Why Russia Shut Down NED Fronts
The neocon-flagship Washington Post fired a propaganda broadside at
President Putin for shutting down the Russian activities of the
National Endowment for Democracy, but left out key facts like NED’s
U.S. government funding, its quasi-CIA role, and its plans for
regime change in Moscow.
By Robert Parry
July 31, 2015 "Information
Clearing House"
-
"Consortium
News"
- The Washington Post’s descent into the depths of neoconservative
propaganda – willfully misleading its readers on matters of grave
importance – apparently knows no bounds as was demonstrated with two
deceptive articles regarding Russian President Vladimir Putin and
why his government is cracking down on “foreign agents.”
If you read
the Post’s editorial on Wednesday and
a companion op-ed by National Endowment for Democracy
President Carl Gershman, you would have been led to believe that
Putin is delusional, paranoid and “power mad” in his concern that
outside money funneled into non-governmental organizations
represents a threat to Russian sovereignty.
The Post and Gershman were especially outraged
that the Russians have enacted laws requiring NGOs financed from
abroad and seeking to influence Russian policies to register as
“foreign agents” – and that one of the first funding operations to
fall prey to these tightened rules was Gershman’s NED.
The Post’s editors wrote that Putin’s “latest
move, announced Tuesday, is to declare the NED an ‘undesirable’
organization under the terms of a law that Mr. Putin signed in May.
The law bans groups from abroad who are deemed a ‘threat to the
foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation,
its defense capabilities and its national security.’
“The charge against the NED is patently
ridiculous. The NED’s
grantees
in Russia last year ran the gamut of civil society. They
advocated transparency in public affairs, fought corruption and
promoted human rights, freedom of information and freedom of
association, among other things. All these activities make for a
healthy democracy but are seen as threatening from the Kremlin’s
ramparts. …
“The new law on ‘undesirables’ comes in addition
to
one signed in 2012 that gave authorities the power to
declare organizations ‘foreign
agents’ if they engaged in any kind of politics and receive
money from abroad. The designation, from the Stalin era, implies
espionage.”
But there are several salient facts that the
Post’s editors surely know but don’t want you to know. The first is
that NED is a U.S. government-funded organization created in 1983 to
do what the Central Intelligence Agency previously had done in
financing organizations inside target countries to advance U.S.
policy interests and, if needed, help in “regime change.”
The secret hand behind NED’s creation was CIA
Director William J. Casey who worked with senior CIA covert
operation specialist Walter Raymond Jr. to establish NED in 1983.
Casey – from the CIA – and Raymond – from his assignment inside
President Ronald Reagan’s National Security Council – focused on
creating a funding mechanism to support groups inside foreign
countries that would engage in propaganda and political action that
the CIA had historically organized and paid for covertly. To
partially replace that CIA role, the idea emerged for a
congressionally funded entity that would serve as a conduit for this
money.
But Casey recognized the need to hide the strings
being pulled by the CIA. “Obviously we here [at CIA] should not get
out front in the development of such an organization, nor should we
appear to be a sponsor or advocate,” Casey said in
one undated letter to then-White House counselor Edwin
Meese III – as Casey urged creation of a “National Endowment.”
NED Is Born
The National Endowment for Democracy took shape in
late 1983 as Congress decided to also set aside pots of money —
within NED — for the Republican and Democratic parties and for
organized labor, creating enough bipartisan largesse that passage
was assured. But some in Congress thought it was important to wall
the NED off from any association with the CIA, so a provision was
included to bar the participation of any current or former CIA
official, according to one congressional aide who helped write the
legislation.
This aide told me that one night late in the 1983
session, as the bill was about to go to the House floor, the CIA’s
congressional liaison came pounding at the door to the office of
Rep. Dante Fascell, a senior Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs
Committee and a chief sponsor of the bill. The frantic CIA official
conveyed a single message from CIA Director Casey: the language
barring the participation of CIA personnel must be struck from the
bill, the aide recalled, noting that Fascell consented, not fully
recognizing the significance of the demand.
The aide said Fascell also consented to the Reagan
administration’s choice of Carl Gershman to head the National
Endowment for Democracy, again not recognizing how this decision
would affect the future of the new entity and American foreign
policy. Gershman, who had followed the classic neoconservative path
from youthful socialism to fierce anticommunism, became NED’s first
(and, to this day, only) president.
Though NED is technically independent of U.S.
foreign policy, Gershman in the early years coordinated decisions on
grants with Raymond at the NSC. For instance, on Jan. 2, 1985,
Raymond wrote to
two NSC Asian experts that “Carl Gershman has called concerning a
possible grant to the Chinese Alliance for Democracy (CAD). I am
concerned about the political dimension to this request. We should
not find ourselves in a position where we have to respond to
pressure, but this request poses a real problem to Carl.”
Currently, Gershman’s NED dispenses more than $100
million a year in U.S. government funds to various NGOs, media
outlets and activists around the world. The NED also has found
itself in the middle of political destabilization campaigns against
governments that have gotten on the wrong side of U.S. foreign
policy. For instance, prior to the February 2014 coup in Ukraine,
overthrowing elected President Viktor Yanukovych and installing an
anti-Russian regime in Kiev, NED was funding scores of projects.
A second point left out of the Post’s editorial
was the fact that Gershman took a personal hand in the Ukraine
crisis and recognized it as an interim step toward regime change in
Moscow. On Sept. 26, 2013, Gershman published an op-ed in the
Washington Post that
called Ukraine “the biggest prize” and explained how
pulling it into the Western camp could contribute to the ultimate
defeat of Russian President Putin.
“Ukraine’s choice to join Europe will accelerate
the demise of the ideology of Russian imperialism that Putin
represents,” Gershman wrote. “Russians, too, face a choice, and
Putin may find himself on the losing end not just in the near abroad
but within Russia itself.” In other words, NED is a U.S.
government-financed entity that has set its sights on ousting
Russia’s current government.
A third point that the Post ignored is that the
Russian law requiring outside-funded political organizations to
register as “foreign agents” was modeled on a U.S. law, the Foreign
Agent Registration Act. In other words, the U.S. government also
requires individuals and entities working for foreign interests and
seeking to influence U.S. policies to disclose those relationships
with the U.S. Justice Department or face prison.
If the Post’s editors had included any or all of
these three relevant factors, you would have come away with a more
balanced understanding of why Russia is acting as it is. You might
still object but at least you would be aware of the full story. By
concealing all three points, the Post’s editors were tricking you
and other readers into accepting a propagandistic viewpoint – that
the Russian actions were crazy and that Putin was, according to the
Post’s headline, “power mad.”
Gershman’s Op-Ed
But you might think that Gershman would at least
acknowledge some of these points in his Post op-ed, surely admitting
that NED is financed by the U.S. government. But Gershman didn’t. He
simply portrayed Russia’s actions as despicable and desperate.
“Russia’s newest anti-NGO law, under which the
National Endowment for Democracy on Tuesday was
declared an “undesirable organization” prohibited from
operating in Russia, is the latest evidence that the regime of
President Vladimir Putin faces a worsening crisis of political
legitimacy,” Gershman wrote, adding:
“This is the context in which Russia has passed
the law prohibiting Russian democrats from getting any international
assistance to promote freedom of expression, the rule of law and a
democratic political system. Significantly, democrats have not
backed down. They have not been deterred by the criminal penalties
contained in the ‘foreign agents’ law and other repressive laws.
They know that these laws contradict international law, which allows
for such aid, and that the laws are meant to block a better future
for Russia.”
The reference to how a “foreign agents”
registration law conflicts with international law might have been a
good place for Gershman to explain why what is good for the goose in
the United States isn’t good for the gander in Russia. But hypocrisy
is a hard thing to rationalize and would have undermined the
propagandistic impact of the op-ed.
So would an acknowledgement of where NED’s money
comes from. How many governments would allow a hostile foreign power
to sponsor politicians and civic organizations whose mission is to
undermine and overthrow the existing government and put in someone
who would be compliant to that foreign power?
Not surprisingly, Gershman couldn’t find the space
to include any balance in his op-ed – and the Post’s editors didn’t
insist on any.
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.