US "Diplomacy"...

Authored by John Laughland, op-ed via RT.com,

On the world’s Grand Chessboard, the US is fighting for control and influence. And there are countries where its ambassadors are perceived more as imperial governors than simple channels of communication.

At the height of the Maidan protests in Kiev in early 2014, a conversation was leaked between the US ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, and the then-Assistant Secretary of State in the Obama administration, Victoria Nuland. The conversation gained notoriety because Nuland said to Pyatt, "F**k the EU" and the recording was almost instantly available on Youtube.

More shocking than Nuland's bad language, however, was what the conversation was about. The US government officials were discussing how to put their men into power in Ukraine - which of the three then opposition factions would dominate, who would take the lead (Arseniy Yatsenyuk) and who would be excluded (Vladimir Klitschko).  At the time of this conversation, early February 2014, their enemy Viktor Yanukovych was still president. The leaked recording proved that the US and its Kiev embassy were actively involved in a regime change operation. The composition of the post-Maidan government corresponded exactly with US plans.

What few people knew at the time was that such levels of control over the composition of foreign governments had become standard practice for US embassies all over the world. As I could see on my very numerous travels around the Balkans in the late 1990s and early 2000s, the US ambassador was treated by the political class and the media in those countries not as the officially accredited representative of a foreign government but instead as an imperial governor whose pronunciamentos were more important than those of the national government.

This has been going on for decades, although the levels of control exercised by the United States increased as it rushed to fill the political vacuum created by the collapse of Soviet influence in Eastern Europe after 1989. In earlier times, such control, especially regime change operations, had to be conducted either covertly, as with the overthrow of Iranian prime minister, Mohammad Mosaddegh, in 1953, or by financing and arming an anti-government militia, such as in Nicaragua and elsewhere in central and South America, or by encouraging the army itself, most famously in Chile in 1973. There is a huge body of literature on this vast subject (for the coup against Mosaddegh, see especially 'All the Shah's Men' by Stephen Kinzer, 2003) and there is no possibility of denying that such operations took place. Indeed, former CIA director, James Woolsey, recently admitted that they continue to this day.  

Many of the ambassadors who engineered or attempted regime change operations in Eastern Europe and the former USSR had cut their teeth in Latin America in 1980s and 1990s. One of them, Michael Kozak, former US ambassador to Belarus, even boasted in a letter to The Guardian in 2001 that he was doing the same thing in Minsk as he had done in Managua. He wrote: "As regards parallels between Nicaragua in 1989-90 and Belarus today, I plead guilty. Our objective and to some degree methodology are the same."

Kozak did not mention that he also played a key role in the overthrow of General Noriega in Panama in 1989 but he is far from alone. The experience accumulated by the Americans during the Cold War, including in major European countries like Italy where US interference was key to preventing Communist victories in elections, spawned a whole generation of Kermit Roosevelts (the architect of the coup against Mosaddegh) who have made their careers over decades in the State Department. Some names, such as that of Michael McFaul, former US ambassador to Russia who made no secret of his opposition to the president of the state to which he was accredited, will be familiar to RT readers.

Two years after the violent overthrow of Viktor Yanukovych, which he helped coordinate, Geoffrey Pyatt was appointed US ambassador to Greece. He remains in that post to this day - which is why some are asking whether his hand might be behind last week's expulsion of Russian diplomats from Athens. Greece and Russia have customarily had good relations but they differ on the Macedonian issue. Now, the Greek government headed by the "pseudo-Euroskeptic" Alexis Tsipras, claims that four Russian diplomats were engaged in covert operations in Greece to lobby against forcing Macedonia to change its official name. 

Like almost every other political issue these days, this relatively arcane one is regarded through the distorting prism of alleged Russian "interference": any decision which does not consolidate the power of American-dominated supranational structures like the US or the EU is now routinely attributed to all-pervasive Russian influence, as if all dissidents were foreign agents.

Western discussion of this subject now resembles the paranoia of the old Soviet regime, and of its satellites in Eastern Europe, which similarly attacked anti-Communists for being "fifth columnists" - the very phrase used by a prominent European politician last month to lambast all his enemies as Russian stooges.

US influence is suspected in this case between Greece and Macedonia because the Americans are pushing to bring the whole of the Balkan peninsula under Western control.  This has been policy for nearly thirty years - at least since the Yugoslav wars led to a US-brokered peace deal in Bosnia in 1995. In recent years the tempo has quickened, with the accession of Montenegro to NATO last year leaving only Macedonia and Serbia as missing pieces of the puzzle. The Greek victory over the name of Macedonia removes the last obstacle to that country's accession to NATO and other "Euro-Atlantic structures" like the EU and soon only Serbia will be left. Will she last long? 

One of the most notorious anecdotes of the Second World War was told by Churchill. While in Moscow in 1944, he and Stalin divided up Eastern Europe and the Balkans into spheres of influence, putting percentage figures to show the respective weight of the West and the USSR - 10:90 in Greece, 50:50 Yugoslavia, 25:75 in Bulgaria, and so on. Churchill recalls how this so-called Percentages Agreement was concluded in a few minutes, and how he scribbled a note of their verbal agreement on a piece of paper which Stalin glanced at for a second and then ticked off. Churchill wrote, "It was all settled in no more time than it takes to set down."  

Churchill then reflected that it might seem cynical to decide the fate of millions of people in such an offhand manner. Later generations have generally agreed with his self-criticism.  Today's West would certainly never conclude such an agreement - but not because of any squeamishness or lack of cynicism on its part. Instead, the West, especially the US, could not conclude any agreement because in every case the only acceptable outcome would be 100% influence for itself. That is what Geoffrey Pyatt and his colleagues spend their entire careers trying to achieve - and, to a large extent, they succeed.

Tags

Comments

powow Fri, 07/20/2018 - 02:01 Permalink

 

US doesn't do diplomacy. It ORDERS countries around.

 

Except of course for APARTHEID Israhell,

which is ALLOWED to run roughshod in the Middle East

committing WAR CRIMES with impunity.

 

WARNING: Graphic Images  

 

Heros MoreSun Fri, 07/20/2018 - 02:57 Permalink

Another waste of time post because it ignores the JQ.  Laughland complains about the US dominating little countries, but ignores that Bibi lords over the US in exctly the same way that Pyatt does Greece.

The truth is that it isn't the US empire, it is the ZOG empire.   It is ZOG marching around the planet destroying Christians, thier churches, and their institutions.  Its all in the Protocols, but people like Laughland are too stupid to bother to figure out what is really going on, for instance that the majority of these actors are dual citizens, or that Building 7 wasn't hit by anything.

In reply to by MoreSun

Bokkenrijder Heros Fri, 07/20/2018 - 03:17 Permalink

And this is exactly why the US should pay more for NATO: it's the enforcement squadron of the US global empire.

You want to be in charge of a Global Empire with the USD as Reserve Currency and install friendly regimes around the globe? Well fine, then also pay for it please!

As explained in the ZH artikel below, NATO is nothing else but Military Kensyanism, and now the Trumptards and the Orange Jesus are pushing the MIC’s agenda: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07-19/plague-military-keynesianism-and-obsolescence-war

In reply to by Heros

Klassenfeind Bokkenrijder Fri, 07/20/2018 - 04:09 Permalink

The Nuland "Fuck the EU" video speaks volumes about how the US sees NATO and it's 'European Allies.'

Instead of dismantling NATO after the Cold War ended in the early 1990's, the Americans decided to expand NATO eastward, supposedly in order to 'curtail Russian aggression' but we all know the real reason: to expand the US Empire. Remember the "not an inch East" promise made to Gorbachev?

Let NATO go poof and then see how fast the US will be crawling back on it's knees...

NATO is an important extension for the US worldwide hegemony as the sole surviving superpower, a vital element to maintain that sole superpower status (i.e. to prevent Russia from challenging the US), an important pillar/stepping stone for US dominance in the Middle East, and the 'enforcement' side (ask Gadaffi and Saddam Hussain) of the US Dollar Reserve Currency Status.

Trump and his dumb-fuck supporters here on ZH are too dumb to understand that, as they are just a short-term thinking Yanks who are only looking to make 'a fast Buck,' and easily fooled by some "drain the swamp" rhetoric. They are your typical arrogant Yankees who have one foot firmly planted in their (leased/financed) private jet, the other foot firmly planted in bankruptcy court whilst simultaneously huffing and puffing loudly in order to inflate their image and their ego. That's the American Way: it's all ‘fake, fiat and financed.’

Running a global empire costs money, so stop begging your NATO colonies for money! You can't have your cake (a global empire + worldwide military dominance + USD reserve currency) and expect someone else to pay for it. For many decades since Breton-Woods you’ve had BILLIONS of barrels of oil and all other commodities priced in USD basically for free! Everything priced in Dollars and even a global banking system (SWIFT) priced in Dollars, the same US Dollars to which you alone hold the keys to the printing press.

And you still are pleading poverty? Get outta here! 

Instead of complaining and begging, perhaps start managing your own money in a better way? Stop running up debts, stop spending money you don't have, stop driving gas guzzling 've-hi-cles' requiring permanent wars in the Middle East, stop supporting Israel, and start to live within your means.

Stop your worldwide meddling, stop your USD reserve currency colonialism, stop NATO's eastward expansion, and stop your worldwide regime changes and see how much money you'll save!

Unfortunately Trump is just a dumb comb-over puppet for the Deep State and the MIC, just look at Mattis, Pompeo, Haspel, Mnuchin, Bolton all getting hired by Trump.

In reply to by Bokkenrijder

Someone Else Klassenfeind Fri, 07/20/2018 - 07:58 Permalink

Trump is one guy.  One guy cannot stop a train wreck in progress on his own.  But if he is to try, he needs to get guys who know about trains in the proper positions.  Putting dentists and acrobats and fish mongers in at key positions isn't going to help much.

 

You make sense in the beginning of your post.  Then you seem to lose it.  As if the drugs you took are taking effect.

 

Trump cannot change the world overnight.  And the people he must put in power are sometimes the problems (like Session whom he regrets) but Trump has us moving in the right direction.

 

Long term or short term?  Trump is only in power 4 or 8 years.  So it might seems short term.  Short term precedes long term.  And we will have to see if the movement catches fire.  Trump cannot do it alone.  And he is getting no help from the press or the political establishment yet.  And you are irrational and high if you can't see that.

In reply to by Klassenfeind

MoreSun youshallnotkill Fri, 07/20/2018 - 02:36 Permalink

Regarding Trump's Helsinki Sumit: "All that matters now is if the Democrat faction of the Deep State approves. And apparently they don't."

  • Answer:

They (Dems & Jews) surely didn't like his initial handling but watch & hear his second handling after they got to him- its staggering the effects these jew supremacists have on him- he seems outright scared. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2-pya23H30 

In reply to by youshallnotkill

Serious.Lee Fri, 07/20/2018 - 02:11 Permalink

Pyatt, like McFaul, McCain, Graham, Soros, Kagan, Nuland, Diamond, Kristol, Gershman, Power, Clinton, Bush, and many other neocon/neoliberal are warmongering filth.  They are also insane.  They should be air-dropped on a small uninhabited island to beta test their crappify-the-planet models, and crucially, so as to not endanger normal humans.  MSNBC. CNN, and others should join along to document the inevitable Lord of the Flies type outcome.  God willing, there will be no rescue party.

Mustahattu Fri, 07/20/2018 - 03:46 Permalink

You have to wonder how much is all this costing the American tax payer? I bet every one of these countries that convert to US vassal status are receiving a LOT of money for it.

What's the ultimate objective? There has to be some kind of a result at the end assuming this is conducted as in a business.

A war with Russia is not a result as such. Firstly it would be impossible to win and secondly the nukes might fly.

Regime change in Russia is not going happen either. The people in Russia are more and more anti-US and will vote accordingly even after Putin.

There's no end goal. It's a gamble - something might happen or change in the near future and that's when the neocons will strike. If it doesn't they will likely squeeze each of the vassal states for all they got.

MilesN Mustahattu Fri, 07/20/2018 - 04:52 Permalink

You have to wonder how much is all this costing the American tax payer? I bet every one of these countries that convert to US vassal status are receiving a LOT of money for it.

 

Not country. Bought-off would-be leadership of that country. A LOT cheaper this way. Few billions are chump change for a state but not for person, and thirty pieces awarded to that bunch is probably a lot lower than that. More effective, too - You get what you want in terms of geopolitical alignment and the rest (problems of the country) migfht just go to hell (which it do in most cases) and be a problem of said stooges which could be replaced at even smaller expense, as country usually gets poorer after first round.

 

What they missed in their regime change fever, however, is humand mind's tendency to generalize and compare. When selling all those coups as freedom fighting against corrupt regimes to the US citizenry over and over and over again, they inevitably triggered comparison betwwen those regimes and their alleged crimes and USG, which is no less guilty of the same crimes, however more beautifully packaged. In a way those who peddled regime change ensured Trump election as anti-estabilisment candidate. Unintended cobsequences in action.

 

 

In reply to by Mustahattu

MilesN Oldguy05 Fri, 07/20/2018 - 05:08 Permalink

Always funny to read such "charges" of priopaganda.

 

Propaganda, for all intents and purposes is just dissemination of information, or more precisely, someone's viewpoint on events (which RT never omitted, positioning itself as channel giving Russian take on world events) Such information is of course biased to a certain degree that may vary and might be misleading, but it is up to a reader to critically think over someone's take on event to find fault if there are any. EVERYONE does propaganda, as everyone has a personal (or official if it is organization) opnion. Some are more brazen than others in information manipulation, but it had to be decided on case-to-case basis.

 

Do you have any factual objections to what is said in the aricle?

In reply to by Oldguy05

Sandmann Fri, 07/20/2018 - 05:33 Permalink

You don't think Merkel was put in by US interests after they bought the Stasi Files and flew them to Langley and discovered how manageable she could be ? You don't think Sarkozy's father-in-law had any role in his election ? You don't imagine those Lithuanian, Croatian Presidents who got to study at Georgetown U were CIA assets ?

Chief Joesph Fri, 07/20/2018 - 07:04 Permalink

The U.S. doesn't even know the definition of diplomacy.  And when the U.S. sends fat, snorting pigs, like Victoria Nuland, to speak to other foreign diplomats, what an embarrassment.  You know the U.S. isn't being respectful to any other country.  No wonder why we don't have much in the way of allies.

mendigo Fri, 07/20/2018 - 07:10 Permalink

So this is how the world functions.

The us does not have so much wealth but it has an infinite supply of worlds reserve currency.

For the moment this has payed for worlds dominant military. Fortunately weak economy ensure lots of fresh meat and attention from suppliers. Plus we can manufacture conflict and supply weapons to shoot at each other.

It no longer has a functioning government but is host to parasitic political infections. Breeding ground for chaos.

Great ride while it lasts.

WallHoo Fri, 07/20/2018 - 08:56 Permalink

The pyatt dude is currently in greece and hes practically runing the foreign policy of the country...This article happens to be spot on...