The title is maybe unfair.  Soros does sponsor some very good
things domestically, such as the drug legalization.  He also
funds some good people.  Internationally, he is terrible.  This
article mostly tells the international story.


Covert Action Quarterly    Number 74   Fall 2002

George Soros, Imperial Wizard

Master-builder of the new bribe sector systematically bilking the
world

Heather Coffin

“Yes, I do have a foreign policy...my goal is to become the
conscience of
the world.”’

This is not a case of narcissistic personality disorder; this is
how George
Soros exercises the authority of United States hegemony in the
world today.
Soros foundations and financial machinations are partly
responsible for the
destruction of socialism in Eastern Europe and the former USSR.
He has set
his sights on China. He was part of the full court press that
dismantled
Yugoslavia. Calling himself a philanthropist, billionaire George
Soros’ role
is to tighten the ideological stranglehold of globalization and
the New
World Order while promoting his own financial gain. Soros’
commercial and
“philanthropic” operations are clandestine, contradictory and
coactive. And
as far as his economic activities are concerned, by his own
admission, he is
without conscience; a capitalist who functions with absolute
amorality.

Soros is a leading figure on the Council of Foreign Relations,
the World
Economic Forum, and Human Rights Watch (HRW). In 1994, after a
meeting with
his philosophical guru, Sir Karl Popper, Soros ordered his
companies to
start investing in Central and Eastern European communications.
The Federal
Radio Television Administration of the Czech Republic accepted
his offer to
take over and fund the archives of Radio Free Europe. Soros moved
the
archives to Prague and spent over $15 million on their
maintenance. 2 A
Soros foundation now runs CIA-created Radio Free Europe/Radio
Liberty
jointly with the U.S. and RFE/RL, which has expanded into the
Caucasus and
Asia. 3 Soros is the founder and funder of the Open Society
Institute. He
created and maintains the International Crisis Group (ICG) which,
among
other things, has been active in the Balkans since the
destruction of
Yugoslavia. Soros works openly with the United States Institute
of Peace—an
overt arm of the CIA.

He thrusts himself upon world statesmen and they respond. He has
been close
to Henry Kissinger, Vaclav Havel and Poland’s General Wojciech
Jaruzelski. 4
He supports the Dalai Lama, whose institute is housed in the
Presidio in San
Francisco, also home to the foundation run by Soros’ friend,
former Soviet
leader Mikhail Gorbachev. 5

When anti-globalization forces were freezing in the streets
outside New
York’s Waldorf-Astoria hotel in February 2002, George Soros was
inside
addressing the World Economic Forum. As the police forced
protesters into
metal cages on Park Avenue, Soros was extolling the virtues of
the “Open
Society” and joined Zbigniew Brzezinski, Samuel Huntington,
Francis Fukuyama
and others.

WHO IS THIS GUY?

George Soros was born in Hungary in 1930 to Jewish parents so
removed from
their roots that they once vacationed in Nazi Germany. 6 Soros
lived under
the Nazis, but with the triumph of the Communists moved to
England in 1947.
There, Soros came under the sway of the philosopher Karl Popper,
at the
London School of Economics. Popper was a lionized anti-communist
ideologue
and his teachings formed the basis for Soros’ political
tendencies. There is
hardly a speech, book or article that Soros writes that does not
pay
obeisance to Popper’s influence.

Knighted in 1965, Popper coined the slogan “Open Society,” which
eventually
manifested in Soros’ Open Society Fund and Institute. Followers
of Popper
repeat his words like true believers. Popperian philosophy
epitomizes
Western individual ism. Soros left England in 1956, and found
work on Wall
Street where, in the 1960s, he invented the “hedge fund.”

“...hedge funds catered to very wealthy individuals... The
largely secretive
funds, usually trading in offshore locations. . produced
astronomically
superior results. The size of the “bets” often became self
fulfilling
prophecies: ‘rumors of a position taken by the big hedge funds
prompted
other investors to follow suit,’ which would in turn force up the
price the
hedgers were betting on to begin with.” 7

Soros organized the Quantum Fund in 1969 and began to dabble in
currency
manipulation. In the 1970s, his financial activities turned to:

“Alternating long and short positions... Soros won big both on
the rise of
real estate investment trusts and on their subsequent collapse.
Under his
20-year stewardship, Quantum returned an amazing 34.5% a year.
Soros is best
known (and feared) for currency speculation.. . In 1997 he earned
the rare
distinction of being singled out as a villain by a head of state,
Malaysia’s
Mahathir Mohamad, for taking part in a highly profitable attack
on that
nation’s currency.” 8

Through such clandestine financial scheming, Soros became a
multibillionaire. His companies control real estate in Argentina,
Brazil,
and Mexico; banking in Venezuela; and are some of the most
profitable
currency traders in the world, giving rise to the general belief
that his
highly placed friends assisted him in his financial endeavors,
for political
as well as financial gain. 9

George Soros has been blamed for the destruction of the Thai
economy in
1997.10 One Thai activist said, “We regard George Soros as a kind
of
Dracula. He sucks the blood from the people." 11 The Chinese call
him “the
crocodile,” because his economic and ideological efforts in China
were so
insatiate, and because his financial speculation created millions
of dollars
in profits as it ravished the Thai and Malaysian economies. 12

Soros once made a billion dollars in one day by speculating (a
word he
abhors) on the British pound. Accused of taking “money from every
British
taxpayer when he speculated against sterling,” he said, “When you
speculate
in the financial markets you are free of most of the moral
concerns that
confront an ordinary businessman.. .I did not have to concern
myself with
moral issues in the financial markets." 13

Soros has a schizophrenic craving for unlimited personal wealth
and a desire
to be thought well of by others:

“Currency traders sitting at their desks buy and sell currencies
of Third
World countries in large quantities. The effect of the currency
fluctuations
on the people who live in those countries is a matter that does
not enter
their minds. Nor should it; they have a job to do. Yet if we
pause to think,
we must ask ourselves whether currency traders.. .should regulate
the lives
of millions." 14

It was Soros who saved George W. Bush’s bacon when his management
of an oil
exploration company was ending in failure. Soros was the owner of
Harken
Energy Corporation, and it was he who bought the rapidly
depreciating stocks
just prior to the company’s collapse. The future president cashed
out at
almost one million dollars. Soros said he did it to buy
“political
influence." 15 Soros is also a partner in the infamous Carlyle
Group.
Organized in 1987, “the world’s largest private equity firm” with
over
twelve billion dollars under management, is run by “a veritable
who’s who of
former Republican leaders,” from CIA man Frank Carlucci to CIA
head George
Bush, Sr. The Carlyle Group makes most of its money from weapons
expenditures.

THE PHILANTHROPIST SPOOK

In 1980, Soros began to use his millions to attack socialism in
Eastern
Europe. He financed individuals who would cooperate with him. His
first
success was in Hungary. He took over the Hungarian educational
and cultural
establishment, incapacitating socialist institutions throughout
the country.
He made his way right inside the Hungarian government. Soros next
moved on
to Poland, aiding the CIA-funded Solidarity operation and in that
same year,
he became active in China. The USSR came next.

It is not coincidental that the Central Intelligence Agency had
operations
in all of those countries. The goal of the Agency was exactly the
same as
that of the Open Society Fund: to dismantle socialism. In South
Africa, the
CIA sought out dissidents who were anticommunist. In Hungary,
Poland and the
USSR, the CIA, with overt intervention from the National
Endowment for
Democracy, the AFL-CIO, USAID and other institutions, supported
and
organized anticommunists, the very type of individuals recruited
by Soros’
Open Society Fund. The CIA would have called them “assets.” As
Soros said,
“In each country I identified a group of people — some leading
personalities, others less well known — who share my belief...”16
Soros’
Open Society organized conferences with anticommunist Czechs,
Serbs,
Romanians, Hungarians, Croatians, Bosnians, Kosovars. 17 His
ever-expanding
influence gave rise to suspicions that he was operating as part
of the U.S.
intelligence complex. In 1989, the Washington Post reported
charges first
made in 1987 by the Chinese government officials that Soros’ Fund
for the
Reform and Opening of China had CIA connections. 18

TAKING ON MOSCOW

After 1990, Soros funds targeted the Russian educational system,
providing
the entire nation with textbooks. 19  In effect, Soros ensured
the
indoctrination of an entire generation of Russian youth with OSI
propaganda.
Soros foundations were accused of engineering a strategy to take
control of
the Russian financial system, privatization schemes, and the
process of
foreign investment in that country. Russians reacted angrily to
Soros’
legislative meddlings. Critics of Soros and other U.S.
foundations said the
goal of these maneuvers was to “thwart Russia as a state, which
has the
potential to compete with the world’s only superpower." 20
Russians began
to suspect Soros and the CIA were interconnected. Business tycoon
Boris
Berezovsky said, “I nearly fainted when I heard a couple of years
ago that
George Soros was a CIA agent." 21  Berezovsky’s opinion was that
Soros, and
the West, were “afraid of Russian capital becoming strong.”

If the economic and political establishment in the United States
fear an
economic rivalry from Russia, what better way to control it than
to dominate
Russian media, education, research centers and science? After
spending $250
million for the “transformation of education of humanities and
economics at
the high school and university levels,” Soros created the
International
Science Foundation for another $100 million. 22 The Russian
Federal
Counterintelligence Service (FSK) accused Soros foundations in
Russia of
“espionage.” They noted that Soros was not operating alone; he
was part of a
full court press that included financing from the Ford and
Heritage
Foundations; Harvard, Duke, and Columbia universities, and
assistance from
the Pentagon and U.S. intelligence services. 23 The FSK
criticized Soros’
payouts to 50,000 Russian scientists, saying that Soros advanced
his own
interests by gaining control of thousands of Russian scientific
discoveries
and new technologies to collect state and commercial secrets. 24

In 1995, Russians were infuriated by the insinuation of State
Department
operative Fred Cuny into the conflict in Chechnya. Cuny’s cover
was disaster
relief, but his history of involvement in international conflict
zones of
interest to the U.S., plus FBI and CIA search parties, made clear
his
government connections. At the time of his disappearance, Cuny
was working
under contract to a Soros foundation. 25  It is not widely known
in the U.S.
that the violence in Chechnya, a province in the heart of Russia,
is
generally perceived as the result of a political destabilization
campaign on
which Washington looks favorably, and may actually be directing.
This
assessment of the situation is clear enough to writer Tom Clancy
that he
felt free to include it as an assertion of fact in his
best-seller, The Sum
of All Fears. The Russians accused Cuny of being a CIA operative,
and part
of an intelligence operation to support the Chechen uprising. 26
Soros’ Open
Society Institute is still active in Chechnya, as are other
Soros-sponsored
organizations.

Russia was the site of at least one joint endeavor to enhance
Soros’ balance
sheet, arranged with diplomatic assistance from the Clinton
administration.
In 1999, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright blocked a $500
million loan
guarantee by the U.S. Export-Import Bank to the Russian company,
Tyumen Oil,
on the grounds that it was contrary to U.S. national interests.
Tyumen
wanted to buy American-made oil equipment and services from Dick
Cheney’s
Halliburton Company and ABB Lummus Global of Bloomfield, New
Jersey. 27
George Soros was an investor in a company that Tyumen had been
trying to
acquire. Both Soros and BP Amoco lobbied to prevent this
transaction, and
Albright obliged. 28

NURTURING LEFT ANTI-SOCIALISM

Soros’ Open Society Institute has a finger in every pot. Its
board of
directors reads like a “Who’s Who” of Cold War and New World
Order pundits.
Paul Goble is Communications Director; ‘he was the major
political
commentator at Radio Free Europe. Herbert Okun served in the
Nixon State
Department as an intelligence adviser to Henry Kissinger. Kati
Marton is the
wife of former Clinton administration UN ambassador and envoy to
Yugoslavia,
Richard Holbrooke. Marton lobbied for the Soros-funded radio
station B-92,
also a project of’ the National Endowment for Democracy (another
overt arm
of the CIA), which was instrumental in bringing down the Yugoslav

government.

When Soros founded the Open Society Fund he picked liberal pundit
Aryeh
Neier to lead it. Neier was the head of Helsinki Watch, a
putative human
rights organization with an anticommunist bent. In 1993, the Open
Society
Fund became the Open Society Institute.

Helsinki Watch became Human Rights Watch in 1975. Soros is
currently on its
Advisory Board, both for the Americas and the Eastern
Europe-Central Asia
Committees, and his Open Society Fund/Soros/OSI is listed as a
funder. 29
Soros is intimately connected to HRW, and Neier wrote columns for
The Nation
magazine without mentioning that he was on Soros’ payroll. 30

Soros is intimately involved in HRW, although he does his best to
hide it.
31 He says he just funds and sets up these programs and lets them
run. But
they do not stray from the philosophy of the funder. HRW and OSI
are close.
Their views do not diverge. Of course, other foundations fund
these
institutions as well, but Soros’ influence dominates their
ideology.

George Soros’ activities fall into the construct developed in
1983 and
enunciated by Allen Weinstein, founder of the National Endowment
for
Democracy. Weinstein said, “A lot of what we do today was done
covertly 25
years ago by the CIA.”32 Soros is operating exactly within the
confines of
the intelligence complex. He is little different from CIA drug
runners in
Laos in the 1960s, or the mujahedin who profited from the opium
trade while
carrying out CIA operations against socialist Afghanistan in the
1980s. He
simply funnels (and takes home) a whole lot more money than those
pawns, and
he does much of his business in the light of day. His candor
insofar as he
expresses it is a sort of spook damage control that serves to
legitimize the
strategies of U.S. foreign policy.

The majority of people in the U.S. today who consider themselves
politically
left-of-center are undoubtedly pessimistic about the chances for
a socialist
transformation of society. Thus the Soros ‘Decentralization”
model, or the
“piecemeal” approach to “negative utilitarianism, the attempt to
minimize
the amount of misery,” which was Popper’s philosophy, appeals to
them. 33
Soros funded an HRW study that was used to back California and
Arizona
legislation relaxing drug laws. 34 Soros favors the legalization
of drugs —
one way of temporarily reducing awareness of one’s misery. Soros
is an
equal-opportunity bribester. At a loftier rung of the
socioeconomic ladder,
one finds Social Democrats who accept Soros funding and believe
in civil
liberties within the context of capitalism. 35 For these folks,
the evil
consequences of Soros’ business activities (impoverishing people
all over
the world) are mitigated by his philanthropic activities.
Similarly,
liberal/left intellectuals, both in the U.S. and abroad, have
been drawn in
by the “Open Society” philosophy, not to mention the occasional
funding
plum.

The New Left in the United States was a social democratic
movement. It was
resolutely anti-Soviet, and when Eastern Europe and the USSR
fell, few in
the New Left opposed the destruction of the socialist systems.
The New Left
did not mourn or protest when the hundreds of millions in Eastern
Europe and
Central Asia lost their right to jobs, housing at reasonable and
legally
protected rents, free education through graduate school, health
care and
cultural enhancement. Most belittled any suggestion that the CIA
and certain
NGOs such as the National Endowment for Democracy or the Open
Society Fund
had actively participated in the annihilation of socialism. These
people
felt that the Western determination to destroy the USSR since
1917 was
barely connected to the fall of the USSR. For them, socialism
failed of its
own accord, because it was flawed.

As revolutions, such as the ones in Mozambique, Angola, Nicaragua
or El
Salvador were destroyed by proxy forces or were stalled by
demonstration
“elections,” New Left pragmatists shrugged their shoulders and
turned away.
The New Left sometimes seemed to deliberately ignore the
post-Soviet
machinations of U.S. foreign policy.

Bogdan Denitch, who had political aspirations in Croatia, was
active within
the Open Society Institute, and received OSI funding. 36 Denitch
favored the
ethnic cleansing of Serbs from Croatia, NATO bombing of Bosnia
and then
Yugoslavia, and even a ground invasion of Yugoslavia. 37 Denitch
was a
founder and chair for many years of the Democratic Socialists of
America, a
leading liberal-left group in the U.S. He has also long chaired
the
prestigious Socialist Scholars Conference, through which he was
key to
manipulating the sympathies of many toward support for NATO
expansion. 38
Other Soros targets for support include Refuse and Resist the
ACLU, and a
host of other liberal causes. 39 Soros added another unlikely
trophy when he
became involved in the New School for Social Research in New
York, long an
academy of choice for left intellectuals. He now funds the East
and Central
Europe Program there. 40

Many leftists who were inspired by the revolution in Nicaragua
sadly
accepted the election of Violetta Chamorro and the defeat of the
Sandinistas
in 1990. Most of the Nicaragua support network faded thereafter.
Perhaps the
New Left could have learned from the rising star of Michael
Kozak. He was a
veteran of Washington’s campaigns to install sympathetic leaders
in
Nicaragua, Panama and Haiti, and to undermine Cuba — he headed
the U.S.
Interests Section in Havana.

After organizing the Chamorro victory in Nicaragua, Kozak moved
on to become
U.S. Ambassador to Belarus. Kozak worked with the Soros-sponsored
“Internet
Access and Training Program” (IATP), which was busy “creating
future
leaders” in Belarus. 41 This program was simultaneously imposed
upon
Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan,
Turkmenistan, and
Uzbekistan. IATP operates openly with the support of the U.S.
Department of
State. To its credit, Belarus expelled Kozak and the Soros-Open
Society/U.S.
State Department crowd. The government of Aleksandr Lukashenko
found that
for four years before moving to Minsk, Kozak was instrumental in
engineering
the flow of tens of millions of dollars to the Belarus
opposition. Kozak was
creating a united opposition coalition, funding web-sites,
newspapers and
opinion polls, and tutoring a student resistance movement similar
to
Yugoslavia’s Otpor. Kozak brought in Otpor leaders to instruct
dissidents in
Belarus. 42 Just before September 11, 2001, the U.S. was revving
up a
demonization campaign against President Aleksandr Lukashenko.
Demonizing
Lukashenko has temporarily taken a back burner to the “war on
terrorism.”

Through OSI and HRW, Soros was a major supporter of the B-92
radio station
in Belgrade. Soros funded Otpor, the organization that received
those
“suitcases of money” in support of the October 5, 2000 coup that
toppled the
Yugoslav government. 43 Human Rights Watch helped legitimize the
subsequent
kidnapping and show trial of Slobodan Milosevic in The Hague by
saying
nothing about his rights.” 44 Louise Arbour, who served as judge
at that
illegal tribunal, is presently on the Board of Soros’
International Crisis
Group. 45 The Open Society/Human Rights Watch gang has been
working on
Macedonia, calling it part of their “civilizing mission.” 46
Expect that
republic to be “saved” to finish the total disintegration of the
former
Yugoslavia.

DEPUTIES OF POWER

Soros has actually stated that he considers his philanthropy
moral and his
money management business amoral. 47 Yet those in charge of
Soros-funded
NGOs have a clear and consistent agenda. One of Soros’ most
influential
institutions is the International Crisis Group, founded in 1986.
ICG is
headed by individuals from the very center of political and
corporate power.
Its board includes Zbigniew Brzezinski, Morton Abramowitz, former
U.S.
Assistant Secretary of State; Wesley Clark, former NATO Supreme
Allied
Commander for Europe; and Richard Allen, former U.S. National
Security
Adviser, Allen is noteworthy for quitting Nixon’s National
Security Council
out of disgust with the liberal tendencies of Henry Kissinger;
recruiting
Oliver North to Reagan’s National Security Council, and
negotiating missiles
for hostages in the Iran-Contra scandal. For these individuals,
“containing
conflict” boils down to U.S. control over the people and
resources of the
world.

In the 1980s and 1990s, under the aegis of the Reagan Doctrine,
U.S. covert
and overt operations in Africa, Latin America, the Caribbean, and
Asia were
in the works. Soros was openly active in most of these places,
working to
buy off would-be revolutionaries, or subsidize politicians,
intellectuals
and anyone else who might come to power when the revolutionary
moment had
passed. According to James Petras:

“By the early 1980s the more perceptive sectors of the neoliberal
ruling
classes realized that their policies were polarizing the society
and
provoking large-scale social discontent. Neoliberal politicians
began to
finance and promote a parallel strategy ‘from below,’ the
promotion of
‘grassroots’ organizations with an ‘anti-statist’ ideology to
intervene
among potentially conflictory classes, to create a “social
cushion.” These
organizations were financially dependent on neoliberal sources
and were
directly involved in competing with sociopolitical movements for
the
allegiance of local leaders and activist communities. By the 1
990s these
organizations, described as “nongovernmental,” numbered in the
thousands and
were receiving close to four billion dollars world-wide.” 48

In Underwriting Democracy, Soros boasts about the
“Americanization of
Eastern Europe.” According to his account, through his education
programs he
began to establish a young cadre of Sorosian leaders. These Soros

Foundation-educated young men and women are prepared to fulfill
the
functions of so-called “influence agents.” Thanks to their fluent
knowledge
of languages and their insertion into the emerging bureaucracies
in target
countries, these recruits would philosophically smooth the
inroads for
Western multinational corporations.

Career diplomat Herbert Okun, on the Europe Committee of Human
Rights Watch,
along with George Soros, is connected to a host of State
Department-linked
institutions, from USAID to the Rockefeller-funded Trilateral
Commission.
>From 1990 to 1997, Okun was executive director of something
called the
Financial Services Volunteer Corps, part of USAID, “to help
establish free
market financial systems in former communist countries." 49
George Soros is
in complete accord with the capitalists who are in the process of
taking
control of the global economy.

NON-PROFIT PROFITEERING

Soros claims not to do philanthropy in the countries in which he
is involved
as a currency trader. 50  But Soros has often taken advantage of
his
connections to make key investments. Armed with a study by ICC,
and with the
support of Bernard Kouchner, chief of the UN Interim
Administration in
Kosovo (UNMIK), Soros attempted to acquire the most profitable
mining
complex in the Balkans.

In September 2000, in a hurry to take the Trepca mines before the

Yugoslavian election, Kouchner stated that pollution from the
mining complex
was raising lead levels in the environment. 51 This is incredible

considering that he cheered when the 1999 NATO bombing of
Yugoslavia rained
depleted uranium on the country and released more than 100,000
tons of
carcinogens into the air, water and soil. 52  But Kouchner had
his way, and
the mines were closed for “health reasons.” Soros invested $150
million in
an effort to gain control of Trepca’s gold, silver, lead, zinc
and cadmium,
which make the property worth $5 billion. 53

As Bulgaria was imploding into “free-market” chaos, Soros was
busy
scavenging through the wreckage, as Reuters reported in early
2001:

“The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD)
invested $3.0
million in [Bulgarian high-tech company] Rila, the first firm to
benefit
from a new $30 million facility set up by the EBRD to support IT
firms in
central and eastern Europe.... Another $3. 0 million came from
U.S private
investment fund Argus Capital Partners, sponsored by Prudential
Insurance
Company of America and opera ting in central and eastern
Europe... Soros,
who had invested around $3.0 million in Rila and in 2001 invested
another
$1.0 million...remained its majority owner. “ 54

FRAMING THE ISSUES

His pose as a philanthropist gives Soros the power to shape
international
public opinion when social conflict raises the question of who
are the
victims and who are the malefactors. Like other NGOs, Human
Rights Watch,
Soros’ mouthpiece on human rights, avoids or ignores most
organized and
independent working class struggles.

In Colombia, labor leaders are routinely killed by paramilitaries
working in
concert with the U.S.-sponsored government. Because those unions
oppose
neoliberal economics, HRW is relatively silent. In April of this
year, HRW’s
Jose Vivanco testified before the U.S. Senate in favor of Plan
Colombia: 55

“Colombians remain committed to human rights and democracy They
need help.
Human Rights Watch has no fundamental problem with the United
States
providing that help.” 56

HRW equates the actions of the Colombian guerrilla fighters
struggling to
free themselves from the oppression of state terror, poverty and
exploitation with the repression of the U.S-sponsored armed
forces and
paramilitary death squads, the AUC (United Self-Defense Forces of
Colombia).
HRW validated the Pastrana government and its military, whose
role was to
protect property rights and maintain the economic and political
status quo.
According to HRW, 50% of civilian deaths are the work of the
government-tolerated death squads. 57 The correct number is 80%.
58

HRW essentially certified the election and ascendancy of the
Uribe
government in 2002 as well. Uribe is a throwback to the Latin
American
dictators the U.S. supported in the past, although he was
“elected.” HRW had
no comment about the fact that the majority boycotted the
election. 59

In the Caribbean Basin, Cuba is another opponent of neoliberalism
that has
been demonized by Human Rights Watch. In nearby Haiti,
Soros-funded
activities have worked to defeat popular aspirations following
the end of
the Duvalier dictatorship by undermining Haiti’s first
democratically
elected leader, Jean-Bertrand Aristide. HRW’s Ken Roth helpfully
chimed in
with U.S. denunciations of Aristide as “undemocratic.” To
demonstrate his
idea of “democracy,” Soros foundations were commencing operations
in Haiti
complimentary to such unseemly U.S. activities as USAID’s
promotion of
persons associated with FRAPH, the notorious CIA-sponsored death
squads
which have terrorized the country since the fall of ‘Baby Doc’
Duvalier. 60

On HRW’s web site, Director Roth criticized the U.S. for not
opposing China
more vigorously. Roth’s activities include the creation of the
Tibetan
Freedom Concert, a traveling propaganda project that toured the
U.S. with
major rock musicians, urging young people to support Tibet
against China. 61
Tibet has been a pet project of the CIA for many years. 62

Roth has recently pressed for opposition to Chinese control over
its
oil-rich western province of Xinjiang. With the colonialist
“divide and
conquer” approach, Roth has tried to convince some of the Uighur
religious
minority in Xinjiang that the U.S/NATO intervention in Kosovo
holds promise
as a model for them. As late as August 2002, the U.S. government
has given
some support in this endeavor as well.

U.S. designs on this region were signaled clearly when a New York
Times
article on Xinjiang Province in western China described the
Uighurs as a
“Muslim majority, [which] lives restively under Chinese rule.”
They “are
well versed in the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia last year which
some celebrate
for liberating the Muslims in Kosovo; they fantasize about a
similar rescue’
here." 63 The New York Times Magazine noted “Recent discoveries
of oil have
made Xinjiang extremely attractive to international trade,” while
comparing
the conditions for its indigenous population to those in Tibet.
64

INNUMERACY

When Sorosian organizations count, they seem to lose track of the
truth.
Human Rights Watch asserted that 500 people, not over 2,000, were
killed by
NATO bombers in the 1999 war in Yugoslavia. 65 They said only
350, not over
4,000, died as a result of U.S. attacks on Afghanistan. 66  When
the U.S.
bombed Panama in 1989, HRW prefaced its report by saying that the
“ouster of
Manuel Noriega.. and installation of the democratically-elected
government
of President Guillermo Endara brought high hopes in Panama...”
The report
neglected to mention the number of casualties.

Human Rights Watch prepared the groundwork for the NATO attack on
Bosnia in
1993 by the false rape-of-thousands and “genocide” stories. 67
This tactic
of creating political hysteria was necessary for the United
States to carry
out its Balkan policy. It was repeated in 1999 when HRW
functioned as the
shock troops of indoctrination for the NATO attack on Yugoslavia.
All of
Soros’ blather about the rule of law was forgotten. The U.S. and
NATO made
their own law, and the institutions of George Soros stood behind
it.

Massaging of numbers to provoke a response was a major part of a
Council on
Foreign Relations campaign after September 11,2001. This time it
was the
2,801 killed in the World Trade Center. The CFR met on November
6, 2001, to
plan a “major public diplomacy campaign.” CFR created an
“Independent Task
Force on America’s Response to Terrorism.” Soros joined Richard
C.
Holbrooke, Newton L. Gingrich, John M. Shalikashvili (former
Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff), and other powerful individuals on a
campaign to make
the Trade Center dead into tools for U.S. foreign policy. The CFR
report set
out to make the case for a war on terrorism. George Soros’
fingerprints were
all over the campaign:

“Have senior-level U.S. officials press friendly Arab and other
Muslim
governments not only to publicly condemn the 9/11 attacks, but
also to back
the rationale and goals of the U.S. anti-terror campaign. We are
never going
to convince the publics in the Middle East and South Asia of the
nghteousness of our cause if their governments remain silent. We
need to
help them to deflect any blow-hack from such statements, but we
must have
them vocally on board.... Encourage Bosnian, Albanian, and
Turkish Muslims
to educate foreign audiences regarding the U.S. role in saving
the Muslims
of Bosnia and Kosovo in 1995-99, and our long-standing, close
ties to
Muslims around the world. Engage regional intellectuals and
journalists
across the board, regardless of their views. Routinely monitor
the regional
press in real time to enable prompt responses... Stress
references to the
victims (and ideally named victims to personalize them) whenever
we discuss
our cause and goals.” 68

Sorosian innumeracy: counting to bolster and defend U.S. foreign
policy.

Soros is very worried about the decline in the world capitalist
system and
he wants to do something about it, now. He recently said: “I can
already
discern the makings of the final crisis.... Indigenous political
movements
are likely to arise that will seek to expropriate the
multinational
corporations and recapture the ‘national’ wealth.” 69

Soros is seriously suggesting a plan to circumvent the United
Nations. He
proposes that the “democracies of the world ought to take the
lead and forge
a global network of alliances that could work with or without the
United
Nations.” If he were psychotic, one might think he was having an
episode.
But the fact is, Soros’ assertion that “The United Nations is
constitutionally incapable of fulfilling the promises contained
in the
preamble of its charter,” reflects the thinking of such
reactionary
institutions as the American Enterprise Institute. 70 Though many

conservatives refer to the Soros network as left-wing, on the
question of
U.S. affiliation with the United Nations Soros is on the same
page as the
likes of John R. Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control
and
International Security Affairs, who, with “[M]any Republicans in
Congress—believe that nothing more should be paid to the UN
system.” 71
There has been a decades-long rightwing campaign against the UN.
Now Soros
is leading it. On various Soros web sites one may read criticism
of the
United Nations as too rich, unwilling to share information, or
flawed in
ways that make it unfit for the way the world should run
according to George
Soros.

Even writers at The Nation, writers who clearly ought to know
better, have
been influenced by Soros’ ideas. William Greider, for instance,
recently
found some validity in Soros’ criticism that the United Nations
should not
be a venue for “tin-pot dictators and totalitarians. . treated as
equal
partners.” 72 This kind of Eurocentric racism is at the heart of
Soros’
hubris. His assumption that the United States can and should run
the world
is a prescription for fascism on a global scale. For much too
long, Western
“progressives” have been giving Soros a pass. Probably Greider
and others
will find the reference to fascism excessive, unjustified, even
outrageous.

But just listen closely to what Soros himself has to say: “In old
Rome, the
Romans only voted. In the modern global capitalism, the Americans
only vote.
The Brazilians do not vote.” 73

NOTES

1. Dan Seligman, “Life and Times of a Messianic Billionaire,”
commentary,
April 2002.
2. “Sir Karl Popper in Prague, Summary of Relevant Facts Without
Comment,”
http://www.lf3.cuni.cz/aff/p1_e.html.
3. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Transcaucasia/Central Asia,
www.rferl.org.
4. Seligman.
5. Lee Penn, “1999, A Year of Growth for the United Religions
Initiative.”
http://ad.doubleclick.net/adi/N1684.TMP3/B103O723.3;sz=720x300;ord=6249?.

6. George Soros, Soros on Soros, Staying Ahead of the Curve (New
York: John
Wiley, 1995), p. 26.
7. “Hedge Funds Get Trimmed,” Wall Street Journal, May 1, 2000.
8. Theodore Spencer, “Investors of the Century,” Fortune,
December 1999.
9. Jim Freer, “Most International Trader George Soros,” Latin
Tradecom,
October 1998,
http://www.latintrade.com/newsite/content/archives.cfm?StoryID=473.

10. Busaba Sivasomboon, “Soros Speech in Thailand Canceled,” AP
wire,
January 28, 2001.
11. Sivasomboon.
12. George Soros, The Asia Society Hong Kong Center Speech,
www.asiasociety.org/speeches/soros.
13. Soros on Soros, pill.
14. George Soros, Open Society: Reforming Global Capitalism (New
York:
Public Affairs, 2000).
15. David Corn, “Bush and the Billionaire, How Insider Capitalism
Benefited
W,” The Nation, July 17, 2002.
16. Soros on Soros, pp. 122-25.
17. Agence France-Presse, October 8,1993.
18. Marianne Yen, “Fund’s Representatives Arrested in China,”
Washington
Post, August 8, 1989, p. A4.
19. Los Angeles Times, November 24, 1994, p. ASS.
20. Chrystia Freeland, “Moscow Suspicion Grows: Kremlin Factions
Are at Odds
Over Policy,” Financial Times (London), January 19, 1995.
21. Interfax Russian News, November 6,1999.
22. Irma Dezhina, “U.S. Non-profit Foundations in Russia, Impact
on Research
and Education”
www.jhu.edu/~istr/conferences/dublin/workingpapers/dezhina.pdf.
23. “FSK Suspects Financing of Espionage on Russia’s Territory,”
AP wire,
January 18, 1995.
24. David Hoffman, “Proliferation of Parties Gives Russia a
Fractured
Democratic System,” Washington Post, October 1, 1995, p. A27;
Margaret
Shapiro, “Russian Agency Said to Accuse Americans of Spying,”
Washington
Post, January 14, 1995, p. A17.
25. Allan Turner, “Looking For Trouble,” Houston chronicle, May
28, 1995, p.
E1; Kim Masters, “Where Is Fred Cuny,” Washington Post, June 19,
1995, p.
D1; Patrick Anderson, “The Disaster Expert Who Met His Match,”
Washington
Post, September 6, 1999, p. C9; Scott Anderson, “What Happened to
Fred
Cuny?” New York Times Magazine, February 25, 1996, p. 44.
26. Scott Anderson, “The Man Who Tried to Save the World: the
Dangerous Life
and Disappearance of Fred Cuny,” Philanthropy Roundtable,
March/April 2002,
www.philanthropyroundtable.org/magazines/2000-01/hedges.
27. “U.S. Blocks $500M Aid Deal for Russians” Wall Street
Journal, December
22, 1999.
28. Bob Djurdjevic, “Letters to the Editor,” Wall Street Journal,
December
22, 1999.
29. “Open Society Institute,” www.soros.org/osi/newyork.
30. Connie Bruck, “The World According to Soros,” New Yorker,
January 23,
1995.
31. Olga M. Lazin, “The Rise of the U.S. Decentralized Model for
Philanthropy, George Soros’ Open Society and National Foundations
in
Europe,”
http://www.isop.ucla.edu/profmex/volume6/1winter01/01lazin1.htm.
32. David Ignatius, “Innocence Abroad: The New World of Spyless
Coups,”
Washington Post, September 22, 1991, p. C1.
33. Patrick McCartney, “Study Suggests Drug Laws Resemble
Notorious Passbook
Laws,” www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v00/n861/a06.
34. McCartney.
35. See Sean Gervasi, “Western Intervention in the USSR,”
CovertAction
Information Bulletin, no. 39, Winter 1991-92.
36. “The Cenasia Discussion List,”
http://www.eurasianet.org/resource/cenasia/hypermail/200102/0052.html.

37. Bogdan Denitch, “The Case Against Inaction,” The Nation,
April 26, 1999.

38. “Biographies, 2002 Socialist Scholars Conference,”
www.socialistscholar.org/biographies.
39. “Grants,” www.soros.org/repro/grants.
40. “East and Central Europe Program,”
www.newschool.edu/centers/ecep.
41. Oxana Popovitch, “IREX Belarus Opens a New IATP Site in
Molodechno.”
www.iatp.net/archive/belarus.
42. lan Traynor, “Belarussian Foils Dictator-buster...For Now,”
Guardian,
September 14, 2001,
www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,551533,00.html
43. Steven Erlanger, “Kostunica Says Some Backers ‘Unconsciously
Work for
American Imperial Goals,”’ New York Times, September 20, 2000;
and “Bringing
Down a Dictator, Serbia Calling.” PBS,
http://www.pbs.org/weta/dictator/rock/serbiacalling.html
44. Milosevic in the Hague, Focus on Human Rights, “In-Depth
Report
Documents Milosevic Crimes,” April 2001,
http://www.hrw.org/press/2001/10/milocroat1029.htm.
45. “About ICG,” May 2002,
http://www.intl-crisis-group.org/annual/2002/ICG2002.pdf.
46. Macedonia Crimes Against Civilians: Abuses by Macedonian
Forces in
Lluboten, August 10-12, 2001, <www.hrw.org>.
47. Andrew Leonard. “The Man Who Bought the World,” February 28,
2002,
Salon.com. http://archive.salon.com/tech/books/2002/02/28/soros/
48. James Petras, “Imperialism and NGOs in Latin America,”
Monthly Review,
vol. 49, no. 7, December 1997.
49. International Security Studies, “Herbert Okun,”
www.yale.edu/iss/peopleadvisoryboard1.
50. Leonard.
51. Edward W. Miller, “Brigandage,” Coastal Post Monthly, Mann
County, CA,
September 2000.
52. Mirjan Nadrljanski, “Eco-Disaster in Pancevo: Consequences on
the Health
of the Population,” July 19, 1999,
www.gci.ch/GreenCrossPrograms/legacy/yugoslavia/Nadrljanski.html
53. “Soros Fund Launches $150 MIn U.S.Backed Balkans Investment,”
Bloomberg
Business News, July 26, 2000; Chris Hedges, “Below It All in
Kosovo,” New
York limes, July 8,1998, p. A4.
54. Galina Sabeva, “Soros’ Sofia IT Firm Gets $9 Million Equity
Investment,”
Reuters, January 23, 2001.
55. On Plan Colombia see: Manuel Salgado Tamayo, “The Geostrategy
of Plan
Colombia CovertAction Quarterly no. 71, Winter 2001.
56. “Colombia: Human Rights Watch Testifies Before the Senate,”
Human Rights
Watch Backgrounder, April 24, 2002,
http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/americas/colombia-testimony0424.htm.

57. “Colombia: Bush/Pastrana Meeting, HRW World Report 2001,
Human Rights
News” (New York, November 6, 2001).
58. Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, Action Alert,” New York
limes
Covering for Colombian Death Squads,” February 9, 2001.
59. Doug Stokes “Colombia Primer Q&A on the Conflict and U.S.
Role,” April
16, 2002. Znet,
http://www.zmag.org/content/Colombia/stokes_col-primer.cfm.
60. Interpress Service, January 18, 1995. For additional
background see Jane
Regan, “AIDing U.S. Interests In Haiti,” CovertAction Quarterly
no. 51,
Winter 1994-95; and Noam Chomsky, “Haiti, The Uncivil Society,”
CovertAction
Quarterly no. 57, Summer 1996.
61. Sam Tucker, Human Rights Watch,
www.webactive.com/webactive/sotw/hrw.
62. John Kenneth Knaus, Orphans of the Cold War (New York, BBS
Public
Affairs 1999), p. 236.
63. Elisabeth Rosenthal, “Defiant Chinese Muslims Keep Their Own
Time,” New
York limes, November 19, 2000, p. 3.
64. Jonathan Reynolds (pseudonym), “The Clandestine Chef,” New
York Times
Magazine, December 3, 2000.
65. “Lessons of War,” Le Monde Diplomatique, March 2000; Peter
Phillips,
“Untold Stories of U.S./NATO’s War and Media Complacency,”
http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/suntold.htm
66. Marc W. Herold, “A Dossier on Civilian Victims of United
States’ Aerial
Bombing of Afghanistan: A Comprehensive Accounting,”
www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/civiDeaths.html
67. “Rape as a crime against humanity,”
www.haverford.edu/relg/sells/rape.html
68. “Improving the Public Diplomacy Campaign in the War Against
Terrorism,”
Independent Task Force on America’s Response to Terrorism,
Council on
Foreign Relations, November 6, 2001. 69. William Greider,
“Curious George
Talks the Market, The Nation, February 15, 1999.
70. “Oppose John Bolton’s Nomination as State Department’s Arms
Control
Leader,” Council for a Livable World , April 11, 2001,
http://www.clw.org/bush/opposebolton.html
71. Ibid.
72. Greider.
73. “The Dictatorship of Financial Capital,” Federation of Social
and
Educational Assistance (FASE), Brazil, 2002, www.fase.org.br

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Heather Cottin is a writer, lifelong political activist, and
recently
retired high school history teacher She lives in Free port, NY
and was for
many years married to the late scholar and activist Sean Gervasi.







--

Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Reply via email to