Introduction

On the eighth of August, 2008, for the first time since the war in Afghanistan, in South Ossetia the blood of Russian soldiers and civilians was spilled with the involvement of the United States of America. American involvement on this occasion was obvious: in contrast to Afghan mujahideen in rags, the Georgian military were dressed in the latest "digital" American uniforms – the camouflage pattern on them was applied with pixels. The U.S. Marines had only changed over to this type of uniform by the end of 2004. Images on the world's leading television channels emphatically portrayed that there was a proxy war going on between the United States and Russia.

Even during the Cold War, the sides were careful to avoid armed conflict. How did war in South Ossetia come about under current conditions where, despite all the tense rhetoric, relations between Russia and America are still far from an open confrontation?

The French documentary film “États-Unis – À la conquête de l'Est” (“The United States – the Conquest of the East”, by Manon Loizeau, Marc Berdugo Production, CAPA & Canal + France, 2005) shows an intriguing incident. At an official reception in the Georgian capital, the first person that President Saakashvili shook hands with was Bruce Jackson. His name does not appear on the protocol list. For over twenty years Jackson served as an intelligence officer in the U.S. Army, and in 1996 he founded the U.S. Committee to Expand NATO. The motto of the Committee is militarily short and to the point: “Strengthen America. Secure Europe. Defend Values. Expand NATO.” Jackson is easiest to find where a color revolution is being prepared – or the benefits of one are being reaped.

Mikhail Saakashvili said to the camera: "The need for Russian soldiers to leave their base in Georgia is obvious. However, it must be done in a civilized manner. We don't want to drive them out. Look, the Syrians left Lebanon in three weeks, despite the fact that there were four times as many of them as there are Russians in South Ossetia."

Bruce Jackson, who was standing right behind Saakashvili, listened attentively. Saakashvili turned towards him with an embarrassed smile and looking a little confused said:

"Did I say something wrong?"

"No, Mister President, please continue. Everything is fine," answered Jackson.

Photo: Bruce Jackson and President Saakashvili at a reception in Tbilisi. Frame from the documentary, "Revolution.com. USA. The Conquest of the East."

In addition to the United States, Georgia had another active ally in the Ossetian conflict against Russia: Ukrainian President, Viktor Yushchenko. Since his election in 2004, Saakashvili has supplied Yushchenko with tanks, helicopters and artillery systems. Over time, more and more emphasis has been placed on offensive weapons: modular Shkval systems, grenade launchers, cannons and machine guns. In anticipation of the August attack Yushchenko did not send surplus weapons to Georgia; he took weapon systems from line units: all told, Ukraine gave Georgia 7 battalions of Buk-M1 anti-aircraft missile systems – half of the Ukrainian arsenal. Yushchenko sold Georgia weapons at prices reduced by 3 to 7 times. This was established by a Verkhovna Rada commission chaired by Deputy Valery Konovalyuk, who conducted an investigation into arms deliveries. Konovalyuk personally visited the large Ukrainian weapons depots at Lozovaya Station, where a fire at the end of August destroyed military property. According to Konovalyuk, the depots were burned to cover up traces of the deliveries.[1]

Photo: Saakaskvili and Yushchenko: allies in the fight for American democracy. Reuters.

Bruce Jackson left that reception together with Giga Bokeriya, his long-time protege and leader of Georgia's Rose Revolution. During the course of the film, Bokeriya appears in a number of different places with a wide variety of people. He is seen in Washington at a reception where leaders of color revolutions from all over Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States were gathered in hopes of an audience with President Bush – they were drawing up plans for Cuba with their Serbian counterpart, Ivan Marović. And here he is in Tbilisi receiving the Belarusian opposition leader Anatoly Lebedko, who had come for some advice and tips. And who else is there in Tbilisi but President Bush. Bokeriya discusses with Lebedko whether there are people in the Belarusian government that it is possible to work with, whether he could distribute leaflets throughout the country, and what the situation is with the “donor” – to which Lebedko answers that the U.S. Congress has decided to allocate funds, but the process is currently on standby. Then Bokeriya appears in Bruce Jackson’s Washington office and congratulates him on the abandonment of the Russian military base in Georgia (which happened ten days after Bush's visit to Georgia); Jackson answers that people in Washington are pleased with Bokeriya's work. In Jackson's office there are two students from Russia, members of opposition groups – they are very excited at the opportunity to meet Bokeriya "in the flesh", to them he is a revolutionary icon. Bokeriya actively shares the experience as he personally received it from Serbian "revolutionaries".

Photo: Bokeriya in Bruce Jackson's office in Washington presents him with a tee-shirt showing the symbol of the Georgian revolution – the same black clenched fist used by the Otpor!, or Resistance!, youth movement in Serbia and earlier by the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations. Frame from the documentary "Revolution.com. USA. The Conquest of the East."

After the rose revolution, Bokeriya became an advisor to President Saakashvili. On April 7, 2008, when preparations for the attack on South Ossetia and Abkhazia were gaining momentum, he was appointed Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Georgia. Now not a single Western article on the topic of Russia and Georgia is published without a quote from Bokeriya. In response to the findings of the OSCE commission announced on November 6, 2008 which confirmed that the conflict had been started by Georgia, jeopardizing the lives of its own citizens, Russian peacekeepers and unarmed observers, Bokeriya told The New York Times: "That information, I don’t know what it is and how it is confirmed. There is such an amount of evidence of continuous attacks on Georgian-controlled villages and so much evidence of Russian military buildup, it doesn’t change in any case the general picture of events.”[2]

Georgia and Ukraine are the most successful examples of the color revolutions. The task set by the organizers, which will be discussed below, has been fully completed: people educated in America have come into power, and they are ready to openly confront Russia should that be in the interests of the United States. The independence gained by the Soviet republics in 1991 was, of course, a major victory for the United States and the West in general. But the Soviet leaders who became the first presidents of the independent states did not entirely suit America: with all their flirting with the United States, Eduard Shevardnadze and Leonid Kuchma were not radical enough and were not prepared to attack Russia.

The color revolutions challenged Russia, but this challenge was hardly a new one.

PART 1. UKRAINE

Chapter 1.
Katherine Chumachenko – at ease with U.S. presidents, Ukrainian Nazis and fascists from around the world.

In a black-and-white photograph dating from 1983, a pretty young blonde is standing comfortably with her hands on the backs of the chairs of two people who are well-known in America. On the left is Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick (1926-2006), a Democrat who became a rabid Republican, a foreign policy adviser to President Reagan, a fervent anti-Communist and the first female U.S. ambassador to the UN. Ms. Kirkpatrick devoted her life to the doctrine that bears her name; it advocated U.S. support of all anti-communist governments in the world, including dictatorships, provided they furthered American goals – entirely without irony the doctrine declared that the power of the American example would convert them into democracies.

On the right is Yaroslav Stetsko (1912-1986), head of the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations and the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, OUN-B. By 1983 he had traveled a long journey. As First Deputy to Stepan Bandera in the OUN-B, Stetsko reported the following in a June 25, 1941 letter to the commander: "We are creating a militia which will help remove the Jews" – the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, or UPA. Together with Theodore Oberländer, an Abwehr liaison officer with Ukrainian punitive detachments, Stetsko led the Nachtigall battalion in its attack on Lvov. On June 30th at 8:00 PM, that is, at the end of the 10th day of Hitler's attack on the Soviet Union, Stetsko "on behalf of the Ukrainian people and the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists under the leadership of Stepan Bandera" issued the "The act of the Proclamation of the Ukrainian State" and appointed himself prime minister of the "Ukrainian Government." And this is only the part of his activities that are public.

The photograph was taken at a meeting of the Captive Nations Committee, which brought together the leaders of anti-Soviet organizations from around the world.

The attractive blonde standing between Kirkpatrick and Stetsko was Katherine Chumachenko. As a recent graduate of Georgetown University in June 1982, she embarked on her first job in the leadership of the Ukrainian National Information service, a propaganda organization of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America. So it was in the most secretive corners of the American government that Chumachenko began her precipitous political career, a career which would later take her to the post of first lady of Ukraine.

Photo. In the foreground: United States Permanent Representative to the UN Jeane Kirkpatrik and president of the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations Yaroslav Stetsko; seated in the background are Osami Kuboki (Japan), President of Victory over Communism, and John Wilkinson (United Kingdom), a member of the British Parliament . Standing between them is Katherine Chumachenko, Director of the Ukrainian National Information Service.

Photo. Katherine Chumachenko with her husband, Viktor Yushchenko, and George and Laura Bush in the East Room of the White House, April 4, 2005. George Bush is not the first American president that Katherine Chumachenko-Yushchenko has worked with.

In a December 2004 article on the presidential elections, the Wall Street Journal called Katherine Yushchenko "a sober and sensible businesswoman who was raised in America." The newspaper continued: "It is the strong bond he has with his wife that has helped Mr. Yushchenko through the tough campaign and it will likely be his relationship with her that will help him have a successful presidency." If the author of the article knew Ms. Chumachenko's true history, this was a unique public revelation. If not – it was a unique bull’s-eye that was full of irony.

Just who is Katherine Chumachenko-Yushchenko?

Katherine Chumachenko was born on September 1, 1961 to a family of Ukrainian immigrants in Chicago; father: Mikhailo (1917 – 1998); mother: Sofia (1927 -). In 1981 Chumachenko received a bachelor's degree in International Economics from the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University – Professor Jeane Kirkpatrick taught there, and Paula Dobriansky was also a student there.

The Ukrainian National Information Service, of which Katherine Chumachenko became the director, was established in 1976 in Washington to "strengthen the work of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America with regard to contacts and cooperation by the Ukrainian community with American official circles."[3] The Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (UCCA), founded before the war, in 1940, stated its goal as "creating a Ukrainian representative organization to promote Ukrainian interests in the United States and assist in the struggle for the independence of the Ukrainian Nation."[4] Lev Dobriansky, a one-time US Ambassador and one of the main lobbyists for a bill on "captive nations," served as the Chairman of the UCCA. Chumachenko was well acquainted his daughter, Paula Dobriansky, and collaborated closely with her. Between 1981 and 1987, Ms. Dobriansky progressed from a position as an employee of the National Security Council's section on the USSR and Eastern Europe to its chief.

According to a UCCA report, Katherine Chumachenko's efforts to counter the work of the Office of Special Investigations, which was established in 1979 to find former Nazis in America, were particularly successful. On November 18, 1982, the Washington Post published a letter by Chumachenko "sharply rejecting charges that the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists [OUN] collaborated with the Nazis."[5]

In 1983 Chumachenko became the executive director of the National (American) Captive Nations Committee (NCNC). Among other activities, this committee holds a "Captive Nations Week," and on the 18th and 19th of July, 1983 it celebrated its 25th anniversary. It attracts "officials, legislators, ambassadors and guests from all over the world." According to a UCCA report, this event has been personally attended by "President Reagan, Vice President Bush and UN Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick, who vehemently condemned the domination of nations by Communists." Yaroslav Stetsko, President of the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations, and Richard Allen, a former National Security Advisor, have also attended.

John Singlaub (about whom more later) headed up the organizing committee for the Captive Nations Week Conference. "Katherine Chumachenko, Executive Director of NCNC and Director of the Ukrainian National Information Service" – continued the report – "was the main coordinator of four events: the White House ceremony, the official dinner of the Congress, the plenary session and the banquet."

The 17th Conference of the World Anti-Communist League (WACL) was held in Luxembourg from the 20th to the 23rd of September of that same year. A number of books have been written about the WACL. The title of one, written by American investigative reporters Scott Anderson and John Lee Anderson, gives a good overview of the composition and activities of this organizations: Inside the League: The Shocking Expose of How Terrorists, Nazis, and Latin American Death Squads Have Infiltrated the World Anti-Communist League.[6] Former League member Geoffrey Stewart-Smith describes it as "mainly a collection of Nazis, fascists, anti-Semites, distributors of lies, brutal racists and corrupt careerists."[7]

Representatives of 70 countries and ten international organizations attended this conference; among them were the following:

- Prof. Dr. Theodore Oberländer, from Germany – he is a former Abwehr officer responsible for liaison with Ukrainian SS units.

- Intelligence Major General John Singlaub, an officer in the Office of Strategic Services, the predecessor of the CIA, one of the founders of the CIA, co-founder of the private intelligence and analysis network Western Goals Foundation, with forty years of experience in clandestine operations around the world, particularly in Latin and Central America.

- U.S. Lieutenant General Daniel Graham, former Deputy Director of the CIA, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and one of the principal architects of Star Wars.

- The Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations (ABN) was represented by its president, Yaroslav Stetsko, and his wife and deputy in ABN. This remarkable couple will be discussed separately.

- And the 22-year-old Katherine Chumachenko. She represented the US National Nations Committee (USNCNC).

Let us pause for a moment here. How did such a young Ukrainian come to attend a meeting of Nazis who had escaped the Nuremberg trials, leaders of nationalist movements who had served in SS units, and American intelligence generals who had created death squads? How is it that having barely graduated from a university at 21 she immediately became the head of several important organizations in the Ukrainian nationalist network, served as the coordinator of Ukrainian events in the US White House and Congress, and felt quite comfortable in the company of the American president, vice-president and ambassador to the UN?

How is it that at such a young age she got such high level access in such a secret milieu? Why was she so trusted? It is obvious that during Chumachenko’s youth and university life a number of events occurred that gave her entrée into the highest echelons of American government and gained her their deepest confidence. Charges that Chumachenko has ties to American interests and intelligence are not new and are clichéd: there are a lot of people like that. Chumachenko's case is on an entirely different level. She is in a different weight class, a special class to which among the Ukrainian confederates of the United States she alone belongs.

There is a moral aspect to this situation. The "Galicia Division," the full name of which is the 14th Waffen-Grenadier-Division of the SS (1st Ukrainian Division), which was organized by the Abwehr to carry out ethnic cleansing of Poles and Jews in Ukraine, took care of the dirtiest kind of work for the Gestapo, such as the execution of children. For a person, especially a young person, who has read at least some accounts of the excesses of the Ukrainian Gestapo collaborators – and Chumachenko read them and wrote an article in rebuttal – it is difficult, psychologically and morally, to consciously deny the facts, to work every day alongside fascists and fight for their goals with conviction. In order for her to feel at home in that kind of working environment, she would need to belong, to receive a special kind of education, an early and deep initiation into fascism.

Over the next two years, from 1984 to 1986, Chumachenko received a master's degree in Business Administration in Chicago while doing an internship at the Illinois Department of Commerce and working as an editor at the Washington Center for Ethics and Public Policy (How come? Because the Internet didn't exist at that time).

Immediately upon completion of her education in September 1986, she served from 1987 to 1990 as the Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs, Paula Dobriansky. President Reagan had created this post in response to sharp criticism of the United States over the Iran-Contra scandal, and it was given the mission of demonstrating concern for human rights.

In April 1988 Chumachneko moved to the White House, where she took the post of Associate Director of the Office of Public Liaison. In this capacity, Chumachenko and Paula Dobriansky welcomed attendees at the 15th Congress of Ukrainian Americans, held in Washington on 16-18 September 1988. She extended the greetings of President Reagan to those taking part in the Congress. Ambassador Lev Dobriansky joined his daughter and her friend at the banquet.

Katherine Chumachenko worked at the White House until January, 1989. She held a position for a short time from January to November1989 in the Treasury Department, and then from November 1989 to May 1991 she continued her new line of work as an economist on the Congressional Joint Economic Committee.

From 1991 to 1993 Chumachenko co-founded the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation, served as its Vice President and headed the Pylyp Orlyk Institute. From 1993 until 2000 Chumachenko worked as a country manager for KPMG in Ukraine and a consultant on the Bank Staff Training Program under the sponsorship of the U.S. Agency for International Development.

The subsequent events that took Katherine Chumachenko to the immediate goal of her splendid training are well-known: she romantically met Victor Yushchenko "accidentally" on a plane, and in 1998 he became her husband. Viktor Yushchenko has his own story. His father admitted in an interview that it was only in a German concentration camp that he drank real coffee. What did he have to be doing in a fascist camp to get the best coffee? We shall leave Yushchenko's nature and upbringing of the Yushchenko out of this book; it is clear that the choice of him for a spouse by the brilliant student of the American government Katherine Chumachenko was well thought out.

Subsequent to the marriage, Yushchenko became Prime Minister of Ukraine in 1999. And in 2004 he became president of the country as a result of the Orange Revolution.

Thus a plan initiated during the Great Patriotic War, which was patiently executed by generations through the decades of the Cold War and scrupulously nurtured during the 1990s, came to a successful conclusion 60 years later. On January 2010 Yushchenko, in one of his last acts as president, proclaimed Bandera a national Hero of the Ukraine.

Chapter 2.
Roman Zvarych: not a lawyer, never lived in Ukraine – but Ukrainian Minister of Justice

In 1995 Roman Zvarych [spelled Swarycz in the WACL document above] became the first U.S. citizen in history to exhange his American citizenship for Ukrainian. What in Ukraine during those years of confusion could interest a full American citizen?

Roman Zvarych was born in 1953 to a family of Ukrainian political emigrants living in Yonkers, which is near New York City. His biography on the site of the Ukrainian Cabinet of Ministers states that from 1971 to 1976 Zvarych studied social science at Manhattan College. In 1976 he continued his studies at Columbia University, "earning the right to teach after two years and starting work on a dissertation" on Plato. And according to his official CV, from 1983 to 1991 Zvarych taught political theory, philosophy, history and theory of law at New York University – a broad area of expertise for a young instructor.

In 1991, that is, at the first opportunity, Zvarych emigrated to Ukraine. His first job in the country, which he had never before visited, was Director of the Demos Analytical and Information Service of the Center for Democratic Reform. In May 1998 Zvarych was elected as a III Convocation Verkhovna Rada deputy through the list of the People's Movement of Ukraine (Rukh); he served in the Committee on Law Reform and the Committee on Foreign Affairs. Beginning in May 2002 he again served as a deputy in the Rada, a member of the Our Ukraine faction and Deputy Head of the Parliamentary Committee on European Integration.

From February to September 2005 Zvarych served as Justice Minister in the government of Yulia Tymoshenko. In March 2006 he became a people's deputy for the third time, from the Our Ukraine bloc. In August 2006 Zvarych was again made Justice Minister, and on November 1st the Verkhovna Rada called for his resignation. But soon after that Viktor Yushchenko named the ex-minister as his representative to the Verkhovna Rada. Now Zvarych is a Yushchenko deputy and a member of the Political Council of the Our Ukraine People's Union party. At the same time, Zvarych holds leadership positions in the Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists and the Reforms and Order party.

Photo: Roman Zvarych, ex-Justice Minister of Ukraine and Director of the legal department of the Our Ukraine People's Union bloc

In the spring of 2005, Ukrainian Pravda published an article alleging that the minister had not been a professor at Columbia University, had not authored scientific papers, and did not receive a diploma from the university as was stated in his official biographies.

Then in an exclusive interview with The Ukrainian Weekly Roman Zvarych admitted that he had not received a masters or a doctoral degree from Columbia University, nor had he attained the rank of professor at New York University. And unfortunately he had no formal legal education, either.

Columbia University confirmed that Roman Zvarych had not received a document of completion of higher education from them. Nor was the publication able to obtain confirmation from Manhattan College, where, according to Zvarych, he had received a bachelor’s degree. New York University spokesperson Josh Taylor told The Ukrainian Weekly that Zvarych had been "a part-time lecturer" in the School of Continuing and Professional Studies from 1989 to 1991, i.e., not for eight years but for two. Teaching evening continuing education classes is a very common way in New York for businessmen and other non-academic people to acquire an academic gloss.

As his basis for aspiring to the post of Justice Minister of country with 50 million people (certainly no banana republic), Zvarych said that he had served as a deputy in the country's legislative assembly for 6 years, and that gave him "considerable legal expertise."

Looking deeper, however, it becomes obvious why Roman Zvarych did not have enough time for education. He was involved in extra-curricular activities.

The first few days in May 1981 Roman Zvarych was busy opening a plenary session for youth at the Congress of the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations.

Photo: Moderator Roman Zvarych opens a youth plenary session at the Congress of the American Friends of the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations, May 2 – 3, 1981. Source: ABN Correspondence, May – August 1981.

In September 1983 Roman Zvarych attended the Conference of the World Anti-Communist League in Luxembourg, together with Catherine Chumachenko, the Stetskos, Theodore Oberländer, John Singlaub and Daniel Graham.

In 1984 Zvarych explained to an American correspondent: "No matter what we think of Reagan, holding the Captive Nations Week during Reagan's presidency is at least an indicator of a significant and fundamental change in American foreign policy, and this has led to some tactical changes that have been good for us. . . . Before Reagan, none of the foreign policy elite in the United States saw a need to associate with us."[8]

Looking even deeper, this intense activity in international anti-Soviet organizations was not the main event for Zvarych. His real objectives were resolved on an entirely different level of publicity. And it wasn't legal knowledge that gave Roman Zvarych a foundation for serving in a ministerial post in Ukraine.

On March 28, 2005 the Kiev office of BBC Monitoring published an interview with Justice Minister Roman Zvarych under the heading, "Ukrainian Justice Minister Shares Personal Story."[9] In it Zvarych tells how hard it was to live in the U.S. "melting pot" because he had "spiritual roots" in the motherland, that he had worked as a taxi driver in New York, that he had to turndown a proposal to cooperate with the CIA when he was a student, and that the KGB had been keeping tabs on his future wife. “Yes,” he said, “his American origin gives rise to a mass of rumors representing him as an agent of world capitalism and the CIA in Ukraine.”

Correspondent Alexander Artazey asked the Minister an innocent question:

"How did you meet your wife? Is she also from the Ukrainian diaspora?"

Zvarych answered:

"No, and that is the second reason I came to Ukraine. Svitlana and I met in 1983 in Poland in 1983."

Then Zvarych said the most astounding things:

"I won't go into the details because there are some confidential things still, not personal, but really confidential. The thing is I had already left work with the university [author's note: in 1983 according to his official biography Zvarych had begun teaching at New York University] and worked in Munich – the office was at 67 Zeppelingstrasse – the personal secretary of the head of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, Yaroslav Stetsko. I was responsible for his international activities, and that was still a top secret area."

Artazey:

"In other words, you prepared agents for work in Ukraine?"

Zvarych:

"I wouldn't call them agents. Rather they were people for links to the underground. In this context Yaroslav Stetsko gave me several special missions. Once, in 1983 in Poland, while fulfilling one of them, I made contact with a courier from Ukraine."

And then Zvarych went on to speak about a personal matter:

"That courier was my Svitlana. I cannot give out any other details. She is a Kiev resident with roots in the city. We met and took a good look at one another. And in 1985 in Kiev... my son was born, about whom I knew nothing until 1990!”.

In other words, Roman Zvarych, who went on to become Justice Minister of Ukraine, was responsible for Yaroslav Stetsko's international intelligence network which was working under the cover of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations.

Out of all the Ukrainian lawyers in the world, the United States chose the head of an international intelligence network of Ukrainian nationalists for the job of Ukrainian Justice Minister.

Chapter 3.
Yaroslav and Yaroslava Stetsko: loyal allies in the fight against Russia and the USSR alongside Nazis from all over the world

By the time Yaroslav Stetsko attended the 16th Conference of the World Anti-Communist League in Luxembourg in 1983, and a young Katherine Chumachenko was captured in a photograph with him and Jeane Kirkpatrick, he had already fulfilled his mission in the fight against Russia.

Yaroslav Stetsko (1912, Ternopil – 1986, Munich) started his career against Russia in the clandestine organization Ukrainian Nationalist Youth. Soon he joined the Ukrainian Military Organization (UMO) and the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), which was founded in 1929 to fight for the independence of Ukraine. In 1939 Stetsko prepared the Rome congress of OUN. At that time there appeared friction between the old guard, led by Andrew Melnyk, and the young radicals headed by Stepan Bandera. The OUN split into two parts, OUN-M and OUN-B, so called after the last names of their leaders; and Stetsko became Bandera's deputy in OUN-B. The Stetsko-Bandera alliance lasted for 19 years, until Bandera's death in 1959.

Bandera and Stetsko earned their livings in part by murdering Polish officials, and they spent time in a Polish prison for that. It was there that they were discovered by the Nazis planning Operation Barbarossa, who needed Ukrainian agents that would undermine the resistance of the Soviet Army. The Nazis saw ideological allies in the radical Ukrainian nationalists: their fanatical racism, hatred for Jews, Russians and Poles was in complete accord with the beliefs of the Third Reich. By November, 1939 approximately 400 Ukrainian nationalists had begun training in Abwehr camps in Zakopane, Komárno, Kirchendorf and Hakestein.

The Nazis organized their Ukrainian allies into regiments. The “Special Unit Nachtigall,” as it was called in the Abwehr documents, in Wehrmacht uniforms and under the command of Bandera and Stetsko, was to become the vanguard in the conquest of Ukraine. The Nachtigall unit was given the mission of attacking the rear guard of the Soviet Army and engaging in guerilla warfare. The OUN-B also formed a secret police, which was to facilitate a purge of Jews, ethnic Russians and Communists for their Nazi allies. Mykola (Nikolai) Lebed, the third man in the OUN-B hierarchy, was appointed head of the secret police.[10]

The American investigative reporters, the Anderson brothers, examined in detail the activities of the Eastern European collaborators and of Stetsko, in particular, both during and after the war. "By June 30, 1941, the advance units of the Wehrmacht had entered Lvov. They included the Ukrainian Nachtigall unit under the command of the German officer Theodore Oberländer and Yaroslavl Stetsko. Stetsko immediately organized ’national assemblies’ in a rather small room. From the podium he announced the formation of a Ukrainian government and named himself its premier."[11] His radio address stated:

"The Ukrainian nation will work closely with the great Nazi Germany, which under the leadership of Adolf Hitler will establish a new world order in Europe and worldwide. . . . A Ukrainian National Revolutionary Army is being formed on Ukrainian land; it will fight jointly with the allied German Army against Moscow's occupation on behalf of the Sovereign Catholic Ukrainian State and the new order throughout the world."

Photo: A poster reading "Traveling the same road . . ." A German Wehrmacht soldier and a volunteer in the Ukrainian SS division.

"Pogroms code-named 'Operation Petlura' began a few hours after Stetsko and Oberländer arrived in Lvov," continue the Andersons. ”Jews, intellectuals, ethnic Russians, members of the Communist Party – all who could be suspected of opposing the 'New Order' – were herded together and shot by Nazis and Ukrainian nationalists in their joint operation."[12] During one week of Stetsko's "premiership" in Lvov, according to estimates, about seven thousand people were massacred, most of them Jews. Tens of thousands more were killed on the outskirts of the city by marauding OUN-B units. In the following four years, the German Nazis and their Ukrainian collaborators massacred the entire Jewish population of Lvov – approximately one hundred thousand people – and more than a million Ukrainian Jews.[13]

Ukrainian police units organized by German mobile extermination units – the Einsatzgruppen – were financed out of funds confiscated from the Jews. The Einsatz-Kommandos restrict themselves to shooting adults, assigning the shooting of children to their Ukrainian collaborators. [14]

Photo: a poster of the Galicia division: "The Galician SS troops go into battle!" with the Lvov coat of arms and a quote from Hitler.

After the Battle of Stalingrad turned the course of the war in the Soviet Union's favor, the Nazi need for Ukrainian allies only grew. In the spring of 1943 the Germans began forming an SS division with Ukrainian volunteers from the Galicia district – it was named the 14th Waffen-Grenadier-Division of the SS "Galicia"(1st Ukrainian Division). The oath taken by members of this division was the same as that taken by members of other volunteer units of the Reich:

"I will serve you, Adolf Hitler, as Führer and Chancellor of the German Reich with loyalty and valor. I swear to obey you till death. So help me God!"

The Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UIA) was formed in 1944. The German press published numerous articles about UIA successes in the fight with the Bolsheviks, calling members of the UIA "Ukrainian freedom fighters." Later, it wasn't the German press but the American government that would call the OUN, the UIA and Stetsko "freedom fighters."[15]

In March 1945 the Germans made a populist move when they announced the creation of a so-called Ukrainian National Army based on the "Galicians" under the command of General Shandruk. Pavlo Shandruk lived in Germany after the war, and in 1949 he moved to the United States, where he lived happily in Trenton, New Jersey until 1979. The Ukrainian Quarterly, a publication of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (UCCA), which was chaired by Lev Dobriansky, published an ode on his death, noting his "academic success" and "charismatic ability to make a good impression on people."[16]

The defeat of Nazi Germany and the new disposition of forces in the world, with the Soviet Union playing a significantly greater role, signified the defeat of the Ukrainian Nazis and hence the need for reorganization. At an OUN conference in 1945 a board consisting of three people was elected: Stepan Bandera (Chairman), Stetsko and General Roman Shukhevych.

The Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations (ABN) was formed in Munich in April 1946; it included anti-Communist organizations from 15 countries in Europe and Asia. Yaroslav Stetsko was elected President of the ABN – an "Ex-Nazi International."[17] He fulfilled this role until the last day of his life.

The Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations served as coordination center for anti-Communist organizations in the Soviet republics and socialist countries. At various times it included organizations of Armenia, Belarus, Bulgaria, Georgia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Croatia, Czechoslovakia (later Czech Republic and Slovakia) and of some ethnic groups. Its headquarters and cells were involved in disseminating propaganda, organizing anti-Soviet demonstrations and holding press conferences and international congresses. Stetsko established an ABN office in Taiwan in 1971, but before that the ABN had long cooperated with Taiwan-based Chinese Anti-Communist League.

It is worthy of note that it was the Ukrainians who played the leading role in this assembly of anti-Communist nations.

In 1967, the efforts of Stetsko and others brought about a new anti-Soviet organization – the World Anti-Communist League (WACL), in which Stetsko became a permanent member of its leadership. Publicly, the League was involved in anti-Soviet propaganda.

It is important to understand that, as the membership and activities of the WACL, the ABN and other such groups demonstrated, their goals were not limited to national territories. Anti-Soviets from around the world regularly gathered in multinational conferences and held meetings in Congress and the White House; their agent network closely cooperated with Western intelligence services. Fifty years later, in exactly the same way the leaders of the "color revolutions" of Serbia, Ukraine, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Belarus and the other countries where the process is well under way, including Russia, would meet and exchange experiences. Their organizers would visit the same offices in Washington and meet with the President of the United States – George W. Bush, at that time. Exactly like the battle with the Soviet Union, the fight against Russia will be a global operation, not a local one. The ABN was formally dissolved in 1996 – but in fact networks of new organizations with updated names have continued its mission.

The photo of Katherine Chumachenko with Stetsko and Kirkpatrick is a clear illustration of the continuity of the fight against Russia: A Ukrainian collaborator is passing the baton to the new generation organizing the Orange Revolution – in the presence and under the direction of an agent of the U.S. radical right.

On July 13, 1983 a former executioner who had sworn allegiance to fascism and taken part in the genocide of Jews, Russians and Poles was invited to a reception at the White House to hear from the first row the words of United States President Ronald Reagan: "Your dream is our dream. Your hope is our hope."

Yaroslav Stetsko did not travel his complex road alone. His wife and companion, Yaroslava (Slava) Stetsko worked with him in all his organizations and initiatives. While Stetsko was running the ABN, Slava was a member of the central committee, the head of the public relations department, and the chief editor of the ABN's bulletin, ABN Correspondence. When WACL was formed, she became a member of the ABN permanent delegation in the League. Beginning in 1968, Slava Stetsko headed the foreign policy division of OUN-B. After her husband's death in 1986 she was elected head of OUN-B and president of ABN.

Yaroslava, unlike Yaroslav, was lucky enough to see the fruits of many years of effort. In 1991 she moved to Ukraine after a 47-year absence just in time to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Proclamation of Ukrainian Independence on June 30, 1991, which was held in Lvov, where Yaroslav first read it. Yaroslava Stetsko definitively emigrated to Ukraine that same year.

As her first task in her native land Slava Stetsko undertook to establish a political party based on OUN-B. This party was formed a little over a year later and was called the Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists (CUN), and Stetsko herself became the head of the party. After receiving her Ukrainian citizenship, Stetsko was elected to the Verkhovna Rada in 1997 and, as the oldest deputy in the Verkhovna Rada, she opened the first session of the newly elected parliament on May 14, 1998.

At her funeral in 2003, Mr. Shymko, former president of the World Congress of Free Ukrainians (now called the World Ukrainian Congress) praised Slava Stetsko as a "heroine" of Ukraine: "Pani Slava lived a life without compromise from the time she joined the liberation struggle when she was 18."[18] Immediately behind her casket and shoulder to shoulder marched the leader of the Our Ukraine party Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko.

The funeral service for Slava Stetsko, the oldest deputy in the Verkhovna Rada, was held in a modest Kiev church filled to capacity. Reference: http://www.vesti7.ru/news?id=12408.

Everything that the Ukrainian Nationalists had dreamed about, that they had fought for in the 14th Waffen-Grenadier-Division of the SS "Galicia" and the American intelligence networks (which is discussed in a later section), began gradually to take shape.

On October 14, 2005 a Ukrainian government commission approved the expert conclusions of a working group which had proposed considering the activities of the OUN/UPA as a struggle for the freedom and independence of Ukraine.

During Victory Day celebrations in 2006, President Viktor Yushchenko addressed the need for OUN/UPA veterans to reconcile with veterans of the Soviet Army and appealed to the Verkhovna Rada with a request pass a bill as soon as possible on the status of UPA soldiers: "The Verkhovna Rada should pay tribute to all who defended their native land and vote in favor of a bill recognizing the UPA soldiers as war veterans. This is our duty to our fathers' generation."

On October 14, 2006, the 64th anniversary of establishment of the UPA, President Viktor Yushchenko signed the Decree "On the Thorough and Objective Study of the Activities of the Ukrainian Liberation Movement and Assistance in the Process of National Reconciliation." In the decree the President required, in particular, the Ministry of Education and Science to popularize the history of the UPA as a Ukrainian national liberation movement; to organize production of literature, popular science films and broadcasts on the participation of Ukrainians in the Second World war; and to "fully and objectively elucidate in the educational process" the activities of such organizations as the OUN/UPA, the Ukrainian Liberation Organization and other organizations.

PART 2. THE THIRD REICH

Chapter 4.
Theodore Oberländer: professor, demographer, overseer of the Ukrainian butchers, minister in the FRG government

In previous chapters, our examination of the events involving the Ukrainian figures revealed Theodore Oberländer as the German coordinator of the Ukrainian Waffen SS units, who entered Lvov along with Stetsko and Bandera and participated in the World Anti-Communist League conference held in Luxembourg in 1983. Now we shall look his activities on the German side. [19]

Oberländer studied economics, demographics and the social aspects of the East European countries, particularly Poland; notably, he developed plans for the colonization of Poland by Germans. From 1937 to 1938 he worked in the central office of the Abwehr – the German intelligence and counterintelligence agency. In 1939 he was transferred to the Abwehr detachment in Breslau (now named Wroclaw). This was a special detachment. It served as a center for implementing tasks from the Abwehr Second Department, which specialized in sabotage, subversion, organization of "fifth columns," psychological warfare and other devious methods for engaging an enemy. The use of these methods began in Czechoslovakia and continued in Poland with the support of German and Ukrainian minorities in those countries. As a specialist on Polish issues, Oberländer, was involved in preparation of these activities in advance of the occupation of Poland by German forces.

Oberländer's next stop was Krakow, where he arrived with occupation forces as the Abwehr's representative on Ukrainian affairs. The Abwehr's main instrument for Ukraine was the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, with which the Abwehr had already been working in Poland. This happened just as a split was happening in the OUN. A new radical wing under the leadership of Bandera, which was comprised of activists who had never lived outside of Ukraine but had participated in terrorist actions in Poland between the two wars, locked horns with the official OUN leader, Andriy Melnyk, and his followers, who had spent years abroad and advocated a more moderate course.

All German attempts to reintegrate the organization were unsuccessful. "An absolute disaster" was how General von Lahousen described those attempts after the war. They had to choose. The experience in terrorism and sabotage in Poland, plus Oberländer's lobbying for radical methods, determined the choice of Bandera's group.

Photo: Theodore Oberländer, the Führer's comrade in arms, who personally directed punitive actions against Ukrainian partisans, as Adenauer minister.

Three SS men: from left: K.H.Frank, R. Heydrich (sitting), and T. Oberlander (standing).

Meanwhile, it was decided in 1940 in Berlin to attack the USSR. The planning for the operation began in August; May 15, 1941 was selected for the beginning of the war. Cooperation with the OUN-B entered a new and more active phase as the plan was being drafted. Oberländer was transferred to Prague. By that time, Oberländer, a 36-year-old demographer, had been given the rank of Oberleutnant. The two sides agreed to the following: the Abwehr would form and equip two Ukrainian units which would work for it, and in return OUN-B would be entitled to pursue its own political goals in the occupied territories. This allowed Stetsko to proclaim Ukraine's independence and name himself its Premier. Oberländer was assigned responsibility for all joint operations between the Abwehr and OUN-B.

Oberländer spent the time from May 8 to June 18, 1941 at the Nachtigall base in Neuhammer overseeing the training of his units and conferring with the OUN-B leaders, including Stetsko. Twenty days later, on June 30th, the Oberländer unit entered Lvov. The chapter on Stetsko describes what happened after that.

Oberländer bears direct responsibility for the crimes committed by the Nachtigall unit, which was subject to his orders alone. He was indirectly responsible for the pogroms and purges committed by the Ukrainian police, because he was the political overseer of Stetsko and the execution squads organized by his "government."

As the war was nearing its end, a meeting took place in April 1945 between German officers and collaborators at which it was decided to establish contact with the Western Allies. Oberländer left for General Patton's headquarters. Contact was made on April 23rd.

After mention of his Abwehr work was removed from his record, Oberländer received a rehabilitation document from a local denazification commission in Bad Kissingen, Bavaria.

At the beginning of 1950, Oberländer was given the post of Minister of Refugee Affairs in the FRG government. This post allowed him to oversee the process of "bleaching" the Nazi past from the records of needed people and place them in official posts. In this manner, tens and hundreds of former Nazis were reintegrated into the West German government.

Chapter 5.
Reinhard Gehlen: head of Third Reich's Eastern front intelligence – and the "top American spy"

Soon after the war's end an airplane landed at an airbase near Washington to deliver an especially valuable, secret passenger. Onto American soil stepped one of the highest ranking representatives of the conquered enemy – a legendary figure in Nazi Germany's intelligence service, Lieutenant General Reinhard Gehlen.

While still serving the Führer, in December 1944 Reinhard Gehlen (1902 – 1979), then a major general, was made head of German intelligence on the Eastern Front in recognition of his "extraordinary talents and experience." Actually it was collecting intelligence on the Soviet Union that he had previously been involved in while serving on the German General Staff.

In March of 1945, understanding that the Third Reich was coming to an end, Gehlen and a small group of officers close to him microfilmed materials they had collected and hid them at several locations in the Austrian Alps.

Photo: Reinhard Gehlen while still in the service of the Third Reich.

In Bavaria on May 22, 1945, Wehrmacht Lieutenant General Gehlen surrendered to General Patton's 7th Army and immediately requested an interview with American counterintelligence (at the time the U.S. Counterintelligence Corps performed that function). Gehlen offered his apparatus, his agent network and the materials collected to American counterintelligence in exchange for his freedom.

While the Soviet Union demanded in vain that Gehlen be extradited and his materials turned over, in the Pentagon the parties quickly came to a mutual understanding: Gehlen's materials and his network were "invaluable," and "all of his conditions were accepted." Under the agreement, Gehlen would rebuild his intelligence apparatus, which had consisted "entirely of German personnel," and it would be financed by the "lavish funds of U.S. counterintelligence."[20] In the talks with Gehlen the United States was represented by Allen Dulles, director of the future CIA, and a group of intelligence generals.

As a result of the agreement between the Pentagon and Gehlen, hundreds of Wehrmacht and SS officers were freed from prisoner of war camps and transferred to Gehlen's staff in the Spessart Mountains in Central Germany – they formed the skeleton of an organization consisting of 350 officers personally chosen by Gehlen. They included, for example, Alois Brunner, who was responsible for the Drancy internment camp outside Paris and the death of 140,000 Jews in it. When the staff of Gehlen's Organization, or Gehlen Org, as it was informally called, reached 3000, the headquarters moved to a closely guarded location near Munich, where Gehlen Org operated under the cover name "South German Industrial Development Organization."[21]

At the beginning of the 1950s Gehlen Org numbered 4000 officers. Gehlen's agent network covered a huge territory from Korea to Cairo, and from Siberia to Santiago de Chile.

In 1955 the Federal Republic of Germany became an independent state under the leadership of chancellor Konrad Adenauer, and in 1956 Gehlen Org was officially integrated into the FRG. Reinhard Gehlen became the head of the federal intelligence service of West Germany, the BND (Bundesnachrichtendienst). He retired from this post only in 1968.

Gehlen's name was not unknown to Europeans; the activities of the organization were well known in Germany by 1950; Soviet intelligence successfully infiltrated the Gehlen network. But the American public first heard of Gehlen only in 1954 from the pages of The Washington Post, which described him as the "top American spy."

"Gehlen's name has never been pronounced in Congress during appropriations debates and he spends a sum of 6 million dollars per year provided to him by the U.S. Treasury Department.

“His organization includes thousands of agents of various nationalities, together with the elite of the counterintelligence corps of the old German Army.

“The Central Intelligence Agency and the Pentagon seemingly trust this retired German lieutenant general more than any politician of their allies . . ."[22]

Many Historians and experts believe that the philosophy of the Cold War emerged during the Second World War. Valentin Falin and Viktor Litovkin present data on Churchill's development of Operation Unthinkable – a plan for war against the Soviet Union that was to have begun on July 1, 1945 with 112 – 113 divisions, including a dozen Wehrmacht divisions that were kept in readiness in Schleswig-Holstein and southern Denmark until the spring of 1946.[23]

Nazi intelligence Lieutenant General Gehlen succeeded with the U.S. leadership because the United States, like Britain, was at that time drawing up its own plans regarding the Soviet Union. In May 1945 the then president Truman was convinced that the Soviet Union would be America's next enemy. However, the United States did not have an agent network in Eastern Europe – it was in critical need of assets like Gehlen and his organization. For many years, Gehlen Org remained the CIA's only capability to "see" and "hear" what was happening in the Soviet bloc.

The story of the establishment of Gehlen Org and its relationships with the American intelligence services is documented in detail in the recently declassified two-volume collection of CIA documents, "Forging an Intelligence Partnership: CIA and the Origins of the BND, 1945-49." The program for assimilating Nazis in the American establishment by "bleaching" their records and preventing investigations was given the name "Operation Paperclip" (among those who were later involved was Katherine Chumachenko, when she was working against the Office of Special Investigations). The program initiated by Allen Dulles continued covertly until the middle of the 1950s.

While the U.S. Armed Forces were hunting Nazis in Europe, other parts of the American government were hiring those same Nazis. Not the prohibition against using Nazi personnel in America, nor the ongoing Nuremberg trials, nor Gehlen's hidden desire to restore Deutschland Über Alles, about which the OSS and the CIA must have known – nothing hindered America's close cooperation with the Nazis. The end – the battle against the USSR – justified the means with a vengeance.

Gehlen for his part continued the war against the USSR by American hands. At a time when the half destroyed country was just beginning to rebuild, Gehlen sent Washington reports about an inevitable attack by the Soviet Union. According to E. H. Cookridge's biography of Gehlen, as well as other investigators, in 1948 Gehlen almost convinced the United States that the Soviet Union was about to attack the West. Gehlen recommended striking the first blow. Later, in the 1950s, Gehlen maintained that the USSR was ahead of the United States in force development – the so-called "missile gap" inflamed anti-Communist sentiments to a feverish level.

The former CIA officer Victor Marchetti related that the CIA "loved Gehlen because he fed us what we wanted to hear. We used his stuff constantly and fed it to everybody else: the Pentagon; the White House; the newspapers. They loved it too. But it was hyped up Russian bogeyman junk, and it did a lot of damage to this country."

It is possible that one of the most important results of Gehlen Org's work was the formation in America of the concept of "rolling back" the USSR and "liberating" Eastern Europe. The concept of "rolling back" was based on political warfare and the covert operations strategy developed in the Third Reich by the Ministry of Eastern Affairs under the direction of Alfred Rosenberg. In part, the strategy involved recruiting national minorities in the USSR to overthrow the government – in return, the minorities were promised nominal independence as part of a Greater Germany.

In the American version, the theory of "liberation" contemplated the eradication of Communism in Eastern Europe and the breakdown of the Soviet Union into its component republics under the pretext of establishing democracy in the "liberated" countries. With the help of the CIA, this theory became the political mainstream in the United States and crystallized into a crusade for "freedom."

Chapter 6.
Adolf Heusinger: architect of the Third Reich’s Operation Barbarossa – and the head of NATO’s Permanent Military Committee

Gehlen was not alone in deciding to unite his efforts with the Western conquerors. In addition to him, another brilliant Wehrmacht general surrendered to American forces and achieved even greater success in serving the new – and old – ideals.

On the day that Nazi Germany attacked the USSR, Great Britain's Prime Minister Winston Churchill, hardly a friend of the Soviet Union, said: "The Nazi regime . . . has lost all sense and principle except for a thirst for power and racial domination. Its cruelty and savagery in this aggression have surpassed all forms of human depravity. Behind all this I see a small group of monstrous individuals, who planned, organized and perpetrated this cataract of horrors on humanity."[24]

One of these few "monstrous individuals" was Adolf Heusinger (1897 – 1982), a lieutenant general in the German Army and chief of the operations staff of the main headquarters of the ground forces. In July 1940 Heusinger, one of Hitler's most brilliant associates, was assigned to plan Operation Barbarossa. His superior officer found the draft plan "so well done that no significant changes were made to it."[25]

Historians call General Heusinger the "brain and genius" of the German General Staff. He combined in himself talent; high erudition; and knowledge of military strategy, tactics and Germany's long military tradition. From 1938 to 1945 he developed strategy and guided and directed Hitler's tactics in conquering Europe and the USSR. Heusinger knew that Hitler was planning to break its non-aggression pact with the USSR; he knew that the goal was the genocide of Slavs and Jews. He reported only to Hitler, and after the Eastern Front was opened he controlled all operational matters in that theater from the Wehrmacht's headquarters in Vinnitsa.[26]

Surprisingly, however, the chief strategist of Hitler's General Staff at the Nuremberg Trials testified as a witness for the American prosecution. By doing this, the State Department determined that "General Heusinger was cleared of complicity in atrocities committed by the Nazi regime."[27]

The fact is that the "brain and genius" of the German General Staff in his own words "thought things through" – and surrendered to the advancing American forces on May 8, 1945.

General Heusinger's next place of work, naturally, was the Gehlen Organization, and in 1957 he took the post of Inspector General of the FRG Bundeswehr.

It is 1961. The young, recently elected President of the United States, John Kennedy, is opening NATO's Permanent Military Committee, the highest military organization of the alliance; gathered together are the military leaders of all of the member states. The new chairman of the committee is to be presented at this meeting; according to the charter of the alliance, he is "responsible for recommending military measures to carry out NATO policies." President Kennedy thanked the members of the Alliance for their efforts in the "defense of the free world" and called upon them to "work together to strengthen the world's defenses for a free society."[28] "And now," said the President, "I would like to turn over our meeting to the new chairman, General Heusinger."

General Heusinger.

Hitler's personal appointee and chief strategist of the vanquished Third Reich, who miraculously escaped the Nuremberg Trials, became chairman of the NATO Military Committee on April 1, 1961. His office in the Pentagon at room number 3-E-180 was located among the offices of the highest ranking members of the U.S. Armed Forces. Nazi Germany and the thwarted purpose of Heusinger's service to it had been avenged in a most sublime fashion.

Photo: A caricature from the London Daily Mirror.

Many Americans understood the sinister symbolism in this assignment. Wayne Morse, Democratic Senator from the state of Oregon, said:

"Let the State Dept. thoroughly understand that I do not buy the argument that . . . in order to build up the military strength of West Germany it is necessary to put a Nazi General in a position of high command . . . where he will have influence, authority and power in determining the combined military policy to which the United States is a party. This Nazi general beyond all doubt has to bear part of the responsibility for the deaths of thousands of American boys . . . What has happened to our memory? Is it really so short?"[29]

Neither responsibility for the deaths of American boys nor responsibility for the deaths of millions of others could outweigh Heusinger's usefulness as the architect of Operation Barbarossa to the architects of the new military plans against the USSR.

PART 3. THE UNITED STATES

Chapter 7.
Reboot: transfering the mission, resources and personnel from the Third Reich to the United States

Before committing suicide, the Führer of the Third Reich, Adolf Hitler, designated as his successor Karl Dönitz, the Grand Admiral and Commander-in-Chief of the German Navy. The admiral did not lead the Reich for long. Soviet troops had already entered Berlin, and on May 7, 1945 Dönitz sent a farewell testament letter to Nazi Germany's officer corps:

"Comrades! It has become obvious to all that we are now completely in the hands of the enemy. Our fate is dark. We cannot know what they will do with us, but we know well what we must do. We have been thrown back a thousand years. The land which was German for a millennium is now in the hands of the Russians. Therefore our political line is clear. It is obvious that we must affiliate ourselves with the Western states and cooperate in the occupied territories in the west, for only cooperation with them gives us hope of regaining our lands from the hands of the Russians …".[30]

Gehlen's convictions are in accord with the testament left by Admiral Dönitz. In his memoirs, which were published in 1971, Gehlen wrote:

"My opinion is that in Europe, which has rearmed itself against Communism, a place will be found for Germany also. Therefore, we must orient ourselves on the Western states and be guided by a two-fold goal: to assist in the defense against Communist expansion and to reunite the territories that Germany has lost."[31]

In the 1948 memorandum "On Psychological Warfare," Oberländer proposed the following:

"In order to overcome Bolshevism it will be necessary to combine the following efforts:

- A political warfare program before the beginning of military actions;

- A program to prepare for armed conflict;

- A program for the world to which the first two programs are subordinate. This program for the world must with complete moral responsibility establish long-term political guidelines – not the Atlantic Pact but Pax Americana with the social content of a Pax Christiana."[32]

The investigative reporter Christopher Simpson cited the following facts in his book Blowback: America's Recruitment of Nazis and Its Effects on the Cold War:

"The CIA, the State Department and U.S. military intelligence each separately established special programs with the specific goal of bringing selected former Nazis and collaborators to the United States . . . The government used these people as experts in propaganda and psychological warfare, to work in American laboratories and moreover as special armed guerilla groups to be deployed in the USSR in the event of nuclear war. ... Hundreds or possibly even thousands of these recruits were SS veterans; some were officers of the bloody Sicherheitsdienst (SD), the Nazi Party's secret service."[33]

Thus the mission of fighting against Soviet Russia was transferred from Nazi Germany to the United States of America. Ultraconservative circles in America have adopted not only the concepts, tactics and methods of Nazi Germany, but also some of its people, who later worked in Eastern Europe, Latin and Central America, Asia and Africa.[34]

Thus the former Nazi network – with its personnel, methods and mission – was built into NATO's structure; it formed the skeleton and architecture of the organization. According to the Heritage Foundation's ideology, "people is policy." In Russian, this sounds like the familiar slogan "cadres decide everything."

The American Displaced Persons Commission, in particular, served as a channel for the "rebooting" of personnel. According to Russ Bellant, the author of Old Nazis, the New Right, and the Republican Party: Domestic fascist networks and their effect on U.S. cold war politics, between 1948 and 1952 this commission facilitated the arrival of approximately 400,000 people in the United States. Originally, entry was forbidden to former Nazis – which did not hinder their arrival at all, since Gehlen, Oberländer and Heusinger in conjunction with the American and British intelligence services cleared all links with Nazism from the records of the useful personnel. And in 1950 the official policy changed: the commission announced that "the Baltic Legion is not a movement hostile to the U.S. government . . ."[35] The other name of this legion was the Baltic Waffen SS. The United States welcomed former Nazis and considered them worthy of American citizenship.

Just as the Nazi network was integrated into the U.S. intelligence infrastructure, the immigrant organizations of Ukrainian "independence fighters" were also integrated into it – these were organizations with extensive experience in working with the Nazis. WACL, ABN, the Captive Nations Committee and tens of other diaspora organizations from the East European nations were established to give refuge to collaborators and use their covert sections as agent assets and as a reserve for direct military operations in the event of war with the Soviet Union. The British intelligence services followed the same policy: between the Americans and the British, the Ukrainians were in great demand.

Naturally, Ukrainian radicals were not the only ones to pour into the anti-Soviet network. Units and organizations like the Galicia battalions and OUN existed in many of the republics and East European countries: The Latvian Legion, the Belarusian team, the Arrow Cross in Hungary, the Iron Guard in Romania and the Bulgarian Legion were formed with the aid of the SS and worked for the Nazis.

In Europe Gehlen, Oberländer and Heusinger were used to mobilize the remnants of the Third Reich and their confederates for the fight against the USSR. The United States established an internal network of organizations consisting of East European immigrant collaborators. These two networks were closely linked and served as the main tool in the fight against the Soviet Union.

WACL in its official role of fighting Communism coordinated intelligence gathering and active hostile actions. When Scott and John Lee Anderson began working on their book about the League, they received this warning from a former member:

"With the World Anticommunist League you are entering a world of ideological fanaticism, radicalism, ignorance and terror that is beyond the understanding of the average American. ... The object of your study is a collection of eastern Nazis, warmongers, ultraconservative terrorists who have placed bombs in civilian aircraft, death squads, murderers, criminals and many others who oppose democracy as much as they oppose Communism. You are putting yourselves in danger."[36]

As the Andersons write, "Many of the figures that were in favor of establishing and promoting the league practiced their own brand of military actions in pogroms, ghettos and concentration camps in the Europe of the Second World War."[37]

The chairman of WACL's American branch was the intelligence Major General John Singlaub (born 1921), who was previously mentioned. Congressman Henry J. Hyde, a member of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee and the Policy and Intelligence committees , praised General Singlaub as a "courageous man, a true patriot," who had been "at the center of almost every scandalous military operation since the Second World War." In fact, Singlaub was considered one of the most experienced U.S. specialists on covert and paramilitary operations. According to his biography he began his service in Europe "behind enemy lines;" in 1951 he became deputy CIA station chief in South Korea, then chief of station in Manchuria; he commanded the Joint Unconventional Warfare Task Force and the Special Operations Group in Vietnam; and he worked with the Contras in Nicaragua. In addition to WACL, Singlaub headed the Organization Committee for Captive Nations Week – the same Week for which Katherine Chumachenko in 1983 coordinated a series of main events as the Executive Director of the National (American) Captive Nations Committee.

Singlaub's deputy in WACL was the previously mentioned Lieutenant General Daniel Graham (1926 – 1995), a member of the "Military Intelligence Hall of Fame." General Graham served in Germany, Korea and Vietnam, then in the CIA's Office of National Estimates. In 1973 he became the Deputy Director of the CIA, and from 1974 to 1976 he was the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). President Reagan appointed Graham as military advisor to his election campaigns in 1976 and 1980. In 1981 Graham founded and headed the High Frontier organization, which took part in developing and implementing the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), Reagan's "Star Wars" concept, with the active support of Reagan's "kitchen cabinet." In the United States Graham is considered the originator of SDI and one of the main lobbyists for anti-ballistic missile systems and plans and the militarization of space. In addition to High Frontier Graham chaired other space-related organizations – the Coalition for SDI, the American Space Frontier Committee; he participated in the American Freedom Coalition and the U.S. Council for World Freedom; and he co-chaired the Coalition for Peace through Strength – the name speaks for itself. And, of course, General Graham was a member of the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations.

Another person can be seen in WACL, one who until recently was prominent as a presidential candidate – Senator John McCain. In the 1980s McCain was on the League's consultative council.

Another group in the network of international anti-Soviet entities of the diaspora that used former Nazis, among other persons, was the Republican National Heritage Groups Council. The predecessor of the council, the Ethnic Division of the Republican National Committee, helped the Republicans blame the Democrats for not being sufficiently tough on Communism and promote the "liberation" policies of Eisenhower and Nixon. The council was founded in 1969 by the Hungarian Laszlo Pasztor, who had led the young peoples branch of Arrow Cross. The council consisted of national cells in many U.S. cities that were combined at the local level into multinational councils. At the end of the 1980s the national council had local branches in 25 states, bringing together the representatives of 34 nationalities.

As far as the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists is concerned, in its struggle for "Ukrainian independence" the OUN used a well-developed international agent network. This network, called K3, began as an internal OUN-B police force, which was also known as the SB. After the war it was reorganized into an independent intelligence entity; it was run by Bohdan Pidhany (AKA Stiven Kordyuk), a member of the executive and one of the founders of OUN-B. The network agents, extremely fanatic and well-trained Ukrainian nationalists, were chosen by Bandera's leadership from the Galicia battalions, which were taken to Britain after the war.

In their public and covert activities these organizations of Ukrainian and other East European diasporas collaborated closely with American research institutions, many of which provided cover for intelligence operations. Their names are well known: Freedom House, National Endowment for Democracy, Human Rights Watch.

The collapse of the Soviet Union and the independence of the Soviet republics was a great victory for the people and organizations who had worked toward this goal from moment the USSR was formed. Some of the entities lost their reason for existence when communism and bolshevism were defeated: the ABN disbanded in 1996; WACL was renamed the World League for Freedom and Democracy and lost its leading role. Others became a part of official parties: the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists transformed itself into the Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists and joined Viktor Yushchenko's Our Ukraine bloc.

However, the gaining of independence by the Soviet Republics did not mean that they had completely achieved their goal. Russian interests remain dominant there, and their new leaderships have not succeeded in cutting their ties with the Russian "center" despite all attempts to play their own game. The next round in the struggle involved ensuring the loyalty of the leaderships of the "newly independent states," as the U.S. called them (The Commonwealth of Independent States has not been recognized), and further disrupting Russia's stability and soundness.

Other organizations took the lead in the battle with Russia. They adopted a different approach.

Chapter 8.
From underground into the light of day: the methodology of the color revolutions

Even during the Cold War the American military and the Intelligence Community recognized that a battle with the Soviet Union using military methods would not yield the results needed: the events in Hungary in 1956 and the Prague Spring of 1968 proved it. Of course, the CIA, WACL, ABN, Freedom House, National Endowment for Democracy and an entire battery of non-government U.S. organizations were actively generating propaganda and carrying out covert actions. Gradually, actions other than war and "peaceful" methods of "regime change" began to be systematized. The things that the CIA, NATO, Gehlen Org, WACL and ABN previously did are now handled by non-government organizations and research institutions. In September 1991 the influential Washington Post commentator David Ignatius described this amazing process in his article, "Innocence Abroad: The New World of Spyless Coups."[38]

Covert operations to disrupt and change regimes have one great shortcoming – they are clandestine by nature. When the American public finds out about them – and it's hard to hide information in the information age – criticism is inevitable. The CIA regularly undergoes "purges" of its ranks under the watchful eye of Congress and a progressive society – a high price to pay for a job well done. It soon became obvious: if the same thing is done openly and sold as "promoting freedom and democracy," not only will the public not object, it will even help. The openness of operations to change governments gives them legitimacy.

Street riots and protest demonstrations may look spontaneous. But behind all of the chaos on the streets there is a well-thought-out, precisely orchestrated, systematic organization and methodology. As stated by Srdja Popovic, one of the founders of the youth organization Otpor, which played a decisive role in the Serbian revolution: "It was interesting to hear that there was this whole science behind what we were learning the hard way."[39]

The methodology of the color revolutions grew out of the work of a person who is nearly unknown to the general public and an idol of opposition members in all countries, Gene Sharp. This icon is 80 years old and walks with a cane. But in June, 2007 he was publicly accused by Hugo Chavez of organizing riots in Venezuela, to which he replied with an open letter advising Chavez to read his book, The Anti-Coup, if he is apprehensive about being overthrown. In September 2008 the Wall Street Journal published a long front-page article about Gene Sharp with the headline "American Revolutionary: Quiet Boston Scholar Inspires Rebels Around the World."[40] Sharp found his inspiration for the organization of insurrections and coups . . . in Mahatma Ghandi's philosophy of non-violence.

Photo: Gene Sharp, taken from the Einstein Institution's web site.

Sharp's book, From Dictatorship to Democracy: a Conceptual Framework for Liberation, has received a great deal of attention. This 90-page brochure has become the bible and guide to action for anti-government movements in Vietnam, Burma, Zimbabwe, Tibet, Iran – as well as in Serbia, Ukraine, Georgia and Kyrgyzstan. This book has been translated into 39 languages, from Amharic (spoken by from 6 to 100 million people in Ethiopia) to Farsi and Tibetan – and of course, all the languages of the CIS.

Gene Sharp, a Doctor of Political Science who spent 30 years in a research post at Harvard University, began developing his methodology in the 1960s. In 1973 he published his 902-page fundamental opus, Politics of Nonviolent Action. In 1983 Gene Sharp founded the Albert Einstein Institution. Einstein's name was used because the great physicist "highly valued the potential of nonviolent struggle," and in a 1950 UN radio address he called Ghandi "the most enlightened politician of our time."[41]

Photo: Gene Sharp, a frame from the documentary "Revolution.com. USA. The Conquest of the East."

Sharp's theoretical works are supplemented by specific guides to action. The brochure, 198 Methods of Nonviolent Action, describes a wide variety of methods: public speeches; letters of opposition or support; group or mass petitions; more creative methods, such as organization of mock awards and mock elections; skywriting and earthwriting, new signs and names, "haunting" officials, fraternization, vigils; marches, prayers, protest disrobing, hunger strike, "satayagraphic" fast, destruction of own property. The section "The Methods of Nonviolent Intervention," however, mentions "self-exposure to the elements (self-immolation, drowning, etc.)," "nonviolent invasion (?)" and "nonviolent air raids (?)."

Sharp does not appear in public and rarely grants interviews. In the documentary "Revolution.com. USA. The Conquest of the East" he drops his guard and gives details about the organization of the revolution in Serbia, which became the first in a series of "color revolutions":

"The opposition members in Serbia intentionally ’softened up’ the military and police to make them less violent in their repressions when the resistance became active. Two years before Milosevic was overthrown, 14- and 15-year-old boys and girls began sending presents to the police from home. Various little things – food, whatever they could – to weaken their morale and loyalty to Milosevic. And then, I know, rather serious efforts were made to get in contact with the leaders of the police so that when demonstrators went out the police would let them pass."

The funds used to establish Sharp's institution were provided by the financier Peter Ackerman, who earned millions on Wall Street. Earlier, he had written his doctoral dissertation under Sharp's guidance – and he repaid the professor for his learning with interest. In 2002 Ackerman opened his own organization in Washington – the International Center for Nonviolent Conflict. Ackerman is Soros on a smaller scale. His example shows how the American system begets millionaires and billionaires who, after earning comfortable sums of money, turn their efforts to changing the world – in America's favor, of course.

The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) is the patron and chief financier for "democratizing the world," i.e., changing the constitutional order in countries the United States finds objectionable. The NED was established by Congress in 1982 at the request of President Reagan as a mechanism for distributing funds among organizations that carry out democratization programs in various countries. The NED receives annual funding from the State Department's Agency for International Development. A tiny share of its funding – less than one percent – comes from private sources in order to justify its status as a "non-government" organization. In the State Department the NED is overseen by our old friend Paula Dobriansky, and her Assistant Secretary for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, Barry Lowenkron, is directly in charge of it.

Photo: A chart of the color revolutions. Poster in the New York office of Freedom House.

NED's mission, according to its web site, is "to strengthen democratic institutions around the world through nongovernmental efforts." This task is inspired by a "belief that freedom is a universal human aspiration that can be realized through the development of democratic institutions, procedures, and values," as framed by the founders of the American nation.

The NED has four major channels for distributing funds: the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs cater to the political initiatives of the Republicans and the Democrats, respectively. The Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE) and the American Center for International Labor Solidarity carry out business-oriented projects; the former has a Republican-style liberal market orientation, and the latter works on socially oriented projects in the style of the Democratic Party.

As an umbrella organization, the Endowment greatly facilitates the funding of hundreds of organizations that would otherwise have to work through a difficult bureaucratic process for obtaining government funds. The Endowment, which was established for Cold War purposes, has gained relevance and funding since it ended: the International Republican Institute alone is currently carrying out programs in 70 countries.

The NED operates as a multi-service clearinghouse for building the infrastructure of democracy: it provides funding; technical support; training programs; technology for communicating with the media and the public; and cutting-edge equipment for selected political groups, civic organizations, labor unions, dissident movements, student groups, publishers, newspapers and other media. The NED issues funds either directly to the end user or through a funding chain, sometimes one so lengthy that it is difficult to identify the original government source of the funds.

In 1996 the leadership of the conservative Heritage Foundation lavishly praised the NED as "a valuable weapon in the international war of ideas . . . by promoting the development of stable democracies friendly to the U.S. in strategically important parts of the world." They continued confidently: "The U.S. cannot afford to discard such an effective instrument of foreign policy at a time when American interests and values are under sustained ideological attack from a wide variety of anti-democratic forces around the world."[42]

As soon as the winds of change began blowing in the 1980s, the NED started sponsoring the Solidarity movement in Poland and other parties similar to it in Eastern Europe. In the 1990s the Endowment financed hundreds of projects in Russia and in the post-Soviet space – both directly and through dozens of affiliated organizations. At the end of the 1990s the NED began financing the color revolutions.

Together with the U.S. government and affiliated entities, the billionaire George Soros financed the promotion of democracy throughout the world and especially in Eastern Europe. Soros established his first foundation, the Open Society Fund, in 1979. The geographic activity of the fund increased exponentially: in 1984 – Hungary; 1986 – China (phased out in 1989); 1987 – the Soviet Union; 1988 – Poland; 1989 – Czechoslovakia; 1990 – Bulgaria, Estonia, Lithuania, Romania, and Ukraine; 1992 – Albania, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Czech Republic, Latvia, Macedonia, Moldova, Slovakia, Slovenia; 1993 – Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, South Africa; 1994 -Georgia; and in 1995 – Haiti. Soros' significant influence and resources played an important role in the precepts and practice of "shock therapy" in Russia at the beginning of the 1990s.

An example was the overwhelming success of the Open Society Georgia Foundation under the leadership of Alexander Lomaia, one of the key people in the overthrow of Eduard Shevardnadze. According to his official biography, from 2002 to 2003 as regional director for post-Soviet space of the Democratic Coalition of the Soros Foundation, Lomaia "contributed to building a coalition of newly independent states to promote active democratic reforms." These national coalitions were to "exert pressure on their governments and demand that they carry out the democratic obligations they had accepted when they signed the Warsaw Declaration in 2002." The project also had the goal of "integrating democratic values in the foreign policy of states." "The creation of an international federation of national coalitions that jointly carry out democratic reforms in the international arena" has been identified as one of Lomaia's achievements.

From 2003 to 2004, that is, during the time the Rose Revolution was being actively prepared and executed, Lomaia led the Open Society Georgia Foundation. In Saakashvili's government he held the post of Minister of Culture (2004 – 2007). And in November, 2007 – that is while preparations were being made for the armed intervention in South Ossetia and Abkhazia – Lomaia transferred directly from his post as Minister of Culture to that of Secretary of the Georgian National Security Council.

Photo: Alexander Lomaia, head of George Soros' operations in Georgia and, previously, his director for post-Soviet space, then Secretary of the Georgian National Security Council; currently Georgia's Ambassador to the UN. Frame from the documentary "Revolution.com. USA. The Conquest of the East."

In the French television documentary Eduard Shevardnadze points to photographs of him taken with George Bush and talks helplessly about the people who organized the regime change that ousted him:

". . . young people, many of whom, I am absolutely certain, were bribed. The infamous Soros played a big role in it. For some reason he was interested in changing the leadership. . . . There was no revolution – it was just an ordinary attempted coup."[43]

During the summer of 2008 Soros was engaged in revamping his activities in Russia. Open Society was looking for a "program coordinator" whose duties would include "the distribution of grants in Russia . . . oversight and liaison with national funds in central and Eastern Europe; evaluation of applications by Russian and other NPOs; and detailed monitoring of the social, political and economic situation in the region."[44]

Meanwhile, branches of the Soros Foundation in Poland, Lithuania and Ukraine were actively working on the Belarusian situation.

The West has made masterful use of the institution of non-government organizations, which in reality serve as a direct extension of government. Their role is to carry out functions that government agencies (such as the CIA) cannot perform, while representing them as the initiatives of civil society and the democratic expression of the will of an interested public.

The point is that, given the idealistic attitude of the American people and their desire to carry freedom to the world and serve as a "beacon for freedom-loving peoples throughout the world," "promoting democracy" is a highly successful and effective formula for furthering the political and economic interests of the United States in the world. It performs multiple tasks simultaneously: it gives society high ideals of service in compensation for the rampant consumption of material goods; it mobilizes the huge energy of civil society to implement policy; it prevents possible resistance to the means used to democratize the world as being "justified by the ends."

Chapter 9.
The end goal: NATO

Thus the United States took on the mission of combating Russia from the Third Reich and adopted the Nazi networks, methods and personnel. The United States developed a broad network of radical anti-Soviet organizations out of the East European diaspora. After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the American government switched from military to nonviolent methods bundled together with the idea of "promoting freedom and democracy." The United States successfully replaced the governments in Georgia and Ukraine and continues to prepare "regime changes" in the remaining CIS countries.

Regime change in and of itself works to the advantage of the United States. Whereas former Georgian President Eduard Shevardnadze for all his flirting with America had no desire to start a war with Russia, the new president, Mikhail Saakashvili, provoked one at the first opportunity. Although Leonid Kuchma was not ready to openly follow an anti-Russian line, the new President, Viktor Yushchenko, actively armed Georgia before and during the Ossetian conflict, even when it was necessary to take weapons from line units in Ukraine.

But not even that was enough to satisfy the American desire for world domination and absolute security. Russia will not be well enough contained until the countries bordering it are formally integrated into Western structures and into the most important of them – NATO. The final goal of the United States will not have been achieved until Russia is surrounded by a strong cordon of U.S. military allies that deprive it of all room for maneuver. To line up all the states around the perimeter of Russia in a military alliance, from Finland to Central Asia, – that is the end goal of the color revolutions.

Even though in the 1990s anti-Russian activities moved out of the clandestine realm and were carried out in the open under the rubric of furthering democracy, in reality they were and remain essentially a military project that is directed by the CIA and former military intelligence personnel.

"A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA," Allen Weinstein openly admitted in 1991. Weinstein was the first president of the NED and, subsequently, the founder of a series of organizations for peace and democracy: the Center for Democracy (1984) and the United States Institute of Peace (1985) in Washington, and the International Institute for Democracy in Strasbourg.

In the French documentary film Adrian Karatnitsky, president of Freedom House, who supported all of the color revolutions with funds and personnel, spoke about his recruits in Eastern Europe and Central Asia:

"The CIA secretly controlled these kinds of activists in the 50s, 60s and 70s. Thus these people became the tool of the U.S. intelligence services. Whereas this practice was covert in the past, today the White House has decided that from now on the United States will do this kind of thing in the open, publicly; and undoubtedly they will do it using non-government organizations."

Since the establishment of the NED in 1983, it has supported death squads in Central America and Africa, representing them, like the Afghan Mujahideen, as "freedom fighters." The Endowment's roots go back to 1967, when the CIA's scandalous funding of student and other organizations in America was disclosed. On March 29, 1967 the White House issued an order based on recommendations made by the Katzenbach Report, which was signed by CIA Director Richard Helms, Attorney General Katzenbach and Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare Gardner. The order described the damage done to confidence in the recipients of direct funding from the CIA and recommended that "the government at the earliest possible date develop and implement a public funding mechanism for foreign organizations which, from the standpoint of the national interest, merit public support."

"This new organization assumes government financing," continued the recommendations. "It also assumes participation by officials. But the most important aspect should be participation by private citizens and the expression of private opinions, because in order to be effective the organization must possess – in the eyes of public opinion – a high degree of independence."[45]

The people who initiated the establishment of the NED referred to the conclusions of a book entitled Developing Democracy, published in 1972. In 1982 its author, William Douglas, published an article in the Freedom House journal entitled, "A Matter of Freedom":

"When the security interests of the United States required that it support friendly political movements abroad, the United States acted covertly – directly through the CIA or through secret U.S. government subsidies to so-called 'private groups' among students, trade unions or publishers. These clandestine operations were ineffective and ran counter to ethical norms; there is no need for them."

Even former CIA head William Colby called for decisive aid to domestic political forces in other countries and stated: "There is no need to use a covert approach. Many programs that were conducted covertly in the 1950s are today carried out entirely in the open and, therefore, without controversy."[46]

NED's current State Department overseer, Assistant Secretary for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor Barry Lowenkron, who was mentioned above, was engaged in anything but such idealistic tasks until 2002. He came to the State Department from a post as Special Advisor to the Director of the CIA. Before that he had worked as Director of the National Intelligence Council's Analytic Staff; he had twice served as Director of European Security Affairs at the National Security Council (1988 – 89, 1991 – 93), and had been a special advisor to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Lowenkron began his political career as an intelligence officer in Europe and a program development manager for the U.S. Information Agency. Obviously, the CIA and military intelligence gave Mr. Lowenkron all the skills and experience needed for his job as the assistant secretary in charge of "democracy, human rights and labor" at the State Department.

Let us return for a moment to Professor Sharp. He went into academia, but his partner from the moment that the Albert Einstein Institution was established was and remains Robert Helvey. Helvey is certainly not an academic person – he is a military intelligence colonel who served 30 years in the Army, fought in Vietnam and served as a military attaché in Burma. What Helvey found attractive in Sharp's theory was that nonviolent conflict "had nothing to do with pacifism."[47]

Helvey knew very well how to weaken an army and overthrow a government – in Burma he had trained guerillas and had been dismayed by how ineffective open armed conflict with the authorities was. It was Burma that became the first testing ground for Sharp's theory of nonviolent coups – in 1990 Colonel Helvey taught it to guerillas in the jungle.

Photo: Colonel Robert Helvey in his office at the Albert Einstein Institution explains how to soften up an army or a police force. Frame from the documentary "Revolution.com. USA. The Conquest of the East."

Sharp and Helvey specialize in "softening up" the military and police. Helvey told the French film makers:

"The idea is to knock out the underpinnings of a system and move them out into your own camp. There's no need to destroy them; you only need to move them and make people believe that they have a place in the future, in a democratic government."[48]

Serge Popovic, leader of the Serbian revolution, met with Helvey in April, 2000.

"The meeting with Helvey was very useful for us, because this is a man with a great deal of experience. You take people in a number of law enforcement agencies, especially the police, then you constantly send them messages that everybody is a victim of the regime, both them and us," said Popovic, explaining how it was done.

After Robert Helvey had spent two months in Serbia sharing his experiences, the Milosevic regime was gone.

But the most telling example is that of our friend from the first chapter, Bruce Jackson, who was asked by President Saakashvili whether he had said anything wrong. Jackson, a reserve military intelligence officer, founded the U.S. Committee to Expand NATO. The first members of the Committee included Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, and Steven Hadley.[49]

Until 2002 Jackson combined his social work on behalf of world democracy with his job as Vice President for Strategy and Planning at the largest U.S. defense company, Lockheed Martin. In talking about NATO expansion and Lockheed Martin the Anderson brothers used an allusion to Mayakovsky's famous line about Lenin and the Party – "When we say Lockheed Martin, we mean NATO expansion; when we say NATO expansion, we mean Lockheed Martin." The integration of new countries into NATO requires the integration of military systems – this is a multi-billion dollar market for fighters, attack helicopters, electronics, communications systems and many other types of military hardware. According to the U.S. Congressional Budget Committee, the cost of joining NATO for some countries may reach about $125 billion over 15 years; $19 billion will go to military integration.[50] One well-known neoconservative described Jackson as "the nexus between the defense industry and the neoconservatives. He translates us to them and them to us."[51]

The new NATO will be better for the United States than the Cold War model: the regular influx of new members makes it possible to collect a tribute from them for the U.S. defense industry; serves as a tool to protect American interests using other countries' resources, including such natural resources as oil; and allows part of the human and material costs – and, of course, the responsibility – to be shifted to others.

Before the Iraq war began, in the capital of Latvia the Vilnius declaration was signed by 10 governments – those that Donald Rumsfeld termed the "New Europe" – in support of the war against Iraq independently of a UN mandate. Slovenia later withdrew from this agreement, alluding to the fact that its Minister of Foreign Affairs had "buckled under Bruce Jackson's threat."[52]

There is yet another fascinating aspect to Jackson's personality. His father, William Jackson, was one of the founders of the CIA, and from 1950 to 1951 he held the post of Deputy Director of the CIA. He later became President Eisenhower's National Security Advisor. Talk about intergenerational continuity!

Bruce Jackson's persona vividly and revealingly combines military intelligence, change of governments by color revolutions, NATO expansion and defense industry interests – and to complete the picture there is his father's legacy as a founder of the CIA, which took on the coloration of Third Reich military intelligence and of Nazi collaborators from all over Eastern Europe.

CONCLUSION

In addition to its deadly nature, Georgia's attack on South Ossetia had a deep historical significance: Saakashvili's regime has defied the principles of the current security system that has NATO as its backbone and has shown it to be inadequate. At their core, Saakashvili's actions are part and parcel of the tradition that nourished Stetsko, Oberländer, Heusinger and Gehlen. The George Bush administration directly made it possible for such a tradition to emerge in Georgia, since part of the U.S. political establishment urged Saakashvili to attack Russia. And it contributed indirectly in that its example has established a world order in which it is lawful to practice torture, to hold thousands of prisoners for years without trial or investigation, to resolve international issues based solely on its own self-interest and to undertake military and political ventures while totally ignoring the loss of human lives of other nations – Iraqi, Afghan or South Ossetian. These approaches were also used by the Nazi regime of the Third Reich.

The "promotion of democracy" by means of color revolutions has proven to be a more effective means of advancing NATO to Russia's borders than direct military clashes by armored divisions. Even now, this project is proceeding at full speed in the CIS countries and in Russia. As the French TV journalists have shown, a calendar of new revolutions has already been drawn up – their dates and "colors" are being adjusted on the fly – Belarus, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan. They are the next in line.

Currently, Belarus is the most important link in the chain for the United States. From the standpoint of American interests this is the only gaping hole on Russia's western border. "Belarus must be next. That's fair," said Anatoly Lebedko, the Belarusian opposition leader who is mentored by Giga Bokeria and Bruce Jackson. It is likely that Lukashenko himself is already in bed with the West. In February-March of 2008 he signed a contract with British political PR guru Tim Bell, whose list of clients has included Alexander Litvinenko, Boris Berezovsky, President Yeltsin, General Pinochet and Margaret Thatcher. Since then, Lukashenko has freed his main opponent, Alexander Kozulin; has not rushed to acknowledge the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia; regularly curtsies to the West; and is ready to accept money from the IMF. The West, for its part, has recognized the legitimacy of the Belarusian parliamentary elections, removed sanctions on the accounts and travel of Belarusian officials, renewed trade talks and is prepared to grant loans.

If color revolutions bring regimes loyal to the United States to power, the incorporation of these countries into NATO will institutionalize the changes and make them irreversible. The incorporation of Georgia and Ukraine into NATO will become a new partitioning of Europe, a Yalta Agreement without Russia.

This book has described the development of the American scheme against Russia that began during the Second World War. But it has a long history. An earlier stage began in 1917 with the funding of the White Guard and the debarkation of British and American units in the Far East, in Murmansk and Arkhangelsk. But even this was just another round in a game: the Great Game, which was started by the superpower of the 19th century, Great Britain.

Thus the torch of the fight against Russia has been passed from hand to hand, from one dominant empire to another, from Great Britain to the United States by way of Nazi Germany. For no matter what an empire is called, it cannot be dominant in the world without subduing Russia.

On November 4, 2008 Barack Obama was victorious in the U.S. presidential election. The personality of the new president has inspired extraordinary hope throughout the world that the United States will change course.

In the context of the unique sweep of history it is appropriate to ask: how well founded are these hopes, and what can we expect from President Obama?

The answer to the first question is simple. The history of the United States, like the history of the West's centuries-old scheme against Russia, gives no reason to hope for such a change. Kipling, unfortunately, was right: "When everyone is dead the Great Game is finished. Not before." From time to time, individual members of the American establishment oppose the entry of Ukraine and Georgia into NATO. They do not say that because they suddenly empathize with Russia's interests. They say it because the time is wrong; it causes too many complications. They can just wait and accept new members that have less dissension. The essence of the matter does not change.

During the election campaign President Obama was frequently compared with President Kennedy. Indeed, Barack Obama resembles John Kennedy in terms of his youth, liberal views and inexperience, especially in the foreign policy arena. It is important not to extend the parallels too far. Because during the first months of his presidency Kennedy committed a blunder that went down in the history of the United States as one of its biggest foreign policy failures – the landing of a military force at the Bay of Pigs in an attempt to conquer Cuba. The military establishment presented the plan to a young president who was striving to demonstrate his competence and decisiveness. Kennedy later said that he wanted to smash the CIA into a thousand pieces for that.

It is safe to say that today in the United States there are enough people willing to assist the young President Obama in pursuing U.S. interests in a drastic fashion in order to avoid accusations that he is indecisive and liberal. The question of how Obama will conduct himself in such situations remains open.

Today, the complex U.S. foreign policy situation – two wars, terrorism, Iran, Pakistan – is compounded by a systemic economic crisis, which will complicate the social environment for the near future. These circumstances are a most fertile environment for the development of radical approaches and solutions. The most pessimistic observers will find similarities between today's America and Germany in the middle 1930s. At that time, Nazism and the Second World War were what it took to solve the problems.

In this context, it is extremely important that Europe not forget the lessons of history, which were learned at a high cost. This means refraining from dividing the world into camps, halting the expansion of NATO and forgoing the stationing of missile defense elements and military bases in the countries that recently joined the alliance.

NATO's "original sin" – the participation of Nazis in its formation – has forever compromised the organization. NATO cannot serve as the basis for security and stability in Europe and the world. Russia must devote all of its efforts to building a new global security architecture in the Euro-Atlantic and Eurasian spaces that will establish a single standard for resolving conflicts and common rules of conduct for all. Russia cannot allow itself to lose the next round in the Great Game.