|
New Documents Reveal More British Efforts To Undermine Russia
In 2018 we wrote about:
The 'Integrity Initiative' – A Military Intelligence Operation, Disguised As Charity, To Create The "Russian Threat".
The reporting was based on the British Integrity Initiative's internal files which some 'anonymous' organization had acquired and published.
Data acquired from Britain's Foreign and Commonwealth Office by the same group revealed large British propaganda programs in support of Jihadis in Syria as well as British influence operations designed to undermine the security institutions of Lebanon and to secretly influence its population.
Now another large set of files has been published by the same source. These describe an extensive British government program designed to undermine Russia by organizing and financing 'independent' Russian language media, by 'training' Russian journalists and by secretly paying Russian influencers. It is certainly not the only British anti-Russia program but it probably has, secretly, the most public influence.
The anonymous author has laid out the complete Undermining Russia program in four extensive parts: One, two, three, four.
The information discussed is from government files which outlay various projects and from companies and -interestingly- from the media charities of Reuters and the BBC who made bids to run the FCO projects. All underlying files are available for download as one archive file (~80 MB).
The most interesting files are the bids the companies make for projects. They reveal previous projects, methods and people and thereby create the larger picture.
The budget for the various anti-Russian projects runs at dozens of millions pounds per year. The first programs were launched in 2016 and some continue through this year.
A 'Supplier Event' for one of the projects laid out the general idea:
Programme Strands
- ENGAGE – working through the British Council to implement people-to-people activities between ethnic Russians and local communities to develop links along the lines of 21st century skills – includes English language skills and media literacy, social enterprises and cultural activities;
- ENHANCE – supporting independent media in Russia’s near abroad to bring balance and plurality to Russian language media, in the Baltic States and Eastern Partnership countries;
- EXPOSE – by debunking and exposing Russian disinformation in real time, which can be reported in mainstream media with the goal to expose malign state disinformation in countries that are targeted by it. If you expose disinformation, it is less likely to be impactful; therefore, the Russian State becomes less credible.
- ENABLE – working with allied governments through the Government Communication Service to improve their strategic communications to their populations.
Note that 'Russian disinformation' is whatever Britain does not like about Russia. 'Exposing' such 'disinformation' is best done by spreading one's own. These are not defensive programs but attacks on Russia.
Projects to achieve the above were to be implemented in nearly every country that borders Russia and has a Russian speaking minority as well as in Russia itself.
The British government does not want you to know about such projects. The 'Supplier Event' sheet says:
Security
No unauthorised disclosures of activity on this work. Contract will need to take a look at who we are working with. Basic IT security reasonable steps should cover our requirements but the FCO may request an explanation of wat steps have been taken to ensure security and Duty of Care.
It should be noted that for security reasons, some grantees will not wish to be linked to the FCO. It should be noted that the Programme Team would prefer the programme documents do not end up in the Russian media. We know that they are following us, and we are expecting an expose soon.
What is the overall purpose of such secret programs? The author of the Undermining Russia series explains that with regards to the 'poisoning' of Alexei Navalny:
Many years of painstaking work of HMG through its embassies and intelligence cutouts precede a chemical attack. They create Media, CSOs and pseudo humanitarian organisations that happen to be just at the correct place and in the correct time with their cameras ready when 'suddenly' a dreadful accident 'shocks every one into action'.
Do you believe HMG staged the 'Navalny accident' as part of some kind of a secret operation? Did HMG create Media outlets, nurture bloggers and stringers that it controlled? Did it engage Russia's youth and CSOs? Did it try to demonise Putin just like it had done with Assad by labeling them Evil Dictators who poisoned their people with forbidden chemical weapons? Do you know what all of this is needed for? They need it to delegitimise a leader of a country and convince people around the world that 'no holds should be barred to fight a mad dictator'. Can you grasp the gravity of what is going on? Well, you ought to. They are preparing us for war with the Russians and the Chinese. They are looking for casus belli, and only the truth can stop them, because 'if wars can be started by lies, they can be stopped by truth'. (Julian Assange)
That view is not even exaggerated. The 'west' has the knives out against Russia. We previous mentioned a report from the Pentagon think tank RAND which evaluated how to best 'unbalance and overextend' Russia. In the end it was clearly aimed at regime change in Russia, or if not otherwise possible, war. On Friday Gabriel Felbermayr, the president of the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, was asked by a German radio station about new sanctions the EU might impose on Russia. He is skeptic that those might work because (my translation):
The aims we have towards Russia are very big. We do not want anything less but regime change in Russia, which is difficult to achieve by economic pressure.
The new documents also reveal some interesting new points on Navalny who seems to be on the British government payroll:
bigger
These self-exposing documents show that the FCO has established a network of popular YouTubers in Russia who investigate corruption in the government, and the YouTubers get assistance from some journalists from the Baltic States. Also, the FCO has experience of instigating protests in Russia.
By now you must have guessed the identity of one of the popular YouTubers investigating corruption. After obtaining EXPOSE Network files and examining the case studies two years ago, we didn't figure out which YouTuber the FCO supported through ZINC. We refrained from making any preliminary conclusions even when journalists discovered that Vladimir Ashurkov, a close ally of Alexei Navalny, was a part of the Integrity Initiative cluster.
But when we saw Mr. Navalny and Bellingcat together, things started to make sense. By digging deeper, we discovered another Navalny's supporter who lives in London – some shadowy Maria Pevchikh who is promoting a system of smart voting in Russia. The Labour used a similar voting system to take the votes of the Conservatives. So, basically it is highly likely that the UK recommended the system to Mr. Navalny.
It also turned out that Navalny began a smear campaign against the RT – one of the few media outlets in the West that allows those who disagree with the official position of western government to speak out. Note that Navalny's campaign was running in parallel with that of the Integrity Initiative. A reasonable question is – why Navalny who is mostly engaged in political battles inside Russia spends time fighting a TV network operating outside the country? Was RT really such a problem for him? No, it wasn't. It was a problem for the Western imperialists and apparently, they told Navalny to join in.
Anyway. Here are again links to the four parts of 'Undermining Russia': One, two, three, four.
They give extensive insight into the methods the 'west' is using to destroy foreign countries. Knowledge that one needs to really understand what is happening in this world.
… These self-exposing documents show that the FCO has established a network of popular YouTubers in Russia who investigate corruption in the government, and the YouTubers get assistance from some journalists from the Baltic States. Also, the FCO has experience of instigating protests in Russia …
It would be interesting to know if the Russian-language news website Meduza.io might have some connection to this assistance to the YouTubers. Meduza.io is based in Riga, Latvia, and employs Russian-language journalists. Kevin Rothrock, formerly of The Moscow Times (English-language newspaper in Moscow), is editor-in-chief of Meduza.io’s international version.
BTW Maria Pevchikh accompanied Alexei Navalny from Omsk to Berlin. She was the one who was supposed to have gone to his hotel room in Tomsk and picked up the water bottle supposed to contain Novichok, at least until information came out that she acquired the water bottle from a vending machine at Omsk airport en route to Berlin. Pevchikh was the one person in Navalny’s entourage who did not submit to questioning by Russian authorities on Navalny’s poisoning.
I think we should see a bit more (in Google’s English-language translation) of what Gabriel Felbermayr said to Katharina Petz of Deutschlandfunk:
Gabriel Felbermayr: I am sceptical about [further sanctions]. The question is always what we want to achieve with sanctions. If we really want to bring Russia to its knees economically, we would need a large coalition of countries to do so, and Europe alone cannot do as much as is necessary. At least China on board and, best of all, India and other [Russia’s] trading partners would need it. The fact that sanctions have worked so badly in the past has to do with the fact that they are being undermined by other countries, that is a key problem. That is why I am sceptical that putting a on it (sic) really helps now. The objectives we have with Russia are very large. After all, we want nothing less than regime change in Russia, which is very difficult to achieve with economic pressure …
… I believe that we must also see who we are hitting with the sanctions. Are these really the people who are acting and who, in the light of the sanctions, may then reconsider their actions, or is it the general population that is hit very diffusely, each a little bit. This does not hurt enough, so to speak, to put great pressure on the regime, but it does hit the general public. That is why I believe that a sanctions instrument that is much more adicating (sic) to individuals is more promising and does not affect the broad mass of Russians. That already exists, we are using it in the European Union. These could be travel restrictions, that could be the freezing of assets abroad, and this could also be sanctions against certain companies that are very close to the Kremlin. Perhaps there is more that can be done than Europe alone, because Russian foreign assets are not in China, so to speak, and the second residences of Russian oligarchs are not somewhere in the Third World, but in Monaco and London and Paris. So smart sanctions are certainly what is more promising – one has to ask whether Europe has the right instruments …
…Yes, of course, the economic impact of the sanctions is quite different. Germany suffers from the Russia sanctions that have been in place since 2014, more than any country in the world, in absolute terms, and is also much more affected in percentage of economic output than in France. In Germany, this costs about 0.2% of GDP, according to various estimates, and in France this figure is much lower. There are, of course, other European countries where the level of concern is higher, [Bulgaria] for example, or the Eastern European Member States of the European Union as a whole. This unequal concern is certainly a political dilemma.
It is also a political problem with regard to the United States of America, which, while always insisting and pushing for sanctions, has so far drawn little economic disadvantage from it, simply because US trade with Russia is very low. That is the core problem when it comes to forging a broad coalition that costs are too unevenly distributed. We would certainly also have to think about compensation mechanisms within Europe or within the Western world, so that the joint fight against the violation of human rights, for example in Russia, must be paid for economically, not only by a few countries …
… Yes, I would agree, I think [Nordstream II shutdown] is overestimated. The question is how much billions of export revenues Russia generates in the European Union by selling natural gas, that is the central question. And whether natural gas enters the European Union via Ukraine or Turkey or Germany does not matter much. It may even be the case that the possibility of shutting down or blocking such a pipeline again, or imposing conditions, means that Germany will even get a leverage over Russia that would not otherwise have been possible.
So I also think that Nord Stream 2 is overestimated. Here again the question would have to be asked, who does it actually cost if you do not complete the project. A great many European and German investors are also negatively affected, and with sanctions we want to inflict pain, above all, on the Russian power apparatus and not on ourselves. I believe that Nord Stream 2 is a bad instrument …
So the sanctions regime against Russia is hitting the EU, and Germany and parts of Eastern Europe in particular, harder than it’s hitting Russia and the EU needs more nations on board with sanctioning Russia.
I can’t imagine the US would be willing to compensate the EU for any losses it has to sustain by sanctioning Russian government officials and businesspeople.
Posted by: Jen | Feb 15 2021 23:08 utc | 26
Yesterday’s Lavrov presser has finally had the Q&A section added to it and its a doosey! Lavrov’s sounds incendiary in print! “Question: Your recent interview generated a lot of controversy. You implied that Russia admits the possibility of breaking off with the EU. How do you see this break and what conditions would have to happen for it to occur, that is, where does Moscow draw the red line?”
Lavrov: “This interview took place on February 12, and the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell was here on February 5. Upon his return, he made a number of statements to the effect that Russia had failed to live up to expectations and to become a modern democracy and is rapidly moving away from Europe. That is, it sounded as if Russia was a hopeless case. This happened several days before the interview. Hence, the question as to whether we were ready to break off with the EU during the interview with Vladimir Solovyov based on those remarks about Russia. As a matter of fact, anyone who is even slightly interested in the situation in Europe has long known that a break-off has been underway for many years now. The EU has been consistently tearing down our relations.
“2014 was a turning point. A coup took place in Ukraine, and the EU showed it was helpless and unable to comply with the agreement that was reached between the government and the opposition right before the coup. Importantly, Germany, France and Poland put their signatures under it. The opposition spat on these signatures and on the EU, which thought it was important to comply with this agreement. It was then that the EU was really humiliated. Everyone knows what happened next. By and large, the EU turned a blind eye to the attacks against the residents of Crimea and eastern Ukraine on the part of the ultras and neo-Nazis who came to power, and decided to put all the blame on the Russian Federation.
“The EU has consistently destroyed all the mechanisms without exception that were based on the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement, including the biannual summits and annual meetings between the Russian Government and the European commissioners and presidents of the European Commission, projects to form four common spaces, over 20 sector-specific dialogues and almost every other more or less important contact, as well as the Partnership and Cooperation Council’s annual meetings with the Russian Foreign Minister and the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. These meetings were supposed to be used to conduct a full review of all areas of cooperation between Russia and the EU. To reiterate, all of that has been destroyed. Not by us, mind you.”
That’s the most candid I’ve read of his answers to the events of that time. Lavrov turns down his fire and brimstone to make this very important distinction as he finishes his answer:
“Importantly, we do not have any problems in our relations with individual European countries, I would even say, most European countries. Russia’s relations with Finland are a very good example of how they are being built systematically and based on general principles, primarily, equality and mutual benefit, and how they are translated into the language of specific economic, cultural and other projects that are of interest to both sides.
“The EU should not be confused with Europe. We are not leaving Europe, we have many friends and like-minded people in Europe, and we will continue to expand mutually beneficial relations with them.” [My Emphasis]
It’s the NATO/EU combo controlled by the Outlaw US Empire that’s the problem. And another blast aimed at the EU over Navalny related events:
“In evaluating the questions expressed by Mr Haavisto, we heard that our colleagues from Finland and other EU countries always bring them. We know that they are edited and written by the EU, in Brussels, and are a subject of consensus. We hear this regularly enough, and these statements are practically the same, word for word. If the organisation called the European Union has made this decision, we take it as a certainty. We reply to problematic issues, and the main point we express is how the EU consistently, diligently and deviously avoids specific discussions that are fact-based rather than accusations often made against us for some reason or without any evidence.” [My Emphasis]
In the last Q&A, Lavrov again restates what he earlier said about the EU being at fault for the utter erasing of relations that were painstakingly built up over many years, and he repeats what Merkel said at the time foe emphasis, for Russia was innocent of all the crap it was being accused of in 2014:
“At this point, German Chancellor Angela Merkel specially took the floor to say in public that Russia must be punished and that in this situation politics must prevail over the economy. This was very unconventional for a representative of Germany.”
This ought to remind people that this proved Merkel to merely be a cheap prostitute unworthy of any trust, who should have been ousted from her position years ago.
Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 16 2021 19:24 utc | 91
|
