The Russian Endgame Strategy for World Dominance
A Strategic Analysis of Global
Current and Future Events
Introduction:
There would be many that would immediately start to protest and argue with the title of
this article. They would argue that it was absolutely insane, or at best incompetent on
my behalf to even suggest that Russia had plans for world domination. I would argue
back, (if they would listen), that the factual evidence to support this thesis is undeniable.
As an introduction into this article, I would like to include some information from Anatoly
Golitsyn, who in his 1984 Book, NEW LIES FOR OLD, came out with the startling
statement that the leaders of Soviet Communism, mostly from the KGB, had designed
and implemented a long term, 40+ year plan for total world domination starting in the
late 1950′s. He knew this because he had worked on the plan as a Major in the KGB
before he defected to the US. He outlined their plan, in detail, which was so fantastic
that it was considered too outrageous to consider as even remotely possible by most of
the Western Intelligence Community and government leadership.
This is from a National Book Review, Sept 7, 1984 (emphasis are my own):
ANATOLY GOLITSYN, now an American citizen, is a former major in the
counterintelligence service of the KGB, which he joined in 1946. He defected in
December 1961, at the age of 35, from his “cover” assignment as vice consul at the
Soviet Embassy in Helsinki. He lived in England until August 1963, when he left for the
United States. Here Anatoly Golitsyn worked for the CIA under the vigorous
sponsorship of James Angleton, for twenty years head of counterintelligence until he
was fired in December 1974 by the then CIA Director William Colby.
the CIA, was in actuality a Russian Spy. This would be consistent with
Golitsyns’ accusations that the CIA was riddled with Russian Spies from top to
bottom. Former CIA director Richard Helms, James Angleton and others were
convinced he was a spy, and went public with their assertions (leaking it to the
press) when Colby was actually appointed as the CIA director…and when they
could get no investigations started within the intelligence community. As Richard
Helms told his biographer, Colby’s acts “as Director of Central Intelligence were
entirely consistent with those of a man who was a Russian agent.” As the
investigation started to heat up, Colby resigned as director and then died
mysteriously in a canoe accident. It was Colby who helped dismantle the CIA,
firing most of the long time field agents, cutting the CIA effectively in half, and
instituting rules whereby information was highly compartmentalized and not
shared with other agencies…which allowed things like 9/11 to occur.)
published version contains only half of his 1,200-page manuscript.) The book opens
with an extraordinary introduction signed by four former Senior U.S. and British
intelligence officers. Three of the men have known the author and his views for 12
years or more. All four “have the highest regard for his personal and professional
integrity.” (He is an Honorary Commander of the Order of the British Empire.) They
write in the introduction: “Despite the rejection of his views by many of our former
colleagues, we continue to believe that the contents of this book are of the greatest
importance and relevance to a proper understanding of contemporary events . . . We
commend the book for the most serious study by all who are interested in relations
between the Communist and non-Communist worlds.”
Golitsyn’s theme is that, beginning with the power struggle that followed Stalin’s death
in 1953, “the West has misunderstood the nature of changes in the Communist world
and has been misled and outmaneuvered by Communist guile.” From 1958 or so
onward, the combined intelligence and security resources of the entire Communist bloc
were committed by Communist governments to playing an influential part in the
implementation of the new long-range bloc policy. This has entailed providing Western
intelligence with carefully selected “secret” information from inside the Communist
world.
In other words, for more than a quarter-century the West has been victimized by
disinformational events, ranging from false KGB defectors to the Sino-Soviet split, from
KGB-controlled dissidents to Rumanian “independence,” the Soviet-Yugoslav split after
1958, Soviet “liberalization,” the Soviet-Albanian split, the 1968 “Prague Spring,” power
struggles in the Soviet, Chinese, and other Communist parties, and Eurocommunism.
These “case history” happenings, says Golitsyn, are nothing more than beautifully
planned and internationally coordinated KGB disinformation scenarios intended to lull
the West into thinking that the Soviet Union is tossing about in a stormy ocean of
opposition, both internal and external. In fact, the Communist movement remains a
monolith despite any alleged evidence to the contrary. As Golitsyn puts it: “The feigned
disunity of the Communist world promotes real disunity in the non-Communist world.”
While these scenarios were successfully hoodwinking Western statesmen and public
opinion into thinking that time was on the side of the non-Communist world, the USSR
and its allies were building up and projecting their military and political power throughout
the world with insignificant opposition from the West. How does one deal with this
epistemological topsy-turvy?
Most startling is Golitsyn’s prediction that as part of the Communist bloc’s strategy for
victory the following events will soon occur:
* a public Soviet-Chinese reconciliation;
* a “spectacular and impressive” liberalization in the Communist bloc with
amnesty for dissidents, who would be invited to return;
* the freeing of Sakharov,
* more trade-union independence,
*adoption of constitutional amendments guaranteeing fulfillment of the Helsinki
agreements,
* reduction in the role of Communist parties;
*a revival of controlled “democratization” on the Czech pattern for Eastern
Europe, and even the return of Dubcek to power;
*demolition of the Berlin Wall–all of them in reality “cosmetic steps,” says
Golitsyn, because they have been handed down from on high.”
* ‘Restructuring’ political and military blocs—NATO and the Warsaw
Pact—and the creation of a single ‘Europe from the Atlantic to the
Urals’ incorporating a reunited, neutral Germany.’
So ends the quotes from the National Book review. Now, I would like to include some
actual excerpts from the book. New Lies For Old:
‘It was in 1958 that the Communist leaders recognized, after the Hungarian and
Polish revolts, that the Stalinist practice of mass repression had severely
damaged the system and that radical measures were necessary to restore it. It
was then that they decided to transform the Stalinist system into a more
attractive form of ‘Communist democracy’.
was ineffective and lagging behind the West in productivity. It was then that they
decided that it would have to be revived through the introduction of market
incentives. It was then that the Communist leaders realized that Communism
could not be spread abroad against a background of fear and mass repression
and that world Communist victory could only be achieved by transforming
the Soviet and other Communist regimes into a form more attractive to the
West.’
‘It was during 1958-1960 that the Communist leaders envisaged the
convergence of restructured and transformed capitalist systems LEADING
ULTIMATELY TO ONE SYSTEM OF WORLD GOVERNMENT.
Other goals included:
*‘Splitting the United States, Western Europe and Japan. Dissolution
of NATO and the US-Japan security pact, and the withdrawal of US
troops from Western Europe and Japan.’
*‘The introduction and promotion of a new Soviet model with a mixed
economy and a human face in Latin America, Africa and Asia
through a joint campaign by the pseudo-social democratic regimes of
the USSR and Eastern Europe and the genuine social democrats of
Western Europe led by the Socialist International.’
* ‘To neutralize the influence of the anti-Communist political right in
the American political parties and to create favourable
conditions for a victory of the radical left in the 1992
US presidential elections
(Roger’s Note: Bill Clinton was elected president in 1992.)
*To ‘restructure’ the American military, political, economic and social
status quo to accommodate greater convergence between the Soviet
and American systems and the eventual creation of a single
World Government.’
weaken and neutralize anti-Communist ideology and the influence of
anti-Communists in political life in the United States, Western Europe
and elsewhere—presenting them as anachronistic survivors of the
Cold War, reactionaries and obstacles to ‘restructuring’ and peace.
Anyone who warns about Moscow’s true objectives is automatically
branded a ‘Cold Warrior’, even by people who have doubts about
Moscow’s motives.’
As the concluding ‘chapter’ of this Soviet Plan towards total World Conquest,
Golitsyn wrote:
“In the new worldwide Communist federation;
* the present different brands of Communism would disappear, to be
replaced by a uniform, rigorous brand of Leninism. The process
would be painful.
* Concessions made in the name of economic and political reform
would be withdrawn.
*Religious and intellectual dissent would be suppressed.
* Nationalism and all other forms of genuine oppositions would be
crushed.
* Those who had taken advantage of détente to establish friendly
Western contacts would be rebuked or persecuted like those Soviet
officers who worked with the Allies during the Second World War. In
new Communist states—for example, in France, Italy, and the Third
World—the “alienated classes” would be reeducated.
* Show trials of “imperialist agents” would be staged. Action would be
taken against nationalist and social democratic leaders, party
activists, former civil servants, officers, and priests.
* The last vestiges of private enterprise and ownership would be
obliterated.
* Nationalization of industry, finance, and agriculture would be
completed. In fact, all the totalitarian features familiar from the early
stages of the Soviet revolution and the postwar Stalinist years in
Eastern Europe might be expected to reappear, especially in those
countries newly won for Communism.
*Unchallenged and unchallengeable, a true
Communist monolith would dominate the world.”
events that Golitsyn outlined in 1984, 98% have taken place. Currently,
according to Golitsyn we are in the final stages of the Russian plan for world
dominance. Therefore, the next part will be to discuss the strategic events that
have taken place over the last couple of years, including the last few months, that
indicate the intentions of this Russian Expansionism plan.
THINGS TO REMEMBER ABOUT RUSSIAN MOVES:
As we proceed, it is important to remember that Russians as a people, and
especially Russian Leadership & military, do not do anything without a plan.
They are grandmaster chess players with each step being carefully planned and
laid out to achieve final checkmate.
They often have plans within plans and are very good at setting up traps that are
unseen…and then carefully sprung on their opponents. Additionally, they are
patient players…they will take however long it needs to setup the final endgame
for checkmate. (They started this particular game some 40+ yrs ago)
If Russia is truly preparing to initiate a global world war for world dominance,
then we should see specific “moves” and preparations that indicate this. From
observing these “moves” we might get an indication of timing…as in; How soon
before the big trigger is “pulled” starting World War III. In order to ascertain or
understand the importance of what we might see, it would be important for us to
understand what types of war preparation “moves” we are actually looking for?
What follows is a brief list of what I call the:
# PREPARATION BEFORE the war/battle is often THE KEY to winning the
war/battle.
# DEFEAT OR WEAKEN YOUR ENEMY BEFORE YOU ENGAGE THEM
MILITARILY. (critical objectives can sometimes be won without a fight.)
# MISDIRECTION, MISINFORMATION & DECEPTION can win a battle/war.
(example D-Day & Georgia)
# SURPRISE is a very powerful weapon.
# DESTROY YOUR ENEMIES COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM. (make them
blind, deaf and dumb)
# CONTROL OF VITAL SUPPLIES & SUPPLY LINES (chokepoints) is
essential. (Securing yours…and controlling/destroying your enemies.)
# IF POSSIBLE, DEPLOY SUPERIOR TECHNOLOGY. A single Superior
Weapon can win the entire war/battle. (a bomb example.)
# ELIMINATE YOUR ENEMIES POTENTIAL ALLIES …while securing your
own.
# Never underestimate the power of a 5th Column behind enemy lines.
(especially agents & spies among enemy forces)
# ATTACK WITH OVERWHELMING FORCE. Better yet…attack where
there is no enemy force to defend. (convince your enemy to move his army
as far away as possible from where you plan to attack)
# REMEMBER The best way to win a war is to win/achieve your
objective… without actually having to fight a war. (Intimidate, Bluff, Trick,
Assassinate, Coup, Economic means, Seduce/Convert to an Ally, etc.)
IN SUMMARY …If you must fight…Attack with overwhelming force when
your enemy least expects it, where/when it is weakest, when/where it
cannot get help from allies or receive critical supplies, and while it cannot
communicate (blind-deaf-dumb).
To emphasize a critical point in modern warfare… IN CURRENT MODERN
WARFARE, OIL IS THE MOST CRITICAL SUPPLY OF ALL SUPPLIES.
Without it, no troops move, no planes fly, no tanks run, no supplies are delivered,
etc. In essence, without an adequate supply of oil (gasoline/diesel/jet fuel)…a
modern army CANNOT even fight a war, let alone win one. This brings up the
Golden Rule…HE WHO HAS THE GOLD…RULES, and the (black) gold of this
world currently is OIL. If you want to rule the world…then you must control the
energy of the world which is now concentrated in oil.
If controlling oil means that you can win wars, control production/manufacturing,
and even control food production and distribution, then that is where the most
critical preparation for a global war would be…that of securing your
supplies of oil…and setting up the situation to deny your enemy access to
it.
With that in mind, let us look at the current top 10 oil production/exporting
countries.
Saudi Arabia (8.73 million barrels per day) …26.12%
Russia(6.67) …19.96%
Norway (2.91)…8.71%
Iran (2.55)…7.63%
Venezuela (2.36)…7.06%
United Arab Emirates (2.33)…6.97%
Kuwait (2.20)…6.58%
Nigeria (2.19)…6.55%
Mexico (1.80)…5.39%
Algeria (1.68)…5.03%
Legend: Red=Anti-US/Pro-Russia, Orange=Moderate Arab Countries,
Blue=US Friendly, Black=Open to highest bidder
Please note in the above listing that there are only two countries, comprising only 14%
of the worlds top ten production that are overtly friendly to the United States. (Though
there would be some who would argue that Mexico is really not that friendly.) If the
moderate Arab nations were somehow convinced to join in the declared Jihad against
Israel and the U.S. being pushed by radical Islam/Iran, then Russia and its declared
allies would control over 79% of the top oil production in the world. Not good news
strategically.
On the other side of the coin, the following is a listing of the top 10 oil importing
countries:
Top Ten Oil Importing Countries (All potential allies except China)
United States (11.8 million barrels per day)
Japan (5.3)
China (2.9)
Germany (2.5)
South Korea (2.1)
France (2.0)
Italy (1.7)
Spain (1.6)
India (1.5)
Taiwan (1.0)
Nice to have…except they, just like the U.S., are all dependent upon foreign oil.
Again, not good strategically in case of a global war.
Some other points to consider:
* Russia has extensively developed its oil/natural gas reserves and production
over the last 20 years.
*Russia has developed a lot of Oil production/export “friends” over the last 10
years.
Compare this with the following:
*The U.S. has curtailed almost all development of its extensive oil/natural gas
reserves and production over the last 20 years.
*US has a lot of “Friends” that are Oil import dependent. Additionally, during
the last 10 years, it has lost oil production/export “friends.” (With notable
exception of Iraq, which came by attack and invasion.)
develop its oil and gas reserves, Europe has no such reserves at all. Consider
the following:
*In the last ten years Europe’s reliance on Russian crude exports has grown
from around 12 percent of total crude imports to around 31 percent in 2008.
(45% from Middle East, 23% from Norway)
*EU oil imports are set to grow by an additional 29% by 2012 with Russia
imports growing to 55% or more of the total.
*Europe now depends upon Russia for 44% of its natural gas (30% Algeria,
25% Norway);
*By 2030, over 60% of EU gas imports are expected to come from Russia
with overall external dependency expected to reach 80%.
Bottom line is simple; Europe depends heavily upon Russian Oil and Gas
and this dependency is increasing. Another point is that while Oil can be
imported via ship if needed, natural gas cannot. It must be delivered via
pipeline.
To continue reading this PDF go here : The Russian Endgame Strategy for World Dominance
Popularity: 2% [?]
Add A Comment