America’s cooperation with Israel has had widespread impact on the global perception of the country; the majority of Middle Eastern nations oppose the United States for their role in the oppression of the Palestinian people. These nations find themselves in agreement on Soros with this issue, as indicated by an article he published titled “On Israel, America, and AIPAC.”[29] Soros calls America’s compliance with the Israeli government a “major policy blunder,” pointing out that a solution to the conflict with Palestine would serve to further contain the geopolitical reach of Iran. As long as America supports Israel’s apartheid, Iran will be able to exploit the situation to its own ends—at the eventual detriment of the United States.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, a former Secretary of State and principle of NED and Freedom House, readily agrees with this assessment:
These neocon prescriptions, of which Israel has its equivalents, are fatal for America and ultimately for Israel. They will totally turn the overwhelming majority of the Middle East’s population against the United States. The lessons of Iraq speak for themselves. Eventually, if neo-con policies continue to be pursued, the United States will be expelled from the region and that will be the beginning of the end for Israel as well.[30]
Brzezinski, also a board member of the International Crisis Group alongside Soros, has stated that in the event of an Israeli air force attack on Iran, “they have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch?” Brzezinski holds no illusions about what would have to be done—”we have to be serious about denying them that right. That means a denial where you aren’t just saying it. If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not.”[31] If these statements make Brzezinski appear as a dove, he is anything but. As indicated by his various affiliations, his views are in alignment with Soros’, never casting aside the ideas of American supremacy or capitalist superiority. Like Soros, he seems to understand the “open society” approach to foreign policy—covert imperialism under the guise of humanitarianism and democracy promotion.
Brzezinski mainly concerns himself with the geopolitical balance of power in the Middle East and Caucus regions, arguing that America should take lengths to ensure that no one country or group takes too much power in Eurasia. By keeping an even balance of power, America would be able to enjoy access to the natural resources of the region. He notes that America’s relationship with Israel does not further this agenda, but “a gradual improvement in American-Iranian relations” would be far more beneficial for the United States’ own ends.[32] It would seem that the OSI and NED are attempting to do just that: Soros’ institute provides grants to the American Iranian Council (AIC), while State Department funds flow through NED to the similarly-named National Iranian American Council (NIAC).
The AIC was founded in 1997 by former World Bank consultant Hooshang Amirahmadi, drawing notable liberal politicians such as Dennis Kucinich and Cyrus Vance to its board with the intent of providing “a sustainable dialogue and a more comprehensive understanding of US-Iran relations.” One Council board member that deserves certain scrutiny is Thomas R. Pickering, a former US ambassador to the United States and board member of the International Crisis Group. Pickering also sits on the advisory board of the bipartisan foreign policy think-tank Partnership for a Secure America alongside Zbigniew Brzezinski. The proximity here to Brzezinski is telling, as the actions of the AIC fit exactly into his ideas of American-Iranian rapprochement; in 2003, the AIC attempted to help establish a “grand bargain” for diplomacy between American and Iran based on the Islamic Republic’s offer to assist in the invasion of Iraq.[33]
The diplomatic overtures made by Iran were revealed by Trita Parsi, the founder of the NED-funded NAIC. Parsi, who wrote his doctoral thesis on Israeli-Iranian relation under the tutelage of Francis Fukuyama and Zbigniew Brzezinski,[34] established the NAIC in 2002 to increase “Iranian-American participation in America civic life.” The organization has taken a very proactive stance condemning military intervention in Iran, stating that such action would ultimately serve to undermine any true democratic movement—truly an interesting statement, given that the same Endowment that has provided grants to the NAIC was already meddling in the country’s affairs by funding their opposition movements.
As expected, a neoconservative backlash against these two organizations has already begun. A Center for Security Policy report titled Rise of the Iran Lobby has charged both councils with “being apologists for the Iranian regime,” systematically infiltrating the American government with the “ominous agenda” of “conciliatory negotiations” between the two nations.[35] Rise of the Iran Lobby acts as a brilliant propaganda piece, simultaneously equating Iran with “Jihadist entities” and attacking the President Obama for allowing his administration to fall prey to the machinations of an Islamic country that is actively seeking nuclear weapons. The report also makes ample mention of NED, indicating that it, to, is oblivious the necessary measures taken to ensure the safety of the American people. What is interesting about the report is that in the bio of the author, Clare M. Lopez, nowhere does it mention that she is a former CIA operational officer, an advisory board member of the radically anti-Islamic Clarion Fund, or a member of the Iran Policy Committee.[36] The Iran Policy Committee’s membership draws from the overlapping worlds of intelligence agencies, defense contractors, right-wing media consultants, and pro-Zionist think-tanks; clearly this organization would have every interest in opposing the methods encouraged by NED, Brzezinski, and Soros.
It would be foolish to classify the neoconservatives and NED/OSI complex into a divisive good-and-bad dichotomy. As noted several times in this article, the two are not mutually exclusive and often overlap. Second, the stated goal of both is the exact same: regime change in Iran towards a pro-Western model built of the foundation of a “liberal democracy.” One seeks to maintain Israel’s position in the Middle East by direct military action, and the other wants to utilize a more covert method, lurking behind innocuous buzz-words like “rapprochement,” “civic engagement,” and “democracy empowerment.” Both operate under the thin veneer of “humanitarianism.” Both understand that Iran presents a fundamental question in US foreign policy, as the country—a place of vast oil reserves and nationalized industry—is the key geopolitical entity in the Middle East. Both neglect the fact that the Iranian people deserve the right to their own sovereignty, their right to protest for their own destiny, and their right to determine their own position in the world. America’s meddling in Iranian affairs in the 1950s sowed the seeds that erupted into the revolution of 1979, putting the current regime in power. Perhaps we should learn from those lessons.
Edmund Berger is an independent researcher and writer. He can be reached at Edmund.B.Berger [at] gmail.com.
Notes
[1] “Oil wealth ‘must be shared’ with citizens, says Soros” BBC News, March 3rd, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12643419
[2] Golanz Esfandari, “Iran Ban Targets Some 60 ‘Seditious’ Western Groups” Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, May 1st, 2010,
[3] Ibid.
[4] Carl Berstein, “The Holy Alliance” Time Magazine February 24th, 1992
[5] Michael Barker, “The Soros Media Empire”, Swans Commentary, July 14th, 2008, and John O’Sullivan, The President, the Pope, and the Prime Minister: Three Who Changed the World Regnery History, September 23rd 2008, pg. 173
[6] Jeffery Sachs, The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities of Our Time Penguin, 2006, pgs. 110-111
[7] Naomi Klein, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism Picador, 2007, pg. 218
[8] Alexander Cockburn, “The Soros Syndrome” Counterpunch, October 8th-10th, 2010
[9] “Out of the Shadows: Georgia” CNBC Business, December, 2007, http://www.cnbcmagazine.com/story/out-of-the-shadows-georgia/295/1/
[10] “Analysis of the Situation and Recommendations for Continuing Privatization Process in Ukraine” World Bank Report, May, 2005 http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTUKRAINE/147271-1140529183591/20847303/PrivatisationEng.pdf
[11] Edward Duffy “Iran – Who is Hossein Mousavi?” Denver News Examiner, June 20th, 2009, http://www.examiner.com/news-in-denver/iran-who-is-hossein-mousavi-could-he-be-a-game-changer
[12] Scott Peterson “Iran protesters: the Harvard professor behind their tactics” Christian Science Monitor December 29th, 2009 http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2009/1229/Iran-protesters-the-Harvard-professor-behind-their-tactics
[13] Michael Barker, “Sharp Reflection Warranted: Nonviolence in the Service of Imperialism” Swans Commentary, June 30th, 2008
[14] Gene Sharp, “A Short History of ‘From Dictatorship to Democracy'”, Albert Einstein Institution http://www.aeinstein.org/organizations/org/FDTD_history.pdf
[15] Kenneth Timmerman, “State Department Backs ‘Reformists’ in Wild Iranian Election” NewsMax, June 11, 2009, quoted in Paul Craig Roberts, “Is This the Culmination of Two Years of Destabilization?” Counterpunch, June 19th-21st, 2009, http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts06192009.html
[16] “Iran: The Next Domino?” SHOAH, February 24th, 2011 http://www.shoah.org.uk/2011/02/24/iran-the-next-domino/
[17] Ken Dilanian, “U.S. grants support to Iranian dissidents”, USA Today, June 28th, 2009, http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-06-25-iran-money_N.htm
[18] Daniel Halper, “McCain Calls for Regime Change in Iran” The Weekly Standard, June 10th, 2010, http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/mccain-calls-regime-change-iran
[19] Thomas Donnelly, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces, and Resources for a New Century”, Project for the New American Century, September, 2000 http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
[20] “Office of Iranian Affairs” RightWeb, July 25th, 2007, http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Office_of_Iranian_Affairs
[21] William A. Gorton, Karl Popper and the Social Sciences, State University of New York Press, 2006, pgs. 14-15
[22] George Soros, “Towards a Global Open Society”, The Atlantic, January, 1998 http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/98jan/opensoc.htm
[23] Julian Borger, “Financier Soros puts millions into ousting Bush” The Guardian, November 12th, 2003 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/nov/12/uselections2004.usa
[24] Dan Briody, The Iron Triangle: Inside the Secret World of the Carlyle Group Wiley, 2004
[25] “Advancing the Freedom Agenda” USAID fact sheet, http://www.usaid.gov/press/factsheets/2008/fs080724.html
[26] Steve Clemons “Cheney Attempting to Constrain Bush’s Choices on Iran Conflict: Staff Engaged in Insubordination Against President Bush” The Washington Note, May 24, 2007, http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/002145.php
[27] Lucas Powers, “Non-Lethal Destabilization OK’d by Bush” Pine Magazine May 27th, 2007 http://www.pinemagazine.com/site/article/nonlethal-destabilization-okd-by-bush-788
[28] John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2007, pg. 286
[29] George Soros, “On Israel, America, and AIPAC” The New York Review of Books, April 12th, 2007, http://www.georgesoros.com/articles-essays/entry/on_israel_america_and_aipac
[30] Daniel M. Pourkesali, “Brzezinski: The Beginning of the End for Israel’, Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran” August 3rd, 2006, cited in “Le Cercle and the Struggle for the Eurasian Continent”, Institute for the Study of Globalization and Covert Politics, https://wikispooks.com/ISGP/miscellaneous/2010_Le_Cercle_update.htm
[31] Jake Tapper, “Zbig Brzezinski: Obama Administration Should Tell Israel U.S. Will Attack Israeli Jets if They Try to Attack Iran” ABC News Political Punch, September 20th, 2009, http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/09/zbig-brzezinski-obama-administration-should-tell-israel-us-will-attack-israeli-jets-if-they-try-to-a.html
[32] Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Supremacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives Basic Books, 1998 http://www.scribd.com/doc/52239247/5/Chapter-5-The-Eurasian-Balkans
[33] Nicholas D. Kristof “Iran’s Proposal for a Grand Bargain” The New York Times, April 28th, 2007, http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/04/28/irans-proposal-for-a-grand-bargain/
[34] Trita Parsi bio, http://www.tritaparsi.com/
[35] Clare M. Lopez “Rise of the Iran Lobby: Tehran’s front groups move on – and into – the Obama administration” Center for Security Policy Occasional Papers Series, February 25th, 2009 http://www.analyst-network.com/articles/117/RiseoftheIranLobbyTeheransfrontgroupsmoveonandintotheObamaAdministration.pdf
[36] Clare M. Lopez bio, http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Clare_M._Lopez
“Soros: Iran will be overthrown in the bloodiest of revolutions…”
an old saying in Persion says: having (seemingly impossible) dream is not a falut for yongesters!!
Mr Soros is another israeli asset in US goverment. If he is worried about Human rights he can have a look at other US allies in the region who are killing their citizen with US helps starting from Bahrain, Yeman, sadui …
Do this western so called analyst think that the rest of the world is so naive that donot see this big hypocracy by US and EU or …
FYI
Soro’s has worked to overthrow the Burmese Junta for 21 years and
lost. He tanked the Thai Baht with the help of the Clinton Administration.
His Open Society funds rebel groups in and out of Burma. Having backed
the so-called leader of the democracy movement Suu Kyi and losing the
election last year he never gives up.
Sanctions on Burma have killed more innocent people in the name of democracy which is Demo-crazy
This is one of the most dangerous men in the world today
He made Bin Laden look good
The question now is “Where is it all going to end” and “Who will be on whose side”. As you indicate the current “war” had its origins in the fall of the Soviet Union when the American attempted to take over Russia by financial means using the USSR satelite states.
If we learn fom previous military campaigns we can see that once the Americans have shown their hand they now have to keep going and more quickly for fear of losing the initiative. That is why they are now lining up Syria and Iran for invasion but I believe the eventual goal is the same as it has been since the second world war – the take over of Russia either by military or financial means.
This raises the interesting question who will be on Russia’s side and who will back the Americans and the most inportant countries here are China and Germany. I would suggest that there are some surprises in store.
One of the best article on this: ”Iran is one country that is ripe for a real revolution, lock stock and barrel, it is possibly the revolt against Mullahcracy. A modern post-revolution Iran will be a secular Iran. Ahmadinejad can only stir that much trouble in Bahrain, Iranians really don’t want a Bahraini revolution that may trigger a mass Shiite reform-based uprising.
A revolution of Shiites in Bahrain will encourage a revolution across the streets of Tehran; much as Iran wants the trouble in Bahrain to multiply, they want this spring of freedom to be choked as soon as possible, as these revolutions are the Iranian mullahs’ worst nightmare. The slide of Iran cannot be arrested by half measures of a ‘lesser dose of religion,’ rather, an eradication campaign aimed at revolution to be democratic and freedom akin to the passage of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen! Ex radical Musavi cannot deliver this; he does not have the credentials. And any revolution led by reactionaries who perpetrate continuity of ‘doctrine and faith’ that has lost all significance will just fade away or result in Robespierre and the Jacobinians’ anarchy.
Iranian revolution will be a modern revolution, may be even demanding a secular state whenever it may come. Until such time, Iranians and Saudis are well placed to contain their own populace by proxy wars in Bahrain. Iranian/Saudi nexus makes them, without realizing it, strange bedfellows; both are anaemic to the idea of reform and revolution that would bring a change of direction and thinking, any status quo that multiplies ignorance, debauchery, depravity and transgression is ideal spring for both the nations.
A modern Iranian revolution will lead to an Iran that will be less threatening; in turn a lesser amount of evil posturing by Iran will encourage the reformists in Saudi to stir troubles. At the moment the reformists have gone on the back foot and Iranian/Saudi preoccupation with their ideologies has won the day. The ‘Spring’ has withered due to ideological expediencies of the Middle East. Iran needs Saudis to crush the Bahraini revolution and Saudi need Iran to maintain its jingoistic posture. That balance keeps both sides happy and well installed.
Revolutions are inspired by prophets of ‘Enlightenment.’ Until Iranian/Arab enlightened philosophers are brought ahead of the sacred writings no ‘revolt’ is possible. Revolutions only succeed when a society is able to embrace new realities. If society chooses to live in space of decadence and old thought, any revolution will only be a tool to accelerate its descent to ignominy and disasters.”
http://iqballatif.newsvine.com/_news/2011/04/05/6411784-iran-saudi-nexus-the-two-make-strange-bedfellows
One wonders what the author’s intent was to state that Iran wants nuclear weapons as Iran wants no such thing. Iran needs nuclear energy for its own consumption since it receives little rainfall notwithstanding that it experiences 4 seasons.
As far as Soros is concerned, he is a Jew, so can’t be trusted. I published an article on what his real name is and what he is. Soros is simply a clog in the Hegelian Dialectic, nothing more, nothing less.
What about his activity in Azerbaijan? Is Soros freelancing or acting with the approval, spoken or unspoken, of the State Department and White House in his quest to replace the current President with Samir Sharifov?
Lauren – Soros made it perfectly clear during his visit with President Aliyev earlier this year that his message regarding reshuffling the Azerbaijan government came straight from the horse’s mouth (the hoses being the Obama administration). The United States is encouraging Aliyev to appoint Samir Sharifov to be the new Prime Minister, they even promised to increase assistance to the country through the Agency for International Development if the appointment is made…it’s not a question of whether or not George Soros has approval from the State Department or the White House – Soros IS the White House. The real question is why Soros and Obama are lobbying so hard for Sharifov? His background in mismanaging the country’s lucrative oil funds and his recently exposed kickbacks from the Asian Development Bank where he serves as a governor for Azerbaijan, clearly indicate a pattern of corruption.
So where do I sign up to lead the colour revolution in Canada? Oh, right…Canada is already a satellite state of the U.S. I must have missed the revolution here….