sphere, of rivaling them. And here we, the Brazilians, have the audacity to approach Russia and China as part of the BRICS coalition, creating an alternative for global development, both economic and political.

For those who wish to extend the embrace of NATO to the Ukrainian plains, this is a major task, considering that Brazil and South Africa are considered to be reasonably well-behaved back yards of American power.

If in order to eliminate the risk of closer ties with Russia it were necessary to destabilize the Brazilian government, appealing to the existence of some fictional tolerance of corruption, as occurred in Ukraine, the U.S. will not come begging with hat in hand.

The Americans have powerful allies here in Brazil, serving as loyal fifth-columnists. For some reason, they tapped Dilma’s phone!

In Chile, meanwhile,  according to documents declassified after 40 years of the coup that toppled Allende, it is now proven, as “Foreign Affairs” reports, that the coup and the assassintion of Allende were orchestrated from Washington under the baton of Henry Kissinger. It began with the assassination of the anti-coup General Schneider, paid for by the CIA, and throughout the entire plotting process it counted on support from the daily “El Mercurio”, which received US$ 11 milhões (adjusted) from the CIA.

“Veja” magazine, as we all know, is passing through financial difficulties. Could this be the time to ask who is underwriting its infamies in a(nother) bid to destabilize the Brazilian government?