This is a must read. I am hoping to
have at least one of the authors on my June 28th show when I move to Thursdays.
This is a must read!
The pdf is 20 pages with foot notes. Take your time and thoroughly
read the CSP analysis. I could probably write a whole other post trying to
introduce this extremely important analysis, but I won’t.
That which I say will little justice to the content
presented, but here goes a brief thought. The central bad guy as to American
National Security is Russia. You will discover that Russia is at the heart of
the Muslim Refugee crisis smacking Europe. AND in relation to that you should
understand the Russian goal is destabilization first in Europe and second in
the USA. Russia even has tentacle infiltrating European Nationalist movements
to foment societal chaos while also publicly supporting the Multicultural Left
ideals. This duo strategy has only one purpose: cultural destabilization designed
to disunite European resolve and alienate a united Europe away from America.
TRUST ME! Those brief words about “Russian Strategy and
Europe’s Refugee Crisis” is only the mere tip of the iceberg that I pray you
take the time to fully understand what the authors J.R. Nyquist and Dr.
Anca-Maria Cernea are trying to enlighten you concerning the survival of our
Western Culture via strategic concepts of National Security and National
Interests.
JRH 6/5/18
************************
Russian Strategy and Europe’s Refugee Crisis
By J.R. Nyquist and Dr. Anca-Maria Cernea
May 29, 2018
INTRODUCTION
Forty years ago, a serious long-term problem confronting
Moscow was the USSR’s fast-growing Muslim population. It was then speculated
that the Soviet Union’s high Muslim birthrate would turn the USSR into a
majority Muslim country by the middle of the twenty-first century. It is a
strange joke, and more than a curious twist of fate, that NATO faces this same
prospect today.
The Russian armed forces officially moved into Syria on 30
September 2015. Already a massive Muslim “refugee” invasion of Europe was underway,
stretching through the spring and summer of that year. This migrant flood
occurred without a dramatic change in the Syrian crisis. According to a report
by investigative journalist Witold Gadowski, published in mid-September 2015,
the people then pouring into the heart of Europe included more than refugees,
and possibly included ISIS terrorist infiltrators.1
Gadowski was a well-known war reporter, documentary film
director, and winner of several journalism prizes in Poland and abroad. He went
to Syria in 2015 and discovered that in the territory controlled by the Islamic
State (ISIS), there was no chance for anyone to leave ISIS-controlled territory
without permission. As he explained, the punishment for attempting to escape
was crucifixion.2
In Gadowski’s opinion, the flood of refugees had been
triggered by decisions made in Moscow, and perhaps in Tehran. In fact, the mass
killing of Syrian civilians was an ongoing project of the Russian-backed Syrian
dictator, Bashar al-Assad – whose troops were killing seven times more
civilians than ISIS.3 Once the Russian bombers arrived, even more
civilians were targeted.4
Of special interest, and contrary to public declarations,
Russian and Chinese technicians were busy helping ISIS to maintain its captured
oil rigs and refineries, while Russian trained Iraqi military officers
(formerly in Saddam Hussein’s army), were leading ISIS forces against the
Baghdad government (which government set up a joint intelligence headquarters
in league with Iran and Russia).5 From this and other evidence it
appears that Russia has been playing a double game in the Middle East.
Using the Iraqi oil infrastructure, relying on clandestine
Russian technical support, ISIS earned $800 million in annual revenues by
“selling more than 60,000 barrels of oil per day.” But this was not the Islamic
State’s only source of income. According to Gadowski:
…the Islamic State trades
artworks and archeological artifacts. It is not true that the monuments of
antique culture are destroyed. They are sold and bring a large income. In 90
percent of the cases, this is happening through the Russian mafia. The Islamic
State and the wave of refugees bring profits to the Russian, Turkish and
Albanian mafias.6
In this matter the Russian mafia is not simply the Russian
mafia, and the same can be said of mafia organizations which have appeared
throughout the “former” communist world. As noted by Brian Whitmore of Radio
Free Europe/Radio Liberty, “Organized crime is now a major element of Russian
statecraft.”7 According to Gadowski, Russia’s game is to “checkmate
Europe, and to a lesser extent the United States.” Outwardly Russia pretends to
fight ISIS. In reality, Russia helps ISIS. Essential to the plan, the Syrians
were generating refugees by terrorizing civilians in Syria. As stated above,
Gadowski believed that a secret Islamic State Terrorist Unit (AMNI) was placing
fanatical killers among the refugees. In this way a vast network of suicide
bombers and murderers entered Europe.8
After arriving in Syria, Russian air units launched bombing
raids against Syrian civilians, adding to the refugee flow in late summer. Of
course, the refugee crisis was well under way before the Russians arrived. It
had peaked earlier. What the bombing showed, however, was Russia’s strategic
intention. The Syrians and the Russians were following a pre-defined path. The
bombers were the icing on a cake already baked. Long before the Russian bombers
arrived other means of pressure had been employed by Syria – including the use
of chemical weapons. Refugees (and terrorists) had long since flooded into
neighboring Turkey. Through the spring and summer of 2015, the numbers were
getting larger and larger. A significant proportion of these masses moved into
Europe. This paper will present evidence and arguments that Russia and her
allies (Syria and Iran) set this process in motion as part of a larger strategic
design. The authors believe that Moscow does not act haphazardly. Rather, its
moves are carefully thought-out in advance. The strategy being applied is
complex, its objectives masked by disinformation and subterfuge, extortion and
blackmail, organized crime and false flag terrorist operations.
THE ARAB SPRING
When rebellions began to break out in the Middle East
several years ago, the former chief of Romanian intelligence, Ion Mihai Pacepa,
wondered why the first rebellions in the series took place “only in Islamic
countries that are pro-American.” He asked why the rebels were burning American
flags. He thought it suspicious that the United States had no advanced warning
of the mass demonstrations that swept the Arab world from Morocco to the
Persian Gulf. Pacepa noted that “on the first day of the Cairo uprising” the
demonstrators “were carrying flags displaying the hammer and sickle.” He called
this “a mistake caused by overzealousness….”9
The rebellion that began on 17 December 2010 in Tunisia, and
spread across the Arab world, was an attempt to sweep away “moderate” Arab
regimes. It was not a revolution for freedom or democracy. As Richard Miniter
wrote in a 2011 Forbes article,
“Virtually every element of the media narrative [on the Arab Spring] … is wrong
or misleading.” The rebellion was not a spontaneous reaction to local
dictatorships. According to Miniter, Egypt’s chief of intelligence warned Gen.
David Petraeus in 2010 that Iran – a close ally and client state of Moscow –
was preparing to “bring down [Egypt’s] Mubarak regime.”10
Miniter was told by intelligence officials that “Iran’s
agents are behind the street demonstrations and violent attacks on government
buildings.” 11 Iran’s revolutionary activity throughout the region,
however, was not merely Iranian. This activity was connected to Russia, and to
Russia’s past support for the communist cause. According to an Iranian
specialist, the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ali Khamenei, was educated in Moscow
and may be a Russian intelligence asset. Worse yet, other top leaders in Iran
were also educated in Russia, with ongoing ties to Moscow.12
In a recently published article by the Katehon Institute13
in Russia, B. Ozerov explained that the Soviet government in 1918 “was guided
by understanding Islam as a close ideology to the communist doctrine.” After
all, Islam favored ideals of equality, social justice, and the redistribution
of wealth. According to Ozerov, Moscow’s initial plan in the region was “to
transform Islam into an Eastern edition of Communism….”14
In a 4 July 1925 interview with the Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shimbun, Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin was asked
if he believed revolutionary turmoil in China, India, Persia and Egypt was
bound to sweep away the Western powers. “Yes, I do,” said the communist leader,
who added that the West would be “attacked on two sides – in the rear as well
as in front.”
RELATED INSIGHTS OF
V. KALASHNIKOV AND A. ILLARIONOV
In June 2013 J.R. Nyquist interviewed a disaffected KGB
officer in Russia named Viktor Kalashnikov. In reference to Syria, the former
KGB lieutenant colonel said, “It’s all about struggle against the United
States. All allies are measured in terms of their anti-Americanism. If they are
anti-American, they are our friends.” Kalashnikov then referred to the
deployment of “terrorist armies.” Armies composed of terrorists, said
Kalashnikov, were better than old-fashioned Soviet tank armies. They were more
flexible, and cheaper than tanks. “The head of the Russian state has publicly
warned the West that … arms deliveries to the opposition in Syria might result
in terrorist attacks against Europe. That’s a clear causus belli – a real terrorist threat,” said Kalashnikov.15
When Nyquist advanced the idea that the Cold War was over,
Kalashnikov scoffed. This is yet another topic, he said. “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.” The Soviet generals were not
happy with the strategic situation. The large tank armies of the Soviet Union
were, in Kalashnikov’s words, “a wasting asset, especially after 1983.”16
The core strategy, he explained, “was splitting Europe from
America.” In the 1980s this was attempted with the threat of war. But now,
under present circumstances, a different method would have to be devised. “What
happened on 9/11 was just an omen of things to come,” he explained.
In Part 1 of the interview, headlined “Russia’s Islamist
Alliance, Plans to Destroy NATO,” the former KGB lieutenant colonel, who had
been trained as a strategist, attempted to draw the interviewer’s attention to
Russia’s support for the anti-immigrant parties in Europe. Here Kalashnikov referred
to Islam as a Russian weapon in the destruction of NATO. Realizing the
interviewer was perplexed, Kalashnikov said, “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.”17
What did the anti-immigrant parties have to do with
“terrorist armies” in the Middle East? What did any of it have to do with
splitting America off of Europe? Here was a question requiring careful
consideration. To answer this question, one might well imagine how NATO would
have prospered if Hillary Clinton and Marine Le Pen had won their respective
elections. What if Europe followed France’s lead? Would the politically correct
Americans remain allies with the new Europe? “What I would suggest,” said
Kalashnikov, “is that your anti-terror experts 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.”18
Was Kalashnikov talking about Europe?
More than one year after Kalashnikov’s curious
pronouncements, a former Kremlin economic advisor named Andrei Illarionov, made
an even more curious statement. In a December 2014 television interview,
Illarionov noted that Europe had reached its lowest level of defense readiness.
He also noted that Russia was openly threatening the West with nuclear war.
Illarionov then made an astonishing prediction, adding that “the European
nations will not be very much surprised, let’s say, if in the spring of next
year, 2015, there will be some kind of massive political movement – let’s say a
kind of ‘Islamic spring.’”19
Being Russian himself, having worked in the Kremlin, it
seems obvious that Illarionov had access to high-level sources. The coming
“Islamic spring,” he said, would not occur in the Middle East, “but
in Europe.” He mentioned destabilizing effects on “certain European countries”
where the crisis would “consume the energy and attention of European leaders at
a time when Mr. Putin would try and fulfill his neo-imperial project….”20
Illarionov was quite specific when he said the coming
“Islamic spring” in Europe would involve “movements and activities … in
European countries themselves.” When asked if this could be triggered by Russia,
Illarionov said, “I am just warning … when it should happen … European
societies should not be [too] much shocked and surprised.”
Illarionov’s prediction carries forward the suggestion that
Moscow instigated the migrant crisis. For how else could Illarionov have known
about an “Islamic spring” involving “movements and activities … in Europe”? His
prediction was an unlikely direct hit. To know something in advance is to know
something is being planned. Illarionov clearly predicted the most significant
event of the following year. He also implied this event was planned to distract
the West from Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. And this prediction fits
perfectly with the analysis of Lt. Col. Viktor Kalashnikov, a resident of
Moscow, who warned of Russia deploying “terrorist armies” in 2013. The fact is,
people in Moscow knew what was coming. And why wouldn’t they? It takes enormous
resources and real planning to move millions of people from the Middle East to
the heart of Europe. A lot of people had to know in advance, if only to set up
the needed transport system.
INSIGHTS OF A
ROMANIAN GENERAL
Those who have lived under communist regimes, who were
educated as strategists, are in a better position to properly evaluate recent
events than their West European counterparts. During an August 2015 Adevarul Live television discussion,
retired Army General Constantin Degeratu referred to the European refugee
crisis as a “hybrid war” of aggression, conjured out of the Middle East by
Russia. Superficially, the refugee crisis “completely covered the problem of
the Russian aggression against Ukraine,” Degeratu noted. He then stated that
the whole refugee operation was “well organized.” The general added, “Look at
the people who are coming. They are better dressed and better fed than 10 to 15
percent of Romania’s population. This is a planned invasion, it doesn’t have a
direct cause in the Middle East….” He then pointed out the logistical
difficulties involved in moving millions of people hundreds or thousands of
miles. “If somebody is to come from Afghanistan with a trolley to the border of
Macedonia, this requires logistics.”21
As if to clarify Kalashnikov’s earlier point about Hungary,
Degeratu pointed to a curious anomaly. “It is said that this threefold increase
in the number of refugees compared to the numbers of last summer is taking
everyone by surprise. But [this] occurred a week after Hungary completed the
building of [a large border] fence. Doesn’t it seem interesting to you that
first the fence was built and afterwards this migration started, in that particular area?”22
Retired Army General Alexandru Grumaz was also on the
program. He agreed that the migration was “well supported.” He added that
Turkey also had an interest in pushing the refugees along, toward Europe. It
was, said Grumaz, a crisis of European institutions. Degeratu said the problem
of the refugee invasion could not be solved. Why? “Because it is managed by
Russia and thus it is meant not to be solved, but to be maintained.” The
general then said, “Russia’s interest is to maintain this crisis.”
“It is clear,” said Degeratu, “that if the European Union
doesn’t want to live the nightmare … which says that in the years 2030 to 2040
more than 60 percent of the active EU population will be Muslim … then the
European countries should decide if they want to survive as a civilization or
not.” According to Degeratu’s strategic assessment, “We have to understand that
we are the target of a war, and we may call it hybrid, or an asymmetrical war,
but this migrant wave is a consequence of it.” He then summarized the perilous
cost of the migrants for Europe, noting, “the cost for each one of these people
is three times the minimum retirement pension in Romania!”23
Surely, said Degeratu, “The political attitude [in Europe]
with regard to this situation needs to change. So far, it’s been peace-time
politics. Now we are the target of an aggression. Border control is absolutely
mandatory.”
According to Prof. Przemysław Żurawski vel Grajewski, who
was asked by Dr. Cernea to comment on Gen. Degeratu’s assessments, “The
opinions of Gen. Degeratu are fully justified and I would subscribe [to] each
of his statements….” Prof. Żurawski is one of Poland’s best political analysts.
He teaches social science at the University of Łódz and the National School of
Public Administration, serving in the National Council for Development, an
advisory board to President Andrzej Duda. He is also a counselor to the current
Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jacek Czaputowicz. According to Prof.
Żurawski, the Russians are not responsible for all the refugees who have
flooded into Europe, but it is certain “they did their best to make [the
problem] larger … to confuse the political scene in European countries … as
much as they can. Russia is the main ally of Assad and Iran….” These allies of
Russia, he said, have maximized “the scale of the refugees.” Prof. Żurawski
also pointed to “the semi-criminal FSB/local mafias and hybrid structures in
Bosnia and Herzegovina.” These also played a role in moving refugees through
the Balkans into the heart of Europe. “The conclusion is,” he said, “that
Russia had instruments to maximize the troubles” despite Europe’s inability to
find “a smoking gun.”24
Prof. Żurawski also noted that, “Anti-immigrant parties in
the West are usually pro-Russian (Front National, AfD); so deepening the crisis
helps Russia’s followers in the West.” This point should not be overlooked.
(Kalashnikov hinted at this factor with reference to Hungary more than a year
before the refugee crisis began.) Here the manipulation of the European right
that takes center stage. Moscow has every reason to believe the European
anti-immigrant parties will gain political traction as the refugee crisis intensifies.
Moscow, therefore, has reason to invest in the European right. Simultaneously,
Moscow also uses its agents on the European left. These agents intensify the
crisis through “politically correct” policies. As the left drives the crisis
forward, the right opposition grows and seeks ready allies – and is driven into
Moscow’s open arms.
This process may already be underway in Hungary where Prime
Minister Viktor Orban has shifted toward Moscow.25 The Chief of the
Hungarian General Staff, Gen. Tibor Benkő, says that Hungary does not have to buy equipment exclusively from NATO
countries. Russia is currently modernizing Hungarian Mi-24 and Mi-17
helicopters for $64 million.26 Perhaps even more alarming is Prime
Minister Orban’s tolerance with regard to Russian infiltration of the Hungarian
right. Former Hungarian anti-communists are now celebrating Soviet cosmonaut
Yuri Gagarin, linking arms with Russian officials. According to authors Péter
Krekó and Lóránt Győri, Russia has
invested political capital in “hate groups in Central Europe,” with financial
ties “to violent organizations in Central and Eastern Europe as well….”27
This is a conscious strategy:
In Moscow’s toolkit of active
measures and hybrid warfare, the boundaries between violent and nonviolent
tools are increasingly blurry. And this process is two-directional: not only
can information be weaponized; violent organizations can be used as soft-power
tools. The Kremlin is highly effective at infiltrating fringe parties and
paramilitary organizations in Central Europe. They are easy to purchase or
control, as these extremist groups tend to be small and easily manipulated.28
What is the ultimate strategic value of the infiltration and
manipulation of fringe parties and paramilitary groups? Keeping this question
in mind, when we look at the present-day chaos in the Middle East, Russia’s
past support for terrorist organizations of every kind becomes less and less of
a riddle.
The former Romanian Minister for Communications and
Information,29 Marius Bostan, was asked by Dr. Cernea if he agreed
with Gen. Degeratu’s remarks. Bostan replied, “From the perspective of my own
experience in public service and politics, I do agree with Gen. Degeratu’s
opinion that Russia is likely to have been involved in the migrant crisis and …
it should be regarded as a hybrid war operation against the West.” Bostan emphasized
that “a very important component of the hybrid war is the cultural dimension.”
Here the Internet plays a key role. The Russian long-term investment in
“propaganda, disinformation, opinion and behavior-shaping” cannot be
underestimated. A short-term view would be a mistake. Bostan explained,
There is something about the
Russian strategy that is difficult to explain to our Western allies. It’s the
fact that Russia usually acts on both sides of a (real or manufactured)
conflict. For instance, on [the] Internet we notice that Russian propaganda,
disinformation or trolling activity on forums and social networks typically
carry messages meant to create/amplify conflicts between different ethnic or
religious groups – Romanians versus Hungarians, Poles versus Ukrainians,
Christians versus Jews, etc. And they encourage at the same time groups with
opposed views – far left anti-market tendencies [versus] libertarian ones,
LGBT-rights [versus] conservative Christian activism, open-border
multiculturalism [versus] anti-immigration movements, etc. Thus, Russia is able
to provoke conflicts and crises, and to influence the public agenda of the
countries it targets for subversion.
This ambivalence may seem
paradoxical to Western minds, used to a binary logic according to which
something cannot be black and white at the same time. Well, Russians are not
Westerners. In the East, black and white may be defined in many different ways.
Moreover, the Russian leaders still function according to a mentality shaped by
Marxist dialectics, which says that progress results from the constant struggle
between contrary elements.
It looks like the West is only
now discovering that, for instance, Russian internet trolls simultaneously
support a certain cause and its contrary.30
Bostan has laid out one of Russia’s key strategies. He says
this kind of strategy is “difficult” for the West to understand. As Rudyard
Kipling expressed it, “East is East, and West is West, and never the twain
shall meet.” At some point in the future, however, the West must learn to appreciate Russia’s
“scissors strategy” – “that Russia usually acts on both sides of a … conflict.”
If there is one central lesson to be drawn from this study, Bostan has
underscored it.
In their Atlantic
Council article, “From Russia with Hate,” Péter Krekó and Lóránt Győri
explain how Polish counterintelligence “is currently investigating Mateusz
Piskorski, the leader of the Polish leftist party … as well as former activists
of the far-right Polish Congress of the New Right (KNP) on charges of espionage
on behalf of Russia.”31 Here is the classic Russian “scissors
strategy” at work If the refugee crisis is part of a Russian scissors strategy,
how does Russia benefit? First, political tensions are intensified between the
European right and left; second, the right can be pushed toward Moscow by a
variety of mechanisms; third, a general weakening of NATO develops under a
scenario of “divide and conquer”; fourth, a general demoralization and loss of
belief in existing institutions naturally follows.
In his interview with Epoch
Times in November 2015, General Degeratu showed the depth of this
understanding when he said we “should see who takes profit” from the refugee
crisis. “Well,” he explained, the Russians profited, and many cracks appeared
in NATO. “We see how ‘united’ Europe has been,” Degeratu added. “Full unity!
There have been 50 voices in our European ‘unity.’”32
Those who have set up the
exercise have understood all our weaknesses and have exploited them properly.
What else have they obtained … does anyone still speak about the Ukrainian
crisis? Not anymore. There are also 1 million – in fact, 800,000 – refugees,
from Eastern Ukraine and Crimea, most of them from Donbass. Eight hundred
thousand. There are 8,000 dead. Around 2,000 children and pregnant women have died
in this crisis. We almost haven’t seen them on the (TV) screen, there have been
no gatherings, there was no session of the Romanian Parliament….33
Degeratu is extraordinarily perceptive, and other experts
agree with his assessment that Russia is waging a hybrid war against Europe.
“Maybe some of us are too militarily-minded and ask questions that shouldn’t be
asked,” said Degeratu.
DIRECT TESTIMONY FROM
A SYRIAN GENERAL ON RUSSIA’S DOUBLE GAME
There is a stunning revelation in the fragment of a
September 2015 interview given to Witold Gadowski by Syrian Brigadier General
Ahmad Aljjdeaa, a soldier with thirty years of experience in the Syrian Army
who is also the deputy minister of defense in the Syrian government-in-exile.
According to Gen. Aljjdeaa, “Russian officers are constantly present in the
branches of the Syrian army supporting the regime of Bashar Assad….”
Then he added, “Russia is interested in confusion in Syria.
There are also four military training centers in Russia, in which
fanatics are trained, who then fill the ranks of the Islamic State troops (ISIS). Among the trained are also Chechens.”34
Related to this, another curious headline reads: “In
retreating from Iraq, ISIS terrorists
lost their Russian passports.”35 The facts are reported as follows: “The Iraqi
military, who at the end of last week occupied the university building
previously held by ISIS in the city of Mosul, displayed what was found in
evidence as the identification papers of Islamic State terrorists, which mostly
turned out to be Russian.”36
Again, it is a case of the “scissors strategy.” Moscow has
perfected the fine art of stage-managing fake wars and phony splits with false
fronts made up of “useful idiots.”37 Russia’s deployment of
terrorist and counter-terrorist forces in Syria and Iraq should surprise no
one. This procedure was used during the Soviet-Afghan War in the 1980s and
again during the recent wars in Chechnya.38
At this juncture it may be useful to recite a bit of
history. In July 2005 the Russian KGB/FSB defector Alexander Litvinenko told
the Polish newspaper Rzeczpospolita
that Ayman al-Zawahiri (then Al-Qaeda’s second in command) was trained by the
FSB in Dagestan in 1997. According to the former KGB foreign intelligence
officer Konstantin Preobrazhensky, Litvinenko “was responsible for securing the
secrecy of al-Zawahiri’s arrival in Russia … in 1996-1997.”39
The Romanian intelligence defector, Lt. Gen. Ion Mahai
Pacepa, has described Moscow’s use of Arab terrorist organizations throughout
the Cold War in his books.40 We know that Russia stands firmly
behind the Islamic terror regime in Tehran. Researcher Antero Leitzinger
explained, “Modern terrorism was born within a year, 1967-68. International
socialists (communists) started the fashion all over the world simultaneously,
which should make us suspicious about the common roots. National socialists
followed suit, turning Marxists of Muslim origin into Islamists of Marxist origin.”41
Among the closest associates of
Khomeini, there were many Communists who had conveniently grown beards. Mustafa
Ali Chamran had studied in California and Egypt before he founded a Red Shi’ite
secret society. His pupils included later foreign minister Ibrahim Yazdi, oil
minister Mohammed Gharazi, and Lebanese fellow student in Berkeley University,
Hussein Shaikh al-Islam, who led the occupation of the US Embassy in Tehran.
This occupation, shortly before the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, focused
Iranian radicalism into anti-Americanism…. Mohammed Beheshti, whose death at a
bombing on June 28th, 1981, remained a mystery, had resided in East
Germany. Khomeini’s early companion and foreign minister, Sadegh Ghotbzadeh had
successfully accommodated with the new regime. Both Ghotbzadeh and Chamran had
received Palestinian terrorist training. As a student in the USA, Ghotbzadeh
had been recruited by the [Soviet] GRU.42
With regard to the Soviet-Afghan War, Leitzinger explained
that Soviet Military Intelligence (GRU) had developed special capabilities by
the late 1980s, especially “how to manipulate Islamists and to make Communists
(of the Khalq faction) to grow beards
and join their declared enemies.” According to Leitzinger, “This ‘Khalq strategy” provided a successful
alternative to the more orthodox “Parcham
strategy” that relied on ideologically less unholy alliances.”43
Leitzinger argued that the Russian secret services “gained a
tight hold on international terrorism, and [especially] on Islamism” in the
1990s. The terrorist is, in essence, a special kind of agent provocateur. A Western analyst finds it difficult to see the
Afghan-Soviet War or the first and second Chechen Wars as utilizing provocation
techniques on a broad scale. Former CIA official T.H. Bagley and KGB defector
Peter Deriabin noted, “Soviet provocation … remains little understood in the
West. People safe in a democratic system may find it difficult to conceive that
rulers would systematically use such hostile techniques against their own
subjects.”44
If Moscow’s wars in Afghanistan and Chechnya were built
around terrorist provocations, and the objective was to radicalize and
infiltrate Islam, and reorient Islam against the West, then the wars in
Afghanistan and Chechnya appear in a more intelligible light. The Soviet Union
did not invade Afghanistan for conventional reasons, or to attain classical
military control.
With the advent of the refugee crisis in Europe, with the
likelihood of thousands of terrorists settled within a mass of protected Muslim
refugees, the least sign of Russian involvement – or the involvement of
Russia’s Islamist surrogates – ought to inspire a shockwave of alarm through
Europe’s security establishment. Given the history of Moscow’s infiltration of
Islam, and the mounting evidence of Russia’s double game, the Kremlin would be
the most natural suspect in any close study of the refugee crisis. Arguably,
any other focus would be irresponsible.
As reported by the BBC, U.S. Gen. Philip Breedlove, the
senior NATO commander in Europe, said that Russia and Syria were “deliberately
weaponizing migration in an attempt to overwhelm European structures and break
European resolve.” He cited Russia’s use of barrel bombs against Syrian
civilians. What was the purpose of such indiscriminate attacks? The purpose
was, he said, to “get them [masses of people] on the road” to Europe.45
Masses of homeless people, adhering to an alien religion, is
one problem for Europe. Terrorism is yet another. Since the refugee crisis
began Europe has been hit with an unprecedented wave of terrorist attacks (not
to mention rapes and robberies). First came the Paris killings of November
2015, then the Brussels bombings of March 2016, then the Nice truck attack and
the Normandy church attack of July 2016. Then there was the string of Islamic
stabbings across Europe.46
Some of our sources (quoted above) have claimed that modern
terrorism was introduced to the Muslims by the communist bloc half a century
ago. This point must not be forgotten when evaluating the left’s strange love
affair with Islam. “From the very beginning,” said former KGB Lt. Col.
Konstantin Preobrazhensky, “the so-called Bolsheviks, or communists, were
considering Muslims as the reserve [army], as the human resource for the world
revolution. Not all … people know that the second appeal by Lenin, after the
Great October Socialist Revolution in 1917, was addressed to Muslim toilers….”
Preobrazhensky continued:
At that time Islam was the
religion of the oppressed … of the people colonized by the West. As Lenin said
by the time of the … Communist International, ‘The West is existing at the
expense of the East.’ Even now we can hear such conclusions, such ideas. And as
soon as the Russian Revolution took place, Russian Muslims immediately
supported it, so that the communist Muslim military organizations were formed.
The Muslim communists were dethroning the local bourgeois Muslim governments
which appeared in the Russian Empire47.
MUSLIM REFUGEES TO
EUROPE: A RUSSIAN POLICY
According to Antoni Rybczynski, “The migratory crisis in
Europe is largely a work of Russian policy….” He further stated, “Already …
when nobody expected Russian raids in Syria, Vladimir Putin warned that Europe
would face the great problems associated with the influx of immigrants.” In
this way Moscow supported Assad while undermining Europe.48
Another Niezalezna.pl
headline underscores this same idea: “Putin’s diabolical game, Exporting Muslim
immigrants to Europe.” The article begins, “The Norwegian authorities believe
that the refugees’ invasion of their country is a Russian provocation.”49
In October 2015 the Czech Minister of Defense, Martin
Stropnicky, suggested that Russia was possibly financing the transportation of
refugees to Europe. “Although I do not have 100 percent proof of this
information,” he said, “I cannot discount it either.”50 Given all we
know, his surmise is logical. It is sensible. Why wouldn’t Russia – which has
armed Islamic terrorists throughout Asia – arm Islamic terrorists in Germany,
Britain, France or Sweden?
According to a member of the Estonian National Defense
League, Ants Laaneots, “Putin’s aim is the disintegration of the European Union
and NATO, if possible.” Russia, he added, is promoting “Euroscepticism.”51
More likely, Russia’s strategy includes many subtle and indirect objectives. As
with the work of the late Mohammad Fahim in Afghanistan, Russia can take over a
NATO-defended country through the work of an enterprising criminal. Russia can
thereby paralyze the heart of Afghanistan or the heart of Europe in a way that
mocks European compassion.
The Chairman of the Supreme Council of Lithuania, Vytautas
Landsbergis, made an observation on 15 September 2015 about the refugee crisis
almost identical to others we have seen:
I was thinking who had to
profit, and I know now. In the current crisis, the whole attention is focused
on Europe. Nobody is speaking of Ukraine any more, although there are almost 2
million refugees there as well. Putin has chased them away, and nobody is
proposing them to go where life is better….52
According to Landsbergis, the current migration crisis is a threat
to European civilization.
Europe has met a big danger for
its own system, even for its own civilization. The Germans earlier had
illusions, that they would manage to integrate a million Turks, that the Turks
would become Germans and there would be no problem. It didn’t work. Ghettos
were created, a state within the state, and these are big problems….53
The Ukrainian MP, Anton Gerashchenko, speaking on TV Channel
News One, stated:
The crisis of migrants in Europe
arose because of Putin. The war in Syria began in 2011, but migrants flooded
[Europe] like a large river in the spring of 2015. Russia made a decision after
Europe imposed economic sanctions on Russia: ‘Let’s create problems for them.”
They created a problem: $1,000 was allocated for the head of [each] refugee who
will be taken from Syria to Europe. A million refugees are a billion dollars.
This is nothing to Putin….54
The cost to Europe, however, is much more than a $1 billion.
Gerashchenko added that an atmosphere of xenophobia has been created in Europe
along with the growing influence of various nationalist parties, which are
known for their favorable position toward Putin’s Russia.
CONCLUSION
Whatever the causes of the Refugee crisis, Moscow’s
strategists have taken full advantage of the situation. Those who know Russian
policy best, who are geographically further east, know that Russia has
something to gain. If a “smoking gun” is absent, in a strict sense, there is yet a loaded gun. One might say
this gun is pointed at the heart of Europe.
With regard to proof, the strategist does not wear a white
lab coat or follow some academic procedure to understand the world. He is not a
prosecuting attorney who has to prove his case in a court of law. He is engaged
in “a duel on an extensive scale” – which was Carl von Clausewitz’s famous
definition of war. If military and political leaders only acted on the basis of
scientific proof – or rely on proofs used to convince a jury – they would not
be able to act at all. The soldier and the stateman exercise judgment on a more
commonsense level.
Consider the following analogy: If it is 2 December 1941 and
an American plane spots six Japanese aircraft carriers moving east between
Alaska and Midway Island, a sensible strategist would assume that the Japanese
were intending to attack the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor. The sensible
strategist would be quite foolish to declare that “there was no proof” of a
Japanese intention to attack. It would be pedantic, under the circumstances, to
say there was “no smoking gun.” Strategy dictates an entirely different
epistemology. The reported movement of the Japanese aircraft carriers would
constitute a loaded gun, aimed at the
U.S. Pacific Fleet. A responsible military leader does not wait for that gun to
be fired. An American admiral, drawing the proper inferences, would know
exactly what to do. He would alert the fleet at Pearl Harbor and take
countermeasures. He would know, as one who directs fleets, that every enemy
move speaks to intention. That must be the foundation of his certitude, of his
practical knowledge.
In terms of the Muslim refugee crisis in Europe: reports of
ISIS training camps in Russia, reports of GRU/SVR and Russian Mafia assistance
to a massive influx of refugees, reports of Russian infiltration of terrorist
organizations throughout the Muslim world, etc., constitute a loaded gun. We must judge these reports
as strategists – not as social
scientists or academics. This must be the foundation of a new strategic
methodology for the Muslim Refugee problem. Clearly, this is not simply about
Islam. Russian involvement is indicated. Russian strategy must be understood as
part of a greater strategic whole in order to properly assess the larger
situation.
NOTES
1
http://www.fronda.pl/a/gadowski-dla-frondapl-agenci-panstwa-islamskiego-wsrod-imigrantowf,57134.html?part=1
2 Ibid.
3 http://www.vocativ.com/news/224151/syria-government-assad-kills-more-civilians-than-isis/index.html
4 http://www.vocativ.com/news/247479/russian-airstrikes-killed-more-syrian-civilians-than-isis-fighters/
5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_military_intervention_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War
6 http://ileanajohnson.com/2015/12/witold-gadowski-polish-journalist-talks-to-fronda-pl-about-syrian-refugees/
7 http://www.businessinsider.com/organized-crime-is-now-a-major-element-of-russia-statecraft-2015-10
8 http://ileanajohnson.com/2015/12/witold-gadowski-polish-journalist-talks-to-fronda-pl-about-syrian-refugees/
9
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2011/02/usegypt_relations_under_attack_1.html#ixzz58Jw
FkwoF
10
https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardminiter/2011/08/18/the-exciting-notion-of-arab-spring-is-a-jedi-mind-trick/#2ab603254ce7
11
Ibid.
12
The former intelligence
official was interviewed by J.R. Nyquist on condition of anonymity.
13
Katehon’s president is
Konstantin Malofeev, a Russian oligarch with close ties to Aleksandr Dugin,
previously the co-founder of the National Bolshevist movement (along with Eduard
Limonov). This was a movement which combined nationalism and communism (i.e., a
Red-Brown prototype movement). More recently Dugin changed his ideological
formula, mixing pan-European or Eurasianist ideas with nihilistic metaphysics
in order to justify a worldwide anti-U.S. alliance between traditionalist and
Marxists. All this is interspersed with a thinly disguised Lenin-style
anti-capitalist millenarianism which seeks to hasten the “end times” with the
destruction of Carthage (i.e., the United States). Dugin’s pretense at Orthodox
Christianity should not be taken any more seriously than his nationalist
pretenses. His entire ideology is an arcane justification for a renewed
USSR/Third Rome. His enemies are the old enemies of the USSR. His friends are the
old friends of the USSR. Dugin’s philosophic sophistication is not to be taken
seriously, though his past fascination with Aleister Crowley’s black magic
craves closer investigation. Of course, Dugin’s flirtation with esoteric ideas
has helped to win adherents on the alt-right, particularly among neo-pagans,
occultists and Sufis. His supposed positive attitude toward traditional
Christianity leads to the conclusion that he is consciously toying with
dialectically opposite theologies and ideologies. Using conspiracy theory as a
tool to advance his anti-U.S. agenda, Dugin also pretends to support President
Donald Trump, making English language broadcasts praising Trump for stopping
globalism and “the expansion of liberal ideology.” Dugin also praises Alex Jones
and Infowars. To watch Dugin’s
English language broadcasts, see – “The Mystic Shaping Russia’s Future and
Bringing Back the Dark Ages, https://godsandradicals.org/2017/03/28/the-mystic-shaping-russias-future-and-ending-the-modern-era/.
See also, http://www.4pt.su/en/content/who-aleksandr-dugin and https://www.nationalreview.com/2014/06/dugins-evil-theology-robert-zubrin/.
14
http://katehon.com/article/tragic-loss-red-pasha
15
http://www.trevorloudon.com/2013/06/exclusive-part-2-former-kgb-colonel-victor-kalashnikov-on-the-dangers-of-putin-worship-russias-anti-western-alliance-with-islam-israel-syria-iran-and-the-kremlins-grand-strateg/
16
Ibid.
17
http://conservativeread.com/former-kgbs-victor-kalashnikov-dangers-of-putin-worship-russias-islamist-alliance-plans-to-destroy-nato/
18
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2013/07/were-911-terror-attacks-false-flag.html
19
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=27&v=F6vj0z_oZIs
– at about 15 minutes into the interview.
20
Ibid.
21
http://adevarul.ro/international/europa/adevarul-live-generalul-degeratu-despre-criza-imigrantilor-rusia-cea-genereaza-criza-acestei-migratii-excesive-1_55e05dbdf5eaafab2c014a6e/index.html
22
Ibid.
23
Ibid.
24
From Żurawski’s
written reply to Dr. Cernea.
25
www.newsweek.com/vladimir-putin-meets-hungary-viktor-orban-agenda-gas-soviet-sanctions-551263
26
http://www.defence24.pl/geopolityka/wegry-sie-zbroja-orban-kupi-sprzet-w-rosji
27
http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/component/content/article?id=35796:from-russia-with-hate-the-kremlin-s-support-for-violent-extremism-in-central-europe
28
Ibid.
29
Bostan was minister
from Nov. 2015 to July 2016.
30
Written response to
inquiry of former Communications and Information Minister Marius Bostan to Dr.
Cernea, dated 3 March 2018.
31
www.atlanticcouncil.org/component/content/article?id=35796:from-russia-with-hate-the-kremlin-s-support-for-violent-extremism-in-central-europe
32
http://epochtimes-romania.com/video/constantin-degeratu-criza-refugiatilor-a-fost-o-operatiune-organizata---1099
33
Ibid.
34
https://wpolityce.pl/swiat/260088-syryjski-general-oskarza-w-rosji-szkoleni-sa-fanatycy-ktorzy-potem-zasilaja-szeregi-panstwa-islamskiego
35
jagiellonia.org/wycofujac-sie-iraku-bojowcy-isis-zgubili-swe-rosyjskie-paszporty/
36
Ibid.
37
See, especially,Yao
Ming-le, The Conspiracy and Death of Lin
Biao (1983). There it is explained how Gen. Lin Biao secretly prepared to
wage a phony war with the Soviet Union in 1971.
38
See, especially,
Bearden and Risen, The Main Enemy: The
Inside Story of the CIA’s Final Showdown with the KGB (New York: Random House, 2003), p. 233.
39
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Litvinenko#cite_note-69
40
Ronald Rychlak and
Ion Mihai Pacepa, Disinformation: Former
Spry Chief Reveals Secret Strategies for Undermining Freedom, Attacking Religion, and Promoting Terrorism (WND
Books, 2013). See also, Pacepa, Red Horizons: The True Story of Nicolae and
Eana Ceausescus’ Crimes, Lifestyle, and Corruption (1990).
41
See also Antero
Leitzinger’s article in the The Eurasian
Politician – Issue 5 (April-September 2002), “The Roots of Islamic
Terrorism,” http://users.jyu.fi/~aphamala/pe/issue5/roots.htm
42
Ibid. In this matter Leitzinger offers citations from the following
sources: Livingston & Halevy, Inside
the PLO (USA, 1990), p. 153-154; and Kuzichkin, Inside the KGB – Myth and Reality (Frome, 1990), p. 302.
43
Leitzinger referenced
Finnish researcher Anssi Kullberg’s master’s thesis on Russian geopolitics
focusing on the Islamic Renaissance Party founded in Astrakhan in June 1990,
“under KGB surveillance.” Kullberg
44
Deriabin and Bagley, KGB: Masters of the Soviet Union (New
York, 1990), p. 252.
45
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35706238
46
http://time.com/4607481/europe-terrorism-timeline-berlin-paris-nice-brussels/
47
Konstantin
Preobrazhensky: “How the Russian Communists Run Islam.” https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Preobrazhensky+Konstantin+How+the+Russian+Communists+r
un+Islamic+Terrorism+https%3a%2f%2fwww.youtube.com%2fwatch%3fv%3d0AqMCLqTRFo&PC=ACTS
&refig=ebf0ef63163f4c948bcf96c60aeb434a&ru=%2fsearch%3fq%3dPreobrazhensky%2bKonstantin%2
bHow%2bthe%2bRussian%2bCommunists%2brun%2bIslamic%2bTerrorism%2bhttps%253A%252F%252
Fwww.youtube.com%252Fwatch%253Fv%253D0AqMCLqTRFo%26FORM%3dEDGNCT%26PC%3dACTS%
26refig%3debf0ef63163f4c948bcf96c60aeb434a&view=detail&mmscn=vwrc&mid=19EC1DC31D497F37
378719EC1DC31D497F373787&FORM=WRVORC
48
http://niezalezna.pl/77702-jak-putin-i-asad-produkuja-uchodzcow-rosjanie-stosuja-taktyke-z-wojny-czeczenskiej
49
http://niezalezna.pl/73114-diabelska-gra-putina-rosja-eksportuje-islamskich-imigrantow-do-europy
50
http://www.uawire.org/news/czech-minister-of-defense-it-is-possible-that-russia-is-financing-the-influx-of-refugees-to-europe
51
http://www.uawire.org/news/estonian-politician-russia-uses-the-migration-crisis-as-part-of-its-hybrid-war#
52
http://zw.lt/litwa/landsbergis-o-kryzysie-z-uchodzcami-winna-jest-rosja/
53
Ibid.
54
https://newsone.ua/news/politics/gerashhenko-krizis-migrantov-dlya-evropy-pridumal-putin.html
________________
About CSP
The Center for Security
Policy was founded in July 1988 by 30 national security policy practitioners
united by an overarching goal – to perpetuate the time-tested policy Ronald
Reagan used to such transformative effect during his presidency: “Peace
through Strength.” Led by Frank Gaffney, a former Reagan Defense Department official and aide to
Senators Henry “Scoop” Jackson and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman
John Tower, they founded a non-partisan, educational public policy organization
with a single, overarching mission: secure freedom.
“What
an exemplary organization you are — devoting yourselves to the pursuit of
peace and national security. I can think of no loftier purpose or goal.” — 1995 letter from President Ronald Reagan to
the Center for Security Policy
The Center has diligently
advanced that goal ever since through a combination of: cutting-edge public
policy research; the skillful and evolving use of multi-media platforms for
outreach to – and impact with – the nation’s leadership and people; and, most
uniquely, the creation and direction of coalitions to undertake effective
advocacy.
In its early days, the Center
for Security Policy became famous for … READ THE REST
