By THIERRY MEISSAN and SIMPLICIUS THE THINKER*

Two articles on the role of Straussian and neoconservative agents (neocons) in the US power structure

At dawn on February 24, 2022, Russian forces entered Ukraine en masse. According to President Vladimir Putin, who was speaking on TV at the time, the special operation was the beginning of the country's response to “those who aspire to world domination” and who were establishing NATO infrastructure on their country's borders.^[1]

Throughout his extensive intervention, he summarized the way in which NATO destroyed Yugoslavia in 1999 without authorization from the United Nations Security Council, going so far as to bomb Belgrade. He then reported on the destruction caused by the United States in the Middle East, Iraq, Libya and Syria. It was only after this long introduction that he announced that he had sent his troops to Ukraine with the dual mission of destroying NATO-associated armed forces and putting an end to NATO-armed neo-Nazi groups.

Immediately all member states of the Atlantic alliance denounced an occupation of Ukraine comparable to that of Czechoslovakia during the “Prague Spring” (1968). According to them, Vladimir Putin had adopted the “Brezhnev doctrine” of the Soviet Union. This would be the reason why the free world would have to punish the resurrected “evil empire” by imposing “overwhelming costs” on it.

The understanding of the Atlantic alliance aims above all to deprive Russia of its main argument: surely, NATO is not a confederation of equals, but a hierarchical federation under Anglo-Saxon command; however, Russia would be acting in the same way. It would be denying Ukraine the possibility of choosing its destiny, just as the Soviets denied it to the Czechoslovaks. Admittedly, NATO, for its modus operandi, violates the principles of sovereignty and equality of countries stipulated by the Charter of the United Nations; it, however, cannot be dissolved – unless it is to dissolve Russia as well.

Maybe – but probably not.

President Vladimir Putin's speech was not directed against Ukraine, or even against the United States, but explicitly against “those who aspire to world domination”, that is, against the “Straussians” housed in the US power structure. It was a true declaration of war against them.

On February 25, President Vladimir Putin described power in Kiev as a “circle of drug addicts and neo-Nazis.” For the Atlanticist media, such words were those of a mentally ill person.

On the night of February 25th to 26th, President Volodymyr Zelensky sent Russia, through the Chinese embassy in Kiev, a ceasefire proposal. The Kremlin immediately responded with its conditions: (i) Arrest of all neo-Nazis (Dmitro Yarosh and the Azov Battalion, etc.); (ii) redenomination of all street names and destruction of all monuments glorifying Nazi collaborators during the Second World War (Stepan Bandera, etc.); (iii) lay down weapons.

The Atlanticist media ignored this event, while the rest of the world that learned about it held its breath. The negotiation failed a few hours later, after Washington intervened. Only then could Western public opinion become aware, but those conditions in Russia were always hidden from them.

What is President Vladimir Putin talking about? Who is he fighting? And what are the reasons that blinded and silenced the Atlanticist media?

Brief history of the Straussians

Let's dwell a little on this group, the Straussians, about whom Westerners know little. These are individuals, all Jews, but absolutely not representative of North American Jews or Jewish communities around the world. They were indoctrinated by the German philosopher Leo Strauss, who took refuge in the United States during the rise of Nazism and who became a professor of philosophy at the University of Chicago.

According to several reports, he brought together a small group of students who became faithful disciples, whom he instructed orally, so that there are no written texts about that instruction. He convinced them that the only way the Jews would not become victims of a new genocide again would be to set up their own dictatorship. Strauss referred to them as the Hoplites (the soldiers of Sparta), and commissioned them to destabilize the courts of rival powers. Finally, he taught them to operate with discretion and secrecy, and praised the role of the “noble lie” (“noble lie”). Even though Leo Strauss died in 1973, the brotherhood of his disciples continued.

The Straussians formed themselves as a political group half a century ago, in 1972. All of them were then members of the team of Democratic Party Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson, including Elliott Abrams, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz. They worked in association with a group of Trotskyist journalists, also Jews, who had met at the City college of New York, and who edited the newspaper Commentary. These were called “New York Intellectuals.” Both of these groups were closely linked to the CIA, but were also linked to the RAND Corporation (the think tanks of the military-industrial complex), thanks to Perle's father-in-law, Albert Wohlstetter (the American military strategist). Many of those young people married each other, until they formed a cohesive group of around a hundred activists.

Together, they drafted and approved, in the midst of the Watergate crisis (1974), the “Jackson-Vanik amendment”, which forced the Soviet Union to authorize the emigration of its Jewish population to Israel, under penalty of economic sanctions. That was his founding act.

In 1976, Paul Wolfowitz was one of the architects of the “B Team” tasked by Gerald Ford with estimating the Soviet threat. Wolfowitz produced a delirious report accusing the Soviet Union of preparing to seize “global hegemony.” The nature of the Cold War was changing: it was no longer about isolating/containing the USSR, it had to be stopped in the name of saving the “free world”.

The Straussians and the New York intellectuals, all leftists,^[2] They put themselves at the service of right-wing President Ronald Reagan. It must be understood that such groups were in fact neither leftist nor rightist. Some of its members even switched from the Democratic party to the Republican party five times and vice versa. What matters to them is to infiltrate power, whatever the ideology of the moment.

Eliott Abrams became Assistant Secretary of State. He was in charge of an operation in Guatemala where he put a dictator in power, and conducted experiments with Israeli Mossad officers on how to create reserves for the Mayan Indians in order to one day replicate them in Israel with the Palestinian Arabs (the Mayan resistance These experiments earned Rigoberta Menchú a Nobel Peace Prize). Then Eliott Abrams continued his abuses in El Salvador and finally in Nicaragua against the Sandinistas, through the Iran-Contra affair.

For their part, New York intellectuals, now called “neoconservatives,” created the National Endowment for Democracy (National Endowment for Democracy – NED) and the United States Institute for Peace, a device that organized many color revolutions, starting in China with the attempted coup by Prime Minister Zhao Ziyang and the subsequent repression in Tiananmen Square.

At the end of George H. Bush's (father's) term, Paul Wolfowitz, then number 3 at the Department of Defense, drafted a document around a strong idea: after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the United States should prevent the emergency of new rivals, starting with the European Union. He concluded by advocating the possibility of taking unilateral action, that is, putting an end to consultation with the United Nations and its Security Council. Wolfowitz is without a doubt the architect of “Desert Storm”, the operation to destroy Iraq that allowed the United States to change the rules of the game and organize a unilateral world. It was then that the Straussians endorsed the concepts of “regime change” and “promotion of democracy”.

Gary Schmitt, Abram Shulsky, and Paul Wolfowitz joined the U.S. intelligence community through the Consortium for the Intelligence Working Group Study on Intelligence Reform. They criticized the assumption that other governments think the same way as the United States. They then criticized the lack of political leadership of intelligence, which would allow itself to wander over unimportant topics instead of focusing on essential ones. Politicizing intelligence activity was what Wolfowitz had already done with the “B Team” and what he would do again in 2002, successfully, with the Office of Special Operations: invent arguments for new wars against Iraq and Iran (the “noble lie” by Leo Strauss).

The Straussians were removed from power during Bill Clinton's term. They then entered the think tanks from Washington. In 1992, William Kristol and Robert Kagan (husband of Victoria Nuland) published an article in Foreign Affairs lamenting President Clinton’s timid foreign policy and calling for a return to “benevolent global hegemony.” The following year they founded the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), under the auspices of the American Enterprise Institute. Gary Schmitt, Abram Shulsky and Paul Wolfowitz were members. All non-Jewish admirers of Leo Strauss, including the Protestant Francis Fukuyama (author of The end of the story), immediately joined them.

Richard Pearl

In 1994, already an arms dealer, Richard Perle (codename “the prince of darkness”) became an advisor to the president and former Nazi Alija Izetbegović in Bosnia-Herzegovina. He was the one who brought Osama bin Laden and his Arab Legion (al-Qaeda's predecessor) from Afghanistan to defend the country. Perle would even be a member of the Bosnian delegation to Paris when the Dayton Accords were signed.

In 1996, PNAC members (including Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser) wrote a study within the Institute for Advanced Political and Strategic Studies (IASPS) on behalf of Israel's new prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. That report recommended the elimination of Yasser Arafat, the annexation of Palestinian territories, a war against Iraq and the transfer of Palestinians there. Perle was inspired not only by the political theories of Leo Strauss, but also by those of his friend Ze'ev Jabotinsky, the founder of “Zionist Revisionism,” of which Netanyahu's father was the private secretary.

Robert kagan

PNAC raised funds for George W. Bush (Jr.)'s candidacy and published its famous report “Rebuilding America's Defenses” before his election. In it, Robert Kagan called for a catastrophe comparable to that of Pearl Harbor, which would plunge the American people into a war for global hegemony. These were the exact words that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, a member of the PNAC, used on September 11, 2001.

Thanks to the 11/XNUMX attacks, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz installed Admiral Arthur Cebrowski as Donald Rumsfeld's shadow. He had a role comparable to that of Albert Wohlstetter during the Cold War. He imposed the “endless war” strategy: the United States military would no longer win wars, but would start a large number of them and make them last as long as possible. It was about destroying the political structures of the target countries in order to ruin their populations and deprive them of any means of defending themselves against the United States; a strategy implemented for twenty years in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen…

The alliance between the Straussians and the Revisionist Zionists was sealed at a major conference in Jerusalem in 2003, which Israeli political figures of all persuasions unfortunately understood they had to attend. So it is no surprise that Victoria Nuland (wife of Robert Kagan, then NATO ambassador) intervened to proclaim a ceasefire in Lebanon, allowing the defeated Israeli army to not be legally incriminated by Hezbollah.

Bernard lewis

Some individuals, such as Bernard Lewis, operated in all three groups, the Straussians, the Neoconservatives, and the Revisionist Zionists. Originally a member of British intelligence, he acquired American and Israeli citizenships, was an advisor to Benjamin Netanyahu and a member of the United States National Security Council. Lewis, who had stated at one point in his career that Islam was incompatible with terrorism and that Arab terrorists were in fact Soviet agents, changed his mind later and stated, with the same shamelessness, that that religion preached terrorism.

He invented the “clash of civilizations” strategy for the US National Security Council. It was about using cultural differences to mobilize Muslims against Orthodox Christians; a concept that was popularized by his adviser on the Council, Samuel Huntington, except that he did not present it as a strategy, but rather as a fatality against which action had to be taken. Huntington had begun his career as a secret service advisor to the US regime. apartheid South African, then wrote a book, The Soldier and the State, stating that the military (professionals and mercenaries) would form a separate caste, the only one capable of understanding the needs of national security.

After the destruction of Iraq, the Straussians were the subject of all kinds of controversy. Everyone had been surprised how a small group, supported by neoconservative journalists, could acquire such authority without being subjected to public debate. The US Congress appointed an Iraq study group, known as the “Baker-Hamilton Commission”, to evaluate its policies. She condemned, without however naming the issue, the Rumsfeld/Cebrowski strategy, and deplored the hundreds of thousands of deaths it caused. Rumsfeld resigned, and the Pentagon continued to relentlessly pursue that strategy it never officially adopted.

During Barack Obama's administration, the Straussians regrouped in Vice President Joe Biden's cabinet. His national security adviser, Jacob Sullivan, played a central role in organizing operations against Libya, Syria and Myanmar, while one of his other advisers, Anthony Blinken, focused on Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran. who was at the forefront of negotiations with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei that resulted in the arrest of key figures in President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's government in exchange for the nuclear deal.

The regime change in Kiev in 2014 was organized by the Straussians. Vice President Joe Biden has been firmly committed to it. Victoria Nuland came to support the neo-Nazi elements of the Right Sector and overseeing the elite Israeli “Delta” forces on Maidan Square. A telephone intercept revealed his desire to “fuck the European Union” (sic), in the best tradition of the 1992 Wolfowitz report. However, the leaders of the European Union did not realize the reasons, and limited themselves to protocol protests.

“Jake” Sullivan and Antony Blinken put Vice President Biden’s son, Hunter, on the board of a major gas corporation, Burisma Holdings, despite opposition from Secretary of State John Kerry. Hunter Biden is regrettably nothing more than an addict, who served as a screen for a gigantic fraud at the expense of the Ukrainian people. Under the supervision of Amos Hochstein, he would appoint several of his drug addict friends to be other front men in the management of various companies to plunder Ukrainian gas. These are the people President Vladimir Putin referred to as the “drug gang.”

Sullivan and Blinken lean on mafia boss Ihor Kolomoisky, the country's third-largest fortune. Despite being Jewish, he finances the bigwigs of the Right Sector, a neo-Nazi organization that works for NATO and fought on Maidan Square during “regime change”. Kolomoisky took advantage of his relationships to gain power within the European Jewish community, but his co-religionists fought back and expelled him from international associations.

However, he acted to have the leader of the Right Sector, Dmytro Yarosh, appointed deputy secretary of the National Defense and Security Council of Ukraine, and to have himself appointed governor of Dnipropetrovsk province. These two men would quickly be removed from any political role. It is their group that President Vladimir Putin calls the “circle of neo-Nazis”.

In 2017, Antony Blinken founded the WestExec Advisors, a consulting firm that brought together former senior Obama administration officials and several Straussians. The company's activities are extremely discreet. It uses its employees' political connections to make money, something that would be called corruption anywhere else. 

The Straussians, always the same

Since Joe Biden's return to the White House, this time as President of the United States, the Straussians have encompassed the entire system. “Jake” Sullivan is the National Security Advisor, while Anthony Blinken is the Secretary of State with Victoria Nuland at his side. As I have reported in previous articles, she traveled to Moscow in October 2021, threatening to crush Russia's economy if she did not get her act together. That was the beginning of the current crisis.

Under-Secretary of State Nuland brought Dmytro Yarosh back to life and imposed him on President Zelensky, a television actor protected by Ihor Kolomoisky. On November 2, 2021, Zelensky appointed him special advisor to the commander of the armed forces, General Valerii Zaluzhnyi. This man, an authentic democrat, initially rebelled, but finally complied. Asked by journalists about this disconcerting duet, he refused to answer, claiming it was a matter of national security. Yarosh lends his full support to the “white Führer”, Colonel Andrey Biletsky, and his Azov battalion. That copy of the SS division “Das Reich” has been forged since the summer of 2021 by former American Blackwater mercenaries.

Since this long digression has made it possible to identify the Straussians, we must admit that Russia's ambitions are understandable, and even desirable. Ridding the world of the Straussians would do justice to the millions of deaths they have caused, and save those they are about to kill. Time will tell whether this intervention in Ukraine is the right path.

Be that as it may, if the responsibility for current events lies with the Straussians, those who allowed them to act without hesitation also have a responsibility. Starting with Germany and France, who signed the Minsk agreements seven years ago and did nothing to implement them, and then the fifty or so countries that signed the OSCE declarations banning NATO expansion east of the Oder line. -Neisse,^[3] and they did nothing. Only Israel, which has just got rid of the Revisionist Zionists,^[4] expressed his own position regarding these events.

This is one of the lessons of the crisis: democratically governed people are responsible for decisions made long ago by their leaders and maintained even after changes in power.^[5]

* * *

How the Fall of the Soviet Union Triggered a Neocon “Gold Rush” Towards the “Heart of the Earth”^[6]

By Simplicius The Thinker

Many people are aware of the various disparate geopolitical events of the 1990s and their respective significance – from the dissolution of the USSR to the rise of the American neocon movement to center stage, which precipitated imperialist military actions from the late XNUMXth century into the XNUMXst century. Few, however, recognize the teleological link tying these events into direct causality.

When the USSR was brought into controlled demolition in 1991, it set off a chain reaction that would change world history and the global geopolitical landscape forever. But to understand such changes we must first begin with an understanding of what the USSR represented specifically in terms of the foundation of global security.

The most important factor is that the USSR represented a balance of powers between global blocs, a kind of multipolarity, which inherently provided a system of deterrence, preventing one bloc or the other from exerting too much influence and encompassing too many key geographic areas. under your control.

This balance operated in a tangible way in a variety of post-World War II conflicts, where a line was drawn between the two superpowers. Everything from the Korean War to Vietnam to the Arab-Israeli conflicts, and even the Indo-Pakistani conflict of the 1970s, represented a push-and-pull competition between the two sides. In some of them, one side made marginal gains, while the opposite occurred in the following conflict. However, ultimately the balance was maintained to the extent that neither side was able to shake the global security architecture in such a way as to completely unbalance it and break it.

In the Bangladesh liberation war that led to the Indo-Pakistani war of 1971, the Soviet Union supported Bangladesh while the United States supported Pakistan. In the subsequent Indo-Pak war, the US supported Pakistan and the USSR supported India. Such support typically led to a containment of the conflict, allowing some local “victory” for one side or the other, without, however, one of them ever coming to dominate the entire region.

However, with the end of the USSR, all this began to change. With the United States as the only hegemon remaining, the Neocons who had long salivated for the chance at total global hegemony now had an open avenue before them.

Zbigniew Brzezinski, who served as President Carter's National Security Advisor, wrote his book The Grand Chessboard, in which he notably described Eurasia as the center of global power. Brzezinski used the “Heart of the Earth Theory” (Heartland) as the central foundation of his seminal work.

Considered the founding father of geopolitics and geostrategy, Mackinder wrote The Geographical Pivot of History, in which he described Europe, Asia and Africa together as the “Island of the World” and, at the center of it, the most important region of the world: the Heart of the Earth.

Mackinder went on to summarize his Theory as follows (Mackinder, Democratic Ideals and Reality, P. 150): (i) Whoever governs Eastern Europe commands the Heart of the Earth; (ii) Whoever governs the Heart of the Earth commands the Island of the World; (iii) Whoever rules the World Island rules the world.

As well as the logic behind it: “Any power that controlled the World Island would control well over 50% of the world's resources. The size of the Heart of the Earth and its central position make it the key to controlling the World Island.”

It should be noted that, despite the typical cliché of “African riches”, Asia can in fact be considered the most resource-rich continent in the world. It is clear that Africa attracted the most plunder simply because the ease with which European colonizers were able to capture its resources was due to their countries' lack of defense capabilities, thus marking it with the reputation of being “the most rich.” But in many ways Africa is also barren with many desert areas. By way of example, Russia alone not only has the world's largest forests for logging, but Lake Baikal holds one-fifth of the world's entire freshwater supply.

But the basic idea of ​​the World Island evolved and was adapted by writers such as Russia's Aleksandr Dugin – colloquially (and erroneously) called Putin's brain, or mystic.

In his work, Dugin characterizes Russia as the land power of “Eternal Rome”, in struggle against the Atlanticist maritime powers (United States/United Kingdom) of “Eternal Carthage”.

As has already been written about him: “The War of the Continents”, in which he described an ongoing geopolitical dispute between two types of global powers: terrestrial powers, or “Eternal Rome”, which are based on the principles of the primacy of the State, of communality, idealism and the primacy of the common good, and maritime civilizations, or “Eternal Carthage”, which are based on individualism, commerce and materialism. In Dugin's understanding, the “Eternal Carthage” was historically embodied in Athenian democracy and in the British and Dutch empires. Nowadays, it is represented by the United States. “Eternal Rome” is embodied by Russia, and the conflict between them will last until one of them is completely destroyed – no type of political regime and no volume of trade can stop this.”

Whether or not you adhere to the idea of ​​the “Heart of the Earth”, it is a useful visual resource for understanding the importance of what Brzezinski called the “Eurasian Balkans”. These are the countries in the critical “back door” area of ​​Asia that serves as a kind of weak point of vulnerability, therefore a means of access to the “Heart of the Earth”.

On the map above, the broader dotted line represents a “zone of instability”, while the arrows point to places of geopolitical pressure, and the stars represent hotspots of conflict.

Just to understand: the southern flank of the “Heart of the Earth” is armored by India, a country too powerful to be a weak entry point through which to penetrate. The eastern (eastern) flank is naturally guarded by China. But the golden corridor that the West has salivated over since the days of the 19th century's “Great Game” is the one that runs from Iran to the “stans,” and from them directly into the Heart of the Earth.

During the existence of the USSR, this corridor was out of reach due to the fact that most of these “Eurasian Balkans” were part of the USSR, namely: Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan. United, they were formidable, unbreakable.

Iran, of course, was not part of the USSR, and it remained under severe CIA attack and control. The 1953 coup that overthrew the Iranian government and installed the CIA-backed Pahlavi dynasty is today an openly recognized stage in history: “The CIA recognizes that the coup was carried out “under the direction of the CIA” and “as an act of the foreign policy of the United States, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government.”

Only with the 1979 revolution was the CIA-backed government overthrown. But the great geopolitical dream of the Atlanticist powers was still out of the question because the rear corridor into the Heart of the Earth was united under the powerful and stable authority of the USSR.

Even as the United States began its attempts to interfere in Afghanistan – something Brzezinski later assumed had begun much earlier in the 70s than is commonly acknowledged – the USSR invaded to quickly neutralize the CIA-backed rebels who were threatening to destabilize that country. geopolitically key “back door” country.

Conquest after the fall

The dissolution of the USSR in 1991 freed up decades of robust planning almost instantly. Once the former guardians of the “back entrance” to the Heart of the Earth had become independent, then weak and vulnerable to political insinuation and interference, the grand plan to drive the dagger into the heart of the World Island was quickly set in motion.

The official date for the dissolution of the USSR was December 26, 1991. A mere fourteen months later, on February 26, 1993, the first shot of the new era was fired – the bombing in World Trade Center. The plan aimed to make the north tower collapse onto the south tower, bringing them down together in a massive terrorist attack, which its perpetrators envisioned would kill “250 people.”

But what most people don't know is that that attack was designed to be 11/11 long before the real 11/1993 happened. He just failed. Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the mastermind of 1993/XNUMX a decade later, later confessed to having also masterminded the XNUMX attack. His own nephew, Ramzi Yousef, was the main perpetrator of the XNUMX attack, and both were linked to Osama bin Laden.

In fact, after the 1993 attack, Khalid Sheik Mohammed conceived another ambitious plan that served as a rehearsal for the preparation of 11/XNUMX, called Operation Bojinka. Its similarity with the subsequent September 11 attacks was notable: among other things, the plan involved hijacking eleven commercial planes and having one of them crash into the CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. At one point he planned to make planes crash into nuclear plants in the United States, but ended up giving up on that idea.

Yet another plan that was suggested would have involved the hijacking of more aircraft. O World Trade Center (New York City, New York), the Pentagon (Arlington, Virginia), the Capitol (Washington, DC), the White House (Washington, DC), the Tower Sears (Chicago, Illinois), the Bank of the United States Tower (Los Angeles, California) and the Transamerica Pyramid (San Francisco, California) would have been likely targets. This plan ended up being the basic plot for the September 11 attacks, which involved hijacking commercial planes, rather than loading small planes with explosives, and crashing them into their intended targets.

Nevertheless, the situation is clear: the same international deep state forces that intended to trigger a tsunami of war that would lead to the conflagration of the Middle East and that had already set their plan in motion a mere fourteen months after the dissolution of the USSR, for the first time They realized that a clear path into that access passage to the “Heart of the Earth” fell into their lap.

The Straussians

But who were those forces in the shadows that were surreptitiously plotting their plans under the guise of “Islamic terrorism”? To go back a little, we must first realize that, just two months after the dissolution of the USSR in December 1991, the infamous Wolfowitz Doctrine came to light.

This doctrine, dated February 1992, openly declared its purpose: “The doctrine enshrines the stature of the United States as the only remaining superpower in the world after the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War, and proclaims that its objective The last thing is to maintain that position. Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, whether on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat of the nature of that previously expressed by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regionalized defense strategy, and it requires that we strive to prevent any hostile power from dominating some region whose resources could, under consolidated control, be sufficient to produce global power.”

Wolfowitz was a Neocon founding member of what in many circles are called “the Straussians”, a small and secretive group of Neocons who among themselves form a government within a government (i.e. a deep state – deep state), and who held the highest positions in successive administrations over decades. They began as students of Leo Strauss, who taught them the “noble lie” (noble lie), among other things, in secret lectures that could not be recorded.

These concepts are not inventions of Thierry Meyssan's obscure harangues from Voltaire network,^[7] but rather they are the result of real academic culture of which connections have long been established. The 1999 book by Shadia B. Drury Leo Strauss and the American Right, for example, identifies the great influence of Leo Strauss on the historian Gertrude Himmelfarb and her husband Irving Kristol, known as the founder of neoconservatism. Irving Kristol's son is, of course, William Kristol, founder of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), which we'll talk about below.

Leo Strauss was then accused of defending forms of fascism and authoritarianism: “Drury maintains that Strauss taught that “the perpetual deception of citizens by those in power is critical because they need to be guided, and they need strong rulers who tell them what to do. which is good for them.” Nicholas Xenos similarly maintains that Strauss was “an anti-democrat in a fundamental sense, a true reactionary.” Xenos says: “Strauss was someone who wanted to go back to an earlier, pre-liberal, pre-bourgeois era, of blood and guts, of imperial domination, of authoritarian rule, of pure fascism.”

The supreme characteristic of this group of “Straussians” was their rigid cohesion, some of them having married (Victoria Nuland and PNAC co-founder Robert Kagan, as well as Irving Kristol and Gertrude Himmelfarb years before), and forming a kind of family unit. cohesive generational structure within the government in positions not limited by terms, which allowed them to remain in power behind the scenes for decades. These people include Elliot Abrams, Richard Perle, Kagan and his wife Nuland, Paul Wolfowitz, the aforementioned William Kristol, etc.

Using Grand Chessboard of Brzezinski as a model, this Neocon claque formed think tanks in the 1990s, the most notable and influential of which was the PNAC (Project for the New American Century), which in essence reformulated the manifest destiny expressed in the Wolfowitz Doctrine on a larger scale, calling for an escalation in American military spending and to aggressiveness in order to preserve and ensure global American domination in the coming XNUMXst century.

And since virtually all the leading figures in this clique were Jews, with a manifest interest in Israel's supremacy in the Middle East, one can see the double elegance of the plan. On the one hand, he stood to launch a new wave of American expansion in the Middle East which was useful to Israel's interests in eliminating its declared enemies and, on the other hand, he secured an American bridgehead toward the center. of the “Heart of the Earth”, serving as a definitive wedge that could split the Eurasian continent once and for all.

By the way, none of this is a conspiracy theory: Paul Wolfowitz was investigated by the FBI in 1978 for “providing intelligence to the Israeli government,” and several founding members of PNAC, including Wolfowitz and Richard Perle, worked directly with Benjamin Netanyahu in producing government guidelines for Israel, such as “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm”, which drove an even greater Zionist expansion, aggressively destabilizing Israel's enemies and eliminating Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq: “While there are those who advocate continuity, Israel has the opportunity to effect a clean break: it can forge a strategy and a peace process based on a whole new intellectual foundation, which will restore strategic initiative and provide the nation with the environment to devote all possible energy to the reconstruction of Zionism [N. do T.: Hence “Zionist Revisionism”], for which the starting point must be economic reforms”.

In many ways, the USSR frustrated Zionist expansion for a long time. During the 60s and 70s, the USSR was the main support for the Arab world during its many conflicts with Israel. From the Six-Day War in 1967 to the subsequent war of attrition, to the Yom Kippur War of 1973 and the Lebanon War of 1982, each time the USSR fought Israel. In some cases even directly, as in Operation Rimon 20 during the war of attrition, when Soviet pilots on the Egyptian side engaged the Israeli air force; as well as during the 1982 Lebanon War, when the USSR sent more than 2.000 anti-aircraft defense men to help Syria repel Israeli aggression. Thus the dissolution of the USSR allowed Israel many gains in its immediate neighborhood, since there was no longer a “Big Brother” to protect their Arab enemies.

Tip and shim

Thus it can be seen how the interests of both the United States and Israel largely converged and aligned in the Middle East precisely after the fall of the USSR. Thus, it was no surprise that this group of Neocons immediately launched their plans to establish a new century of American supremacy, starting with the conquest of the Middle East. Let us remember the famous interview with the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO forces in Europe, General Wesley Clark, regarding “seven countries in five years”, in which he revealed that he had received a memo immediately after 11/XNUMX exposing that the American military they would get rid of seven countries (mostly in the Middle East) over the next five years, starting with Iraq, and followed by Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.

Of course, at the time of the memorandum, Clark declared that the United States had already started its war in Afghanistan, thus effectively making eight countries in total.

However, the relevant factor to be distinguished is how perfectly those countries align, forming an exact and direct route in a straight line into that “back entrance” to the Heart of the Earth region. From Lebanon on the westernmost coast, to neighboring Syria, then to Iraq, Iran and neighboring Afghanistan, a complete cordon sanitaire is created for the control by the imperial United States of the famously vulnerable southwestern flank of the “World Island”. .

Outlined in blue in the image above is a point of interest: China's Xinjiang province, home of the Uyghurs, where the United States continues to exert maximum propaganda pressure to destabilize the region - a kind of "picking the lock" on the gate. from the bottom of China, in its most vulnerable region – a kind of Chechen Republic of China.

And what most are not aware of is a little-known fact revealed by Trump, that the real significance of Afghanistan, and the US Bagram air base in particular, was its proximity to strategic Chinese installations: “We would have maintained Bagram because it is close to China. It's an hour from their nuclear facility, and we gave that up too,” Trump said. “And now China will take control of Bagram, in my opinion.”

A look at the map above makes it clear that the long strip of land in the northeastern region of Afghanistan is conveniently located towards the borders of China, more precisely in the province of Xinjiang, into which the United States smuggles its unrest and destabilization. engineered to create a backdoor Trojan against China.

Of course, on a micro scale, this is a strategy that the United States also used against Russia shortly after the dissolution of the USSR. The CIA quickly imported terrorism and insurgency into the Republic of Chechnya, fueling separatist sentiments in ways that weakened Russia's own southern point of vulnerability on a local scale.

The simplest way to illustrate this strategy is to compare it to how the ancients used to split large stones in quarries using the tip and chock method.

You find the weakest vein in the stone, hammer a metal bit into it along with a shim to widen that weak spot using pressure, and then voilà, the large and seemingly indestructible stone is split in half.

Failed plan

It is clear that as soon as the USSR dissolved, the generational and unelected Neocons embedded deep within the folds of the US political structure immediately sprang into action with plans to capitalize on the now “open goal” of the Heartland. of Earth left temptingly dangling before them.

Since the 1993 bombing, that secret government-within-a-government^[8] it had already been planned to usher in the new era of imperialism that would then sweep across the Middle East. In fact, as late as 1998, three years before 11/XNUMX, Wolfowitz and the PNAC gang were already urging Clinton to invade Iraq—but instead the most they got was Operation Desert Fox, a four-year campaign. days of intense bombing that killed more than a thousand Iraqis.

However, in the meantime, its fundamentalist operators, long linked to the clan of deep state through innumerable family (not unlike how the daughter of CIA Afghanistan section chief Graham Fuller was married to the uncle of the Tsarnaev brothers who committed the Boston Marathon bombing), business, and financial connections , were already well advanced in their plans to irrevocably launch the United States into the wars to come, which with 11/XNUMX finally became viable.

In the meantime, however, the deep state The United States found itself able to first destabilize Russia on a variety of fronts, to make sure that the coming era of imperialist attacks could in no way be disturbed by some sudden resurgence of Russian power. This resulted in the outbreak of conflagrations such as the Chechen conflict and even the Yugoslav crisis, which aimed at the fragmentation and weakening of Serbia, Russia's key ally in the Balkans.

This was followed by the war in Georgia, just at the end of the Chechen conflict (the “insurgency phase” of which officially lasted until 2009) according to the same line of thought; Western elites needed to constantly keep Russia weakened and off balance in order to interfere the way the USSR would have done.

But despite some initial “successes,” history will remember the arc of his plan as an utter failure. They conquered Iraq and Afghanistan, only to be ignominiously kicked out of one and in the process of being evicted from the other. Their Syria adventure failed, when a resurgent Russia came to the rescue of its longtime ally, forcing the United States into a humiliating and resentful “consolation prize” of hunkering down in some oil fields in the inhospitable remains of Syria province. Deir Ezzor.

And what was to have been the crowning achievement of the entire grand scheme, the key pivot that would have secured the elite's yellow-tiled golden path think-tanker straight into the gaping cavity in the chest of the “Heart of the Earth” itself – namely, Iran – resulted in what? Iran is now more powerful and more influential than ever, unquestionably on the rise. Particularly in light of the latest progress in the Iran-Saudi rapprochement that has seen an unprecedented invitation to Iranian President Raisi to visit Riyadh.^[9]

The “Eurasian Balkans” remain an open wound. O deep state The West still keeps its fangs deep in Kazakhstan and is fomenting a focus of destabilization in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan – which precisely last year saw the outbreak of major hostilities with approximately one hundred dead on each side – as well as in Azerbaijan and Armenia.

But in many ways these are the anguished death throes of a vengeful adversary, struggling, unable to assimilate his defeat. With the coming era of rapprochement among the region's various middle powers, we will likely see even closer cooperation with a focus on economic stability, particularly led by China's various Belt and Road/New Silk Roads initiatives.

The end of the story… for a new beginning

There is a feeling that, after two decades of violent attempts by America to penetrate the vulnerable back entrance to the Heart of the Earth, power actors in the region have begun to tire of the endless conflict and, in times of global economic crisis, have They realized that only cooperation, compromise and reconciliation with each other will give them any chance of seeing some real prosperity again.

Francis Fukuyama, one of the most primitive and staunch disciples of the Neocon movement, would later renege on his beliefs when he realized the consequences resulting from the monumental failure of the United States, and the magnitude of the disasters that this failure caused throughout the world. Having been a key developer of the “Reagan Doctrine” of the 1980s, which uncovered an ambitious focus on worldwide interventions and arming insurgents to confront the USSR in Afghanistan, Fukuyama would later be among the founding signatories of the Project for the New American Century, as well as a prominent member of RAND Corporation.

An inveterate and fanatical neocon, he even wrote the absurdly exultant book The end of the story, which ironically declared that the fall of the USSR meant that all of history had reached its ideological conclusion – from that point on, the “liberal-democratic” system of the West would essentially guide the people into a golden age, as the way definitive government for humanity.

By the mid-2000s, however, Fukuyama's prognosis was curdling. He no longer returned calls from his former bosom friend Wolfowitz, and wrote an article for New York Times in which he equated neoconservatism with Leninism: “In a 2006 essay for The New York Times Magazine strongly critical of the invasion of Iraq, he identified neoconservatism with Leninism. He wrote that neoconservatives “believed that history could be guided, through the correct application of power and will. Leninism was a tragedy in its Bolshevik version, and was repeated as a farce when practiced by the United States. Neoconservatism, both as a political symbol and as a body of thought, has become something that I can no longer endorse.”

Even the man who once proudly proclaimed that history had come to an end with the “ideological victory” of the United States over its rival USSR was now condemned to bear witness to the calamitous farewell to the aftermath of three decades of disastrous attempts to break through the bars of the “Island of the World”.

Who knows, perhaps Fukuyama was ultimately more right than he imagined, and the first sighs of a certain end were in fact emanated. But, on the contrary, an end to “democratic liberalism” and the global hegemonic aspirations, in the name of which the misnamed Neocons have so perversely set the world on fire.[10]

*Thierry Meissan is a writer. President and founder of Réseau Voltaire.

*Simplicius The Thinker is a political analyst.

Translation: Ruben Bauer Naveira.

Translator's notes

[1] By Thierry Meissan, published in Europe Reloaded in March 2022, right at the beginning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

[2] In the context of the author of the article, “leftist” refers to supporters of the Democratic party and “rightist” refers to supporters of the Republican party

[3] The dividing line between the Western and Soviet spheres of power at the end of the Second World War

[4] For a short time, Netanyahu is already back in power.

[5] The author cataloged in his article a large volume of sources on which he based his research.

[6] published in author's blog on March 2023.

[7] The author of the first article, translated above.

[8] Deep State

[9] The rapprochement process has been completed, and Iran and Saudi Arabia now have normalized relations.

[10] The author of the article filled the text with numerous references to his sources, which can be consulted in original

the earth is round exists thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE