Stefano Vernole, resp. relazioni esterne del Cesem, è intervenuto durante la seconda sessione della tavola rotonda Information Warfare, insieme a Vladimir Yakunin, Rolf Schmidt-Holtz e Sergei Kara-Murza. Questo il testo integrale del suo intervento.
1. The War of the network: the United States against the Eurasia
First of all, it’s necessary to understand the nowadays world geo-strategic situation, so at last identify the moves that the major powers are doing on the world stage.
The United States is struggling with one of the worse systemic crisis in their history.
The collapse of the Berlin Wall, the aggression against Iraq, the steps of NATO to overtake the East, the disintegration of Yugoslavia, the political uncertainty and condescending towards Western interests by Gorbachev and Yeltsin before, then, for several years produced the illusion of a triumph given by unipolarity of the United States.
By the way, if the effort beard by the Soviet state was too big and had led to the collapse of its administrative structure and his economy, at the same time the race for military supremacy waged by various US administrations, revealed a trade deficit absolutely unbearable (balance of payments), which today is in addition to the equally dangerous Federal deficit (national).
Yet in international public opinion the hegemonic role of the North American culture continues to be predominant.
The American big media groups, for example, have been a great tool in sabotage, perhaps forever, the traditional pro-European Franco-German axis after the election of Sarkozy, Hollande and Merkel.
In both Berlin and Paris, the powerful means of mass communication, controlled by the same old families as the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers …, played a decisive role in the electoral “coup d’état”.
A special role is played by the famous speculator George Soros, with his Quantum Fund; he financed the gangs of “Afghans” mujahedeen who fought in Bosnia and at the same time fostered the disinformation campaign on Serbia that favored the military aggression of NATO in 1995 and 1999.
The network of foundations and associations feeded by him is endless: Open Society Fund, Humanitarian Rights Fund, Helsinki Committee, Belgrade Circle, European Movement, Centre for Anti-War Action, Nuns, Anem, Otpor, to which must be added the most important international NGOs.
Let’s not forget that many of the corresponding agencies working with the Associated Press and Reuters are owned by Rothschild, who also infiltrated cultural and theatrical institutions, such as the National Library, the Historical Archives, the Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences and the Institute of geopolitics of Belgrade.
Along with Soros the ones who have spent efforts and investments like Rupert Murdoch, Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan, they influenced people as Martti Ahtisaari, James Lion, Morton Abramowitz, Louise Arbour, Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Thorvald Stoltenberg.
This exhibitionistic concentrate of “soft” and “hard power” has been developed against the only Serbia, as it considered the State pivot of Russia in the Balkans.
In addition to the former Yugoslavia, the “colored revolutions” financed by American networks and coordinate by the CIA and MI6, in cahoots with the secret services of Poland, Georgia and the Baltic States, have shocked Ukraine, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Lebanon, causing the split of these nations between militants pro-Atlanticist and militant anti-Atlanticist, real watershed Tricontinental political struggle of the twenty-first century.
The approach of subversive attempts towards the Great Mother Russia was instead documented by the same Nikolai Patrushev, head of internal security services of FSB, which has not only accused the MI6 to try to influence the internal situation in his country but has also indicated in 340 the number of foreign intelligence agents unmasked and arrested since 2003 up to the present, who are engaged in conspiracy.
They are accused of using foreign NGOs to obtain intelligence information, influence the Russian political process and support some international terrorist groups in the The North Caucasus.
Another source of their access would be different citizens of CIS immigrants in United Kingdom, who are under blackmail by MI6 for their criminal activities; cases of Boris Berezovsky and Akhmed Zakayev are only the most glaring.
At last, the Ukrainian crisis and the putsch carried out in Kiev.
The creation of an arch of tension and instability that would stretch from the Balkans to the borders of the Russian Federation, together with the difficulty for Moscow to market his oil, because forced to go through a series of territories controlled by NATO, thus constitute the visible tool of a game whose outcome, in the intentions of the Anglo-Americans leaders, should end with the break in relations between the Kremlin and Europe.
It was all written in the Strategic Plan of American foreign policy for the years 2007 to 2012, published by the State Department, where he stated clearly that his main priority is to hinder the “negative behavior” of Russia in various areas, from weapons sales to unreliably regimes (Iran, Syria and Venezuela) to the pressure of Moscow on several ex-Soviet nations for which Washington would have predicted a future “colored.”
The report also expresses concern about the greater role played by the Russian State in the economy, “for the restriction of the freedom of the media, for supporting separatism in Georgia and Moldova, for the use of energy levers designed to subjugate its neighbors in the CIS” concluding: “Everywhere, in Eurasia, people want the hope sparkled by colored Revolutions of the years 2003-2005 ” (and now) …
2. The geo-economics, current pillar of the Eurasian building
Peter Beinart, a foreign policy expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, made it clear to the Congress and the White House the fact that behind the “aggressive rhetoric” in Moscow and Beijing lies a challenge of a new type, which comes from an alternative model to the North American and of what he calls “authoritarian capitalism, a model that Russia and China do not only want to defend at all costs, but also try to export and spread elsewhere. “
The political and economic stability achieved through the practices of state-building implemented by the presidencies of Vladimir Putin reassured international investors, as well as outside strategic sectors (military and energy), however, have interesting business opportunities.
The agreement reached by Gazprom itself with Italy, Libya and Algeria’s Sonatrach, had allowed a position of monopoly power in the Mediterranean, now broken by the fall of Berlusconi and the war against Gaddafi’s Libya: the Russia to the EU sanctions are the logical consequence of this maneuvers.
The prestigious magazine of the globalist circles, “Foreign Affairs”, writes that “according to the doctrine of national security the American missile defense system should not be conceived as a defensive tool in its own right but as a valuable element in the framework of an offensive context. “
The foreshadowed nuclear scenario would be one in which Washington would be able to launch a first “strike” against Russia and China, to minimize their possible retaliation and neutralize it with the shield.
As in the past, the Pentagon forecast that Europe will be the main battleground to pay the consequences of a possible nuclear war and for this reason greatly increases the cost of its own military budget.
But regardless of the choice of the battlefield, in the case of the “hawks” in the Bush administration were to lose his head, the consequences for global stability would be terrible.
In Europe, however, we would witness the reinterpretation of what on “Eurasia” in 2007, we have defined the “Third Cold War” and today “The New Cold War,” played entirely on the compromise of the international image of Russia and the revival of anti-Chinese slogans (“the yellow danger”).
This kind of psychological warfare, based almost entirely on media disinformation campaigns, aims to revive old and never dormant stereotypes against those who Robert Kagan has “dangerously” defined as “autocratic powers.”
An endless journalism, especially in Italian and French (the “nouveaux philosophes” in Paris, Levy, Glucksmann, Finkielkraut, they can count on their counterparts in Rome, Sofri, Bonino, Lerner …), daily bomb the European public imagination with images aimed to pull Putin to Stalin, China to National Socialism.
Daniel Pipes, a neo-conservative American who embodies well the link between Atlanticist lobbies of “right” and “left”, even went so far as to say “Russia represents a danger to the world far greater than that embodied by Al Qaeda.”
Bill Arkin, an analyst at North American television NBC, however, had informed us of the existence of a special unit of the National Security Agency (NSA) and call Network Attack Support Staff, was responsible for neutralizing foreign media and interfere in their electronic systems communication.
A quick analysis of the main US media during the Russian-Ukrainian crisis of 2004 and of 2014, effectively summarizes the methods employed.
As for the columnist of the Washington Post, Jackson Diehl, the “events of Kiev represent the disturbing memories of the 1947-1948″; for its editorial colleague, Anne Applebaum, “we see the year 2004 as the one in which a new iron curtain has descended across Europe,” while the Kremlin is accused of ” imperial intrusions.”
Moving on to the New York Times, Nicholas Kristof denounces “a massive and malefic Russian intervention in Ukraine, “the Washington Time Elisabet Bumiller points out that “specialists on Russia say that the involvement of Putin in Ukraine is now the most serious insult to the eyes of Americans “.
Scrolling the financial newspapers (Globe, Wall Street Journal, Time), obviously still outraged by the arrest of the tax dodger Khodorkovsky, former protégé of Rothschild, the tones are even more vibrant, coming to offend the Russian as “a government of criminals ” labelling Putin as a sort of new “Saddam Hussein “and” Russian Fuehrer. “
In addition to the mass media demonization, we can not exclude a new wave of “color revolutions”, especially in those countries whose geopolitical position is still uncertain.
3. The Russian counter-strategy and chains eurasiatiste
In an Italy that already suffers from 1945 his lack of political sovereignty and military well-embodied by the presence of 113 military bases Atlantic-Americans within its territory, control of the mass media continues to remain closely firmly in the hands of the financial oligarchies intertwined also on a personal level with those residing in Washington and Tel Aviv.
From major national newspapers, “Corriere della Sera”, “La Stampa”, “La Repubblica”, “Il Resto del Carlino”, even the “communist” “Manifesto”, the weekly best sellers, “Panorama”, “L’Espresso “and so on. is noted as the property belongs to the usual suspects, the trilateralists of the Agnelli family, the Zionists of the De Benedetti, the supporters of the “American Party” presented by Monti, the manager at the service of the former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, a man who in visit to the United States Congress at least had the clarity to declare that: “The whole world must become like America” …
The Italian Council of Ministers upon the proposal of Ricardo Franco Levi, undersecretary and spokesman for the Prime Minister Romano Prodi, has approved a new legislation that provides for the registration requirement for anyone with a blog or a website.
This draft bill, if approved in Parliament, would force everyone who wants to publish on the net to equip itself with a publishing company and recruit a journalist as an editor in chief; the latter would be committed to constantly supervise any defamatory content on the site or blog, because otherwise it would risk jail.
This would involve the likely closure of 99% of the sites or blogs now in circulation …
Moscow should clearly denounce the manipulation of the foreign company operating in its near abroad “and to point out the hypocrisy of the West, said that while fighting a war against international terrorism” supports their logistic bases in anti-Russian and anti-Chinese function.
A cultural counteroffensive should strongly emphasize how Russia’s resurgence will not be prejudging any sort of new imperialism, but offers opportunities for growth and development for all stakeholders to act upon the same footing.
It should be based on explicit denunciation of what is the mortal enemy for the independence of all peoples, that the American-led capitalist globalization, taking advantage of the fact that the historic american “moral leadership” is now experiencing a profound crisis.
A doctrine of this kind takes on the deep processing of a model of society different from that to which the centers of power globalists would approve the different peoples of the planet and it is not in contradiction with the Russian cultural tradition, steeped in the spirit of social and Community.
So that the new Russia can improve its international image and develop closer Eurasian integration is therefore not enough to restate its renewed national sovereignty and throw generic allegations against unilateralism in stars and stripes.
The spying activity of the NSA has highlighted the need to untie us from the instruments to monitor computer’s activities controlled by the USA.
The project of the Bank of the BRICS and the integrated military organization of the Organization for Cooperation of Shanghai are the instruments be further developed to carry out this counteroffensive; next to the action of type material, will also be developed at that time to win the hearts, a Eurasian soft power now more than ever necessary to get consent.
We are in a war, a real war, which started well before Maidan and massacres in Donbass.
The battlefield, now more than ever, is the network, and the ability to manipulate how people perceive the events of the world.
The object of the war of perception is in place at the time only one: the narrative of bloodthirsty dictator Putin. We know they are really countless times when we have tried: paint Putin as a monster is the constant effort of the progressive media, all hanging from the lips (you decide which) of Pussy Riot, of Femen, of Yulja Timoshenko, the Cabinet Baltic and Poles who deny the Mogherini – one that just as soon as they were allowed to make speeches to the Russian giant of realpolitik – the chance to succeed at the Ashton EU foreign.
Yet this narrative of “bad Putin” has never worked. It did not work at the Olympics in Sochi, where it was thought to trigger the trap of homophobia State: all defused, with Putin that a surprise embraces the Dutch skater lesbian.
It did not work in Syria, where the United States has suffered a diplomatic defeat more bitter memories from that time: the fiction that passed was the opposite: “Putin peacemaker” who gets diplomatically what the Pope had asked God with fasting.
Putin adult, against the child warmonger Obama and his irresponsible euro-counterparts, ready to fire Damascus without having really no reason.
Currently, therefore, the war takes place for the electronic fiction: if the figure of Putin will survive the campaigns of denigration carburate network, you really hope that trumps peace and international law.
The mere dissemination of news or information programs of matrix Russian counterpart, although correct from the journalistic point of view, it would not have the ability to penetrate the public, if they are not in place alongside the new “ideas” that do appear to be relevant and interesting for the European countries, the approach to the problems that are dealt with by the new “media”.
For example, the Soviet Union enjoyed a lot of influence in the West (especially in Italy and France) because in addition to being a great power appeared as the “cradle of a new world,” based on the “State of the workers and peasants. “
This new type of state could also affect workers in other countries.
The cultural circle that we create should develop a new way of approaching the problems and values of the working classes of Europe.
In this regard, the proposal Euro-Asian set even by Russian President Vladimir Putin appears to be particularly interesting.
It must, however, be bound, in our view, the problems that arise in countries where new ideas are spread.
The best way of operating is that of creation next to an “average” important, such as a television, a movement-cultural club are looking to put down roots in the society.
The shape party appears, in fact, premature given the lack of attention to the ideas of European populations “alternative” especially if linked to nations that are not part of the European Union (Bank of BRICS, OCS, etc..).
You must first prepare the cultural ground suitable for the subsequent formation of a real political education and to this end it is necessary to expose fraudulent especially the concept of “the West”, according to which the people of Sicily or of Sweden and the United States would all have the same “culture”, the same values and the same aspirations.
To this end, it should be remembered, for example “Greek” roots of the Russian alphabet, or the fact that in the past, Greece and Southern Italy looked to India as the country home of a great civilization.
It should be short, to act in depth in two different directions: the first concerning the interests of contemporary populations, the second the “cultural roots” of the same, which is often at odds with the attempt of approval to a confused concept of “West” wanted by the ruling classes of ‘current process of globalization dominated by the Anglo-American finance.