A Family Business of
Perpetual War
Victoria Nuland and Robert Kagan have a
great mom-and-pop business going. From the
State Department, she generates wars and –
from op-ed pages – he demands Congress buy
more weapons. There’s a pay-off, too, as
grateful military contractors kick in money
to think tanks where other Kagans work,
writes Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry
March 21, 2015 "ICH"
- "Consortium
News" -
Neoconservative pundit Robert Kagan and his
wife, Assistant Secretary of State Victoria
Nuland, run a remarkable family business:
she has sparked a hot war in Ukraine and
helped launch Cold War II with Russia –
and he steps in to demand that Congress jack
up military spending so America can meet
these new security threats.
This extraordinary
husband-and-wife duo makes quite a one-two
punch for the Military-Industrial Complex,
an inside-outside team that creates the need
for more military spending, applies
political pressure to ensure higher
appropriations, and watches as thankful
weapons manufacturers lavish grants on
like-minded hawkish Washington think tanks.
Not only does the broader
community of neoconservatives stand to
benefit but so do other members of the Kagan
clan, including Robert’s brother Frederick
at the American Enterprise Institute and his
wife Kimberly, who runs her own shop called
the Institute for the Study of War.
Robert Kagan, a senior
fellow at the Brookings Institution (which
doesn’t disclose details on
its
funders),
used his prized perch on the
Washington Post’s op-ed page on Friday to
bait Republicans into abandoning the
sequester caps limiting the Pentagon’s
budget, which he calculated at about $523
billion (apparently not counting extra war
spending). Kagan called on the GOP
legislators to add at least $38 billion and
preferably more like $54 billion to $117
billion:
“The fact that [advocates
for more spending] face a steep uphill
battle to get even that lower number passed
by a Republican-controlled Congress says a
lot — about Republican hypocrisy.
Republicans may be full-throated in
denouncing [President Barack] Obama for
weakening the nation’s security, yet when it
comes to paying for the foreign policy that
all their tough rhetoric implies, too many
of them are nowhere to be found. …
“The editorial writers and
columnists who have been beating up Obama
and cheering the Republicans need to tell
those Republicans, and their own readers,
that national security costs money and that
letters and speeches are worse than
meaningless without it. …
“It will annoy the part of
the Republican base that wants to see the
government shrink, loves the sequester and
doesn’t care what it does to defense. But
leadership occasionally means telling people
what they don’t want to hear. Those who
propose to lead the United States in the
coming years, Republicans and Democrats,
need to show what kind of political courage
they have, right now, when the crucial
budget decisions are being made.”
So, the way to show
“courage” – in Kagan’s view – is to ladle
ever more billions into the
Military-Industrial Complex, thus putting
money where the Republican mouths
are regarding the need to “defend Ukraine”
and resist “a bad nuclear deal with Iran.”
Yet, if it weren’t for
Nuland’s efforts as Assistant Secretary of
State for European Affairs, the Ukraine
crisis might not exist. A neocon holdover
who advised Vice President Dick Cheney,
Nuland gained promotions under former
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and
received backing, too, from current
Secretary of State John Kerry.
Confirmed to her present
job in September 2013, Nuland soon undertook
an extraordinary effort to promote “regime
change” in Ukraine. She personally urged on
business leaders and political activists to
challenge elected President Viktor
Yanukovych. She reminded corporate
executives that the United States had
invested $5 billion in their “European
aspirations,” and she literally passed out
cookies to anti-government protesters in
Kiev’s Maidan square.
Working with other key
neocons, including National Endowment for
Democracy President Carl Gershman and Sen.
John McCain, Nuland made clear that the
United States would back a “regime
change” against Yanukovych, which grew more
likely as neo-Nazi and other right-wing
militias poured into Kiev from western
Ukraine.
In early February 2014,
Nuland discussed U.S.-desired changes with
U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt
(himself a veteran of a “regime change”
operation at the International Atomic Energy
Agency, helping to install U.S.
yes man Yukiya Amano as
the director-general in 2009).
Nuland treated her
proposed new line-up of Ukrainian officials
as if she were trading baseball cards,
casting aside some while valuing others.
“Yats is the guy,” she said of her favorite
Arseniy Yatsenyuk.
Disparaging the less
aggressive European Union, she uttered “Fuck
the EU” – and brainstormed how she would
“glue this thing” as Pyatt pondered how to
“mid-wife this thing.” Their unsecure phone
call was
intercepted and leaked.
Ukraine’s ‘Regime
Change’
The coup against
Yanukovych played out on Feb. 22, 2014, as
the neo-Nazi militias and other violent
extremists overran government buildings
forcing the president and other officials to
flee for their lives. Nuland’s State
Department quickly declared the new regime
“legitimate” and Yatsenyuk took over as
prime minister.
Russian President Vladimir
Putin, who had been presiding over the
Winter Olympics at Sochi, was caught
off-guard by the coup next door and held a
crisis session to determine how to protect
ethnic Russians and a Russian naval base in
Crimea, leading to Crimea’s secession from
Ukraine and annexation by Russia a year ago.
Though there was no
evidence that Putin had instigated the
Ukraine crisis – and indeed all the evidence
indicated the opposite – the State
Department peddled a propaganda theme to the
credulous mainstream U.S. news media about
Putin having somehow orchestrated the
situation in Ukraine so he could begin
invading Europe. Former Secretary of State
Clinton compared Putin to Adolf Hitler.
As the new Kiev government
launched a brutal “anti-terrorism operation”
to subdue an uprising among the large ethnic
Russian populations of eastern and southern
Ukraine, Nuland and other American neocons
pushed for economic sanctions against Russia
and demanded arms for the coup regime. [See
Consortiumnews.com’s “What
Neocons Want from Ukraine Crisis.”]
Amid the barrage of
“information warfare” aimed at both the U.S.
and world publics, a new Cold War took
shape. Prominent neocons, including Nuland’s
husband Robert Kagan, a co-founder of the
Project for the New American Century which
masterminded the Iraq War, hammered home the
domestic theme that Obama had shown himself
to be “weak,” thus inviting Putin’s
“aggression.”
In May 2014, Kagan
published a lengthy essay in The New
Republic entitled “Superpowers
Don’t Get to Retire,” in which
Kagan castigated Obama for failing to
sustain American dominance in the world and
demanding a more muscular U.S. posture
toward adversaries.
According to a New York
Times
article about how the essay took
shape and its aftermath, writer Jason
Horowitz reported that Kagan and Nuland
shared a common world view as well as
professional ambitions, with Nuland editing
Kagan’s articles, including the one tearing
down her ostensible boss.
Though Nuland wouldn’t
comment specifically on her husband’s attack
on Obama, she indicated that she held
similar views. “But suffice to say,” Nuland
said, “that nothing goes out of the house
that I don’t think is worthy of his talents.
Let’s put it that way.”
Horowitz reported that
Obama was so concerned about Kagan’s assault
that the President revised his commencement
speech at West Point to deflect some of the
criticism and invited Kagan to lunch at the
White House, where one source told me that
it was like “a meeting of equals.” [See
Consortiumnews.com’s “Obama’s
True Foreign Policy ‘Weakness.’”]
Sinking a Peace
Deal
And, whenever peace
threatens to break out in Ukraine, Nuland
jumps in to make sure that the interests of
war are protected. Last month, German
Chancellor Angela Merkel and French
President Francois Hollande hammered out a
plan for a cease-fire and a political
settlement, known as Minsk-2, prompting
Nuland to engage in more behind-the-scenes
maneuvering to sabotage the deal.
In another overheard
conversation — in Munich, Germany — Nuland
mocked the peace agreement as “Merkel’s
Moscow thing,” according to the German
newspaper Bild, citing unnamed
sources, likely from the German government
which may have bugged the conference room in
the luxurious Bayerischer Hof hotel and then
leaked the details.
Picking up on Nuland’s
contempt for Merkel, another U.S. official
called the Minsk-2 deal the Europeans’
“Moscow bullshit.”
Nuland suggested that
Merkel and Hollande cared only about the
practical impact of the Ukraine war on
Europe: “They’re afraid of damage to their
economy, counter-sanctions from Russia.”
According to the Bild story, Nuland
also laid out a strategy for countering
Merkel’s diplomacy by using strident
language to frame the Ukraine crisis.
“We can fight against the
Europeans, we can fight with rhetoric
against them,” Nuland reportedly said.
NATO Commander Air Force
Gen. Philip Breedlove was quoted as saying
that sending more weapons to the Ukrainian
government would “raise the battlefield cost
for Putin.” Nuland interjected to the U.S.
politicians present that “I’d strongly urge
you to use the phrase ‘defensive systems’
that we would deliver to oppose Putin’s
‘offensive systems.’”
Nuland sounded determined
to sink the Merkel-Hollande peace initiative
even though it was arranged by two major
U.S. allies and was blessed by President
Obama. And, this week, the deal seems indeed
to have been blown apart by Nuland’s
hand-picked Prime Minister Yatsenyuk, who
inserted a poison pill into the legislation
to implement the Minsk-2 political
settlement.
The Ukrainian parliament
in Kiev added a clause that, in effect,
requires the rebels to first surrender and
let the Ukrainian government organize
elections before a federalized structure is
determined. Minsk-2 had called for dialogue
with the representatives of these rebellious
eastern territories en route to elections
and establishment of broad autonomy for the
region.
Instead, reflecting
Nuland’s hard-line position, Kiev refused to
talks with rebel leaders and insisted on
establishing control over these territories
before the process can move forward. If the
legislation stands, the result will almost
surely be a resumption of war between
military forces backed by nuclear-armed
Russia and the United States, a very
dangerous development for the world. [See
Consortiumnews.com’s “Ukraine’s
Poison Pill for Peace Talks.”]
Not only will the
Ukrainian civil war resume but so will the
Cold War between Washington and Moscow with
lots of money to be made by the
Military-Industrial Complex. On Friday,
Nuland’s husband, Robert Kagan, drove home
that latter point in the neocon Washington
Post.
The Payoff
But don’t think that this
unlocking of the U.S. taxpayers’ wallets is
just about this one couple. There will be
plenty of money to be made by other neocon
think-tankers all around Washington,
including Frederick Kagan, who works for the
right-wing American Enterprise Institute,
and his wife, Kimberly, who runs her own
think tank, the Institute for the Study of
War [ISW].
According to ISW’s annual
reports, its original supporters were mostly
right-wing foundations, such as the
Smith-Richardson Foundation and the Lynde
and Harry Bradley Foundation, but it was
later backed by a host of national security
contractors, including major ones like
General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman and CACI,
as well as lesser-known firms such as
DynCorp International, which provided
training for Afghan police, and Palantir, a
technology company founded with the backing
of the CIA’s venture-capital arm, In-Q-Tel.
Palantir supplied software to U.S. military
intelligence in Afghanistan.
Since its founding in
2007, ISW has focused mostly on wars in the
Middle East, especially Iraq and
Afghanistan, including closely cooperating
with Gen. David Petraeus when he commanded
U.S. forces in those countries. However,
more recently, ISW has begun reporting
extensively on the civil war in Ukraine.
[See Consortiumnews.com’s “Neocons
Guided Petraeus on Afghan War.”]
In other words, the Family
Kagan has almost a self-perpetuating,
circular business model – working the
inside-corridors of government power to
stimulate wars while simultaneously
influencing the public debate through
think-tank reports and op-ed columns in
favor of more military spending – and then
collecting grants and other funding from
thankful military contractors.
To be fair, the
Nuland-Kagan mom-and-pop shop is really only
a microcosm of how the Military-Industrial
Complex has worked for decades: think-tank
analysts generate the reasons for military
spending, the government bureaucrats
implement the necessary war policies, and
the military contractors make lots of money
before kicking back some to the think tanks
— so the bloody but profitable cycle can
spin again.
The only thing that makes
the Nuland-Kagan operation special perhaps
is that the whole process is all in
the family.
Investigative reporter Robert
Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories
for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the
1980s. You can buy his latest book,
America’s
Stolen Narrative,
either in print
here or
as an e-book (from
Amazon
and
barnesandnoble.com).
You also can order Robert Parry’s trilogy on
the Bush Family and its connections to
various right-wing operatives for only $34.
The trilogy includes
America’s
Stolen Narrative.
For details on this offer,
click here.