3/23/8 "Transcending" Rivals with "Strategic Non-Violence"




http://www.burbankdigest.com/node/79 http://www.burbankdigest.com/node/78 http://www.burbankdigest.com/node/77

Tibetan's appeal transcends politics, religion
The Dalai Lama in Seattle
Janet I. Tu: 206-464-2272 or jtu@seattletimes.com
Compassion is the focus of a free, 5-day event where more than 153,000 are expected to attend. The Tibetan spiritual leader's appeal transcends politics and religion
The idea for the Seeds of Compassion event started several years ago when Dhonden met Kranzler, president of the Bellevue-based Kirlin Charitable Foundation, which focuses on early childhood development. Seeds is an initiative of the Kirlin Foundation.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004300190_dalailama23m.... (emphasis added}

the digest discovered these connections behind "transcending politics..."



We at the Kirlin Foundation would like to introduce you to our latest initiative: International Education and Resource Network, (IEARN) for the Pacific NW Region. In a world increasingly in need of healthy communication and creative ways to encourage and support cultural understanding, we believe starting with our children is a strategic and effective approach. Our investment has helped seed the start up of a new initiative of IEARN in this region. We are fortunate and grateful to have Greg Tuke, formerly the director of Powerful Schools, here in Seattle, as our leader in this endeavor. Below is a summary of program objectives and projected outcomes. We will keep you up-to-date on this exciting new partnership as it develops.

Executive Summary of IEARN, Pacific NW Region

EARN, I*EARN-USA making a difference award gala
Financier, author and philanthropist who, through the Open Society Institute ... from the Global Catalyst Foundation: For options and opportunities,
www.iearn.org/makingadifference/details.html - 18k - Cached - Similar pages


iEARN : About Us
Open Society Institute (Soros Foundation). In 1993, iEARN-USA began working with OSI in New York and Soros Foundations in 20 countries in Central Europe and ...
www.iearn.org/about/about_partners.html - 32k - Cached - Similar pages

iEARN : Globe
iEARN-Armenia is coordinated out of the National Children's Library in Yerevan, with financial support from the Open Society Foundation. ...
www.iearn.org/globe/globe_Europe_Level1.html - 29k - Cached - Similar pages
iEARN : Globe
Working with the Open Society Institute and the Soros Foundation since 1995, iEARN has established an iEARN-Latvia Center in Latvia, which is based in Riga. ...
www.iearn.org/globe/globe_Europe_Level2.html - 27k - Cached - Similar pages
iEARN : Globe
Working with the Open Society Institute and the Soros Foundation since 1995, iEARN has established an iEARN-Slovakia Center in Kosice, Slovakia. ...
www.iearn.org/globe/globe_Europe_Level3.html - 24k - Cached - Similar pages
iEARN : Globe
The iEARN-Mongolia program started in 1998, with assistance from the Open Society Institute and Mongolian Foundation for Open Society in Ulaanbaatar. ...
www.iearn.org/globe/globe_Asia.html - 35k - Cached - Similar pages
iEARN : News
Workshop in Kyrgyzstan - iEARN Teachers and students, and representatives of the Open Society Foundation (Soros) participated in a training workshp on the ...
www.iearn.org/news/news_meetings.html - 74k - Cached - Similar pages
What is I*EARN - Lebanon iEARN
... the Global Catalyst Foundation to I*EARN-Lebanon to enable participation by ... Open Society Foundation (Soros), The Steven Spielberg Shoah Foundation, ...
www.iearn.org/globe/lebanon/ - 14k - Cached - Similar pages
iEARN : News
Paata Papava, iEARN coordinator in Georgia reports that a new workshop (supported by Open Society Georgia Foundation) for schools and youth organizations ...
www.iearn.org/news/newsflash_115.html - 27k - Cached - Similar pages

Families and Work Institute
John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation .... Kirlin Foundation ... Open Society Institute The Parent-Child Home Program ...

Famiies and Work Institute Current Supporters and Partners as of January 23, 2007

Among the Corporations

Aetna Inc.
Alcoa Inc.
Allstate Insurance Company
American Business Collaboration
Chevron Corporation
CIGNA Corporation
Cisco Systems, Inc.
CIT Group Inc.
Citigroup Deloitte & Touche, LLP
Discovery Communications, Inc.
Eileen Fisher, Inc.
Eli Lilly and Company
Ernst & Young LLP
First Horizon National Corporation
Goldman, Sachs & Co.
Harris, Rothenberg International, LLC
Hilton Hotels Corporation
IBM Corporation
Johnson & Johnson
JPMorgan Chase
Knowledge Learning Corporation
Kraft Foods, Inc.
Lehman Brothers Inc.
Marriott International
The McGraw-Hill Companies
Merck & Co., Inc.
Morgan Stanley
Motorola, Inc.
Pearson Education
Pfizer Inc
The Procter & Gamble Company
Prudential Financial
Texas Instruments
Time Warner
Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.
United Technologies Corporation
Viacom Inc.
Xerox Corporation


World Movement for Democracy - DemocracyNews
The International Campaign for Tibet (ICT) has started a ... Open Society Education Programs in South Eastern Europe (OSEP-SEE) has launched its new Web ...

becomes....'save tibet'

International Campaign for Tibet: Tibet News: Statement by the ...
Mar 14, 2008 ... The International Campaign for Tibet strongly condemns the suppression by Chinese security forces of peaceful demonstrations by Tibetan ...

legitimized by wikipedia

International Campaign for Tibet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The International Campaign for Tibet (ICT) is a private non-profit advocacy group working to promote democratic freedoms for Tibetans, ensure their human ...

U.S. - Soros sponsored 'non-violence' organizing and propaganda hit the two main u.s. geostrategic rivals with one shot:

The Central Eurasia Project is a program of the Open Society Institute-New York. The Open Society Institute-New York is a private operating and grantmaking foundation that promotes the development of open societies around the world by supporting educational, social, and legal reform, and by encouraging alternative approaches to complex and controversial issues.

Sunday, March 23, 2008
Stephen Blank 3/20/08
A EurasiaNet Commentary

China’s crackdown on protesters in Tibet is potentially setting a precedent for members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

At least 13 deaths have been reported in connection with the anti-government protests, which have spread from the Tibetan Autonomous Republic to other areas of China with significant concentrations of ethnic Tibetans. China has barred foreign journalists from traveling to Lhasa, and Chinese officials have lashed out at Western news accounts of events in Tibet. In Beijing’s view, the trouble has no connection to official efforts to culturally assimilate the country’s minority groups, but is instead solely the result of trouble-making by the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader.

Chinese leaders have interpreted developments in Tibet in a way that can classify the Tibetan protesters as secessionists. Such a definition in theory enables China to invoke a provision in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) charter, under which it can summon aid from other members in order to deal with the security threat. China, of course, is unlikely to issue such a call for assistance. Even so, other SCO members have quickly come to Beijing’s defense.

Russia has been the most prominent supporter of China’s actions in Tibet. On March 17, Moscow applauded China’s determined effort to suppress "unlawful actions" in the autonomous region. The next day, in an article published in Rossiiskaya Gazeta, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov claimed that the unrest in Tibet was linked to Kosovo’s declaration of independence. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. "There are grounds to believe that all this happens not by chance," Lavrov said.

"The situation in Kosovo is the most vivid example of ethnic separatism," Lavrov continued. "Developments in other parts of the world also make it possible to suppose that we are witnessing only the beginning of an utterly explosive process."

Russia’s strong show of support for China suggests that the two states might intervene in the event that anti-government protests broke out in one of the SCO member states in Central Asia. The possibility of such unrest in the region is not so far-fetched. The state of Uzbekistan’s economy has some observers believing that Tashkent remains a potential site of unrest, despite the appearance of Islam Karimov’s regime being in complete control. Kyrgyzstan, or course, has been a hotbed of instability since the 2005 ouster of former president Askar Akayev. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. And Tajikistan, where the economic infrastructure came crashing down during the harshest winter in a generation, also can be counted as a potential candidate for anti-government protests. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

There is good reason to believe that if unrest breaks out in Central Asia -- whether it is connected to a rigged election, an unexpected succession or the implosion of the economy -- the Chinese crackdown in Tibet can provide a repression blueprint.

China and Russia have already used the SCO to prepare for several possible contingencies. The SCO’s Peace Mission military exercises in 2007, for example, dealt with a possible militant uprising, as well as with a refugee scenario. Thus, specific response plans for several different Central Asian scenarios would seem to exist.

Russia, naturally, is best positioned to lead a potential intervention in Central Asia. Under the auspices of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, Russia maintains bases in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. It also has the ability to quickly deploy troops to Uzbekistan under terms of a 2006 bilateral agreement.

It is possible to view the SCO, given its dedication to propping up the authoritarian order in Central Asia, as a present-day analogue to the Holy Alliance -- the 19th century entente in which Russia, Austria and Prussia dedicated themselves to the maintaining Europe’s then autocratic order. As the Tibetan example suggests, China and Russia, whether in Tibet or potentially in Central Asia, have eagerly embraced the role of gendarme of Eurasia.

Editor’s Note: Stephen Blank is a professor at the US Army War College. The views expressed this article do not in any way represent the views of the US Army, Defense Department or the US Government.

Posted March 20, 2008 © Eurasianet


"...The Democratic party's National Democratic Institute, the Republican party's International Republican Institute, the US State Department and USAID are the main agencies involved in these grassroots campaigns as well as Freedom House NGO and billionaire George Soros's Open Society Institute ..."

Washington's New World Order "Democratization" Template
by Jonathan Mowat
Dr. Peter Ackerman, the author of "Strategic Nonviolent Conflict" in the "National Catholic Reporter" on April 26, 2002: "It is not true that the only way to 'take out' such regimes is through U.S. military action."...Speaking at the "Secretary's Open Forum" at the State Department on June 29, 2004, in a speech entitled, "Between Hard and Soft Power: The Rise of Civilian-Based Struggle and Democratic Change, " Ackerman elaborated on the concept involved. He proposed that youth movements, such as those used to bring down Serbia, could bring down Iran and North Korea, and could have been used to bring down Iraq... And he reported that he has been working with the top US weapons designer, Lawrence Livermore Laboratories, on developing new communications technologies that could be used in other youth movement insurgencies. "There is no question that these technologies are democratizing," he stressed, in reference to their potential use in bringing down China, "they enable decentralized activity. They create, if you will, a digital concept of the right of assembly."...

Dr. Ackerman is the founding chairman of International Center on Nonviolent Conflicts in Washington D.C, of which former US Air Force officer Jack DuVall is President. Together with former CIA director James Woolsey, DuVall also directs the Arlington Institute of Washington D.C., which was created by former Chief of Naval Operations advisor John L. Peterson in 1989 " to help redefine the concept of national security in much larger, comprehensive terms" it reports, through introducing "social value shifts into the traditional national defense equation."...

The Democratic party's National Democratic Institute, the Republican party's International Republican Institute, the US State Department and USAID are the main agencies involved in these grassroots campaigns as well as the Freedom House NGO and billionaire George Soros's Open Society Institute [...] (emphasis added)...http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MOW502A.html ....

Ukrainian PostModern Coup completes testing of New Template

The U.S. government and allied forces' year-end installation of Victor Yushchenko as President of Ukraine have completed the field-testing of the "Post Modern Coup". Employing and fine-tuning the same sophisticated techniques used in Serbia in 2000 and Georgia in 2003 (and unsuccessfully in Belarus in 2001), it is widely expected that the United States will attempt to apply the same methods throughout the former Soviet Union.

"We have to confront those forces that are committed to reproduce a Georgian or Ukrainian scenario," Kyrgyz President Askar Akayev stated on December 26, the day of the coup, "we'll not allow the import of Rose [Georgian] and Orange [Ukrainian] revolutions in our country." One day later, the Kazakh government launched a criminal case against the Soros Foundation for tax evasion, one of the coups' financiers. And last spring, Uzbek President Islam Karimov accused Soros of overseeing the revolution in Georgia, and condemning his efforts to "fool and brainwash" young intelligentsia in his own country, banned the group. The same networks are also increasingly active in South America, Africa, and Asia. Top targets include Venezuela, Mozambique, and Iran, among others.

The method employed is usefully described by The Guardian's Ian Traynor in a November 26, 2004 article entitled "US campaign behind the turmoil in Kiev," during the first phase of the coup:
"With their websites and stickers, their pranks and slogans aimed at banishing widespread fear of a corrupt regime, the democracy guerrillas of the Ukrainian Pora youth movement have already notched up a famous victory - whatever the outcome of the dangerous stand-off in Kiev.
[T]he campaign is an American creation, a sophisticated and brilliantly conceived exercise in western branding and mass marketing that, in four countries in four years, has been used to try to salvage rigged elections and topple unsavory regimes.
Funded and organized by the US government, deploying US consultancies, pollsters, diplomats, the two big American parties and US non-government organizations, the campaign was first used in Europe in Belgrade in 2000 to beat Slobodan Milosevic at the ballot box.
Richard Miles, the US ambassador in Belgrade, played a key role. And by last year, as US ambassador in Tbilisi, he repeated the trick in Georgia, coaching Mikhail Saakashvili in how to bring down Eduard Shevardnadze. Ten months after the success in Belgrade, the US ambassador in Minsk, Michael Kozak, a veteran of similar operations in central America, notably in Nicaragua, organized a near identical campaign to try to defeat the Belarus hardman, Alexander Lukashenko..."

Much of the coup apparatus is the same that was used in the overthrow of President Fernando Marcos of the Philippines in 1986, the Tiananmen Square destabilization in 1989, and Vaclav Havel's "Velvet revolution" in Czechoslovakia in 1989.

As in these early operations, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and its primary arms, the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI) and International Republican Institute (IRI), played a central role. The NED was established by the Reagan Administration in 1983, to do overtly, what the CIA had done covertly, in the words of one its legislative drafters, Allen Weinstein.

The Cold War propaganda and operations center, Freedom House , now chaired by former CIA director James Woolsey, has also been involved, as were billionaire George Soros' foundations, whose donations always dovetail those of the NED.

What is new about the template bears on the use of the Internet (in particular chat rooms, instant messaging, and blogsites) and cell phones (including text-messaging), to rapidly steer angry and suggestible "Generation X" youth into and out of mass demonstrations and the like -- a capability that only emerged in the mid-1990s.

"With the crushing ubiquity of cell phones, satellite phones, PCs, modems and the Internet," Laura Rosen emphasized in Salon Magazine on February 3, 2001,"the information age is shifting the advantage from authoritarian leaders to civic groups." ... the civilian application of Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's "Revolution in Military Affairs" doctrine, which depends on highly mobile small group deployments "enabled" by "real time" intelligence and communications....

In November 1989, Case Western Reserve in Cleveland, Ohio, under the aegis of that university's "Program for Social Innovations in Global Management," began a series of conferences to review progress towards that strategic objective, which was reported on in "Human Relations" in 1991. There, Dr. Howard Perlmutter, a professor of "Social Architecture'' at the Wharton School, and a follower of Dr. Emery, stressed that "rock video in Katmandu," was an appropriate image of how states with traditional cultures could be destabilized, thereby creating the possibility of a "global civilization." There are two requirements for such a transformation, he added, "building internationally committed networks of international and locally committed organizations,'' and "creating global events" through "the transformation of a local event into one having virtually instantaneous international implications through mass-media." ...

The creation and deployment of coups of any kind requires agents on the ground. The main handler of these coups on the "street side" has been the Albert Einstein Institution, which was formed in 1983 as an offshoot of Harvard University under the impetus of Dr. Gene Sharp, and which specializes in "non violence as a form of warfare."... The group is funded by Soros and the NED. Albert Einstein's president is Col. Robert Helvey, a former US Army officer with 30 years of experience in South East Asia. He has served as the case officer for youth groups active in the Balkans and Eastern Europe since at least 1999.... Helvey "was an officer of the Defence Intelligence Agency of the Pentagon, who had served in Vietnam and, subsequently, as the US Defence Attaché in Yangon, Myanmar (1983 to 85), during which he clandestinely organized the Myanmarese students to work behind Aung San Suu Kyi and in collaboration with Bo Mya's Karen insurgent group....He also trained in Hong Kong the student leaders from Beijing in mass demonstration techniques which they were to subsequently use in the Tiananmen Square incident of June, 1989" and "is now believed to be acting as an adviser to the Falun Gong, the religious sect of China, in similar civil disobedience techniques." ...

The Democratic party's National Democratic Institute, the Republican party's International Republican Institute, the US State Department and USAID are the main agencies involved in these grassroots campaigns as well as the Freedom House NGO and billionaire George Soros's Open Society Institute . [...]

SOROS Falls from Grace in Central Asia
nCa Commentary Central Asia Speaks:

After Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan has also voiced concerns about the activities of SOROS Foundation. This completes the quorum.
In rapid sequence, Uzbekistan kicked out SOROS, Kazakhstan issued a back-taxes notice that is likely to lead to closure of SOROS offices, President Askar Akayev of Kyrgzstan whipped SOROS for interfering in the society and President Imomali Rakhmanov of Tajikistan told his cabinet of ministers that he considered SOROS a destructive presence for the society. Why has the entire Central Asian region united against SOROS, a supposedly philanthropic organization engaged in grand and noble projects of absolutely the greatest possible value to the primitive and barbarian societies of Central Asia? [...]

The NED, NGOs and the Imperial Uses of Philanthropy: Why They Hate Our Kind Hearts, Too
In recent years, nations have challenged the activities and very existence of non-governmental organizations. Russia, Zimbabwe, and Eritrea have enacted new measures requiring registration; "Open Society Institute" affiliates have been shut down in Eastern Europe; and Venezuela has charged the Súmate NGO leaders with treason. In Iraq and Afghanistan, staff of Western charitable NGOs (CARE and Doctors Without Borders) have been assassinated.

What are these organizations, and who or what is behind them?

They are heirs of the missionaries, who did many good deeds, bringing sewing machines to Bulgaria, ideas of women's liberation to Chinese footbinders, and life-saving medicines to the less industrialized world. Yet the missionaries also served as scouts for corporations and colonizers, tying knots with the most ambitious local people, especially those adept at bilingualism.

Missionaries are still operating today, but the field has become more intensely populated and diverse. Today's NGOs are elephantine, serpentine, and Byzantine. They may be international organizations, their local affiliates, or seemingly spontaneous grassroots groups.

Most funding and direction come from the wealthy nations. Often the donors form a conglomerate creating mutual responsibility and considerable ambiguity. CIVICUS, a partnership to promote "civil society" worldwide, is funded by, among others, American Express Foundation, Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation, Carnegie Corporation, Canadian International Development Agency, Ford Foundation, Harvard University, Oxfam, and United Nations Development Programme.

If the source is confusing, the message is usually clear: "democratization" strives for civil rights and elections, but it also must include an open door to foreign capital, labor contracts, resource extraction, and military training. These networks also define "civil society" to include rock concerts and street mobs, but not government-provided maternal health clinics, child care, or senior services.

Affluent nations' government agencies are important NGO funders. The most notorious is the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED; ostensibly a non°©governmental foundation), created by Congress in 1983 to do openly what had been CIA cold war covert activities. When these operations were revealed in 1967, there was shock, not so much because the US was covertly funding foreign political and labor groups, but because organizations such as the National Education Association, American Newspaper Guild, American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, and the National Student Association were secretly used as pass-throughs, and all but the top officers were unwitting. Actual and phony foundations also distributed CIA funds.

NED changed this-but not very much. It distributes grants both directly and through other organizations, now overtly. Its "core grantees" are the Center for International Private Enterprise (of the US Chamber of Commerce), the American Center for International Labor Solidarity (of the AFL-CIO), and, affiliated with the parties, the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs and the International Republican Institute. Some private foundations chip in, for example, Smith Richardson and Mellon-Scaife. The Mott Foundation gave the NDI $150,000 in 1998 "to increase public confidence in democratization and the transition to a market economy in Ukraine." Foundations also directly co-fund NED's ultimate grantees. Thus, the Lilly Endowment supports the Institute for Liberty and Democracy in Peru, headed by Hernando de Soto, which offers free-market remedies for poverty.

Other capitalist democracies now have government foundations similar to NED, and they work collaboratively, e.g., the Canadian Rights and Democracy and the British Westminster Foundation for Democracy. Additional US agencies have joined NED and the CIA in this work, notably, the Agency for International Development (USAID) and United States Information Agency (USIA), which support and create foreign NGOs and media.

Germany, France, the Netherlands, Greece, Italy, and Sweden fund their political parties' foundations. The European members of the Socialist International's fund, the European Forum for Democracy and Solidarity, distributes "democratization" aid.

The European Union has worldwide grant programs for sustainable development and democratization. NATO grant programs support environmental organizations, among others. United Nations agencies such as UNICEF, WHO, UNESCO, UNDP, and FAO have long operated this way, and the World Bank funds, sponsors, guides, and coordinates grassroots poor people's organizations.

NGOs in prosperous nations have extensive grant programs overseas. These include not only the obviously international ones, e.g., Rotary, American Friends Service Committee, and Oxfam; but also labor organizations such as the American Federation of Teachers Educational Foundation. Corporate foundations are active throughout the world, and sometimes have separate funds directed by employees, for example, the Boeing Employees Fund, which supports charities in Japan and England.

Why would these philanthropic efforts offend anyone? Why do they hate our kind hearts?

In the first place, these public-private philanthropies have worked together to fund and direct overthrow movements. We had a "Subversive Activities Control Board" here, but export was encouraged. The grantees' activities included destabilization, the creation of mobs preventing elected governments from ruling, chaos, and violence. Among those funded were the Civic Forum in Czechoslovakia, Solidarity in Poland, Union of Democratic Forces in Bulgaria, Otpor in Serbia, and, more recently, similar groups in the succession states of the USSR. Sometimes mobs (especially of young people) have been moved around from one country to another to give the impression of vast popular opposition. The NED, Rockefeller and Ford Foundations, and the Soros philanthropies have been particularly active in these operations. Human Rights Watch (formerly Helsinki Watch) has nurtured opposition groups. Reformers seeking social democracy or democratic socialism were excluded; such systems might oppress the "vulture capitalists."

It is hard to know how much native support existed for the Western-funded revolutions, as media and information (especially if we can't read Mongolian, Bulgarian, or Uzbeki) are produced by the same conglomerates. Of course, all revolutions are made by minorities, often with assistance of foreign allies. However, by today's standards as embodied in the UN Charter, subverting with the intention of overthrowing foreign governments is a grave violation of international law. Many were shocked by the NED activities complementing other instruments of intervention that helped to destroy the Sandinista revolution in Nicaragua. Yet the 1990 election was judged by the NGO observers to be a free one; neither threats of physical annihilation nor millions of foreign dollars violated the purity of that process. "Cold-war liberal" policymakers have advocated covert actions as a peaceful alternative to invasion, but it isn't as if military action has faded away; they work together... to disrupt revolutionary or even reformist movements that might interfere with neo-liberal goals, hampering the ability of corporations to go anywhere and do anything....

In India and South Africa, the very poor have been organized into Slum Dwellers and Shack Dwellers Associations, which meet with the World Bank people to discuss what is to be done. Protesters against the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) were channeled into groups that were invited and funded to attend the meetings preparing this treaty. Those concerned with the devastation of oil, lumber, and mineral extraction throughout the world can utilize the "participatory mechanisms" of the Earth Council, one of whose board members is Klaus Schwab, director of the World Economic Forum. Conferences for the protesters "parallel" to the globalization elite's are supported by that same elite. These do create fruitful interaction among dissidents; yet they may also function as a diversionary tactic. We won't know unless these possibilities are investigated.

Amelioration is important to keep those societies newly "marketized" on a steady course despite crushing poverty. In Mongolia (as elsewhere), "shock therapy," decimating both employment and social services, has resulted in street children, child prostitution, and increasing maternal mortality, none of which occurred in its "undeveloped" or communist phases. However, the rock concerts and street mobs have attained freedom. Enter PACT (originally, Private Agencies Collaborating Together; funders now include the Ford Foundation, US AID, Mercy Corps International, the Nature Conservancy, the World Bank, Citigroup, Chevron, Levi Strauss, and Microsoft), which provides some substitutes for the former socialist institutions, while desperation drives Mongolia's leaders to welcome foreign garment industries and copper and gold extraction.

For many nations far from the North Atlantic, NATO seems to promise economic security. This inclination has been abetted by the creation, through NATO's grant programs, of NGOs to foster the NATO spirit, and in Bulgaria, a charitable NGO to provide employment for their former military officers, who wouldn't fit in. NATO also supplies research funds for universities in Eastern Europe, which now have little government funding, and is attempting to expand its charities throughout North Africa and the Middle East....

NGO staff members have been accused of being spies. Whether or not this is the case, the system allows access to remote native cultures, where the lay of the land and sociograms of local influentials can be charted for any purpose. This type of missionary penetration, attained through Bible translation in the Amazon River basin, has been recounted in Thy Will Be Done, by Colby and Dennett.

NGOs are now extensively occupied in the relief of disasters, whether natural or man-made, and the US military (with its "coalition") is deeply involved in both the comforting and the afflicting. To receive US funds, humanitarian organizations must support US foreign policy. Consequently, some, such as Oxfam UK, have withdrawn their workers from Iraq. Those remaining are often regarded as collaborators, which is not surprising, as many international NGOs have been handmaids to subversion, overthrow, and occupation. Some have even supported "humanitarian" bombing, especially in the case of Yugoslavia.

It is hard to assess accurately NGOs' complicity because there are few incentives for critical studies by journalists or academics, and anti-capitalist activists are often knotted up in some way. Information about NGOs mostly comes from the same funding sources, such as "Transitions on Line" of the Soros enterprises, or OneWorld.net, sponsored by the Ford Foundation and others. A networking resource, Ngo.net, is administered by Freedom House and funded by the USAID.

The peak of international NGOs, the World Social Forum, meets at the same time as the World Economic Forum, only far away. The WSF's general funding is rarely scrutinized by the participants, whose travel expenses come from similar sources. An exception is a report by the Research Unit on Political Economy-India, which explains why foundation funding was refused for the 2004 WSF in Mumbai, and discusses critically the activities of the Ford Foundation in India....

Joan Roelofs is a professor emerita of political science in Keene, NH. More information on this subject may be found in her Foundations and Public Policy: the Mask of Pluralism. Other books are Greening Cities: Building Just and Sustainable Communities, and a just-published translation of Victor Considerant's Principes du socialisme: Manifeste de la démocratie au XIX siècle. Email: joan.roelofs@verizon.net

George Soros
NEIL CLARK / New Statesman 2jun03
[Review of this article below]

The billionaire trader has become eastern Europe's uncrowned king and the prophet of ''the open society''. But open to what?
George Soros is angry. In common with 90 per cent of the world's population, the Man Who Broke the Bank of England has had enough of President Bush and his foreign policy. In a recent article in the Financial Times, Soros condemned the Bush administration's policies on Iraq as "fundamentally wrong"—based as they were on a "false ideology that US might gave it the right to impose its will on the world".

Wow! Has one of the world's richest men—the archetypal amoral capitalist who made billions out of the Far Eastern currency crash of 1997 and who last year was fined $2m for insider trading by a court in France—seen the light in his old age? (He is 72.) Should we pop the champagne corks and toast his conversion?

Not before asking what really motivates him. Soros likes to portray himself as an outsider, an independent-minded Hungarian emigre and philosopher-pundit who stands detached from the US military-industrial complex. But take a look at the board members of the NGOs he organises and finances. At Human Rights Watch, for example, there is Morton Abramowitz, US assistant secretary of state for intelligence and research from 1985-89, and now a fellow at the interventionist Council on Foreign Relations; ex-ambassador Warren Zimmerman (whose spell in Yugoslavia coincided with the break-up of that country); and Paul Goble, director of communications at the CIA-created Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (which Soros also funds). Soros's International Crisis Group boasts such "independent" luminaries as the former national security advisers Zbigniew Brzezinski and Richard Allen, as well as General Wesley Clark, once Nato supreme allied commander for Europe. The group's vice-chairman is the former congressman Stephen Solarz, once described as "the Israel lobby's chief legislative tactician on Capitol Hill" and a signatory, along with the likes of Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz, to a notorious letter to President Clinton in 1998 calling for a "comprehensive political and military strategy for bringing down Saddam and his regime".

Take a look also at Soros's business partners. At the Carlyle Group, where he has invested more than $100m, they include the former secretary of state James Baker and the erstwhile defence secretary Frank Carlucci, George Bush Sr and, until recently, the estranged relatives of Osama Bin Laden. Carlyle, one of the world's largest private equity funds, makes most of its money from its work as a defence contractor.

Soros may not, as some have suggested, be a fully paid-up CIA agent. But that his companies and NGOs are closely wrapped up in US expansionism cannot seriously be doubted.

So why is he so upset with Bush? The answer is simple. Soros is angry not with Bush's aims—of extending Pax Americana and making the world safe for global capitalists like himself—but with the crass and blundering way Bush is going about it. By making US ambitions so clear, the Bush gang has committed the cardinal sin of giving the game away. For years, Soros and his NGOs have gone about their work extending the boundaries of the "free world" so skilfully that hardly anyone noticed. Now a Texan redneck and a gang of overzealous neo-cons have blown it.

As a cultivated and educated man (a degree in philosophy from the London School of Economics, honorary degrees from the Universities of Oxford, Yale, Bologna and Budapest), Soros knows too well that empires perish when they overstep the mark and provoke the formation of counter-alliances. He understands that the Clintonian approach of multilateralism—whereby the US cajoles or bribes but never does anything so crude as to threaten—is the only one that will allow the empire to endure. Bush's policies have led to a divided Europe, Nato in disarray, the genesis of a new Franco-German-Russian alliance and the first meaningful steps towards Arab unity since Nasser.

Soros knows a better way—armed with a few billion dollars, a handful of NGOs and a nod and a wink from the US State Department, it is perfectly possible to topple foreign governments that are bad for business, seize a country's assets, and even to get thanked for your benevolence afterwards. Soros has done it.

The conventional view, shared by many on the left, is that socialism collapsed in eastern Europe because of its systemic weaknesses and the political elite's failure to build popular support. That may be partly true, but Soros's role was crucial. From 1979, he distributed $3m a year to dissidents including Poland's Solidarity movement, Charter 77 in Czechoslovakia and Andrei Sakharov in the Soviet Union. In 1984, he founded his first Open Society Institute in Hungary and pumped millions of dollars into opposition movements and independent media. Ostensibly aimed at building up a "civil society", these initiatives were designed to weaken the existing political structures and pave the way for eastern Europe's eventual colonisation by global capital. Soros now claims, with characteristic immodesty, that he was responsible for the "Americanisation" of eastern Europe.

The Yugoslavs remained stubbornly resistant and repeatedly returned Slobodan Milosevic's unreformed Socialist Party to government. Soros was equal to the challenge. From 1991, his Open Society Institute channelled more than $100m to the coffers of the anti-Milosevic opposition, funding political parties, publishing houses and "independent" media such as Radio B92, the plucky little student radio station of western mythology which was in reality bankrolled by one of the world's richest men on behalf of the world's most powerful nation. With Slobo finally toppled in 2000 in a coup d'etat financed, planned and executed in Washington, all that was left was to cart the ex- Yugoslav leader to the Hague tribunal, co-financed by Soros along with those other custodians of human rights Time Warner Corporation and Disney. He faced charges of crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide, based in the main on the largely anecdotal evidence of (you've guessed it) Human Rights Watch.

Soros stresses his belief in the "open society" propounded by the philosopher Karl Popper, who taught him at the LSE in the early 1950s. Soros's definition of an "open society"—"an imperfect society that holds itself open to improvement"—sounds reasonable enough; few lovers of genuine liberty would take issue with its central tenet that "the open society is a more sophisticated form of social organisation than a totalitarian one". But Soros's "open societies" don't tend to be all that open in practice.

Since the fall of Milosevic, Serbia, under the auspices of Soros-backed "reformers", has become less, not more, free. The recently lifted state of emergency saw more than 4,000 people arrested, many of them without charge, political parties threatened with bans, and critical newspapers closed down. It was condemned by the UN Commission on Human Rights and the British Helsinki Group. But there was not a murmur from the Open Society Institute or from Soros himself. In fairness, Soros has been far more critical of his former protégé Leonid Kuchma, president of the Ukraine, a country described by the former intelligence officer Mykola Melnychenko as "one big protection racket", and now possibly the most repressive police state in Europe.

But generally the sad conclusion is that for all his liberal quoting of Popper, Soros deems a society "open" not if it respects human rights and basic freedoms, but if it is "open" for him and his associates to make money. And, indeed, Soros has made money in every country he has helped to prise "open". In Kosovo, for example, he has invested $50m in an attempt to gain control of the Trepca mine complex, where there are vast reserves of gold, silver, lead and other minerals estimated to be worth in the region of $5bn. He thus copied a pattern he has deployed to great effect over the whole of eastern Europe: of advocating "shock therapy" and "economic reform", then swooping in with his associates to buy valuable state assets at knock-down prices.

More than a decade after the fall of the Berlin Wall, Soros is the uncrowned king of eastern Europe. His Central European University, with campuses in Budapest, Warsaw and Prague and exchange programmes in the US, unashamedly propagates the ethos of neoliberal capitalism and clones the next pro-American generation of political leaders in the region. With his financial stranglehold over political parties, business, educational institutions and the arts, criticism of Soros in mainstream eastern European media is hard to find. Hagiography is not. The Budapest Sun reported in February how he had been made an honorary citizen of Budapest by the mayor, Gabor Demszky. "Few people have done to Budapest what George Soros has," gushed Demszky, saying that the billionaire had contributed to "structural and mental changes in the capital city and Hungary itself". The mayor failed to add that Soros is also a benefactor of Demszky's own party, the Free Democrats, which, governing with "reform" communists, has pursued the classic Soros agenda of privatisation and economic liberalisation—leading to a widening gap between rich and poor.

The Soros strategy for extending Pax Americana differs from the Bush model, particularly in its subtlety. But it is just as ambitious and just as deadly. Left- liberals, admiring his support for some of their favourite issues such as gay rights and the legalisation of soft drugs, let him off lightly.

Asked about the havoc his currency speculation caused to Far Eastern economies in the crash of 1997, Soros replied: "As a market participant, I don't need to be concerned with the consequences of my actions." Strange words from a man who likes to be regarded as the saviour of civil society and who rails in print against "market fundamentalism".
source: http://www.mail-archive.com/marxism@lists.panix.com/msg45266.html 3jun03