This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
How America's "Think Tanks" Are Compromised & Bought Off By Foreign Governments
Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,
The think tanks do not disclose the terms of the agreements they have reached with foreign governments. And they have not registered with the United States government as representatives of the donor countries, an omission that appears, in some cases, to be a violation of federal law, according to several legal specialists who examined the agreements at the request of The Times.
As a result, policy makers who rely on think tanks are often unaware of the role of foreign governments in funding the research.
Several legal experts who reviewed the documents, however, said the tightening relationships between United States think tanks and their overseas sponsors could violate the Foreign Agents Registration Act, the 1938 federal law that sought to combat a Nazi propaganda campaign in the United States. The law requires groups that are paid by foreign governments with the intention of influencing public policy to register as “foreign agents” with the Justice Department.
At least one of the research groups conceded that it may in fact be violating the federal law.
– From the New York Times article: Foreign Powers Buy Influence at Think Tanks
Liberty Blitzkrieg readers will be under no illusions when it comes to the role “Think Tanks” play within America’s crony, unethical, slimy and entirely compromised political system. Nevertheless, the recent New York Times article exposing how foreign governments, likely illegally, use them to buy influence in Washington D.C., is extremely important and disturbing. Let’s examine a few excerpts.
From the New York Times:
WASHINGTON — The agreement signed last year by the Norway Ministry of Foreign Affairs was explicit: For $5 million, Norway’s partner in Washington would push top officials at the White House, at the Treasury Department and in Congress to double spending on a United States foreign aid program.
But the recipient of the cash was not one of the many Beltway lobbying firms that work every year on behalf of foreign governments.
It was the Center for Global Development, a nonprofit research organization, or think tank, one of many such groups in Washington that lawmakers, government officials and the news media have long relied on to provide independent policy analysis and scholarship.
The money is increasingly transforming the once-staid think-tank world into a muscular arm of foreign governments’ lobbying in Washington. And it has set off troubling questions about intellectual freedom: Some scholars say they have been pressured to reach conclusions friendly to the government financing the research.
The think tanks do not disclose the terms of the agreements they have reached with foreign governments. And they have not registered with the United States government as representatives of the donor countries, an omission that appears, in some cases, to be a violation of federal law, according to several legal specialists who examined the agreements at the request of The Times.
As a result, policy makers who rely on think tanks are often unaware of the role of foreign governments in funding the research.
And you wonder why U.S. foreign policy is such an epic disaster…
“It is particularly egregious because with a law firm or lobbying firm, you expect them to be an advocate,” Mr. Sandler added. “Think tanks have this patina of academic neutrality and objectivity, and that is being compromised.”
The arrangements involve Washington’s most influential think tanks, including the Brookings Institution, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and the Atlantic Council. Each is a major recipient of overseas funds, producing policy papers, hosting forums and organizing private briefings for senior United States government officials that typically align with the foreign governments’ agendas.
Most of the money comes from countries in Europe, the Middle East and elsewhere in Asia, particularly the oil-producing nations of the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Norway, and takes many forms. The United Arab Emirates, a major supporter of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, quietly provided a donation of more than $1 million to help build the center’s gleaming new glass and steel headquarters not far from the White House. Qatar, the small but wealthy Middle East nation, agreed last year to make a $14.8 million, four-year donation to Brookings, which has helped fund a Brookings affiliate in Qatar and a project on United States relations with the Islamic world.
Recall that Qatar was one of the major funders of ISIS in the early days. For more, see:
America’s Disastrous Foreign Policy – My Thoughts on Iraq
Some scholars say the donations have led to implicit agreements that the research groups would refrain from criticizing the donor governments.
“If a member of Congress is using the Brookings reports, they should be aware — they are not getting the full story,” said Saleem Ali, who served as a visiting fellow at the Brookings Doha Center in Qatar and who said he had been told during his job interview that he could not take positions critical of the Qatari government in papers. “They may not be getting a false story, but they are not getting the full story.”
Oh, they’re getting a false story.
In interviews, top executives at the think tanks strongly defended the arrangements, saying the money never compromised the integrity of their organizations’ research. Where their scholars’ views overlapped with those of donors, they said, was coincidence.
“Our currency is our credibility,” said Frederick Kempe, chief executive of the Atlantic Council, a fast-growing research center that focuses mainly on international affairs and has accepted donations from at least 25 countries since 2008.
If that’s the case, I’d be loading up on the tenge way before buying Atlantic Council rupee.
In their contracts and internal documents, however, foreign governments are often explicit about what they expect from the research groups they finance.
“In Washington, it is difficult for a small country to gain access to powerful politicians, bureaucrats and experts,” states an internal reportcommissioned by the Norwegian Foreign Affairs Ministry assessing its grant making. “Funding powerful think tanks is one way to gain such access, and some think tanks in Washington are openly conveying that they can service only those foreign governments that provide funding.”
Several legal experts who reviewed the documents, however, said the tightening relationships between United States think tanks and their overseas sponsors could violate the Foreign Agents Registration Act, the 1938 federal law that sought to combat a Nazi propaganda campaign in the United States. The law requires groups that are paid by foreign governments with the intention of influencing public policy to register as “foreign agents” with the Justice Department.
“I am surprised, quite frankly, at how explicit the relationship is between money paid, papers published and policy makers and politicians influenced,” said Amos Jones, a Washington lawyer who has specialized in the foreign agents act, after reviewing transactions between the Norway government and Brookings, the Center for Global Development and other groups.
At least one of the research groups conceded that it may in fact be violating the federal law.
“We have to respect their academic and intellectual independence,” Mr. Otaka, the Japanese Embassy spokesman, said in a separate interview. But one Japanese diplomat, who asked not to be named as he was not authorized to discuss the matter, said the country expected favorable treatment in return for donations to think tanks.
“If we put actual money in, we want to have a good result for that money — as it is an investment,” he said.
But three lawyers who specialize in the law governing Americans’ activities on behalf of foreign governments said that the Center for Global Development and Brookings, in particular, appeared to have taken actions that merited registration as foreign agents of Norway. The activities by the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the Atlantic Council, they added, at least raised questions.
“The Department of Justice needs to be looking at this,” said Joshua Rosenstein, a lawyer at Sandler Reiff.
But of course, the “Justice” Department will not be looking into anything.
Now how about this gem…
Michele Dunne served for nearly two decades as a specialist in Middle Eastern affairs at the State Department, including stints in Cairo and Jerusalem, and on the White House National Security Council. In 2011, she was a natural choice to become the founding director of the Atlantic Council’s Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East, named after the former prime minister of Lebanon, who was assassinated in 2005.
But by the summer of 2013, when Egypt’s military forcibly removed the country’s democratically elected president, Mohamed Morsi, Ms. Dunne soon realized there were limits to her independence. After she signed a petition and testified before a Senate Foreign Relations Committee urging the United States to suspend military aid to Egypt, calling Mr. Morsi’s ouster a “military coup,” Bahaa Hariri called the Atlantic Council to complain, executives with direct knowledge of the events said.
Ms. Dunne declined to comment on the matter. But four months after the call, Ms. Dunne left the Atlantic Council.
Ms. Dunne was replaced by Francis J. Ricciardone Jr., who served as United States ambassador to Egypt during the rule of Hosni Mubarak, the longtime Egyptian military and political leader forced out of power at the beginning of the Arab Spring. Mr. Ricciardone, a career foreign service officer, had earlier been criticized by conservatives and human rights activists for being too deferential to the Mubarak government.
Scholars at other Washington think tanks, who were granted anonymity to detail confidential internal discussions, described similar experiences that had a chilling effect on their research and ability to make public statements that might offend current or future foreign sponsors. At Brookings, for example, a donor with apparent ties to the Turkish government suspended its support after a scholar there made critical statements about the country, sending a message, one scholar there said.
“It is the self-censorship that really affects us over time,” the scholar said. “But the fund-raising environment is very difficult at the moment, and Brookings keeps growing and it has to support itself.”
But in 2012, when a revised agreement was signed between Brookings and the Qatari government, the Qatar Ministry of Foreign Affairs itself praised the agreement on its website, announcing that “the center will assume its role in reflecting the bright image of Qatar in the international media, especially the American ones.” Brookings officials also acknowledged that they have regular meetings with Qatari government officials about the center’s activities and budget, and that the former Qatar prime minister sits on the center’s advisory board.
Mr. Ali, who served as one of the first visiting fellows at the Brookings Doha Center after it opened in 2009, said such a policy, though unwritten, was clear.
“There was a no-go zone when it came to criticizing the Qatari government,” said Mr. Ali, who is now a professor at the University of Queensland in Australia. “It was unsettling for the academics there. But it was the price we had to pay.”
The price “we the people had to pay is…
The above excerpts are just a small part of the story. I suggest you read the entire article, as it also explains how the mad dash to push the corporate giveaway, Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement, was partly funded by foreign payoffs to think tanks.
»
- 9936 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
How can people be so oblivious to the fact that the media is owned by the Jews worldwide? Be it in the USA, England, France, Germany, Brazil. How can't people see the patterns? The mafia? These people don't identify with their home-country, they identify with each other, they are Internationalists who don't give a fuck about people other than themselves.
The Jews own more than the media worldwide. They own the Fed. Which means they own us all. You have been SOLD OUT.
One must realize that Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu owns the U.S. Congress, the Senate, the President, the FED and our Treasury. Follow the Money.
We are not a Free Nation as many want the Sheep to believe. He even bought his own election with our money. So Sad.
well bibi doesn't own them personally. he's more the current trustee of the irrevocable trust dated 1948. more u.s. citizens should read israeli newspapers:
http://www.jta.org/2010/10/18/news-opinion/israel-middle-east/sephardi-l...
I hate foreign governments.
Especially the one occupying Washington DC
"...policy makers who rely on think tanks are often unaware of the role of foreign governments in funding the research."
That's a good one.
...policy makers who rely on think tanks are often receiving swag from the exact same foreign governments, or their US supporters, and appreciate an "objective" source for the positions their donors require them to take.
There, fixed it.
No Shit Sherlock.......
Sedition
Fifth Column
I think that Belgium is the real problem.
Every war is a Bankster war....
why should they register as a foreign agent if aipac doesn't have to register? this article is stupid without recognizing aipac as the primary culprit
AIPAC is smart. They don't touch any money. They're like Ashley Madison and just do the hookups for a little kickback.
not a bad analogy. for more detail:
http://usc.news21.com/madeline-story/aipac-money-0.html
So that's why perpetually wrong imbeciles like Bill (Shill) Kristol keep their jobs! Guy's wrong so much I doubt he even knows what being right is anymore!
Old news.
They had the neo-con think tanks boughr off 20 years ago.
It's not just the Think Tanks. It is also the Large Tax Free Foundations and various PACs that operate from Washington DC. That troika, individually or all three in their mutuality of interests, have access to every Politician, their staffs and Every Department of Government.
They are the mostly silent but often times in the open, developers and sellers of what US Policy should be - to the US Govt. The governance of "We the People" is a macarbe illusion for those that still believe in the one citizen, one vote ideology.
This is a very underlooked subject. The creation of "Think Tanks" to lobby and to create policies and legislation to favor special interests. They play a huge role in the media and in congress. Funding is mostly corporate and Israeli. There are so many think tanks it beggars belief, all heavily funded, most all right wing zionist. Bankers have theirs, Israeli has theirs, defense industry has theirs, corporate interests like big Ag, abd Pharma run think tanks.
The "Patriot Act" was already written by a think tank and sitting on the shelf when 9/11 came around. It was pulled of the shelf and passed in the matter of days. All the evil deeds in it were already crarefully crafted and waiting for the expected Peral harbor level event. A certain proof that 9/11 was planned long before hand and awaited with baited breath by the Neocons and their many Think Tanks.
When they "think" exactly as their paymasters, they do not think.
"Think tanks" invaded by kikeistanis? OMG Heaven forbid!
So if you put a hundred smart people in a room, they're all being paid off by someone...
Here we all thought they were Vollenteers /s
Yes to propaganda.
No to think.
Think tanks like the Council on Foreign Relations, who supports them?
Carly.
My personal favorite is the CFR. They have an outstanding pedigree and a purpose.
These really smart guys even wear bowties so you know they ain't lying. Most of them are hippy-dippy types so you know they're all about one love...or one something or other.
Think tank this: The Bankers Song
http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/thatguybloke