Max BLUMENTHAL

The campaign manager of Amnesty International UK, Kristyan Benedict, appears to have removed an Amnesty International tweet announcing an Amazon Watch webinar to raise awareness both of Chevron’s pollution of an indigenous region of Ecuador and the company’s ruthless persecution of environmental lawyer Steven Donzinger.

A hardline advocate of Western intervention in Syria, Benedict apparently deleted the announcement because of the participation of Pink Floyd co-founder Roger Waters in the event.

Besides being Donzinger’s most prominent public supporter, Waters is an outspoken opponent of US and UK regime-change policy toward Syria.

Donzinger, for his part, is a self-described “corporate political prisoner” whose persecution began in 2011 after he won a multi-billion dollar legal judgment against Chevron over the oil giant’s toxic dumping in Ecuador’s indigenous Lago Agrio region. He is charged with contempt of court for refusing a federal judge’s order to turn over his cellphone and computer to Chevron. With the order still under appeal on constitutional grounds, Donziger has refused to obey it

Chevron has never paid the $9.5 billion it owes in damages. Instead, it has retaliated with a multimillion-dollar campaign to demonize Donzinger, hiring a massive team of corporate lawyers to oversee an attempt to disbar the environmental lawyer and freeze his personal bank accounts.

In August 2019, a federal judge ordered Donzinger placed under house arrest pending a contempt of court hearing, and confined him to his New York City apartment.

“I’m like a corporate political prisoner,” Donzinger told reporter Sharon Lerner this January. “They are trying to totally destroy me.”

Roger Waters has worked since 2012 to draw attention to Donzinger’s persecution, as well as to the suffering of the victims of Chevron’s toxic practices in Ecuador. The Amazon Watch webinar which Amnesty was supporting was to have been one of the most important events on the issue this year. Though the event itself was not canceled, its attendance was undoubtedly limited thanks the censorship campaign initiated by regime-change fanatics incensed by Waters’ views on Syria.

A crusading anti-war activist, Waters has been a vehement critic of US and British government intervention in Syria, and especially their funding of extremist proxy forces to advance a destabilizing regime-change policy.

At the end of the first week in April 2018, Washington claimed the Syrian government had launched a chemical weapons attack on the Damascus suburb of Douma, which had just been cleared of Saudi-backed extremist forces in a dramatic victory for the national army.

The central piece of evidence bolstering the dubious US claims was a video circulating on social media and produced by a US- and UK-created organization called the White Helmets. Waters told The Grayzone he “smelled a rat, did some research, realized the video was not credible, and decided to speak out.”

From the stage at his “Us and Them” show in Barcelona, Spain, on April 13, the Pink Floyd co-founder denounced the US and UK-funded White Helmets as “a fake organization that exists only to create propaganda for jihadists and terrorists.” By this point, the US, UK and France were signaling their intention to bomb Syria in reprisal for the supposed chemical attack.

Waters pleaded with his audience “to encourage the governments of the USA, UK, and France to properly investigate the alleged attacks before dropping bombs on the Syrian people.”

This August, when US- and UK-based Syria regime-change lobbyists learned of Waters’ participation in the Amnesty International-supported Amazon Watch event with Donzinger, they launched a coordinated campaign to pressure Amnesty into cancelling its support. Within hours, Amnesty’s Twitter announcement of the event mysteriously disappeared.

“Yep – not good at all – it’s been deleted,” Amnesty UK’s Benedict assured several allies after the tweet promoting Waters’ Amazon Watch event with Donzinger was erased.

I would appeal to @amnestyusa not to promote this event given Roger Waters participation because slandered #WhiteHelmets repeating Russian propaganda putting their lives at risk when saved over 150,000 lives & cannot remain silent as know them well as a filmmaker @SyriaCivilDef https://t.co/8e311Xcj2S

— Ronan L Tynan (@RonanLTynan) August 5, 2020

Among those who complained vociferously about Waters’ participation in the Amnesty USA event was Eliot Higgins, the founder of the US- and UK government-backed Bellingcat “open source” media operation, which was among the first major Western outlets to accuse the Syrian government of a chlorine attack in Douma in April, 2018.

In a tweet addressed to Amnesty USA, Higgins denigrated Waters as a “famous war crimes denier.” One minute later, he accused Waters of “spread[ing] conspiracy theories about chemical attacks.”

Benedict responded by assuring the Bellingcat founder that the “tweet was deleted a few hours ago.”

The coordinated attempt at canceling or undermining an event on corporate wrongdoing and the environment was just the latest instance of a tight-knit motley crew of Syria regime-change operatives sabotaging left-wing or social justice organizing.

The same cadre of regime-change fanatics has also sought to divide the Palestine solidarity movement, encouraging the movement to turn against any activist who contradicted the Syrian opposition’s line – which also happens to be the official line of the US State Department that has sponsored it.

This regime-change cadre has also viciously attacked critics of Washington’s hostile policy towards other sovereign nations like Venezuela, Nicaragua, Russia, and China.

Kristyan Benedict, for his part, is a central figure among the echo chamber of regime-change operatives. In recent years, he has helped organize several actions promoting Western military intervention and economic sanctions against Damascus.

Asked on Twitter by this reporter if he was responsible for deleting the tweet advertising the event on Chevron’s abuses, the Amnesty UK staffer declined to respond.

“While Dutch prosecutors prepare war crimes charges against the Syrian government for fighting off the onslaught”

Your man here is justifying torture.

Think what that means to those Syrians the regime tortured.

That should be all you need to know to not share such pieces. https://t.co/YXTfgp8yrI

— kristyan benedict (@KreaseChan) September 26, 2020

The Grayzone has obtained audio of a phone call between Waters and Amnesty International Chief Impact Officer Tamara Draut in which Draut claimed her organization had been lobbied to retract its support for the event by “folks in the White Helmets,” as well as “Syrian human rights activists,” who said they were “hurt by what they saw as [Amnesty’s] promotion” of Waters.

“What on earth has this got to do with a webinar about the plight of rain forest dwellers in northern Ecuador?” Roger Waters asked.

“Because your position on the White Helmets and [Amnesty USA’s] position on the White Helmets is so different from one another,” Draut replied, “people interpreted our promotion of an event where you were speaking as promoting your position on the White Helmets.”

Draut has spent her career in liberal non-profits and authored several books on the US economy; she has no apparent record of foreign policy experience or Middle East affairs.

Draut was joined on the call by Amnesty USA’s Head of Artist Relations Matt Vogel, a recruit from the recording industry who also has no notable experience in international affairs.

Without mentioning Benedict by name, Draut appeared to distance herself and the organization from his apparent actions.

“Sometimes staff try and solve problems on their own. I would not have taken down this tweet,” Draut told Waters. “That is not the policy I like to follow on Twitter. Instead, I would have much rather dealt with this directly and honestly, as opposed to disappearing the tweet.”

Draut privately apologized to Waters during the call. Waters responded by requesting a public apology from Draut for Amnesty USA’s withdrawal of support from the Amazon Watch event to free Donzinger and support Ecuador’s indigenous population.

Since the September 25 conversation, neither Draut nor anyone affiliated with Amnesty have expressed regret for the organization’s actions. Further, they have not clarified Benedict’s role in undermining the Amazon Watch event.

The Amnesty staffer lobbying Western governments for regime-change war

While Amnesty International states that its “mission is to undertake research and action focused on preventing and ending grave abuses of human rights,” Kristyan Benedict has engaged in a series of actions designed to pressure Western governments to enact interventionist policies that have demonstrably violated the rights of Syrians.

Amnesty UK’s Benedict has been a leading cheerleader for regime-change and Western intervention in Syria. In fact, his chapter sponsored a 2016 rally in London demanding that NATO forces impose a No Fly Zone over the country.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton admitted in a private 2013 speech that a No Fly Zone would lead to full-scale war and “kill a lot of Syrians.”

Rally for military escalation and regime change, brought to you by @AmnestyUK and @DailyMirror https://t.co/MKEk00u3dL

— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) October 22, 2016

Benedict has also advocated for the so-called Caesar Sanctions that the US Congress and Trump administration imposed on Syria, placing the country under an economic blockade that has limited vital medical supplies, including cancer medication, and triggered critical shortages of bread and heating oil.

As the Financial Times acknowledged in a June 24 report, “The first and biggest act of the Caesar act was felt, not by regime insiders, but by ordinary Syrians, who saw prices spike as the threat of sanctions roiled the country’s currency market.”

In 2015, Benedict participated in a London event sponsored by the Saudi- and Qatari-backed National Coalition of Syrian Revolution and Opposition Forces, and aimed at promoting the economic blockade against Syria.

Joining the Amnesty UK staffer on stage were two of the key Washington lobbyists behind the sanctions push: Stephen Rapp, then the State Department’s “ambassador at-large for war crimes” presiding over US lawfare efforts against Syria; and Mouaz Moustafa, the Syrian opposition lobbyist who escorted the late Sen. John McCain to his infamous 2013 photo-op inside Syria with CIA-backed insurgents who turned out to be extremist kidnappers.

The so-called Caesar Sanctions were the result of an elaborate propaganda operation in which a still-unknown supposed military photographer was smuggled out of Syria and delivered to the CIA along with thousands of photographs showing casualties of Syria’s proxy war.

A team of lawyers was hired by the government of Qatar – one of the top sponsors of Syria’s armed opposition – to verify and analyze the trove of photos.

While the mysterious “Caesar” figure was shepherded around official Washington by Mouaz Moustafa, invariably covered in a blue shroud to shield his identity from the public, a selected handful of his alleged photos were put on display at events like the one Amnesty’s Benedict participated in in London.

In fact, as The Grayzone reported, nearly half of the photos depicted Syrians who had been killed by anti-government insurgents, inadvertently confirming the violence of the Syrian opposition. This highly inconvenient fact has been concealed from the British and American public by the operatives that brought forth the so-called Caesar file.

As regime-change lobbyists like Benedict pushed intervention in Syria in the name of human rights, they were forced onto the defensive after confidently claiming that an alleged bombing in Douma, Syria on April 7, 2018 was a chemical attack carried out by the Syrian government.

Punishment for sounding the alarm on Douma

The official story of the incident in Douma has since been upended by several Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) investigators, including two of the most important members of the organization’s fact-finding mission to Douma.

In testimony before the United Nations Security Council this January, former OPCW inspection team leader and engineering expert Ian Henderson stated that the organization’s investigation in Douma, Syria indicated in clear terms that no chemical attack took place, and that the incident was likely staged by the Syrian opposition to trigger Western military intervention.

Henderson and three other OPCW investigators have alleged that the organization’s initial report on Douma was censored by management under pressure from the US and UK governments.

Roger Waters has emerged as the most high-profile supporter of the OPCW whistleblowers, using his public platform to demand accountability for what appears to have been a cynical deception designed to justify a military assault on Syria and nearly led to another disastrous regime-change war.

But well before the OPCW staffers went public with evidence that US-aligned organization leadership censored their factual report, Waters issued his dramatic statement on stage in Barcelona condemning the White Helmets organization that spearheaded the apparent deception in Douma.

Marketed as peaceful heroes, designed to trigger military intervention

So who are the White Helmets, and why were they worthy of so much suspicion?

The White Helmets were established thanks to $55 million in funding from the British Foreign Office, $23 million or more from the United States Agency for International Development (USIAD) Office of Transition Initiatives — the State Department’s de facto regime-change arm — and untold millions from the Kingdom of Qatar, which has also backed an assortment of extremist groups in Syria including Al Qaeda.

A British former military officer-turned-mercenary named James Le Mesurier founded the White Helmets in southern Turkey in 2014. Le Mesurier would go on to die in an apparent suicide at his home in Istanbul on November 11, 2019. The Dutch paper NL Times revealed that he had stolen millions donated from Western governments to the White Helmets to finance a lavish lifestyle, and that some of the donor governments apparently looked the other way as the money disappeared into a web of accounts.

Marketed as a band of selfless rescuers, Le Mesurier’s White Helmets members operated exclusively in areas controlled by Salafi insurgents, including the local Al Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra and ISIS. Its members have been filmed participating in several documented public executions, and helped extremists dispose of beheaded corpses of those they’ve killed.

Throughout the Syrian proxy war, footage and testimony by the White Helmets provided the basis for the West’s accusations of government chemical attacks on civilians and other war crimes. When Defense Secretary James Mattis cited “social media” in place of scientific evidence of a chemical attack in Douma, he was referring to the now-infamous video shot by members of the White Helmets.

Similarly, when State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert sought to explain why the US bombed Syria before inspectors from the OPCW could produce a report from the ground, she claimed, “We have our own intelligence.” She, too, appeared to be referring to social media material published by members of the White Helmets.

However, the accounts by White Helmets members of a chlorine attack in Douma in April, 2018 were immediately challenged by Western journalists on the ground as well as by Syrian eyewitnesses. As the dust cleared, it became increasingly apparent that the armed extremists that had been driven out of Douma by the Syrian army had staged a bogus chemical attack in hopes of inviting military intervention by Western governments.

The White Helmets’ attempt to recruit Roger Waters backfires

During his Barcelona concert, Waters implored his audience to exercise critical thinking: “If we were to listen to the propaganda of the White Helmets and others, we would encourage our governments to start dropping bombs on people in Syria. This would be a mistake of monumental proportions for us as human beings.”

As The Grayzone reported days later, an eccentric French photojournalist had been lobbying Waters in the days ahead of his concert to allow him to deliver a message on behalf of the White Helmets and the “children of Syria” from the stage in Barcelona. He claimed to Waters that he represented a “powerful Syrian network.” It was in response to this appeal that Waters said he made his public statement.

Over a year earlier, in October 2016, a London-based public relations firm representing the White Helmets called The Syria Campaign attempted to recruit Waters by inviting him to a lavish dinner organized by a Saudi-British billionaire, Hani Farsi. The Pink Floyd founder was told that by signing on to the organization’s mission, he could help “elevate the voices of Syria’s peaceful heroes.”

Rather than signing on to a humanitarian interventionist public relations scheme as so many other celebrities had, Waters stood on stage in Barcelona on the eve of war and encouraged his audience to see through the wall of misinformation.

“What we should do is go and persuade our governments not to go and drop bombs on people,” Waters proclaimed, inspiring applause from the crowd. “And certainly not until we have done all the research that is necessary so that we would have a clear idea of what is really going on. Because we live in the world where propaganda seems to be more important than the reality.”

With his anti-interventionist jeremiad in Barcelona, Waters made himself the most prominent critic of the West’s catastrophic regime-change campaign in Syria – and a top target of the forces behind it.

He told The Grayzone that he saw the undermining of his Amazon Watch human rights event as part of a much wider phenomenon of censoring and smearing of public figures who challenge the official narrative on Syria. He pointed to the US, UK and French governments blocking the OPCW’s first Director-General, Jose Bustani, from delivering testimony to the United Nations on the organization’s cover-up of its own original Douma investigation, as a recent and especially disturbing example.

“What’s happened with Jose Bustani going public and The Grayzone having to publish the statement he wanted to make in person to the UN Security Council because the US and its allies blocked him is about the same thing that caused Kristyan Benedict to have Amnesty’s tweet in support of indigenous people in Ecuador deleted,” Waters reflected. “It’s all about covering up Douma and preserving the lies that led to missile strikes on a sovereign country and almost took us to war again.”

thegrayzone.com

With that article in the Guardian (and others which have been published exposing these things and even exposed the violation of the US Constitution by these ‘trade’ treaties), Mr Obama’s liberal rhetoric (such as his rhetoric favoring the Paris accord against global warming — an agreement which will become impossible to implement if these treaties become law) is shown to be hiding an agenda that’s more in accord with what Benito Mussolini called sometimes “corporationism,” and sometimes “fascism”; but, by either name, it’s control over the government by the top stockholders in international corporations. Mussolini, in turn, had learned his fascism from the economist Vilfredo Pareto, whose teachings had inspired the young Mussolini.

As Pareto himself said, 1 September 1897, in his essay “The New Theories of Economics”: “Were I of the opinion that a certain book would contribute more than any other to establish free trade in the world at large I would not hesitate an instant to give myself up heart and soul to the study of this particular work, putting aside for the time all study of pure science.” But what the international corporations call “free trade” isn’t quite the same thing that supporters of democracy would mean by that phrase.

Here are the sorts of things that Mussolini had learned from his revered teacher — and which Obama is trying to install not only in the United States but virtually worldwide via his proposed ‘trade’ treaties (and, if the following paragraph is too long for a reader, one can just skip over it; but, Obama is the most skillful practitioner of this ideology ever, and this is the actual ideology behind his proposed ‘trade’ treaties — and behind much else of his actual policies, as opposed to his mere rhetoric, which so often contradicts his real beliefs):

Pareto rejected equality of rights; he said, in his 1906 Manuale di economia politica or Manual of Political Economy (in which he also introduced his Welfare Criterion, which is at the very foundation of today’s microeconomic theory), “The assertion that men are objectively equal is so absurd that it does not even merit being refuted” (Ch. 2, #102: “L’asserzione che gli uomini sono oggettivamente eguali è talmente assurda, che non merita neppure di essere confutata.”) (He repeated this at the back of the volume, on page 556: “Oggettivamente il concetto di eguaglianza degli uomini è assurdo.”) In the same chapter (#106), he said, “You see, now, how great is subjectively the concept of human equality, which objectively is nil. It is the means commonly used, especially in our times, for half of an aristocracy to tower and replace the other half.” In other words, it’s just a ruse by some aristocrats to fool and conquer not merely the masses but their own aristocratic competitors. Pareto believed strongly in human hierarchy, not in human equality. He had utter contempt for the public. They were to be tools and fools for use by the elite. He said (#101, item 4) “Faith alone strongly moves men to act; and so it is not desirable for the good of society that the bulk of men, or even many of them, deal with social matters scientifically. … Here we have an additional argument … which shows us how little wisdom is displayed by those who want to make everyone, indiscriminately and without distinction, participate in knowledge.” Only the aristocracy should be educated. Then, (#107), he went into a tirade against “those naive persons who, in several countries, have disrupted the army by allowing themselves to be carried away by declamations on justice and equality.” He asserted that, “The great error of the present time is believing that men can be governed by pure reason without making use of force, which is, on the contrary, the foundation of all social organization.” This very same writer, who was shunning the use of force for redistribution of wealth, was an impassioned supporter of force as “the foundation of all social organization.” In the same chapter (#117), he also said, “the ruling classes have always tried to speak the language of the people who valued not the most true, but the most convenient.” And (#109) he said, “The equality of citizens before the law is for many a dogma, and in this case escapes the critical test. If we want to talk scientifically, we will soon see that it’s not at all obvious a priori that such equality should be of benefit to society; and, indeed, considering the heterogeneity of society, the opposite seems more likely.” He believed in the ultimate goodness of war. In #35, he said, “European civilization is the the result of endless wars, and the overwhelming destruction of the weak by the strong accomplished, from this suffering … the present prosperity.” Eliminating the weak is the way to the good society, according to that view. In #87, he praised “wars, for it is in these that mainly appears the superiority of man,” by means of combat. For him, superiority meant subduing and controlling, if not crushing, the opponent; it meant one’s possessing superior power. In #39, Pareto specifically condemned “the empty words of meaning of the famous Declaration of the Rights of Man”; he detested the ideal of equality of rights: instead, to the winner should go the spoils; the weak should be commanded and exploited by the strong, he consistently argued.

That is the underlying ideology behind Obama’s proposed ‘trade’ deals.

Here’s the way that Alfred de Zayas, the United Nations Independent Expert on the Promotion of a Democratic and Equitable International Order, referred to the basic problem here, called “ISDS” for Investor State Dispute Resolution, or alternatively the “ICS” for Investment Court System, when de Zayas was addressing, on April 19th, the EU Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affairs and Human rights (and the link that’s supplied here is added by me, for clarification; it’s not by de Zayas):

Experience with ISDS over the past thirty years demonstrates that some countries have been forced to roll back social legislation and that in some cases governments have not even dared to enact environmental protection measures out of fear of being sued for billions of dollars before ISDS tribunals. This regulatory chill – we may call it regulatory freeze – has impacted not only developing countries. Even countries like Canada have preferred to capitulate to threats and demands emanating from the oil and pharmaceutical industries. Germany is currently being sued by energy-giant Vattenfall because of its post-Fukushima decision to phase out nuclear energy, and the US is being sued by Trans-Canada for 15 billion dollars on account of Obama’s decisions not to allow the environmentally dangerous “Keystone pipeline” to be built. The latest assault on the right of sovereign States to protect the population and the environment is the outrageous ISDS case filed by Tobie Mining and Energy Inc. against Columbia, claiming 16.5 billion dollars in compensation on account of Colombia’s refusal to let the mining company expand into the Amazonian National Park and pollute the Amazonian rainforest. … Bottom line: ISDS cannot be reformed, it must be abolished.

We should not be concerned only about the toxicity of future agreements such as the CETA, TPP, TTIP and TISA… Studies about the impact of NAFTA show that the United States lost millions of manufacturing and other jobs that were relocated to Mexico’s maquiladoras, where not only labour costs, but labour standards and human rights protection are depressed… In my reports to the HR Council and General Assembly, I propose to revise existing treaties by invoking the doctrine of severability and thus removing only those treaty provisions that are contra bonos mores, such as ISDS and “survival clauses”…

At this juncture I would like to recall two ontologies that seem to have been lost in the ideologically-driven corporate narrative. First: the ontology of the State, its raison d’être, which is to legislate and regulate in the public interest. This includes taking preventive measures to avert potential harm to the population, e.g. as a result of fracking and other business activities. Second: the ontology of business, which is to take calculated risks for profit. It is not for the State to guarantee the profits of an investor, who can obtain risk insurance and factor it in as part of the cost of doing business. …

It is futile to attempt reforming this fundamentally flawed system that has already caused considerable harm to the commonweal and brought benefits only to corporations and shareholders. ISDS and ICS simply fail the test of human rights. Alas, notwithstanding serious studies by economists, lawyers and judges, human rights impact assessments and expert reports with correct diagnoses, TNCs [Trans National Corporations] and their powerful lobbies continue pushing forward for a corporate take-over of democratic governance, which is incompatible with the three pillars of the Council of Europe – democracy, rule of law and human rights.

De Zayas has elsewhere said that the Obama-proposed international-trade deals, if passed into law, will lead to “a dystopian future in which corporations and not democratically elected governments call the shots”.

That sounds somewhat like what Mussolini was describing as “corporationism”. However, after having lost WW II, the restoration of fascism in this far more sophisticated form — championed by Obama and others — might take over the world.

rinf.com

Ecuador’s Foreign Minister, Ricardo Patiño, thanked the journalists for their courage and allegiance to professional duty. Patiño said the grim events of those days may return as a result of distortions and manipulations normally practiced by the CIA. At an event celebrating the new book, Ricardo Patiño said, «These secret policies continue in Latin America today. Nothing that Philip Agee denounced as CIA actions in the past have been discarded by the espionage seen in the present». He added that the government will frustrate any attempts to exert pressure on the country, no matter Ecuador is targeted by US intelligence services. America has an advanced system of spying, it recruits agents from all walks of life, exercises control over media and disseminates hostile propaganda. Ecuador applies great efforts to counter the US spying activities. It’s not that easy – the United States has great experience accumulated over the years. The problem is getting more complicated. Ecuador is a small country and the mission to accomplish is a tall order, but it stands up to the challenge against all the odds. 

No matter how strong is the US pressure, Ecuador does its best to preserve its sovereignty, independence and national control over resources. President Correa is sure other countries of Latin America face the same problems. The Obama administration wants to weaken leftist governments with the help of smear campaigns. Meeting journalists Correa actually asked questions himself. He said, «Do you really believe that the difficult situations faced by Dilma in Brazil, Maduro in Venezuela, Michelle Bachelet in Chile, Cristina in Argentina and the hard times Evo Morales of Bolivia had to go through before he held a sweeping victory, are all coincidental? All these people head leftist governments. Nothing like this happens with rightist leaders».

It’s hard to counter his arguments. The regimes friendly to the United States face no difficulties in their relationship with the US, for instance: Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, Columbia, Peru, Paraguay etc. These states appear to be more vulnerable to reproaches and attacks of different kinds, but Washington finds fault only with the governments led by leftist politicians. 

The main drug traffic routes to America and Europe go through the countries under US control. Crime is rampant there. Drug lords command real armies that include thousands of well-armed «warriors». Mexico is the leader. Last year 43 college students were murdered in the Mexican state of Guerrero. The country is a transit route for those who want to cross the US border illegally. Criminal gangs wage turf wars. 

The U.S. Embassy has recorded more than 100 murders of U.S. citizens in Honduras since 2002. But the United States turns a blind eye on the fact because Honduras hosts American military facilities and Washington has no wish to worsen the relationship. Corruption scandals frequently hit US friendly regimes but nothing is done to rectify the situation as they are considered to be fragile democracies to be fostered and protected. Guatemala offers a plethora of cases related to human rights and freedom of speech violations. But this country is a regional ally, so it’s more blessed to attack Ecuador or Venezuela raising ballyhoo over single cases to blow them out of proportions. 

Addressing the National Assembly on May 24, President Correa said Latin America faces the threat of military coups as rightist elites are at the end of their tether. As he put it, «South American cannot discard the possibility of coups, including traditional ones, the desperation of the elites is dreadful, just look at what's happening in Brazil, where people shamelessly call for a military intervention against the constitutional government,» exclaimed Correa. The President recalled the days when he also faced hard times. The Ecuador crisis took place on 30 September 2010, when elements of the national police supported by snipers tried to stage a coup. The President barely escaped. Back then the government took urgent measures in response: the ambassador of the United States was declared a persona non grata, the US military and DEA (the Drug Enforcement Agency) missions were told to leave the country, the United States Agency for International Development, (USAID) had to suspend its activities in Ecuador. Philip Agee said the Agency was used for funding organizations involved in subversive activities and bribing venal trade union leaders. In the 1980s one more US agency – the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) – came into the country to conduct activities of destructive nature. 

The disclosures of CIA and military intelligence operatives involved in anti-government operations have become routine in Ecuador. They are sent away from the country to be substituted by other seasoned experts on organizing conspiracies, destabilizing countries and staging «color revolutions». 

U.S. Ambassador to Ecuador Adam E. Namm shies away from confrontational statements. He remembers how President Correa reacted when his predecessors went too far. Namm holds an M.S. in National Security Strategy from the National Defense College. He has seen hard work serving terms in such complicated countries as Columbia and Pakistan. Namm coped with flying colors. In Ecuador he is waiting for the moment to act. Meanwhile the ambassador is consolidating the leaders of «anti-populist» movements and accumulating the potential for protests to deliver a decisive blow. Washington believes that the overthrow is not possible without bloodshed. But a bloody scenario is better than stability in the country ruled by a populist. 

President Correa is adamant in his allegiance to independent policies. He hinders the accomplishment of US strategic objectives in South and Central America. For instance, he stands in the way of forming the US-controlled Pacific Alliance to include Mexico, Colombia, Peru and Chile. Correa considers the members of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) as is natural allies. He calls on other Latin American heads of state to intensify cooperation within the framework of The Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC). The Organization of American States could become a platform for a dialogue with the United States and Canada in case its Charter is reviewed. The idea of getting together to oppose the US influence is attractive for many countries of the region. 

Correa fights US Corporation Chevron which has done great damage to ecology in the areas near the Amazon River. The Ecuadoran President has invited everyone who is interested to come and see the damage with his own eyes. He accused the oil giant of criminal behavior, saying that what happened in the Amazon was no accident. Chevron, through its sister company Texaco, deliberately caused the oil catastrophe in the Ecuadorean jungle, the Latin American country’s president, Rafael Correa claimed May 21. Speaking on the International Anti-Chevron Day, Correa accused the oil giant of intentionally destroying the famous biodiversity and homes of thousands of people. «The disaster caused in the Ecuadorean forest is worse than that of Exxon Valdez in Alaska or BP in the Gulf of Mexico,» the President posted to his official Twitter account. «The worst difference is that those were accidents, what Chevron did was deliberate». 

According to an Ecuadorian court’s decision, Chevron is to pay the compensation of 9, 5 billion to the residents of the Amazon region. It was found responsible for dumping billions of gallons of toxic waste to pollute 5 million cubic meters of land. The US administration is ready to go to any length to protect the Chevron’s interests. That’s why the US has intensified its subversive activities in Ecuador. Since some time ago the President of the country started to get frequent threat of physical violence. He had to cancel public appearances and take measures to bolster personal security. 

According to media sources, Deputy Chief of Mission Douglas A. Koneff is responsible for operational activities to prepare the conspiracy. He also serves as the "Chief Operating Officer" for U.S. Mission Ecuador. Douglas came to country in July 2014. Upon arrival he said, «I’m happy to work with the excellent team at the embassy to strengthen our historic ties with Ecuador». Time will tell what exactly ties he meant. He has seen military service as navigator and then as mission commander on specially-configured P-3C and EP-3E aircraft, managing a crew of 20 to conduct intelligence collection and reconnaissance against targets of U.S. national interest in Pacific, Atlantic, and Mediterranean theaters of operation. He coordinated intelligence support to social, physical science, and engineering specialists to assist Department of Defense warfighters carry out assigned national security missions. Douglas has also managed State Department Task Forces to coordinate the federal government’s response to crises affecting U.S. national security interests and American citizens worldwide. He has served terms in Chile and Indonesia. Serving as the Deputy Principal Officer at the U.S. Consulate General in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, where he coordinated US and Mexican anti-drug effort. As the Deputy Chief of Mission he directly supervises the work of 9 U.S. Government agencies in Ecuador, including nearly 250 American and local staff at the U.S. Embassy in Quito, about 110 American and local staff at the U.S. Consulate General in Guayaquil, and oversees about 160 Peace Corps officers and volunteers. Douglas reports directly to the Ambassador and serves as Charge d’Affaires in his absence.

His team includes experts on clandestine operations: Edward M. Blodgett, Regional Security Officer, Timothy Peltier, Political Section, he serves as CIA agent under cover in Cuba and Romania, Nicole Weber, Economic Affairs Section (he has distinguished himself in India), A.J.Collazo, the Drug Enforcement Agency, Patricia L. Fietz, Consul General, Guayaquil and others. All these people will do their best to get rid of Rafael Correa before his third term expires.

It’s a long time since the shale gas development is an issue on the radar screen of East European media. It hits the agenda in Sofia, Warsaw. Vilnius and Kiev, making the gas controversy be openly tainted with anti-Russian tones. 

Victor Ponta, the Prime-Minister of Romania, thinks the Russia-supplied gas is overcharged and shale gas extraction is the only way to guarantee energy security for the country. The energy security is declared to be the key priority of the government’s agenda for 2013. The authorities have decided not to extend the shale gas development moratorium and have started cooperation with Chevron, the second-largest integrated energy company in the United States. The Romanian protests have taken place under the «Chevron, go home!» slogans. 

The West does its best to strengthen its influence in Central and Eastern Europe. The US insists the East European allies switch over to shale gas extraction instead of Russian pipeline supplies. It promises technical support and expertise sharing. The US Energy Information Administration estimates that Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary have combined technically recoverable shale gas deposits of 538 billion cubic metres. Ukraine granted shale gas exploration rights to US Exxon Mobil and British Shell in 2010. 

Chevron has a concession covering 600,000 hectares in the eastern Barlad region. The company also has three concessions in the Dobroudja region, near the Bulgarian border. Tom Holst, Chevron Romania country manager, does his best to gain a foothold in the East European market. According to him, only shale gas development could achieve energy independence for the Romanians. Lithuania is in talks with Chevron too. 

Bucharest thinks the main obstacle on the way of becoming «Greater Romania» is Russia and the presence of its peacekeepers in the Trans-Dniester Region. The Romanian unionists are quite successful in their efforts in a number of areas: they promote the idea of the national unity along the both coasts of the Prut River, conduct activities to discredit Tiraspol, build Romanian churches on the territory of Ukraine, and call upon Moldavians to recognize national unity with Romanians. But they hit snags while tackling energy issues. In reality, Romania needs Russian gas, but this need is presented as a threat coming from Russia. 

In Moldavia Romanian funds spur information war against those who support the idea of Moldavians being a separate nation and the fact of Russian military presence in the Trans-Dniester conflict zone. While holding talks on the Trans-Dniester problem, Bucharest fluctuates between Washington and Brussels on the one hand, and taking independent stand acting through Moldavia and Ukraine on the other. With the plans of the Trans-Dnieper annexation to Moldavia failed, the Romanian special services incite discontent with Chisinau among the Trans-Dnieper population, hoping to finally thwart any effort to make the Trans-Dnieper join Moldavia. This will to large extent ease the unification of Moldavia with Romania. 2013 is the year of Ukraine’s chairmanship in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). It has made known its intent to give a new lease on life to the management of the Trans-Dnieper frozen conflict. Last year Kiev launched the demarcation of the Trans-Dnieper – Ukrainian border. The action threatens to convert the Trans-Dnieper into an economic reservation. Romania’s Foreign Minister Titus Corlгюean said the integration of Ukraine into the European Union will depend on its stance on the Trans-Dnieper issue. 

It should be noted, Ukraine has no political, economic or cultural potential to substitute Russia in the conflict area. Pushing Kiev to act against Moscow and Tiraspol, Bucharest shifts part of the burden to Ukraine. The advocates of Romania becoming a great power need a weak and pliable Ukraine unable to resist. 

Today, Kiev and Bucharest are getting closer, especially in the field of energy cooperation. Ukraine has increased its gas import from Europe through Poland to five million cubic meters per day starting April 1, 2013, reports Ukrtransgas, the Ukrainian gas transit state monopoly. This is 2.5 times the previous average amount of two million cubic meters per day.

The United States and the European Union try to create an East European bloc at the borders of former Soviet Union, which would be totally dependent of its own resources and the supplies from the Western partners. The former parts of the Soviet Union: Ukraine, Moldavia and the Baltic States are to join the ‘shale union», an association of states to be created. 

Ukrainian and Moldavian explorers have already announced they have discovered significant deposits of shale gas in Moldavia right in the vicinity of Ukrainian border. Will the Romanian government listen to the voices of those involved in civil protests? Or will it ignore the fact that a number of countries have already banned fracturing? Time will show. At present, Chevron is involved in advertisement campaign and is calling on Romanians to launch an open discussion on the issue, hoping people will see how they benefit in case shale gas extraction starts. 

There have been two intertwined events taking place in the country. The electricity has gone up almost twice for ultimate consumers. On October 2 2008 Nancy E. McEldowney United States Ambassador to Bulgaria, sent a secret cable to C. Boyden Gray, then U.S. Ambassador to the EU and a Special Envoy for Eurasian Energy. The cable said, «With few hydrocarbons of its own, Bulgaria relies on Russia for seventy percent of its total energy needs and over ninety percent of its gas». The vulgar imagination of Ambassador made her see «Bulgaria in bed with the muscle bound duo of Gazprom and Lukoil is only partially true — it is a tryst driven less by passion and more by a perceived lack of options».

The copy of cable was sent from Sofia to the U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Department of Commerce, the National Security Council and the Central Intelligence Agency. She wrote, «With the price of energy at near record highs, Russia’s hydrocarbon-generated wealth is increasingly circulating through the Bulgarian economy, making Bulgaria all the more susceptible to Russian leverage. An energy strategy that focuses on renewables and efficiency is one tool Bulgaria can use to put a noticeable dent in negative Russian influence». The Ambassador made the following remarkable revelation, «Though previously a net exporter of electricity, the EU’s decision to force closure of blocks 3 and 4 of the communist-era nuclear plant Kozluduy cost the Bulgarian economy over USD 1.4 billion and put a squeeze on Serbia, Macedonia and Greece, who had purchased the bulk of the exports». She recommended to diversify the energy supply sources as a means to fight the energy deficit (that is to curb the Russian supplies) and rely on US technologies offered by Chevron and Westinghouse. 

Since then the Bulgarian media launched a campaign against Russian gas suppliers (Gasprom), potential energy pipelines (the Burgas-Alexandroupolis project) and nuclear facilities (the Belene nuclear plant that was to be built by Russia's state energy company Rosatom). 

In February 2012 some Bulgarian mass media spread the information supposedly about the using of … uncertified steel at manufacturing of high pressure heaters for units No.5 and No.6 of Kozloduy nuclear power plant. Under the agreement for high pressure heaters manufacturing concluded in 2008, Closed Joint-Stock Company ZiO-Podolsk has manufactured and supplied to the Customer (Atomtoploproekt, Bulgaria) 8 devices for power units of Kozloduy facility. The ZIO – Podolsk is a part of Rosatom – Atomenergomash machine building division. 

The slander didn’t live long. Valentin Nikolov, Director of Kozloduy NPP, has also confirmed that «during the examination in the institute of Bulgarian Academy of Science the compliance of hardness and chemical composition with 22Кsteel has been proved». The concocted story ended there, but the anti-Russian libel campaign was gaining momentum. 

On March 28 2012 the Bulgarian People's Assembly supported the government‘s decision to abandon the Belene power plant construction plans with 120 «yes» against 41 «no» votes. In autumn 2006 Atomstroyexport was awarded the tender for construction of the Belene 2000 MW plant nuclear power by Bulgarian National Electric Company NEK. Somehow, nobody remembers that those days the European Commission said that Belene complied with the standards of power plants safety in Europe. Moreover, it was one of three best projects that were referred to as examples of Generation III reactors along with in Olkiluoto (Finland) and Flamanville (France). The European Union’s experts recommended building reactors with the same level of safety and reliability standards. 

Over 30 Bulgarian national companies involved in the project were to operate at full capacity and guarantee employment. The nuclear plant had an advantage of profitability; one kilowatt-hour was one and a half times cheaper in comparison with renewable energy sources, and five and a half times less compared to a kilowatt-hour generated by Bulgarian thermal stations. 

What made the government of Boyko Brasov abandon the core energy project? The answer is obvious: the pressure exerted by the United States. 

In 2011 the US companies AES and Contour Global acquired two Bulgarian thermal plants Maritsa Iztok 1 and Maritsa Iztok 3 investing accordingly $1.2 billion and $230 million into the facilities to make them operate at full capacity. The investments were to pay off. For this purpose the Americans lobbied the contract duration of 15 years. During this period of time the Bulgarians were to pay ever growing prices for the energy produced. The US did its best to avoid competition. Former Bulgarian energy minister said if Belene plant were built there would be no need for the US thermal plants in ten years. To the contrary, the withdrawal from the Belene project guarantees them a stable consumer demand. 

Hillary Clinton gave a warm welcome to the Belene abandonment decision that actually meant Bulgaria won’t get cheap energy generated by Russian plants. She emphasized the reliability of the United States as a partner. According to her, the oil and gas supplies were to be diversified (read – no Russian exports) and that a number of American firms are well-positioned to help. Still, many Bulgarian energy experts perceived the refusal to build Belene as a threat to national security. Former Minister of Economy and Energy Petar Dimitrov, a member of the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP), has come up with a warning that myopic following the outside recommendations didn’t meet the national interests. According to him, the country would have to import energy in 15 years. Dimitrov insisted that Bulgarian consumers would pay the price for the «irresponsible decision because the country would face the need to import electricity at tariffs that a majority of Bulgarians would find unbearable». The energy crisis would set in the following dozens of years. Bulgaria was doomed to be a victim of energy dependence and deficit that would diminish the population by one third till 2050. That is by the end of this time the population would be 3.5 million like it was by the end of Turkish yoke that lasted five centuries. Nora Stoichkova, a Bulgarian journalist, revealed the essence of the harmful decision. According to her, Bulgaria pulled out of the Belene project as a result of unprecedented pressure from the United States and the European Union…The US Ambassador to the country did not shy away from making media appearances even more often than the exclusively vigorous Prime – Minister of Bulgaria and outright lobbying of US Chevron and Westinghouse energy giants interests. Kolyo Kolev, director of the Mediana Polling Agency, delicately noticed that many Bulgarians realize the country may lose many economic opportunities following the US geopolitical interests. 

The US never stops brainwashing top Bulgarian officials. The rumors go around saying the former US Ambassador to Bulgaria James Warlick was called back because he was not up to par. He didn’t defend the US companies interests vigorously enough and let happened what was to be avoided at all costs: the Boyko Borisov government cracked under the public protests pressure for environment protection. In January 2012 Chevron was banned to use fracking on Bulgarian soil. 

The shelf drilling program was halted. According to Bulgarian media, Boyko Borisov received a behind the closed doors thrashing from Barack Obama while on a visit to Washington. Bulgarian analysts are sure the Prime Minister decided not to take part in the South Stream ground-breaking ceremony on December 7 last year under the US influence. 

Nora Stoichkova is sure the continuation of the Belene project would have prevented the wave of discontent. It was a real opportunity to bring down the costs and provide for cheap energy. She said the nuclear plant was a chance for low price electricity, new working places and industrial progress. As to her, the withdrawal from the Belene project was a great shame before the whole world. Now the investors know only US government friends have a chance to earn money in Bulgaria. 

True, the country has a narrow space for maneuver in the field of energy policy. First, the European Union membership makes it obligatory to make 16% of the sector use renewable energy sources by 2020. The prices went up last summer, because the investors were made to function under the conditions of preferences not oriented on market requirements. Second, the 20 years of pro-US policy dictated by some political circles makes the United States the most preferable nation. In comparison with other European Union members, Bulgaria is a poor country (an average wage is €385.5, an average pension is €138), it’s not easy to protect the national interests. Perhaps Bulgaria doesn’t even realize it has become a country with limited sovereignty as a result of the United Sates diplomatic pressure…