Who should we believe?

July 21, 2007 - 0:0

When the U.S. committee of general diplomacy announced in 2001 that culture, information, and communication would be used as new strategic tools to ensure the security of the United States, it became evident that the new U.S. national security strategy research project -- prepared by Republicans like Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice before George W. Bush took office -- would place a special focus on “soft confrontation” with target states.

In this long strategic document, great emphasis is placed on the establishment and support of cultural organizations and media foundations to replace the local values of the target nations with American values. These foundations and organizations camouflage their activities by operating under the cover of philanthropic NGOs and organizations promoting human rights. The Open Society of the Soros Foundation is one such organization which was established in 1993 by George Soros, a Jewish billionaire affiliated with the U.S. Zionist lobby, immediately after the new U.S. national security strategy was formulated. The Open Society makes economic investments and is active in human rights studies. Whereas Rupert Murdoch, the Jewish emperor of the world media, openly expands his media empire, it seems that Soros pursues a covert model of cultural and media influence. The U.S. media have portrayed Soros as a philanthropist interested in promoting democracy, human rights, and the economic development of various countries throughout world. The BBC says that the Open Society pursues the goals of promoting democracy, observation of human rights, and economic, legal, and political reforms and supporting non-governmental media in various countries. Despite these descriptions, the Open Society pursues its philanthropic activities in over 30 countries which are considered “target nations” in the U.S. security strategy for one reason or another, many of which experienced major political upheavals before the establishment of the Open Society. According to many regional analysts, the Open Society’s activities in a belt of Central Asian countries are meant to decrease the influence of Russia and to promote political currents inclined to the U.S. or subservient to its policies. This organization started its activities with economic and research work -- in a seemingly unrelated way -- but also began surreptitiously identifying the opponents of each country’s central government and supporting the opposition media in order to pave the way for a soft revolution and regime change. In Georgia, the Open Society paid $20 million to opponents of Edward Shevardnadze, who had pursued a strategy of maintaining good relations with Moscow. After unrest, which was called a “velvet revolution”, forced his resignation, four members of the new cabinet, the education, justice, treasury, and sports and youth ministers, were former employees of Soros’s office in Tbilisi. After the Shevardnadze government was ousted, Soros said his foundation would support efforts to democratize Middle Eastern countries. After bloody street riots in Kiev which led to the so-called Orange Revolution, Ukrainian MP Vladimir Timoshenko said that Soros and U.S. intelligence officials were behind the upheavals. Aghel Abbasov, the editor of the Azerbaijan publication Justice, stated that since the events in Georgia of November 2003, the Soros Foundation has been trying to gain influence over the Azerbaijan government and has been training some of President Heydar Aliev’s opponents in Ukraine. Azarbaijan’s national security ministry also warned about the Open Society’s plans to promote the use of drugs among Azeri youth under the cover of a program to combat drug abuse. In addition, the Armenian intelligence services have frequently reported that the Soros Foundation has tried to use the media to upset the country’s political atmosphere and foment disputes between Armenia and Russia. By the way, Armenia hosts the biggest Russian military base in the southern Caucasus. Also, it is said that the Soros Foundation is behind the local media’s increased opposition to the government of Tajikistan. The country’s president even named four newspapers and a few private radio stations and divulged some information about the Soros Foundation’s financial support of his opponents. Through Internet sites, newspapers, TV channels, cultural and educational programs, NGOs, and arts organizations, the Soros Foundation is officially supporting “democratic change” in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan! In recent years, following the formulation of the Greater Middle East Initiative, the Soros Foundation’s activities expanded to the Middle East and Mediterranean region. Turkey’s Al-Sabah newspaper reported that the Soros Foundation supported elements that would look out for U.S. and Israeli interests. With such a background, the Soros Foundation could not have overlooked Iran. But its members are smart enough to know that Iran is aware of its activities in Central Asia. Undoubtedly, the use of front organizations to promote civil disobedience, the establishment of informal information networks, and the recruitment of locals and dual citizens were clever decisions. In addition to the confessions of Haleh Esfandiari and Kian Tajbakhsh broadcast on Iranian TV, it is important to understand that no seemingly philanthropic, cultural, humanitarian, and democratic move is supported by such foundations unless it is part of the “new strategic tool for U.S. security” scenario. Let us forget what the Iranian TV network broadcast. But one can not ignore the results of Azerbaijan’s national security ministry’s investigation that indicates that the Open Society has no intention besides promoting drug abuse in its anti-addiction programs. Of course, Radio Farda, Voice of America radio, and the Washington Post say that the foundation’s only goals are providing humanitarian assistance and improving public health. Who should we believe