CG Posted August 4, 2013 Posted August 4, 2013 Viktor Kalashnikov is a Russian freelance journalist and a former KGB colonel. In the autumn of 2010, he and his wife Marina, a historian, were treated in a hospital in Germany for mercury poisoning in what they said had been an attempt on their lives by Russia’s FSB, the successor to the KGB. He is a distant relative of Mikhail Kalashnikov, the inventor of the AK-47. Kalashnikov and his wife have been publishing articles critical of the Kremlin since the 1990s. After living in Europe for several years they are now back in Moscow. A Russian Analyst’s View, Part One By J.R. Nyquist A few days ago I received a call from Victor Kalashnikov in Moscow, a former KGB officer who now works as an investigative journalist. He was eager to share his analysis of recent global events. This was also an opportunity to ask his opinion about the global economy and the crisis in Syria. “Your side is losing,” he complained. “Did you read Barack Obama’s speech at National Defense University? What was this reference to the Twilight Struggle of the Cold War in his speech? What is this?” Obama had spoken of the collapse of the Berlin Wall, saying that “a new dawn of democracy” had taken hold abroad. It was the sort of thing American presidents liked to repeat. “I’m sorry to say,” Kalashnikov continued, “the president’s statement is at variance with my own perception. He says that your homeland is more secure today and there have been no more big attacks. Usually supreme commanders refrain from saying things like that. Undoubtedly you know what Hezbollah is. It’s not a loose group of fighters. It is a large organization. They use satellite TV programs to spread their radical Islamic ideas. So you may dismantle a bomb or destroy a terrorist network or base, but it would be premature to feel somehow relaxed. Moreover, Hezbollah’s program of indoctrination is going on worldwide. That’s the point. You Americans, whether you like it or not, are confronting an aggressive Islam, and Islam is a huge thing. It is very flexible, very motivated.” I interrupted Kalashnikov’s analysis to ask about the U.S. economy. “You can print as many greenbacks as you like as long as your carrier battle-groups remain active,” he said.” As long as America maintains its security sphere the U.S. currency will be supported by nations who want protection. “The real problem is that your side doesn’t have an adequate grasp of the strategic situation. You defeated Germany and Japan in World War II. What followed next? Brainwashing followed next. What you did was indoctrination – putting into their heads a pro-democracy ideology. That’s why you were successful back then. If the Allies had destroyed German networks without stopping their propaganda the war would never have ended in the hearts of the Germans.” Kalashnikov was making a point about winning hearts and minds, and the relationship between terrorism and indoctrination. “Your president sees that some terrorist organizations are fed by state actors,” noted Kalashnikov. “But terrorism is a tactic. It is fed by many weapons and has many actors. Terror as a political tool was born in Russia. This was very well explained by Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Fyodor Dostoevski [see The Possessed]. Now it is no accident that Russia is a close ally of Iran, Syria and Hezbollah. The latter represents a step forward in military organization. My feeling is that the Russians were the designers of this new organization. Hezbollah has a great tactical advantage compared to the state sponsored armies of the large powers. Hezbollah is flexible and mobile worldwide, not limited by borders, institutions, etc. They use terror to attack and kill civilians, to spread fear and defeatism. They are not the first ones to do that.” Kalashnikov emphasized that Hezbollah, Syria, Iran and Russia are working together against the United States. “Russia is behind Syria and Iran,” he said, “supplying weapons and technologists. So far I see no viable solution to that challenge. That is why I was irritated by your president’s words, ‘we are more secure.’ But who is really in control? Who really has the initiative, Obama or Putin?” I asked Kalashnikov about Russia’s vulnerability to Islamic terrorism. His answer took me by surprise. “The Russians think that with Orthodox Christianity Russia will be able to cope with Islam,” he explained. “Orthodox Christianity is strangely compatible with Islam. Western Christianity is far more distant from Islam. Did you know there are very strong and fast-developing contacts between the Russian Orthodox Church and Iran? This started some five or six years ago. The mullahs and the Orthodox are consolidating their friendship. They share an ideological and spiritual platform which is called ‘anti-Americanism.’ Both of them reject American values and way of life, and they reject American policy. That unifies them. It’s very important after the Soviet collapse that Russia was able to combine with true allies who will work against the same ideological enemy. Iran is a strong anti-American state. The same can be said of Syria and Hezbollah too. I am here in Moscow, just 800 meters from a new Mosque that is being built. It is huge. The Russian police say that some 120,000 Muslims are gathering there in downtown Moscow. The number of Muslim immigrants is growing. They have been coming in for the last five-to-six years. The ethnic composition of Moscow is changing.” I was surprised to hear this and asked Kalashnikov if this wasn’t a dangerous development for Russia. After all, won’t the ethnic Russians eventually reject an alien colony in the heart of their capital? “Sure,” Kalashnikov admitted, “it’s a huge problem. But for now they are Russia’s allies. Please understand that Iran is not a Russian satellite like Cuba or Venezuela. Iran may be regarded as an ally because they target the West, but Iran is different from the others.” I asked Kalashnikov if Russia might be using Iran as Stalin once used Hitler (to start the Second World War). I also suggested that once Russia was done making use of Iran the Kremlin would turn against Islam in order to lead Europe against the Islamic threat. I noted that Moscow already supports the anti-immigrant Right in Europe, which is why figures like Anders Breivik was an admirer of Putin. It is no secret that the racist and neo-fascists of Europe look to the Kremlin for leadership. Kalashnikov responded eagerly by saying, “Let me talk about [the neo-fascists] in Hungary. They are pro-Putin. They are nationalists, and of course, they are absolutely anti-Semitic and anti-American. That’s right. When I came to Berlin two years ago the taxi driver from the airport said he was pro-Nazi, pro-Hitler and the Jews were to blame for everything. He spoke highly of Putin. And taxi drivers are good barometers. There is sort of a trend at work. But the key thing, you must remember, is Winston Churchill’s phrase that Russia ‘is a riddle wrapped inside an enigma’? That was just part of the phrase. Churchill said he knew the key to that riddle. He said it was Russian national interest. What he meant was Russian international strategy as he understood it. In that sense he was definitely right. My point is, whatever groups or trends may be identified, they should be evaluated on the basis of a common denominator. Will they assist in the struggle against the United States?” I asked Kalashnikov if Moscow grasped the fact that working with fascists and neo-Nazis might be dangerous. Didn’t Moscow learn anything from the Hitler-Stalin Pact of 1939? “The main thing, the absolute priority,” said Kalashnikov, “is to get rid of the Americans at any price. It is an absolute priority today. No doubt about it. Whether it is dangerous to combine with fascists, we will see. The main thing is to separate and split NATO. This has been the core of the Russian strategy in Europe. You have to understand that anything that is negative for the Americans is positive for Moscow. American society and ideology – most all American values – are absolutely alien and opposed by us. That is why we are desperately seeking new allies and friends of whatever kind. Two things I would like to stress: from the perspective of the Russian generals everything should have a strategic dimension: politics, military affairs, etc. They interpret everything in terms of a clear-cut enemy because what happened to the USSR did not change the nature of Russian society. We have a ruling class that controls everything, subject to no laws or norms, with huge resources, and centralization. What you have to understand is that Russia is a more centralized state than the Soviet Union was. There are no Republics. All important things are controlled from the Kremlin. And a new Cheka [secret police] has come into existence and everybody has missed it. Everyone is ready to deplore the situation of the Russian opposition, but there is no interest in the new Cheka. It is well-equipped, newly trained and motivated. They are making headway, and they have crushed all the real opposition we’ve had in recent years. It’s a huge political factor at play in Russia. And I must tell you that professionally they are quite good, staffed with a new generation of Russians. Chekism is regenerated with the same old ways of thinking and acting, but with even better weapons and methods. The new KGB generation should be taken into account. They are on the Internet, they are using information warfare. I see them in Ukraine, in the Baltic States and in Europe. These guys are well paid and very committed.” Continuing my discussion with former KGB officer Victor Kalashnikov, I was eager to learn more about Russian strategy. Kalashnikov told me that Russian grand strategy has one focus. “It’s all about struggle against the United States,” he said. “All allies are measured in terms of their anti-Americanism. If they are anti-American, they are our friends.” This is how we should understand the activities of Syria and Iran, for example. Russia is helping these countries acquire new weapons, new capabilities. To measure the degree of Russian enmity let us consider the Syria crisis, noted Kalashnikov: “The head of the Russian state has publicly warned the West that starting arms deliveries to the opposition in Syria might result in terrorist attacks against Europe. That’s a clear causes belli – a real terrorist threat.” The average reader might imagine that Washington has taken alarm at Putin’s threatening remarks. But no such alarm has been registered. The American side barely acknowledges a threat has been made. And this is normal for us. For whatever reason, our leaders ignore the threat from Russia. Again and again, the Cold War is said to be over. There is no longer a threat from Russia, which is now described as a “normal” country. But Russia is not a normal country. “The majority of Russians are supportive of Putin,” Kalashnikov explained. “The popularity of Putin is growing while American society and ideology are depicted as hostile to Russian interests. Therefore Russia is hungry for new allies or friends of any kind whatsoever. And these allies must be anti-Americans. All of this helps place the military issue in a broader context. It is not about tanks on the battlefield of Europe. It is about rockets in the arsenal of Hezbollah.” The Cold War is not over. The rulers of Russia haven’t given up their goal of smashing America. Today, however, their strategy follows an indirect approach. The old direct approach of threatening Europe with tank armies has been replaced with a new strategy based on Islamic terrorism. “Now this is another topic,” Kalashnikov confided, “but we have to ask what happened to the Soviet Union in 1991. It was dismantled for the sake of reorganization and for the sake of Russian power. I remember quite well, even before Gorbachev, that our military showed discontent with the strategic picture. These huge tank masses were a wasting resource, especially after 1983.” The grand strategy of the Soviet Union had to be overhauled and modernized while costs had to be brought down. Therefore, new methods of defeating America had to be devised, and new opportunities would then appear. These methods included the arming of terrorist states with nuclear and biological weapons. Kalashnikov continued: “I mentioned the year 1983. At that time the core strategy was splitting Europe from America. Europeans worried that Soviet troops could reach the Atlantic in one or two weeks. Therefore, the West recognized an imminent threat. And there was real fear on the European side that the Americans would not defend Europe. In 1983, when America deployed Pershing missiles in Europe, this whole Soviet strategy of massing tanks was finished. It was futile. That was the starting point for a new strategy.” Once the old strategy had failed, it was time to apply new strategic concepts. Kalashnikov asked, “What need was there for huge armies in central Europe when the result was always a standoff with the Americans?” Inspiring your enemy with fear may lead him to capitulate. That was not the only possible outcome, however. There was always the possibility that he would call your bluff. In the case of America and NATO, the West’s defenses were strengthened rather than weakened in the 1980s. As Kalashnikov noted, “I remember our officers asking, ‘what shall we do next?’ Well, we were forced to start over with a new design.” According to Kalashnikov, “The West sees that with friends like Iran and Hezbollah the Russians could start a lot of trouble. Add this to Russian ballistic nuclear weapons targeting American cities and you have a new formula: Nuclear rockets plus Hezbollah makes Russia invincible, and it is quite dangerous. It’s a new combination of military tools. That’s why I was irritated by certain statements in President Obama’s speech.” I asked Kalashnikov about the increasingly precarious position of Israel. Kalashnikov replied, “The Israeli position is twofold. They are anti-Syria and anti-Hezbollah. But their position versus Russia was ambiguous. They have a growing population of Russian immigrants. So they would like to develop their relationship with Russia. Yet Russia is moving closer to the anti-Israeli side.” While Israel remains uncertain toward Russia, Russia’s president charts a steady course, noted Kalashnikov: “Some of the top Israeli security figures met with Putin and asked him not to deploy anti-ship missiles which are effective against the American navy, and also the S-300 missiles that will greatly limit Israeli airpower against Syria. Putin rejected the Israeli request.” How will Russia stop the Israelis from destroying the delivered missiles before they are deployed? Kalashnikov offered a surprising answer: “Syria’s military is going to be quasi-integrated with Iran. That means an attack on Syria implies an attack on Iran. Meanwhile Russia is sending ships from the Pacific Fleet, even as they modernize the Black Sea Fleet, with a new naval base at Novorissiysk. So the Russians are bound to increase their naval pressure on the Eastern Mediterranean.” By strengthening Russia’s regional military presence, and by integrating the Syrian and Iranian armed forces, Russia hopes to build a soon-to-be impregnable stronghold in the Middle East. “I see Russia’s position growing there,” said Kalashnikov. “An Israeli attack on Syria would involve Hezbollah. And if push comes to shove, we can make trouble for the Americans in Lebanon, or somewhere in Asia.” The West may not be willing to support Israel under these circumstances. As Kalashnikov explained, “The Western allies are going to think twice whether they will support Israel because of their growing vulnerabilities elsewhere. You have the bombing of the Boston Marathon. You have the vulnerability of NATO’s left flank in the Baltic States. Russia is saying, ‘You mess with our friends, we mess with yours.’ It’s a new game that you didn’t have to play during the good old days of the Cold War. “ Kalashnikov continued, “What happened on 9/11 was just an omen of things to come. At the time of 9/11 America’s dispute with Russia had reached its peak. George Bush was going to leave the ABM Treaty. Putin said, ‘If you do this you will not be able to defend against new threats.’ Bush said, ‘I am leaving the Treaty.’ So 9/11 happened. You had broken the strategic balance based on strategic missiles. You had been warned that new security challenges will emerge. But you didn’t listen in the summer of 2001.” he following paragraphs serve as “background support” for Victor Kalashnikov’s thesis. Many readers of Part 2 may not have understood Victor Kalashnikov’s statement about the terrorist attack of Sept. 11, 2001. So it is time to review and explain. It is necessary to remind readers of the ABM Treaty and of the military strategy of the old Soviet Union which remains the policy of Russia today. At the end of Part 2, in the course of our discussion, former KGB officer Kalashnikov offered the following observation. “What happened on 9/11 was just an omen of things to come,” he warned. “At the time of 9/11 America’s dispute with Russia had reached its peak. George Bush was going to leave the ABM Treaty.” The Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty restricted the number and placement of units for intercepting ICMBs (intercontinental ballistic missiles) and SLBMs (submarine launched ballistic missiles). Since Russian military power largely depends on ICBMs and SLBMs, the mass deployment of ABMs would effectively reduce Russia to a third rate military power. Kalashnikov points to Russian President Putin’s warning about Bush’s announced intention to exit from the ABM Treaty by the end of 2001. At the time Putin warned, “If you do this you will not be able to defend against new threats.” According to Kalashnikov, “You had been warned that new security challenges will emerge. But you did not listen in the summer of 2001.” Kalashnikov’s strategic interpretation of 9/11begs a subtle question. There is no reason a nuclear attack requires an ICBM or an SLBM. A nuclear weapon might be delivered by a terrorist rather than a missile. The United States has fairly open borders. Drugs and people are regularly smuggled across that border. And readers will note that as early as 1999 the name of Osama bin Laden was associated with nuclear terrorism (since terrorism expert Josef Bodansky’s claim that al Qaeda had as many as twenty nuclear weapons “stolen” from the former Soviet Union). Kalashnikov’s suggestion of a Russian connection to 9/11 is far from whimsical. And he is not the first former KGB official to see a connection. In the summer of 2005 a former KGB/FSB officer named Alexander Litvinenko said he had firsthand knowledge of a connection between Russian intelligence and al Qaeda. In fact, he identified the second highest official in al Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri, as a “longtime agent of Moscow.” In July 2005 a Polish journalist sent me the following translation of Litvinenko’s interview with fakt.pl, which took place after a terrorist attack on the London subway. FAKT: Alexander, who, in your opinion, is the originator of this [London] terrorist attack? A. Litvinenko: You know, I have spoken about it earlier and I shall say now, that I know only one organization that has made terrorism the main tool of solving political problems. It is the Russian special services. The KGB was engaged in terrorism for many years, and mass terrorism. At the special department of the KGB they trained terrorists from practically every country in the world. These courses lasted, as a rule, for a half-year. Specially trained and prepared agents of the KGB organized murders and explosions, including explosions of tankers, the hijacking of passenger airliners, strikes on diplomatic, state and commercial organizations worldwide. FAKT: Could you name … some of the terrorists prepared at the “special courses” of the KGB-FSB? A. Litvinenko: The bloodiest terrorists in the world were or are agents of the KGB-FSB. These are well-known, like Carlos Ilyich Ramiros, nicknamed “the Jackal,” the late Yassir Arafat, Saddam Hussein, Adjalan (he is condemned in Turkey), Wadi Haddad, the head of the service of external operations of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Hauyi, the head of the communist party of Lebanon, Mr. Papaionnu from the Cyprus, Sean Garland from Ireland and many others. All of them were trained by the KGB, received money from there, weapons and explosives, counterfeit documents and communication equipment for carrying out of acts of terrorism worldwide. FAKT: Some may object that each of the listed figures, and the forces supporting them, were engaged in solving their own political problems. A. Litvinenko: Certainly, all these figures and movements operated under their own slogans; however, none of them especially hid their “intimate” … relationship with the Kremlin and Lubyanka. There is a simple question: whether the Russian special services would train and finance people and groups that were not supervised by Lubyanka and did not serve the interests of the Kremlin? You understand perfectly, they would not. Each act of terrorism made by these people was carried out as an assignment and under the rigid control of the KGB of the USSR. And [the terrorism] … is not casual after the disintegration of the USSR and [reform of the KGB]…. FAKT: Every terrorist you have named is from ‘the old staff’ of the KGB. Could you name someone from recent history? A. Litvinenko: Certainly, here it is. The number two person in the terrorist organization al Qaeda, who they are crediting with the series of explosions in London, Ayman al-Zawahiri, is an old agent of the FSB. Being sentenced to death in Egypt for terrorism and hunted by Interpol, Ayman al-Zawahiri, in 1998, was in the territory of Dagestan, where for half a year he received special training at one of the educational bases of the FSB. After this training he was transferred to Afghanistan, where he had never been before and where, following the recommendation of his Lubyanka chiefs, he at once … penetrated the milieu of bin Laden and soon became his assistant in al Qaeda. FAKT: Could you hint at least, where this data comes from? A. Litvinenko: I can. During my service in one of the most secret departments of the FSB, top officials from the UFSB of Dagestan, who had directly worked with Ayman al-Zawahiri … were called to Moscow and received high posts. FAKT: What can you say concerning the acts of terrorism in London ? From what region and with what forces was this strike directed? A. Litvinenko: In reply to this question I can definitely say that the center of global terrorism is not in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan or the Chechen Republic. The terrorist infection is spread worldwide from Lubyanka Square and the Kremlin cabinet. And until the Russian special services are outlawed, dispersed and condemned, the terrorism will never stop: bombs will blow up and blood will be shed. Terrorism has no expiration date…. I would like to repeat, that all the terrorists, whom I have named, were supported by the heads of the Soviet and Russian special services – Yuri Andropov, Vladimir Putin, Nikolay Patrushev and others. These people are the main terrorists…. And until we condemn them … global terrorism will continue. Such was the fakt.pl interview with former FSB-KGB officer Litvinenko, which corroborates Kalashnikov’s suggestion above, and helps to explain why Litvinenko was fatally poisoned with radioactive polonium-210 in 2006, and why Kalashnikov himself has suffered from mercury poisoning. (Please note: Kalashnikov’s wife also suffers from mercury poisoning, and the mix of symptoms suffered by the Kalashnikovs suggests the possibility of other, unidentified elements in their poisoning. In fact, if there are any medical doctors reading this who would take an interest in their case, please write to me at jrnyquist@aol.com.) Strategists in the West have a blind spot, especially as Russian disinformation has been successful in diverting investigators and political analysts from investigating Litvinenko’s claims. After Litvinenko’s assassination by Kremlin agents in 2006, the major news media produced a series of documentaries about his background. None of these mentioned Litvinenko’s statements about the FSB connection to al Qaeda. None dared restate Litvinenko’s accusation that Putin was the chief terrorist, or that the FSB was the main headquarters of international terrorism. Why was the media unwilling to discuss Litvinenko’s testimony (and the possible reason for his assassination)? The reason is instinctively grasped by anyone who has worked as a journalist writing about Russia. If your writing threatens to expose Russian machinations, your career is going to suffer. A journalist who doesn’t know this (is a journalist) who doesn’t know his journalistic ABCs. If you write about Russia, be careful not to touch on certain themes. Another former KGB officer I recently interviewed was Konstantin Preobrazhensky, who wrote an intriguing article titled “Russia and Islam are not Separate: Why Russia backs Al-Qaeda.” According to Preobrazhensky: Mohammed Atta, the pilot of the first plane to crash into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, had met with a senior Iraq intelligence agent in Prague, Czech Republic, five months before the attack. But Iraqi intelligence was just a client of Russia’s intelligence service. It brings a new understanding to the fact that President Putin was the first foreign President to call President Bush on 9/11. One my conjecture that he knew in advance what was to happen. In his article, Preobrazhensky credits Litvinenko’s testimony that Ayman al-Zawahiri and other al Qaeda terrorists were trained in Russia. (There is also Czech testimony that Atta was trained in Communist Czechoslovakia during the 1980s). Even more important, this training took place in secret and has been hidden from the world. Every journalistic attempt to expose this secret has resulted in no reaction, no further investigation from the journalistic community. We are left to suppose that Litvinenko’s claim and Preobrazhensky’s support for that claim are owing to the malice of two Russian malcontents. But this is far from the truth. The former head of Communist Romania’s foreign intelligence service, Ion Mihai Pacepa, made the following statement which was quoted inFrontPage Magazine on 1 March 2004: September 11, 2001 was directly rooted in a joint Soviet/Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) operation conceived in the aftermath of the 1967 Six-Day Arab-Israeli War. The object of this joint operation was to repair Moscow’s prestige by turning the Islamic world against Israel and by creating a rabid and violent hatred for its main supporter, the United States. The strategy was to portray the US, this land of freedom, as a Nazi-style “imperial-Zionist country” financed by Jewish money and run by a rapacious “Council of the Elders of Zion” (the Kremlin’s epithet for the US Congress), the aim of which was allegedly to transform the rest of the world into a Jewish fiefdom. In other words, the heart of the joint plan was to convert the historical Arab and Islamic hatred of the Jews into a new hatred of the United States. We threw many millions of dollars at this gigantic task, which involved whole armies of intelligence officers. Like other former Soviet bloc insiders, Kalashnikov emphasizes the connection between terrorism as a new form of warfare and Moscow’s overall strategy. “Lenin created a new kind of terror policy,” Kalashnikov explained. “Terror was the starting point for Bolshevik state strategy. Organized terror is the cornerstone of Soviet statehood.” Kalashnikov further stated, “Moscow wants the ABM Treaty back, otherwise you will face more trouble.” Moscow’s message to Bush was misunderstood, however. For it was Bush’s curse to have, at his beck and call, a hapless and intellectually compromised set of advisors. With regard to terrorism, the American intelligence community has been clueless. The analysis of the CIA suffers from a general incompetence because American intelligence analysts are educated in graduate schools where a realistic appraisal of the Russian threat is generally frowned upon, and where neo-Marxism enjoys a veto over careers and advancements. American analysts are therefore indoctrinated to dismiss any notion of a Soviet policy of terrorist conspiracy, or to dismiss any claim of Russian involvement in the terrorist phenomenon of today. Just as journalists are trained to avoid a certain species of anti-Russian statements, so are the analysts of the CIA and Pentagon. In brief, there has been a tendency to willfully misinterpret Russian strategy, and this tendency has a common root in American academic culture. With regard to American academic expertise, Kalashnikov told me, “I have a friend in America, a Russian journalist, Vladimir Baranov. And he is reporting on the Tsarnaev brothers [i.e., Boston Marathon bombers]. He mentioned this American anti-terror expert … who said the linkages between the Chechens and al Qaeda are unimportant. But this is total nonsense! Chechnya is under Russian military intelligence!” Kalashnikov is disgusted by America’s analysts. “What I would suggest,” he said, “is that your anti-terror expert read Vladimir Lenin who provided the textbook for terrorists: How they should set up combat units; who is to be killed first and second; what strategy and tactics to adopt. Lenin developed a complete theory for using terrorism to take power and govern a huge state. That was the beginning of Soviet strategy, statehood and government, as well as international policy.” Kalashnikov further warned against expert opinion. “Too much academic wording comes about when we use words like ‘socialism’ and ‘communism.’ Lenin was a practical politician who discovered new methods for power. He discovered that terror was the most effective tool in politics.” And so the idea that Russia or the KGB could have no connection with 9/11 is absurd for someone who knows the role that terrorism plays in Soviet strategy. n Part 3 of this series former KGB analyst Victor Kalashnikov criticized the West’s academic experts on Russia. He said that these experts have never understood that Lenin was a “practical politician who discovered new methods for power.” According to Kalashnikov there is “a tremendous chain of continuity across all the ideologies from Soviet to Russian,” from the time of Lenin to present day Russia under Vladimir Putin. This continuity helps explain the problems we face today. The failure of understanding in the West is not merely academic. There is also a failure of the West’s intelligence services and politicians to understand Russia’s continued affinity with Lenin’s terrorist ideas; and this failure of understanding has profound consequences, in Kalashnikov’s view, especially illustrated by the defection to Russia of Edward Joseph Snowden, a former technical contractor for the United States National Security Agency (NSA) and a former employee of the Central Intelligence Agency. Last 14 June U.S. federal prosecutors charged Snowden with espionage after he had left the United States for Hong Kong on May 20 and began releasing information about classified projects. On 23 June Snowden arrived in Moscow. Shortly thereafter the incompetence of American officials in dealing with the matter made itself felt. Hostile to the United States, President Evo Morales of Bolivia was departing Moscow on 2 July and seemed to offer Snowden a ride to Bolivia. After flying out of Moscow Morales’s plane was denied access to the air space of France, Portugal, Spain and Italy. In other words, his passage out of European airspace was blocked. The Bolivian was then forced to land in Austria so that U.S. officials might grab Snowden off the plane. But Snowden was not on the plane. “How was it that the plane to South America with Snowden didn’t have Snowden? Who leaked that disinformation?” asked Kalashnikov. “And Putin is making tremendous gains all the time in this situation. He is the big winner because there is now tension between the U.S. and NATO, between the U.S. and Latin America. We may speculate that’s why Mrs. Napolitano [of Homeland Security] was fired.” I asked Kalashnikov about Snowden’s revelations that the United States is monitoring international telephone and internet traffic. He replied scornfully, “Everyone knows that all major intelligence services are monitoring phone and internet traffic. This is no secret. And making such gains out of nothing, I must confess it is a huge achievement for Moscow! Your side keeps losing, and losing. With the landing of the Bolivian plane in Austria, I must say, somebody submitted the wrong information.” The implications of the Snowden affair are far from insignificant, Kalashnikov explained. “It implies that the Americans have lost their technical edge and professionalism. And now the U.S. government has to make excuses. Worse yet, almost twelve years after 9/11 there is obviously no improvement in U.S. intelligence capabilities. In the Soviet system the consequences of such bungling would involve severe punishment. Here we see deficiencies in U.S. intelligence security.” As for Snowden’s judgment or status, Kalashnikov said, “The Russians are going to exploit Snowden again and again. He seems to have no understanding as to what he is doing. Russia is not a friendly country to the United States. Presently the Russian armed forces have conducted the biggest military exercises since the collapse of the Soviet Union, involving 160,000 men, and if someone thinks it’s just a show, well, they are mistaken.” Kalashnikov sees the present international situation as colored by Western misunderstandings. If Snowden was confused and disoriented enough to flee to Russia, not realizing he was running into the arms of a hostile state, the United States intelligence community proved unequal to the task of stopping him. Before that, Snowden’s educators and parents failed to provide him with that modicum of friendly indoctrination that would have allowed him to see that Russia was not an appropriate destination for a contract employ of the NSA. Because nearly everyone in America is misinformed about Russia, nearly everyone has the wrong idea. And why do they all have the wrong idea? “I recently met with the chief archivist in Moscow,” Kalashnikov told me. “The archivist said that one half of the documents related to the Second World War are still secret. My point is: there is no normal historical research in this country because the most important records are sealed.” It is important to understand why communist history remains hidden, locked away in archives that are kept secret. Communist power (i.e. Soviet power) was always based on deception. Ten thousand small deceptions were always being maintained in support of a few “big” deceptions. “To me the story started with the Bolsheviks coming to power in Russia,” Kalashnikov explained. “My own knowledge and expertise comes from the fact that I met with people who participated [in the Bolshevik system] and gave orders. There is a tremendous chain of continuity across all the ideologies from Soviet to Russian, and it would be reasonable to show that continuity up to the present day.” Perhaps the great parallel to today is in the period between the First and Second World Wars. Moscow’s machinations against the West did not stop with Stalin’s death in 1953. Neither did it stop with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. To understand World War II and the rise of the Nazis, noted Kalashnikov, “you have to understand that Germany was under Comintern-Russian control until the Nazis came to power.” Moscow’s forte has been the control of countries through agent networks. Long before the Roosevelt administration was heavily penetrated by Soviet agents in the 1930s and 40s, Weimar Germany was penetrated in the 1920s. “The Weimar Republic was more or less aware of this situation,” Kalashnikov explained. “When Hitler came to power he basically gave the green light to German intelligence to solve this problem and tackle the Russian spy networks. That is why, after 1933, the relationship between Germany and the Soviet Union deteriorated, then it improved again later on [with the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact].” It was Moscow’s way – the Bolshevik way – to infiltrate and manipulate all important countries in a constant effort to bend their policy to fulfill Moscow’s goals. “Russian intelligence was very successful,” said Kalashnikov. “Russian penetration of Germany up until 1933 was such that they were able to block German counter-intelligence, and this was something the Nazis had to do something about.” Just as Moscow controlled Weimar Germany in the 1920s and early 30s, Moscow’s networks continue to control or heavily influence many countries today. This control offers the possibility of undermining the security of any targeted nation during a military crisis or war. “I can tell you one thing about Hitler,” Kalashnikov noted. “I knew people who were involved in affairs before the Second World War. In order to mobilize against the Versailles Treaty, the German military elite were in desperate need of political party like the Nazis because they assumed that the First World War was lost because of domestic betrayal and they didn’t want such a betrayal to undermine German security again.” The real causes of the Second World War are not fully appreciated in the West. “Germany and Russia considered themselves the losers of the First World War,” said Kalashnikov, “and from the very beginning they came to a kind of joint understanding for a military alliance to destroy the Versailles system and to crush Poland. So the strategy of Germany and Russia shared the same objectives, and had great continuity going back. So the [Molotov-Ribbentrop] Pact of 1939 [that started World War II] was a logical outcome.” So why did Hitler break the pact he had made with Stalin? “I agree with Victor Suvorov’s analysis that Stalin tricked Hitler into starting World War II,” Kalashnikov replied. “Stalin guaranteed that Hitler would be caught in a two-fronted war. He was happy about this, and kept his options open – keeping his hands free. Stalin made Hitler attack Russia in 1941, and Hitler wasn’t properly prepared.” So what is the lesson we should take from this? “The last century has been one continuous war,” said Kalashnikov. “This fact is covered up. The written history of the official Soviet historians is lie after lie. Take the memoirs of Marshal Zhukov. There have been 17 editions. After his death more and more ‘improvements’ have been included. One of his daughters found a stolen manuscript. So this memoir can continue to evolve. This week the Russian defense ministry has announced that historians can be drafted into the Russian military in order to combat the falsification of military history.” As George Orwell once explained, whoever controls the past controls the future. It follows, therefore, that the Russian political system seeks to shape our understanding of the past so that its strategies can succeed in the future. “Everyone who raises doubts and challenges to the official history is an enemy who would be targeted,” Kalashnikov explained. “This is why few scientifically valid histories are published in Russia. And if you want to talk about the history of the Cold War, or the prolongation of a chain of wars, the whole situation is developing according to its own logic. This war … involved a grand global strategy developed by both sides, and it’s still not over.” According to Kalashnikov the Cold War did not end in 1991. “Putin was installed into power with a special purpose in mind,” he explained. “Putin was installed to facilitate the restoration of the Russian Empire in a new shape, not necessarily as a territorial unity, but as a more profitable formation with a near abroad and much else besides.” Bit by bit the old empire is being reassembled. “Penetration is growing in Bulgaria and the Czech Republic, and growing in Poland and Germany as well,” noted Kalashnikov. “Look, Georgia is already back, and Armenia is more Russian than Belarus. Did you know that Russian missiles tests are conducted in Kazakhstan? Ukraine is a big issue, of course, and is quite controversial. Here the method is to control certain strategic points while leaving the population alone.” The Cold War continues and few care to notice. The Soviet Imperium is put back together, piece by piece. At the same time, America disarms in the face of Russian military preparations. But who understands this? Who is willing to treat this information seriously? At the highest levels of the U.S. government nobody is paying attention. http://www.trevorloudon.com/2013/08/exclusive-must-read-part-4-former-kgb-colonel-victor-kalashnikov-on-the-snowden-affair-russian-penetration-of-western-countries-and-the-secret-history-of-the-second-world-war/
Recommended Posts