[국문 번역] Text & Video Fwd: Master of Space video on-line

* Text sent from Bruce Gagnon on July 8, 2010
2010 년 7월 8일 브루스 개그논 보냄

http://vimeo.com/13163912

The Nature of Things - Masters of Space
사물의 본성들-우주의 지배자

The link just above will take you to the new Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) show called The Nature of Things with David Suzuki (a Japanese Canadian academic, science broadcaster and environmental activist) - seen by more than 1 million viewers. He used lots of footage from the new documentary Pax Americana and the Weaponization of Space. The new film features several leaders from the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space.

위의 링크는 백만 관람객 이상이 보는, 데이비드 수주키(재 캐나다 일본 학자, 과학 방송인, 그리고 환경 활동가인)와 함께 하는 '사물의 본성들'이란 새로운 캐나다 방송 기업(CBC) 쇼이다. 그는 새로운 다큐멘타리 '미국의 지배에 의한 평화와 우주의 무기화'에서 많은 장면들을 썼다. ' 새로운 영화는 우주의 무기와 핵을 반대하는 글로벌 넷워크'의 몇몇 지도자들을 선보인다.

Just over fifty years ago, the first satellite was spun into orbit. Space filled us with optimism and awe. But were we in fact just staking out a new war zone? Space weapons feature prominently in science fiction, but how close are we to seeing real weapons systems in space? Today, 1,000 active satellites are officially recorded as circling the earth. Most countries use satellite technology. And 45 nations own their own orbiting satellites. By shutting down a few satellites, the infrastructure of an entire country or continent can be paralyzed.

단지 50년 전에 첫번째 위성이 궤도에 놓여졌다. 우주는 우리를 낙천주의와 경외로 채웠다. 그러나 우리는 단지 새로운 전쟁 구역에 대해서만 말하고 있는가? 우주 무기는 과학 소설에 두드러지게 나오나 우리는 얼마나 우주에서 진짜 무기를 보는데 가까이 있는가? 오는날 천개의 활동하는 위성들이 지구를 도는 것으로 공식적으로 기록되어 있다. 대부분의 나라들은 위성 기술을 사용한다. 그리고 45개 국가들이 그들 자신의 궤도 위성을 소유한다. 몇 개의 위성들을 폐쇄시킴으로써 한 나라 전체 또는 대륙의 하부 구조가 마비될 수 있다.

Now, the United States is the Master of Space. It dominates as the owner and user of space systems, both civilian and military. "Full spectrum dominance" - control and dominance of land, sea, air and, more recently, space, is still the goal of some within the U.S. Defense Department. But what are the realities behind these aims? Trying to track down what the Defense Department is spending on space weapons projects is a tricky business.

지금 미국은 우주의 지배자이다. 그것은 민간이건 군사이건 우주 시스템의 소유자이자 사용자로 지배한다. “전방위적 지배”-육지, 바다, 공기, 그리고 최근 우주는 미 국방부 내 몇 [업무의] 목표이다. 그러나 이 목표들 뒤의 현실은 무엇인가? 국방부가 우주 무기들 프로젝트들에 지출하는 것을 추적하는 일은 종잡을 수 없는 일이다.

When Hitler had the first V2 missile launched in 1944, the weapons race in space officially began. Masters of Space is the saga of the emerging competition between the major industrial nations to control space and the fine line between space-faring and space warfare.

히틀러가 1944년 첫번째 V2 미사일을 발사했을 때 우주에서의 무기 경쟁은 공식적으로 시작되었다. 우주의 지배자는 우주를 통제하기 위한 주요 산업 국가들의 떠오르는 경쟁의 서사이자 우주 운임과 우주 전쟁간 미세한 선이다.

With unprecedented access to present and former US military personnel, and insights from anti-weapons activists, as well as military analysts, Masters of Space explores space as a "new arena for war."

현재 및 전 미국 군대 인사들에 대한 전례없는 접근, 그리고 무기 반대 활동가들의 안목으로부터 우주의 지배자는 “전쟁을 위한 새로운 경기장”으로 우주를 탐험한다.

Masters of Space (and Pax Americana) is directed by Denis Delestrac for Lowik Media and Coptor Productions.

우주의 지배자 (그리고 미국의 지배에 의한 평화)는 로우윅 미디아와 콥터 프로덕션이 제작하고 데이스 델레스트락이 감독했다.

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)

[국문 번역] Bruce Gagnon: Why Talk on Issue of the Militarization of Space, for Peace and Non-Violence? – A Spiritual Meditation

* Image Source: Media Jeju 미디어 제주

* Image Source: Jeju Focus 제주 포커스

* Image Source: Chamsori, Jeonbuk Internet Newspaper 전북 인터넷 신문: 참소리

Bruce K, Gagnon Korean Speech, Oct. 7~25, 2009
브루스 개그논 한국 방문 연설, 2009년 10월 7~25일

Why Talk on Issue of the Militarization of Space, for Peace and Non-Violence? – A Spiritual Meditation
왜 평화와 비폭력을 위해 우주의 군사화를 논의해야 하는가? –영성을 위한 고찰

Bruce K. Gagnon
브루스 K. 개그논
Secretary/Coordinator/ Co-founder, Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
사무 총장/ 코디네이터/ 공동 창설자, 우주의 무기와 핵을 반대하는 글로벌 넷워크


Let me first say a few words about my own personal history and the organization I work for.

먼저 제가 누구인지, 그리고 제가 일을 하는 조직이 어떤 조직인지에 대해 말하도록 하겠습니다.

I grew up in a military family and lived in various places around the world.

전 군인가정에서 태어나 세계 여러 곳을 돌아다니며 자랐습니다.

For several years when I was young we lived in the Black Hill of South Dakota in the western part of the US. This was home to the Lakota Native American people, where the great leaders Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull tried to defend their lands against the US Army. During this time I was touched by the native spirituality, learning about the interconnectedness of all life. All things are related the Native people said – the things that fly, the things that swim, the two-legged, the four-legged, the water, the air, the plants – we are all one family. In my prayers at the time I asked the Great Spirit to guide me and let me be connected to all that is good. My heart opened to these Indian people who suffered from endless occupation and war. Their lands and way of life were taken from them. Even today they still are the poorest people in America with little hope. They taught me to love those who were powerless.

제 어린 시절 몇 년동안 우리 가족은 미 서부 사우스 다코타의 블랙힐에서 살았읍니다. 이 곳은 라코타 원주민의 고향이었는데 크레이지 호스 (Crazy Horse)와 시팅 불(Sitting Bull)등 위대한 지도자들이 미국 군대에 대항해 자신들의 땅을 지키려 했던 곳입니다. 이 때 저는 원주민의 영성에 감화되었는데 그 것은 모든 생명은 서로 연결되어 있다는 것이었읍니다. 모든 것은 연결되어 있다고 원주민들은 말했읍니다– 나는 것, 헤엄치는 것, 두 발 달린 것, 네발 달린 것, 물, 공기, 식물들 우리는 모두 한 가족이라고요. 당시 저는 제 기도에서 위대한 영혼(Great Spirit)이 저를 인도하고 모든 선한 것에 연결시켜 주게 해달라고 빌었읍니다. 제 마음은 끊없는 점령과 전쟁에 고통받는 이 원주민들에게 끌렸읍니다. 그들의 땅과 생활 방식은 강탈당했읍니다. 오늘날까지도 그들은 미국에서 희망이라곤 없는 가장 가난한 사람들입니다. 그들은 저로 하여금 힘없는 사람들을 사랑하도록 가르쳤읍니다.

But I still had many other lessons to learn.

그러나 저는 아직도 배울 것들이 많았읍니다.

In 1971, being a young conservative like my father, I too joined the US Air Force and was stationed in California at an airlift base for the Vietnam war. Soldiers would come from all over the country to board the planes to Vietnam. When the huge transport jets returned they carried the wounded soldiers and the body bags of those troops who had been killed. As a result, there were frequently anti-war protests outside my base. Although they were often very small, they caused the GI’s on our base to endlessly debate the war. This is the time that I became a peace activist.

1971년 제 아버지처럼 보수파였던 젊은 저는 아버지처럼 미 공군에 입대, 캘리포니아 주의 베트남으로 가는 비행기를 이륙했던 기지에 있게 되었읍니다. 미 전역에서 군인들이 와 베트남으로 가는 그 비행기들을 탔읍니다. 거대한 수송 제트들은 부상당한 군인들과 살해된 군인들의 시체 꾸러미들을 싣고 돌아오곤 했읍니다. 결과적으로 기지 바깥에선 종종 반전 시위가 있곤 했읍니다. 그 규모는 자주 작은 것이었다 하더라도 그 것은 기지안의 군인들로 하여금 전쟁에 대해 끊임없이 토론하게 만들곤 했읍니다. 이때가 제가 평화 활동가가 된 때입니다.

By 1983 I began working full-time in the peace movement and because I was living in Florida I began to learn about the plans for space warfare, as the Kennedy Space Center and NASA, the space agency, are based in the center of the state. I began organizing people to go to the space center for protests whenever military satellites were launched, when Trident nuclear missiles were test-fired from there, or when NASA launched space missions with highly-toxic plutonium-238 on-board.

1983년부터 저는 평화 운동에 전적으로 몸을 던지기 시작하게 되었는데 제가 살고 있던 플로리다 주에 케네디 우주 센터, 미 우주 항공국, 그리고 우주국등이 주의 한가운데에 있음으로서 자연히 우주 전쟁 계획들에 관해 깨닫기 되었기 때문입니다. 저는 우주 센터에서 군사 위성들이 발사되거나 트라이던트 핵 미사일들이 시험 발사될 때마다 센터 앞에서, 또는 미 우주 항공국이 독성높은 플루토늄 238을 싣고 우주 임무를 개시할 때마다 사람들을 시위에 조직하기 시작했읍니다.

It was during this time that I learned that much of what the so-called “civilian” NASA space agency was doing is actually “dual use”, meaning virtually every space mission served two masters. Civilian space missions are routinely used to test space weapons technologies.

이 때가 제가 이른바 “민간을 위한다는” 미 우주 항공국의 대부분이 실제로 “이중 임무”를 하고 있다는 것을 알게 된 때인데 말하자면 거의 모든 우주 임무는 두 주인을 섬기고 있읍니다. 민간용 우주 임무는 우주 무기 기술들을 실험하도록 일상적으로 이용됩니다.

By 1992, the Florida Coalition for Peace & Justice that I was working for had become so heavily involved in the space issue that we began looking around for more allies. We had earlier discovered an organization, called Citizens for Peace in Space, in the state of Colorado, where the US Space Command was headquartered. This relationship led to the creation of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space that I coordinate today.

1992년, 제가 일하고 있던 플로리다 평화 정의 연합은 너무 중대하게 우주 이슈에 몰두하고 있던 때라 우리는 더 많은 동지들을 구하기 시작했읍니다. 우리는 미국 우주 사령부 본부가 있는 콜로라도 주 소재 ‘우주의 평화를 위한 시민들’ 이란 조직을 이미 발견한 참이었읍니다. 이 인연이 제가 오늘날 꾸려가는 우주의 무기와 핵을 반대하는 글로벌 넷워크의 창설로 이어진 것입니다.

As we organized the Global Network we learned about US space warfare bases in England, Greenland, Norway, Australia, and in many other parts of the world. Local peace groups in those countries quickly became part of our movement, and today we have 150 affiliated organizations around the planet, including two here in South Korea – the Peace Network and SPARK.

우리가 글로벌 넷워크를 조직함에 따라 우리는 영국, 그린랜드, 노르웨이, 호주, 그리고 세게의 많은 다른 지역들의 미 우주 전쟁 기지들에 대해 깨달았읍니다. 그 나라의 지역 평화 그룹들은 곧 우리 운동에 참여하게 되었고 오늘날 우리는 지구 전체에 150여개 동맹 조직들을 지니게 되었는데 한국의 평화 넷트 워크와 평통사 둘을 포함합니다.

In the years that followed, we began collecting and sharing the US Space Command’s detailed plans for space. “Master of Space” is the logo of the 50th Space Wing at the headquarters of the Air Force Space Command in Colorado.

해가 가면서 우리는 미 우주 사령부의 우주에 관한 구체적인 계획들을 모으고 공유하기 시작했읍니다. “우주의 지배자 (Master of Space) ”는 콜로라도 주 공군 우주 사령부 본부들에 있는 50번쩨 우주 기지의 로고입니다.

In an important planning document called “Vision for 2020”, published in 1997 during the presidency of Bill Clinton, the Space Command calls for US “control and domination” of space, saying: “Control of space is the ability to assure access to space, freedom of operations within the space medium, and an ability to deny others the use of space.”

1997년, 빌 클린턴 재임시절 출간된 “Vision for 2020” 이라 불리는 중요한 계획 문서에서 우주 사령부는 우주를 통한 미국의 “통제와 지배”를 선언하며 말하길, “우주 통제는 우주 접근을 확신하는 능력, 우주 매개물내에서 작전들의 자유, 그리고 타자들의 우주 사용을 부인하는 것을 말한다.”라고 말했읍니다.

Each branch of the military, the Army, Navy, and Air Force, now has its own space command.

군대의 각 부분들, 육군, 해군, 그리고 공군은 현재 각자 자신만의 우주 사령부를 갖고 있읍니다.

When the Space Command talks about “exploiting space” it doesn’t only mean using it as a weapons platform. Scientists have discovered precious mineral resources on the moon, Mars and asteroids. One reason so many nations, including South Korea, are so interested in developing moon missions is because helium-3 has been discovered there.

우주 사령부가 “우주 탐험”을 말할 때 그것은 우주 사령부가 우주를 무기 정거장으로 사용하겠다는 것만이 아닙니다. 과학자들은 달, 화성, 그리고 혹성들에서 값어치나가는 광물 자원들을 발견했읍니다. 한국을 포함하여 많은 국가들이 달 임무를 개발하는 것에 흥미를 갖는 이유들은 헬륨-3가 그 곳에서 발견되었기 때문입니다.

South Korea hopes to orbit the moon by 2020 and have a lunar lander by 2025. Scientists believe that helium-3 could be used to fuel fusion reactors back on Earth, making the profits of the oil corporations pale in comparison. This new race to the planets could be another source of conflict here on Earth unless the world begins now to insist on peaceful, and cooperative space exploration.

한국은 2020년까지 달을 돌고 2025년까지 달 착륙선을 가지길 꿈꿉니다. 과학자들은 헬륨 3가 석유 회사들의 이윤들은 비교도 안되게 지구에서 융해 원자로의 연료로 쓰일 수 있다 믿습니다. 행성들로 가는 이 새로운 경쟁들은 세계가 평화롭고 협조적인 우주 탐험들을 고수하는 것을 당장 시작하지 않으면 지구 위에서는 또 다른 갈등의 요인이 될 수 있읍니다.

The taxpayers will build the rockets for nations like the US and South Korea and the aerospace corporations intend to make the profit from "mining the sky" for precious resources.
Here in South Korea a company called the Korean Aerospace Industries has been created by the combined efforts of Daewoo Heavy Industries, Hyundai Space & Aircraft and the Samsung Aerospace. The South Korean government has supplied 200 billion won to make this merger happen.

미국과 남한 같은 나라들에서 납세자들의 돈은 로켓들을 짓는데 쓰일 것이며 우주 항공 기업들은 값어치 나가는 자원을 얻으러 “하늘을 캐며” 이윤을 얻으려 합니다.

Let us now return to the US Space Command and further define some of the terms it uses.

여기 남한에서 한국 우주 항공 산업이라 불리는 기업이 대우 중공업, 현대 우주와 비행기 그리고 삼성 우주 항공의 합동 노력으로 만들어졌읍니다. 한국 정부는 이 병합이 이루어지도록 2천 억원을 지원했읍니다.

“Full spectrum dominance” means that the US military will control all war fighting at every level of conflict. The Army will control the ground; the Navy will control the oceans; the Air Force will control the air, and the Space Command will control space.

이제 우주 사령부로 돌아가 그 것이 사용하는 몇 가지 용어들을 살펴 봅시다. “전방위 지배 (Full spectrum dominance)”는 미국 군대가 모든 전투들을 모든 갈등의 차원에서 통제하는 것을 말합니다. 육군은 지상을 통제할 것이고 해군은 해양을 통제하며 공군은 하늘을, 우주 사령부는 우주를 통제할 것입니다.

There is just one problem: If the US can do this, so could some other country. Thus, the Space Command says, it must “deny” certain countries access to space. It must be the “Master of Space.” To carry out this denial mission, the Space Command has said, it must have weapons in space that would be able to take out a competitor nation’s “space assets” — meaning their satellites.

딱 한가지 문제가 있는데, 미국이 할 수 있다면 다른 나라도 할 수 있다는 것입니다. 그러므로 우주 사령부는 자신이 특정한 나라들의 우주 접근을 “부인”해야 한다고 말합니다. 그 것은 “우주의 지배자”가 되어야 합니다. 이 거부 임무를 실행하기 위해 우주 사령부는 경쟁국의 “우주 자산들”- 위성들을 말하는데 –을 없애기 위해 우주에 무기들을 가져야 한다 말합니다.

We now know that military satellites are what controls war on the ground today. When the Pentagon launched the initial attack in the “shock and awe” invasion of Iraq in 2003, 70% of the weapons that were used were directed to their targets by space satellites.

지금 우리는 군사 위성들이야말로 오늘날 지상의 전쟁을 통제하는 것들이라는 것을 압니다. 미 국방부가 2003년 이라크 “충격과 공포” 침략에서 선제 공격을 개시했을 때 사용되었던 무기들의 70%는 우주 위성들에 의해 목표물둘에 향해졌읍니다.

The Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, or drones as they are often called, that are killing many civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan today, are actually flown by pilots sitting at computer terminals at military bases inside the US. In real time, split second time, the pilots can watch the ground in Afghanistan from cameras mounted on the drones and order them to fire their deadly "Hellfire" missiles using satellite technology.

오늘날 이라크, 아프가니스탄, 그리고 파키스탄에서 많은 시민들을 죽이는 무인 비행기들 (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) 또는 그들이 종종 드로운(drone) 이라 부르는 것들은 실제 미국 내 군사 기지들의 컴퓨터 최종 부서에 앉아있는 조종사들에 의해 날아갑니다. 조종사들은 위성 기술을 이용, 무인 비행기들에 장착되어 있는 카메라를 통해 아프가니스탄의 지상을 보며, 실제 상황에서 눈 깜짝할 사이 무인 비행기들이 “지옥불(Hellfire)” 미사일들을 발사하도록 조종하는 것입니다.

The idea that no competitor nation will be allowed to have access to space during conflict is of course a very provocative one to Russia and China.

어떠한 경쟁국도 갈등시 우주에 접근하지 못하게 한다는 생각은 러시아와 중국에게는 물론 매우 화나는 일입니다.

Another important point that must be mentioned is the cost of an arms race in space. Not only does the militarization of space make life on Earth less secure today, because it fuels a new arms race, but it is also extremely expensive. The aerospace industry has boasted that Star Wars will be the largest industrial project in the history of the planet. No matter how hard the US government tries, it cannot afford to pay for this new arms race in space by itself. This is where the allies come into the equation. One of the Pentagon’s top jobs today is to persuade Japan, South Korea, Australia, England, Germany, India, and other nations to become a part of the program to put the expensive space warfare system into place. That of course means that many social and environmental needs will be neglected or ignored completely.

언급되어야 될 또 다른 중요한 점은 우주 무기 경쟁의 비용입니다. 우주의 군사화는 새로운 무기 경쟁을 지필 뿐 아니라 엄청나게 비싸기 때문에 지구의 생명을 덜 안전하게 합니다. 우주 항공 산업은 우주 전쟁이 지구 역사상 가장 큰 산업 프로젝트일 거라 우쭐거린 바 있읍니다. 미 정부가 아무리 용을 쓴다 해도 자기 혼자 이 새로운 무기 경쟁의 비용을 다 치룰 수는 없는 일입니다. 이 점이 바로 동맹국들이 필요해지는 지점입니다. 오늘날 미 국방부의 가장 중요한 업무의 하나는 일본, 한국, 호주, 영국, 독일, 인도, 그리고 다른 국가들이 이 프로그램에 참가하여 비싼 우주 전쟁 프로그램을 실현되게끔 하는 것입니다. 이 것은 물론 많은 사회적, 환경적 필요들이 완전히 태만시되거나 무시될 것을 의미합니다.

So today we see the US expanding PAC-3 and THAAD missile defense programs throughout the world, particularly in the Asian-Pacific region. We see the Pentagon pushing for “missile defense” deployments throughout Europe. We see US Star Wars radar facilities being expanded and upgraded in England, Australia, Germany, Greenland, Norway, and in other places around the world for the purpose of communicating with new generations of military satellites that will help direct this program of “full spectrum dominance.”

그래서 오늘날 우리는 세계 전체, 특히 아시아 태평양 지역에 미국이 PAC-3 (패트리어트 미사일-3), THAAD ( Theater High Altitude Area Defense, 전구 고고도 지역 방어) 미사일 방어 프로그램들을 확장하는 것을 봅니다. 우리는 미 국방부가 유럽에 “미사일 방어” 배치들을 갖은 애를 써 추진하는 것을 봅니다. 우리는 미국 우주 전쟁 레이다 시설들이 “전방위 지배”라는 프로그램을 이끄는 것을 도와 줄 신세대 군사 위성들과 통신할 목적으로 영국, 호주, 독일, 그린랜드, 노르웨이와 다른 지역들에 확장되고 업그레이드되는 것을 봅니다.

In the US, we see space technology weapons programs under development like laser weapon systems, new generations of war-fighting satellites, cyber warfare systems, the military space plane, and hives of miniature robotic Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

미국에서 우리는 레이저 무기 시스템들, 신세대 전투 위성들, 사이버 전쟁 시스템들, 군사 우주 비행기들, 축소 모형 로봇 무인 비행기들 집단과 같은 우주 기술 무기 프로그램들이 개발 중에 있는 것을 봅니다. 이것은 단지 빙산의 일각입니다.

Let me talk about just one of these programs to illustrate how space technology “advancements” are a danger to global hopes for nuclear disarmament.

어떻게 이 우주 기술의 “진전”이 비핵무장을 위한 지구의 희망에 위협이 될 수 있는가를, 이 프로그램들의 하나만 예를 들어 설명하겠읍니다.

For the past several years the US Space Command has been annually computer war-gaming such an attack. Set in the year 2016 the Pentagon launches the military space plane that takes off like an airplane, flies through space, and then unleashes a devastating first-strike attack on China’s nuclear forces all within one hour. China then attempts to launch a retaliatory strike with its tens of nuclear missiles capable of hitting the west coast of the continental US. But US “missile defense” systems, like those parked nearby on Naval Aegis destroyers, in Japan, South Korea, Australia, and possibly even Taiwan, help take out China’s crippled nuclear response. Missile defense, sold to the public as a defensive system, is really designed by the Pentagon to be the shield after the first-strike sword has lunged into the heart of China’s nuclear arsenal.

지난 몇 년간, 미 우주 사령부는 매년 공격등의 내용을 담은 컴퓨터 전쟁 게임을 해왔읍니다. 설정된 2016년에 미 국방부는 군사 우주 비행기를 발사하는데 이것은 비행기처럼 이륙해 우주를 날아 중국 핵 무장력에 재앙을 낳는 선제 공격을 실현하고 이 모든 과정은 1시간 안에 이루어집니다. 그러면 중국은 미 대륙 서부 연안을 칠 수 있는 수십개의 핵 미사일들로 보복 공격을 개시합니다. 그러나 일본, 한국, 호주, 그리고 아마도 대만 근처 이지스 구축함들에 장착돼 있는 미국 “미사일 방어” 시스템들은 중국의 비틀거리는 핵 대응을 꺾을 것입니다. 대중에게 방어 시스템으로 미화 선전된 미사일 방어망은 실지로는 미 국방부가 자신의 선제 공격 검을 중국의 핵 병기 심장에 찌른 후의 방패용으로 고안한 것입니다.

Imagine, if you would, how the leaders inside China view this war game. The technologies are now being developed to destroy the firewall between conventional and nuclear weapons. Space technology thus becomes the enabler of first-strike military doctrine. Any hopes for serious nuclear abolition negotiations with China are irreparably harmed by the militarization and weaponization of space.

중국의 지도자들이 이 전쟁 게임을 어떻게 볼지 한번 상상해 보세요. 현재 기술의 발달은 재래식과 핵무기 사이 뚜렸한 경계가 무너지도록 개발되고 있읍니다. 우주 기술은 그러므로 선제 공격 군사 닥트린을 가능하게 하는 것입니다. 우주의 군사화와 무기화는 중국과의 어떠한 진지한 핵 폐지 협상 희망도 만회할 수 없도록 손상할 것입니다.

The entire US military is now tied together using space technology. The Space Command says that all warfare on the Earth today is “net-centric.” With military satellites in space the US can see virtually everything on the planet and can target virtually any place on the Earth.

미국 군대 전체는 현재 우주 기술로 함께 묶여져 있읍니다. 우주 사령부는 오늘날 지구의 모든 전쟁은 “넷워크 중심”이라 말합니다. 우주의 군사 위성들로 인해 미국은 행성의 모든 것들을 가상 현실로 볼 수 있으며 지구의 어떤 곳도 가상 현실에서 명중할 수 있읍니다.

One finds oneself asking the question, why? Why, when we already have a maddening nuclear arms race, is the US pushing the militarization and weaponization of space?

왜냐고 스스로 묻지 않을 수 없읍니다. 왜, 우리가 이미 미친 핵 무기 경쟁 속에 사는데 미국은 우주의 군사화와 무기화를 미는 걸까요?

President Obama’s new National Security Adviser, Gen. James Jones was the former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. In 2006, Gen. Jones told the media, “NATO is developing a special plan to safeguard oil and gas fields in the [Caspian sea] region…. Our strategic goal is to expand to Eastern Europe and Africa.”

오바마 대통령의 새 국가 안보 보좌관, 제임스 조운스는 전 나토 최고 동맹 사령관이었읍니다. 2006년, 제임스 조운스는 언론에, “나토는 [카스피해] 지역의 석유와 개스 지대들을 보호하기 위해 특별 계획을 개발하고 있다 … 우리의 전략은 동유럽과 아프리카로 확장하는 것이다.” 라고 말했읍니다.

Who is the competitor of the US in Africa? The Pentagon maintains that it is China, largely due to the fierce international competition for dwindling supplies of oil, natural gas, coal, uranium, and other resources around the world.

아프리카에서 미국의 경쟁자는 누구인가요? 미 국방부는 그 것이 중국이라는 주장을 유지하는데 중국이 석유, 천연 개스. 석탄, 우라늄, 그리고 세계의 다른 자원들의 축소해가는 공급량의 치열한 국제적 경쟁자라는 큰 이유때문입니다.

In April of 2009 Army Gen. Walter Sharp, the commander of US forces Korea, told members of the US Senate Armed Services Committee in Washington that the US-South Korean alliance was “a linchpin for stability in Northeast Asia.”

2009년 4월, 주한 미군 사령관, 육군 장군 월터 샤프는 워싱턴의 미 상원 무기 업무 위원회의 위원들에게 한미 동맹은 “동북아의 안정을 위한 쐐기”라 말헀읍니다.

The US now has 30 ground-based interceptor missiles deployed in South Korea. Many peace activists here, and in Japan, strongly believe that the ultimate target of these systems is not North Korea, but China and Russia.

미국은 현재 남한에 30개의 지대 요격 미사일들을 배치했읍니다. 많은 이곳과 일본의 평화 활동가들은 이 시스템들의 긍극적 대상은 북한이 아니라 중국과 러시아라고 강하게 믿습니다.

The current US military transformation underway in South Korea and Japan is indeed a key element in this regional offensive strategy to contain China while justifying the military expansion as containment of North Korea. I believe North Korea’s recent nuclear test and missile tests have been a desperate reaction from an insecure nation worried about the US military strategy of “full spectrum dominance.” While North Korea’s nuclear tests were wrong, and only helped to justify “missile defense” deployments in response, it must also be remembered that the US launched a nuclear ICBM from Vandenberg AFB in California toward the Pacific on June 29 and another on August 23.

남한과 일본에서 현재 일어나는 미국 군대의 변형은 북한 봉쇄를 위한 군사 확장을 정당화함과 동시에 실제로 중국을 봉쇄하려는 지역적 공격 전략의 핵심입니다. 저는 북한의 최근 핵실험과 미사일 실험이 “전방위 지배”라는 미 군사 전략에 대해 노심초사한 한 불안한 국가의 필사적 반응이었다 믿습니다. 북한의 핵 실험들이 잘못된 것이었고 그 대답으로 “미사일 방어망”배치를 정당화 하는 것을 도울 뿐이었지만, 미국이 6월 29일, 또 8월 23일 각각 캘리포니아주 밴던버그 공군 기지에서 대륙간 핵탄도 미사일을 발사[실험]했다는 것을 또한 기억해야 할 것입니다.

Why is it OK for the US to launch nuclear rockets toward the Asian-Pacific but wrong for North Korea to test rockets? Why was it OK for South Korea to attempt to launch a space rocket on August 25 but wrong for North Korea to do the same? South Korea has sent 10 satellites into space and nine more will be launched by 2015. But when the DPRK said they were launching a satellite into space the world went crazy.

왜 미국이 아시아 테평양을 향해 핵 로켓을 발사하는 것은 괜찮고 북한이 로켓을 발사하는 것은 잘못된 것입니까? 왜 남한이 8월 25일 우주에 로켓을 발사하려 한 것은 괜찮았고 북한이 같은 일을 했던 것은 잘못된 것입니까? 남한은 10개 위성들을 우주에 보냈고 2015년까지 9개가 더 갈 겁니다. 그러나 북한이 우주에 단 한개 위성을 쏘아 올린다 했을때 세계는 광분했읍니다.

We now hear Japan and South Korea talking about "preemptive" attacks on North Korea.
Reunification on the Korean peninsula will only happen after the US-South Korea-Japan nuclear alliance is terminated.

우리는 오늘날 일본과 남한이 북한에 대한 “선제” 공격을 말하는 것을 듣습니다. 한반도의 재통일은 미국-남한-일본 핵 동맹이 끝날 때만 오직 가능할 것입니다.

Today US forces in Japan and South Korea are being used for global intervention in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. The next step is likely to be the ROK and Japan forces becoming involved in US and NATO interventions around the world.

오늘날 일본과 남한의 미 군사력은 이라크와 아프가니스탄과 같은 곳들에서 전지구적 개입을 위해 이용되고 있읍니다. 다음 순서는 남한과 일본의 군사력들이 미국과 나토의 세계 곳곳의 개입에 참여하게 될 것 같군요.

China maintains that deployment of “missile defense” systems in the Asia-Pacific region by the US and its allies is a threat to hopes for nuclear disarmament.

중국은 아시아 태평양 지역의 미국과 그 동맹국들의 “미사일 방어망” 시스템 배치가 비핵무장 희망에 위협이라는 주장을 합니다.

US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates’ comments were quite revealing last April when he said, “We’re converting more Navy Aegis ships to have ballistic missile defense that would help against China.”

미 국방 장관 로버트 게이츠가 지난 4월 “ 우리는 더 많은 해군 이지스 군함들을 전환해 탄도 미사일 방어를 할 건데 이것은 충국에 대항할 것을 도울 것이다.” 라고 언급한 것은 꽤 시사적입니다.

Living in Bath, Maine I have a special perspective on this US-China naval competition. In my town, the Navy builds the Aegis destroyer that is outfitted with missile defense systems and is being deployed in the Asian-Pacific region. The two Republican senators from my state maintain that more Pentagon funds for Aegis shipbuilding are needed to “contain” China.

메인 주 배쓰에 살며 저는 이 미-중 해군 경쟁에 대해 특별한 시각을 갖게 되었읍니다. 제가 사는 마을에 미 해군은 미사일 방어 시스템이 장착되어 아시아 태평양 지역에 배치될 이지스 구축함을 짓습니다. 메인 주의 두 공화당 상원 위원들은 중국을 “봉쇄”하기위해 이지스 건조에 더 많은 국방부 자금이 필요하다 합니다.

President Obama is calling for a 4% increase in military spending in 2010. Most other nations around the globe are also increasing their military budgets.

오바마 대통령은 2010년에 4% 군사 지출을 요청하고 있읍니다. 지구의 다른 많은 나라들도 군사 예산을 늘리고 있읍니다.

Why is virtually every country in the world expanding its military at the very time that everyone agrees that we must put the nuclear genie back into the bottle?

핵 마귀를 병속에 도로 집어 넣어야 한다고 모두가 동의하는 바로 이 시점에 왜 세계의 실제 모든 나라들이 군사력을 늘리고 있는 걸까요?

We all know that fossil fuels are a declining natural resource on our fragile Mother Earth. Many experts now say we’ve reached the peak of oil availability and are now quickly heading down the hill toward scarcity at the very time that global demand for oil is growing.

우리는 모두 부서지기 쉬운 어머니 지구에서 화석 연료가 줄어드는 천연 자원이란 것을 알고 있읍니다. 현재 많은 전문가들은 우리가 석유 이용의 한계에 도달했으며 전 세계적으로 석유 요구가 높아져 가는 바로 이 시점에 석유가 급속하게 부족하게 될 거라 말합니다.

Renowned author Noam Chomsky says US foreign policy is now all about controlling most of the world’s oil supply as a “lever of world domination.” One way to keep Europe, China, India and other emerging markets dependent on the US and in sync with its policies is to maintain control of the oil supply they’re reliant on. Even as the US economy is collapsing, the Pentagon appears to be saying; whoever controls the keys to the world’s economic engine still remains in charge.

저명한 작가 노엄 촘스키는 현재의 미 외교 정책은 모두 세계의 석유 공급의 대부분을 “세계 지배의 지렛대”로 통제하는 것과 관련된 것이라 말합니다. 유럽, 중국, 인도, 그리고 다른 신생 시장들이 미국에 의존하고 그 정책들과 계속 조화를 이루게 하는 한 방법은 그들이 의존하는 석유 공급을 통제하는 것입니다. 미국의 경제가 무너지고 있어도 미 국방부는 세계 경제적 엔진의 열쇠들을 통제하는 자가 계속 주도권을 가질 거라 말하는 것처럼 보입니다.

China, for example, imports up to 80% of its oil through the Malacca Strait. If any competitor nation was able to militarily control that transit route and choke off China’s oil supply, its economy could be held hostage. Many thus wonder if the current doubling of the US military presence in the Asian-Pacific is really due to North Korea’s nuclear program or is actually a part of a larger military strategy to ensure US control?

예를 들어 중국은 말라카 해협을 통해 석유의 80% 이상을 수입합니다. 다른 경쟁국이 그 운송 항로를 군사적으로 통제하고 중국의 석유 공급을 조일 수 있게 된다면 중국 경제는 볼모가 될 수 있읍니다. 그래서 많은 이들이 현재 아시아 태평양에서 두 배로 증가하는 미군의 존재가 정말로 북한의 핵 프로그램 때문인지 또는 미국의 통제를 보증하기 위한 더 큰 군사적 전략의 일부분 때문인지 의아해 하는 것입니다.

Imagine my surprise to read the September 23 article in the Korea Times that reported on the controversial decision to move ahead with construction of the naval base on Jeju Island. Construction of the base is set to begin in December and will be the homeport for two Aegis destroyer-led naval squadrons. The Aegis naval combat system, built by Lockheed Martin Weapons Corporation, is the world's premier ship-based missile defense system. The news article carried this quote: "Jeju has long been considered a tactical, strategic point to secure southern sea lanes for transporting energy supplies and to conduct mobile operations…Following the construction, the Navy will be able to successfully conduct long-range operations to protect our commercial vessels in blue waters, including the Malacca Strait, as well as carry out full-scale operations around the Korean Peninsula."

제가 9월 23일 자 코리아 타임즈에서 제주도의 해군 기지 건설을 계속하겠다는 논란 많은 결론을 보고한 기사를 읽고 얼마나 놀랐는지 상상해 보세요.기지 건설이 12월 시작하게 되어 있고 그 것은 두 이지스 구축함이 이끄는 해군 비행 중대의 모항이 됩니다. 록히드 마틴 무기 회사에 의해 건조되는 이지스 해군 전투 시스템은 건 세계 제일의 군함 기반 미사일 방어 시스템입니다. 그 새로운 기사는 이 인용을 실었읍니다:”제주는 에너지 공급 물자들을 수송하기 위한 남햇길을 확보하고 이동 작전들을 수행하는 전술적, 전략적 지점으로 오랫동안 고려되어 왔다…건설이 되면, 해군은 말라카 해협을 포함, 푸른 바다에서 우리의 상선들을 보호하고 한반도 주변에서 전면전을 실행할 장거리작전들을 성공적으로 할 수 있을 것이다.”

One might wonder if the US military will recruit the South Korean Navy at Jeju to join the coastal encirclement of China? Is this something the people of South Korea wish to be involved in – poking a sharp stick at China?

미국 군대가 중국을 연안 봉쇄하기 위해 제주에 있는 남한 해군을 고용하는 거냐고 물음이 나올 법 합니다. 중국에 날카로운 막대기를 찌르는 것-이것이 남한 사람들이 참여하길 원하는 겁니까?

Russia has the world’s largest deposits of natural gas and significant supplies of oil. The US has recently built military bases in Romania and Bulgaria and will soon be adding more in Albania. NATO has been expanding eastward into Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, right on Russia’s border. Georgia and the Ukraine are next on the list to become members of what is quickly becoming a global NATO military alliance. US missile defense systems are going to be deployed throughout this part of the world.

러시아는 세계에서 가장 큰 천연 개스와 상당한 공급량의 석유 저장량을 갖고 있읍니다. 미국은 최근 루마니아와 불가리아에 군사 기지들을 지었고 알바니아에 더 추가할 겁니다. 나토는 동쪽으로 러시아 바로 경계의 라트비아, 리투아니아, 에스토니아로 동진을 확장하고 있었읍니다. 조지아와 우크라이나는 전지구적 나토 군사 동맹국으로 급속히 될 리스트의 다음 순서에 있읍니다. 미국 미사일 방어망은 이 지역 전체에 배치될 것입니다.

Former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev delivered the opening address at the “Overcoming Nuclear Dangers” conference in Rome on April 16, 2009. He noted, “Unless we address the need to demilitarize international relations, reduce military budgets, put an end to the creation of new kinds of weapons and prevent weaponization of outer space, all talk about a nuclear-weapon-free world will be just inconsequential rhetoric.”

전 소비에트 대통령 미하일 고르바초프는 2009년 4월 16일 로마 회담에서 “핵 위험을 극복하기”란 개막 연설을 했읍니다. 그는 “우리가 국제 관계를 비무장하고 군사 예산을 축소하고 새로운 종류의 무기 생산을 종식하고 외계 우주의 무기화를 막기 위한 필요성을 말하지 않는 이상, 비핵무장에 관한 모든 논의는 결과없는 수사일 뿐입니다.”라고 말했읍니다.

I must turn to Mr. Gorbachev for one more important point here. In a very recent interview with a German newspaper, he commented that Western Germany, the US and other powers had pledged after Germany’s reunification in 1990 that, “NATO would not move a centimeter to the east.” This broken promise had led to Russia’s disillusionment with relations with the West, Gorbachev said.

저는 여기서 한가지 더 중요한 점을 말하기 위해 고르바초프씨에게 돌아가야 합니다. 독일 신문과의 매우 최근 신문에서 그는 서독, 미국, 그리고 여타 강대국들이 1990년 독일 재통일 이후, ”나토는 1 센티미터도 동진하지 않을 것이다.” 라고 상호 서약했음을 언급했읍니다. 깨어진 약속은 러시아의 서방 관계에 대한 환상을 깨뜨렸다고 고르바초프는 말합니다.

China is not sitting still as these US military moves are made on the grand chessboard. In 2007, they destroyed one of their own defunct satellites with a ballistic missile as a way to show the world that they had “anti-satellite” weapons capability. This contributed to the growing problem of space debris that is now dangerously orbiting the Earth and, if worsened, could one day make it virtually impossible for any nation to launch a rocket into space, due to the minefield of space junk surrounding the planet.

중국은 미국 군대가 이 거대한 체스판 위에서 움직이는 것을 가만히 보고만 있지는 않습니다. 2007년, 그들은 그들이 “대항 위성” 무기 능력들을 갖고 있음을 세계에 보여 주기 위해 그들 자신의 고장난 위성들 중의 하나를 탄도 미사일로 파괴했읍니다. 이는 현재 지구를 위험하게 도는 우주 쓰레기들의 증가하는 문제에 기여했는데 상황이 악화되면 행성을 에워싸는 우주 쓰레기 광산때문에 언젠가는 어떤 나라도 우주에 로켓을 발사하는 것을 실제 불가능하게 할 수 있읍니다.

For many years Russia and China have introduced resolutions at the UN calling for negotiations on a new treaty that would ban weapons in space. All countries of the world have supported the resolution with the exception of the US, Israel, and Micronesia. This was true during the Clinton presidency as well as during the reign of George W. Bush. It will be crucial for President Obama, if he truly hopes to reset relations with Moscow, to seriously enter into negotiations for a global ban on weapons in space.

여러해 동안 러시아와 중국은 우주의 무기들을 금지하는 새로운 조약을 협상하기 위해 유엔에 결의안을 소개했었읍니다. 세계의 모든 나라가 그 결의안을 지지했는데 미국, 이스라엘, 미크로네시아만 예외였읍니다. 이것은 조지 W. 부쉬 정권 때만 아니라 클린턴 재임때에도 마찬가지였읍니다. 오바마 대통령이 진심으로 모스크바와의 관계를 재설정하길 원하다면 그가 우주에 무기를 놓는 것을 전지구적으로 금지하는 협상에 진지하게 임하는 것이 그로서는 결정적이 될 것입니다.

The public is losing confidence in leaders and government. It is as if the people of the world are captives on a sinking ship and they are stuck in the lower decks with no way out. They feel powerless about the things that they most care about.

대중은 지도자들과 정부에 대한 신뢰를 잃고 있읍니다. 그 것은 마치 세계의 사람들이 가라앉는 배의 포로가 된 것 같고 출구없는 기울어진 배에 갇혀 있는 것과 같습니다. 그들은 그들이 가장 아끼는 것들에 대해 무력하게 느낍니다.

It feels like our governments are being taken over by the military agenda as we see ever increasing military budgets and cuts in social programs. It is difficult not to get a hard and cynical heart about politics and politicians in these times of endless war. How can we really make peace possible when our nations are arming themselves with these new high-tech weapons systems? How can good people of conscience and believers in the prince of peace impact growing militarism?

군사 예산이 계속 늘어나고 사회 프로그램이 삭감되는 것을 보면 우리의 정부들은 군사 안건에 의해 사로잡힌 것처럼 느껴집니다. 이 끝없는 전쟁의 시대에 정치와 정치인들에 대해 굳어지고 냉소적인 마음을 갖지 않기란 어려운 일입니다. 우리의 국가들이 이 새로운 고기술 무기들로 무장하는데 어떻게 우리가 진정으로 평화를 이룰 수 있을까요? 어떻게 양심있는 선하고 평화에 신념을 지닌 사람들이 증가하는 군사주의에 영향을 줄 수 있을까요?

In my community we have begun to call for the conversion of the military industrial complex to peaceful production. This would give us the ability to energize the sinking global economy with green jobs and help us deal with the real crisis of our time – climate change.

제가 사는 공동체에서 우리는 평화적인 생산으로 가기 위해 군산 복합체를 전환하는 운동을 시작했읍니다. 이는 우리가 기울어지는 세계 경제를 녹색 직장들로 활력있게 하는 능력을 주고 기후 변화라는 우리 시대의 진짜 위기를 헤쳐나갈 수 있게 합니다.

We ask our fellow citizens in the US, why can't we build a solar society, make wind turbines, and build more public transit rail systems instead of making more weapons of war? I always ask my fellow Americans in my talks, what does it say about the soul of our nation that we have to build weapons to kill people in order to create jobs so people can feed their families?

우리는 미국 시민 동료들에게 왜 우리가 전쟁 무기들을 만드는 대신 태양열 사회를 건설할 수 없는지. 풍력 발전기를 만들 수 없는지, 더 많은 대중 철도 시스템을 지을 수 없는지 묻습니다. 저는 제 연설에서 항상 같은 미국 동료들에게 묻습니다. 직장들을 만들기 위해 사람들을 죽이는 무기들을 만들어야 하고 그것으로 가족을 먹여 살려야 하는 이 사실들이 우리 나라의 영혼에 대해 시사하는 바가 무엇이냐고요.

What does it mean to be a human being in the world? What is the most important job for those of us living on our Mother Earth today?

이 세게에서 인간으로 산다는 것은 무엇을 의미합니까? 오늘날 어머니 지구위에서 사는 우리에게 가장 중요한 일은 무었입니까?

I think of the spider, spinning the web. The spider never grows weary, never gives up, no matter the difficulties. Even if the spider has to spend its whole life just making one web it will do so. The spider understands its role in nature.

저는 거미줄을 짓는 거미를 생각합니다. 거미는 어떠한 어려움에도 전혀 약해지지 않고 포기하지 않습니다. 거미가 하나의 그물을 만들기 위해 전 생애를 바쳐야 한다면 그렇게 할 것입니다. 거미는 자연에서 자신의 역활을 이해합니다.

I've come to see my role as a spinner of sorts as well. My job is to work with people all over the world, linking us to one another, sharing information with one another, encouraging one another, all moving together to bring peace and sanity to this beautiful but fragmented world. My job is to never give up, to always keep spinning, and to try to remember to love, even when my heart feels hard.

저는 제 역활을 거미와 같은 것으로 이해하게 되었읍니다. 제 일은 전 세계의 사람들과 함께 일하며 우리가 서로 연결되게 하며 서로 정보를 공유하고 서로 격려하며 이 아름답지만 분열된 세게에 평화와 온전함을 가져오도록 함께 움직이는 일입니다. 제 일은 결코 포기하지 않으며 항상 실을 돌리고 제 마음이 굳어질 때도 사랑하는 것을 기억하도록 노력하는 것입니다.

Love our enemies. Treat others, as we would like to be treated. Honor our elders and the children. Protect our Mother Earth from harm. Forgive those who have hurt us so that we too might be forgiven when we hurt others.

우리의 적들을 사랑합시다. 타인들을 우리가 대접받고 싶어하는 것처럼 대접합시다. 연장자들과 어린이들을 존경합시다. 우리의 어머니 지구를 해악으로부터 보호합시다. 우리에게 상처준 이들을 용서함으로서 우리 역시 다른 이들을 상처입힐 때 용서 받을 수 있도록 합시다.

I keep praying to the Great Spirit, asking for the wisdom and the strength to keep doing my spinning work. I pray that I can touch some hearts, that I will be understood. I pray that others will find their paths and help us build the peace here on Earth.

저는 위대한 영혼에게 제가 실잣는 일을 계속하기 위해 지혜와 힘을 가지도록 기도를 멈추지 않습니다. 저는 제가 어떤 마음들에 감화를 주고 제가 이해될 수 있도록 기도합니다. 저는 제가 다른 이들이 그들의 길을 찾고 우리가 지구의 평화를 만드는데 도울 수 있도록 기도합니다.

I pray that someday the people of Korea will live in a unified nation, as one people again.

저는 Korea가 언젠가 통일된 나라에서 다시 한 민중들로 살길 기도합니다.

The Native American Indians said that the sacred hoop, the sacred circle, was broken. The time has come for us to heal the sacred hoop and our broken spirits.

미국 원주민 인디언들은 신성한 고리, 신성한 원이 끊겼다고 말합니다. 우리 스스로 신성한 고리와 우리의 분열된 영혼을 치유할 때가 왔읍니다.

Thank you for listening to me. Best wishes to all of you.

들어 주셔 감사합니다. 모두에게 최고의 기원을 올립니다.

Bruce K. Gagnon
브루스 K. 개그논
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
우주의 무기와 핵을 반대하는 글로벌 넷워크
www.space4peace.org

Text Fwd: Color Revolutions, Old and New

Global Reserach
Color Revolutions, Old and New
By Stephen Lendman
Global Research, July 1, 200

In his new book, "Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order," F. William Engdahl explained a new form of US covert warfare - first played out in Belgrade, Serbia in 2000. What appeared to be "a spontaneous and genuine political 'movement,' (in fact) was the product of techniques" developed in America over decades.

In the 1990s, RAND Corporation strategists developed the concept of "swarming" to explain "communication patterns and movement of" bees and other insects which they applied to military conflict by other means. More on this below.

In Belgrade, key organizations were involved, including the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the International Republican Institute (IRI), and National Democratic Institute. Posing as independent NGOS, they're, in fact, US-funded organizations charged with disruptively subverting democracy and instigating regime changes through non-violent strikes, mass street protests, major media agitprop, and whatever else it takes short of military conflict.

Engdahl cited Washington Post writer Michael Dobbs' first-hand account of how the Clinton administration engineered Slobodan Milosevic's removal after he survived the 1990s Balkan wars, 78 days of NATO bombing in 1999, and major street uprisings against him. A $41 million campaign was run out of American ambassador Richard Miles' office. It involved "US-funded consultants" handling everything, including popularity polls, "training thousands of opposition activists and helping to organize a vitally important parallel vote count."

Thousands of spray paint cans were used "by student activists to scrawl anti-Milosevic graffiti on walls across Serbia," and throughout the country around 2.5 million stickers featured the slogan "Gotov Je," meaning "He's Finished."

Preparations included opposition leader training in nonviolent resistance techniques at a Budapest, Hungary seminar - on matters like "organiz(ing) strike(s), communicat(ing) with symbols....overcom(ing) fear, (and) undermin(ing) the authority of a dictatorial regime." US experts were in charge, incorporating RAND Corporation "swarming" concepts.

GPS satellite images were used to direct "spontaneous hit-and-run protests (able to) elude the police or military. Meanwhile, CNN (was) carefully pre-positioned to project images around the world of these youthful non-violent 'protesters.' " Especially new was the use of the Internet, including "chat rooms, instant messaging, and blog sites" as well as cell phone verbal and SMS text-messaging, technologies only available since the mid-1990s.

Milosevic was deposed by a successful high-tech coup that became "the hallmark of the US Defense policies under (Rumsfeld) at the Pentagon." It became the civilian counterpart to his "Revolution in Military Affairs" doctrine using "highly mobile, weaponized small groups directed by 'real time' intelligence and communications."

Belgrade was the prototype for Washington-instigated color revolutions to follow. Some worked. Others failed. A brief account of several follows below.

In 2003, Georgia's bloodless "Rose Revolution" replaced Edouard Shevardnadze with Mikhail Saakashvili, a US-installed stooge whom Engdahl calls a "ruthless and corrupt totalitarian who is tied (not only to) NATO (but also) the Israeli military and intelligence establishment." Shevardnadze became a liability when he began dealing with Russia on energy pipelines and privatizations. Efforts to replace him played out as follows, and note the similarities to events in Iran after claims of electoral fraud.

Georgia held parliamentary elections on November 2. Without evidence, pro-western international observers called them unfair. Saakashvili claimed he won. He and the united opposition called for protests and civil disobedience. They began in mid-November in the capital Tbilisi, then spread throughout the country. They peaked on November 22, parliament's scheduled opening day. While it met, Saakashvili-led supporters placed "roses" in the barrels of soldiers' rifles, seized the parliament building, interrupted Shevardnadze's speech, and forced him to flee for his safety.

Saakashvili declared a state of emergency, mobilized troops and police, met with Sherardnadze and Zurab Zhvania (the former parliament speaker and choice for new prime minister), and apparently convinced the Georgian president to resign. Celebrations erupted. A temporary president was installed. Georgia's Supreme Court annulled the elections, and on January 4, 2004, Saakashvili was elected and inaugurated president on January 25.

New parliamentary elections were held on March 28. Saakashvili's supporters used heavy-handed tactics to gain full control with strong US backing in plotting and executing his rise to power. US-funded NGOs were also involved, including George Soros' Open Society Georgia Foundation, Freedom House, NED, others tied to the Washington establishment, and Richard Miles after leaving his Belgrade post to serve first as ambassador to Bulgaria from 1999 - 2002, then Georgia from 2002 - 2005 to perform the same service there as against Milosevic.

Ukraine's "Orange Revolution" followed a similar pattern to Georgia and now Iran. After Viktor Yanukovych won the November 21, 2004 run-off election against Viktor Yushchenko, it erupted following unsubstantiated claims of fraud. Yanukovych favored openness to the West but represented a pro-Russian constituency and was cool towards joining NATO. Washington backed Yushchenko, a former governor of Ukraine's Central Bank whose wife was a US citizen and former official in the Reagan and GHW Bush administrations. He favored NATO and EU membership and waged a campaign with the color orange prominently featured.

The media picked up on it and touted his "Orange Revolution" against the country's Moscow-backed old guard. Mass street protests were organized as well as civil disobedience, sit-ins and general strikes. They succeeded when Ukraine's Supreme Court annulled the run-off result and ordered a new election for December 26, 2004. Yushchenko won and was inaugurated on January 23, 2005.

In his book, "Full Spectrum Dominance," Engdahl explained how the process played out. Under the slogan "Pora (It's Time)," people who helped organize Georgia's "Rose Revolution" were brought in to consult "on techniques of non-violent struggle." The Washington-based Rock Creek Creative PR firm was instrumental in branding the "Orange Revolution" around a pro-Yushchenko web site featuring that color theme. The US State Department spent around $20 million dollars to turn Yanukovych's victory into one for Yushchenko with help from the same NGOs behind Georgia's "Rose Revolution" and others.

Myanmar's August - September 2007 "Saffron Revolution" used similar tactics as in Georgia and Ukraine but failed. They began with protests led by students and opposition political activists followed by Engdahl's description of "swarming mobs of monks in saffron, Internet blogs, mobile SMS links between protest groups, (and) well-organized (hit-and-run) protest cells which disperse(d) and re-form(ed)."

NED and George Soros' Open Society Institute led a campaign for regime change in league with the State Department by its own admission. Engdahl explained that the "State Department....recruited and trained key opposition leaders from numerous anti-government organizations in Myanmar" and ran its "Saffron Revolution" out of the Chaing Mai, Thailand US Consulate.

Street protesters were "recruited and trained, in some cases directly in the US, before being sent back to organize inside Myanmar." NED admitted funding opposition media, including the Democratic Voice of Burma radio.

Ahead of the 2008 Beijing Olympics, Washington tried to embarrass and destabilize China with a "Crimson Revolution" in Tibet - an operation dating from when George Bush met the Dalai Lama publicly in Washington for the first time, awarded him the Congressional Gold Medal, and backed Tibetan independence.

On March 10, Engdahl reported that Tibetan monks staged "violent protests and documented attacks (against) Han Chinese residents....when several hundred monks marched on Lhasa (Tibet's capital) to demand release of other monks allegedly detained for celebrating the award of the US Congress' Gold Medal" the previous October. Other monks joined in "on the 49th anniversary of the Tibetan uprising against Chinese rule."

The same instigators were involved as earlier - NED, Freedom House, and others specific to Tibet, including the International Committee for Tibet and the Trace Foundation - all with ties to the State Department and/or CIA.

The above examples have a common thread - achieving what the Pentagon calls "full spectrum dominance" that depends largely on controlling Eurasia by neutralizing America's two main rivals - Russia militarily, China economically, and crucially to prevent a strong alliance between the two. Controlling Eurasia is a strategic aim in this resource-rich part of the world that includes the Middle East.

Iran's Made-in-the-USA "Green Revolution"

After Iran's June 12 election, days of street protests and clashes with Iranian security forces followed. Given Washington's history of stoking tensions and instability in the region, its role in more recent color revolutions, and its years of wanting regime change in Iran, analysts have strong reasons to suspect America is behind post-election turbulence and one-sided Western media reports claiming electoral fraud and calling for a new vote, much like what happened in Georgia and Ukraine.

The same elements active earlier are likely involved now with a May 22, 2007 Brian Ross and Richard Esposito ABC News report stating:

"The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a 'black' operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell the Blotter on ABCNews.com. The sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity....say President Bush has signed a 'nonlethal presidential finding' that puts into motion a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial transactions."

Perhaps disruptions as well after the June 12 election to capitalize on a divided ruling elite - specifically political differences between Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Supreme Leader/Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on one side and Mir Hossein Mousavi, former president Hashemi Rafsanjani, and Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri on the other with Iran's Revolutionary Guard so far backing the ruling government. It's too early to know conclusively but evidence suggests US meddling, and none of it should surprise.

Kenneth Timmerman provides some. He co-founded the right wing Foundation for Democracy in Iran (FDI) and serves as its executive director. He's also a member of the hawkish Committee on the Present Danger (CPD) and has close ties to the equally hard line American Enterprise Institute, the same organization that spawned the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), renamed the Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) for much the same purpose.

On the right wing newsmax.com web site, Timmerman wrote that the NED "spent millions of dollars during the past decade promoting color revolutions in places such as Ukraine and Serbia, training political workers in modern communications and organizational techniques." He explained that money also appears to have gone to pro-Mousavi groups, "who have ties to non-governmental organizations outside Iran that (NED) funds."

Pre-election, he elaborated about a "green revolution in Tehran" with organized protests ready to be unleashed as soon as results were announced because tracking polls and other evidence suggested Ahmadinejad would win. Yet suspiciously, Mousavi declared victory even before the polls closed.

It gets worse. Henry Kissinger told BBC news that if Iran's color revolution fails, hard line "regime change (must be) worked for from the outside" - implying the military option if all else fails. In a June 12 Wall Street Journal editorial, John Bolton called for Israeli air strikes whatever the outcome - to "put an end to (Iran's) nuclear threat," despite no evidence one exists.

Iran's rulers know the danger and need only cite Iraq, Afghanistan, and numerous other examples of US aggression, meddling, and destabilization schemes for proof - including in 1953 and 1979 against its own governments.

On June 17, AP reported that Iran "directly accused the United States of meddling in the deepening crisis." On June 21 on Press TV, an official said "The terrorist Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) has reportedly played a major role in intensifying the recent wave of street violence in Iran. Iranian security officials reported (the previous day) that they have identified and arrested a large number of MKO members who were involved" in the nation's capital.

They admitted to having been trained in Iraq's camp Ashraf and got directions from MKO's UK command post "to create post-election mayhem in the country." On June 20 in Paris, MKO leader Maryam Rajavi addressed supporters and expressed solidarity with Iranian protesters.

In 2007, German intelligence called MKO a "repressive, sect-like and Stalinist authoritarian organization which centers around the personality cult of Maryam and Masoud Rajavi." MKO expert Anne Singleton explained that the West intends to use the organization to achieve regime change in Iran. She said its backers "put together a coalition of small irritant groups, the known minority and separatist groups, along with the MKO. (They'll) be garrisoned around the border with Iran and their task is to launch terrorist attacks into Iran over the next few years to keep the fire hot." They're perhaps also enlisted to stoke violence and conduct targeted killings on Iranian streets post-election as a way to blame them on the government.

On June 23, Tehran accused western media and the UK government of "fomenting (internal) unrest." In expelling BBC correspondent Jon Leyne, it accused him and the broadcaster of "supporting the rioters and, along with CNN," of setting up a "situation room and a psychological war room." Both organizations are pro-business, pro-government imperial tools, CNN as a private company, BBC as a state-funded broadcaster.

On its June 17 web site, BBC was caught publishing deceptive agitprop and had to retract it. It prominently featured a Los Angeles Times photo of a huge pro-Ahmadinejad rally (without showing him waving to the crowd) that it claimed was an anti-government protest for Mousavi.

Throughout its history since 1922, BBC compiled a notorious record of this sort of thing because the government appoints its senior managers and won't tolerate them stepping out of line. Early on, its founder, John Reith, wrote the UK establishment: "They know they can trust us not to be impartial," a promise faithfully kept for nearly 87 years and prominently on Iran.

With good reason on June 22, Iranian MPs urged that ties with Britain be reassessed while, according to the Fars news agency, members of four student unions planned protests at the UK embassy and warned of a repeat of the 1979 US embassy siege.

They said they'd target the "perverted government of Britain for its intervention in Iran's internal affairs, its role in the unrest in Tehran and its support of the riots." Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Hassan Ghashghavi, wouldn't confirm if London's ambassador would be expelled. On June 23, however, AP reported that two UK diplomats were sent home on charges of "meddling and spying."

State TV also said hard-line students protested outside the UK embassy, burned US, British and Israeli flags, hurled tomatoes at the building and chanted: "Down with Britain!" and "Down with USA!" Around 100 people took part.

Britain retaliated by expelling two Iranian diplomats. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon demanded an immediate end to "arrests, threats and use of force." Iran's official news agency, IRNA, reported that the Iranian Foreign Ministry rejected Ban's remarks and accused him of meddling. On June 23, Obama said the world was "appalled and outraged" by Iran's violent attempt to crush dissent and claimed America "is not at all interfering in Iran's affairs."

Yet on June 26, USA Today reported that:

"The Obama administration is moving forward with plans to fund groups that support Iranian dissidents, records and interviews show, continuing a program that became controversial" under George Bush. For the past year, USAID has solicited funds to "promote democracy, human rights, and the rule of law in Iran," according to its web site.

On July 11, 2008, Jason Leopold headlined his Countercurrents.org article, "State Department's Iran Democracy Fund Shrouded in Secrecy" and stated:

"Since 2006, Congress has poured tens of millions of dollars into a (secret) State Department (Democracy Fund) program aimed at promoting regime change in Iran." Yet Shirin Abadi, Iran's 2003 Nobel Peace prize laureate, said "no truly nationalist and democratic group will accept" US funding for this purpose. In a May 30, 2007 International Herald Tribune column, she wrote: "Iranian reformers believe that democracy can't be imported. It must be indigenous. They believe that the best Washington can do for democracy in Iran is to leave them alone."

On June 24, Brent Scowcroft, former National Security Advisor to Gerald Ford and GHW Bush, told Al Jazeera television that "of course" Washington "has agents working inside Iran" even though America hasn't had formal relations with the Islamic Republic for 30 years.

Another prominent incident is being used against Iran, much like a similar one on October 10, 1990. In the run-up to Operation Desert Storm, the Hill & Knowlton PR firm established the Citizens for a Free Kuwait (CFK) front group to sell war to a reluctant US public. Its most effective stunt involved a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl known only as Nayirah to keep her identity secret.

Teary eyed before a congressional committee, she described her eye-witness account of Iraqi soldiers "tak(ing) babies out of incubators and leav(ing) them on the cold floor to die." The dominant media featured her account prominently enough to get one observer to conclude that nothing had greater impact on swaying US public opinion for war, still ongoing after over 18 years.

Later it was learned that Nayirah was the daughter of Saud Nasir al-Sabah, a member of Kuwait's royal family and ambassador to the US. Her story was a PR fabrication, but it worked.

Neda (meaning "voice" in Farsi) Agha Soltani is today's Nayirah - young, beautiful, slain on a Tehran street by an unknown assassin, she's now the martyred face of opposition protesters and called "The Angel of Iran" by a supportive Facebook group. Close-up video captured her lying on the street in her father's arms. The incident and her image captured world attention. It was transmitted online and repeated round-the-clock by the Western media to blame the government and enlist support to bring it down. In life, Nayirah was instrumental in Iraq's destruction and occupation. Will Neda's death be as effective against Iran and give America another Middle East conquest?

Issues in Iran's Election

Despite being militant and anti-Western as Iran's former Prime Minister, Mousavi is portrayed as a reformer. Yet his support comes from Iranian elitist elements, the urban middle class, and students and youths favoring better relations with America. Ahmadinejad, in contrast, is called hardline. Yet he has popular support among the nation's urban and rural poor for providing vitally needed social services even though doing it is harder given the global economic crisis and lower oil prices.

Is it surprising then that he won? A Mousavi victory was clearly unexpected, especially as an independent candidate who became politically active again after a 20 year hiatus and campaigned only in Iran's major cities. Ahmadinejad made a concerted effort with over 60 nationwide trips in less than three months.

Then, there's the economy under Article 44 of Iran's constitution that says it must consist of three sectors - state-owned, cooperative, and private with "all large-scale and mother industries" entirely state-controlled, including oil and gas that provides the main source of revenue.

In 2004, Article 44 was amended to allow more privatizations, but how much is a source of contention. During his campaign, Mousavi called for moving away from an "alms-based" economy - meaning Ahmadinejad's policy of providing social services to the poor. He also promised to speed up privatizations without elaborating on if he has oil, gas, and other "mother industries" in mind. If so, drawing support from

Washington and the West is hardly surprising. On the other hand, as long as Iran's Guardian Council holds supreme power, an Ahmadinejad victory was needed as a pretext for all the events that followed. At this stage, they suspiciously appear to be US-orchestrated for regime change. Thus far, Iran's Revolutionary Guard, Basij militia, and other security forces have prevailed on the streets to prevent it, but it's way too early to declare victory.

George Friedman runs the private intelligence agency called Stratfor. On June 23 he wrote:

"While street protests in Iran appear to be diminishing, the electoral crisis continues to unfold, with reports of a planned nationwide strike and efforts by the regime's second most powerful cleric (Rafsanjani) to mobilize opposition against (Ahmadinejad) from within the system. In so doing he could stifle (his) ability to effect significant policy changes (in his second term), which would play into the hands of the United States."

Ahmadinejad will be sworn in on July 26 to be followed by his cabinet by August 19, but according to Stratfor it doesn't mean the crisis is fading. It sees a Rafsanjani-led "rift within the ruling establishment (that) will continue to haunt the Islamic Republic for the foreseeable future."

"What this means is that....Ahmadinejad's second term will see even greater infighting among the rival conservative factions that constitute the political establishment....Iran will find it harder to achieve the internal unity necessary to complicate US policy," and the Obama administration will try to capitalize on it to its advantage. Its efforts to make Iran into another US puppet state are very much ongoing, and for sure, Tehran's ruling government knows it. How it will continue to react remains to be seen.

"Swarming" to Produce Regime Change

In his book, "Full Spectrum Dominance," Engdahl explained the RAND Corporation's groundbreaking research on military conflict by other means. He cited researchers John Arquilla and David Ronfeldt's 1997 "Swarming & The Future of Conflict" document "on exploiting the information revolution for the US military. By taking advantage of network-based organizations linked via email and mobile phones to enhance the potential of swarming, IT techniques could be transformed into key methods of warfare."

In 1993, Arquilla and Ronfeldt prepared an earlier document titled "Cyberwar Is Coming!" It suggested that "warfare is no longer primarily a function of who puts the most capital, labor and technology on the battlefield, but of who has the best information about the battlefield" and uses it effectively.

They cited an information revolution using advanced "computerized information and communications technologies and related innovations in organization and management theory." They foresaw "the rise of multi-organizational networks" using information technologies "to communicate, consult, coordinate, and operate together across greater distances" and said this ability will affect future conflicts and warfare. They explained that "cyberwar may be to the 21st century what blitzkrieg was to the 20th century" but admitted back then that the concept was too speculative for precise definition.

The 1993 document focused on military warfare. In 1996, Arquilla and Ronfeldt studied netwar and cyberwar by examining "irregular modes of conflict, including terror, crime, and militant social activism." Then in 1997, they presented the concept of "swarming" and suggested it might "emerge as a definitive doctrine that will encompass and enliven both cyberwar and netwar" through their vision of "how to prepare for information-age conflict."

They called "swarming" a way to strike from all directions, both "close-in as well as from stand-off positions." Effectiveness depends on deploying small units able to interconnect using revolutionary communication technology.

As explained above, what works on battlefields has proved successful in achieving non-violent color revolution regime changes, or coup d'etats by other means. The same strategy appears in play in Iran, but it's too early to tell if it will work as so far the government has prevailed. However, for the past 30 years, America has targeted the Islamic Republic for regime change to control the last major country in a part of the world over which it seeks unchallenged dominance.

If the current confrontation fails, expect future ones ahead as imperial America never quits. Yet in the end, new political forces within Iran may end up changing the country more than America can achieve from the outside - short of conquest and occupation, that is.

A final point. The core issue isn't whether Iran's government is benign or repressive or if its June 12 election was fair or fraudulent. It's that (justifiable criticism aside) no country has a right to meddle in the internal affairs of another unless it commits aggression in violation of international law and the UN Security Council authorizes a response. Washington would never tolerate outside interference nor should it and neither should Iran.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net .

Also visit his blog site at www.sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Global Research News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Monday - Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and national issues. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14148 01


© Copyright Stephen Lendman, Global Research, 2009

The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=14168

© Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca
Web site engine by Polygraphx Multimedia © Copyright 2005-2007

Text fwd: COMPASSIONATE EMPIRE - A BIBLICAL LESSON

http://space4peace.blogspot.com/2009/06/compassionate-empire.html

Saturday, June 27, 2009
COMPASSIONATE EMPIRE - A BIBLICAL LESSON

Global strike and cyberwarfare - these are two concepts that you'd better get used to hearing as the US military empire moves to expand its doctrine of Full Spectrum Dominance.

The basic idea of cyberwarfare is that we crawl inside the "offending nation's" computer system and shut down (hack) their ability to see what is happening as we launch "preemptive" attacks on them.

Then using "global strike" weapons like nuclear missiles, the military space plane, and other technologies we hit them hard while they are blind.

All very nice stuff, isn't it? The message is that you'd better do as we tell you and save yourself the grief. That's the compassionate empire in us talking. Very proper like, as they say in the United Kingdom.

This is the stuff new arms races are made of....what self-respecting country is going to stand back and let you develop the ability to push them around and not find a way to respond?

The US says we want to "reset" relations with Russia, we want to see China stop building up its military, we want Korea and Iran to stop building nuclear weapons.

Maybe, as the Bible says, "You hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of your own eye; and then shall you see clearly to cast out the mote out of your brother's eye."

Text Fwd: Pentagon Ready To 'Shift Gears' For New Korean War

* Text informed at StopNATO*

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=62994
Stars and Stripes May 30, 2009
Casey: Army would have to ‘shift gears’ for N. Korea battle
By Jeff Schogol

-Casey declined to say how fast the Army could mobilize to meet a threat from North Korea, but he stressed the Army is "combat seasoned" and can move quickly.

-The U.S. Army needs to be prepared for the "full spectrum" operations ranging from offensive, defensive and stability operations, he said. Casey expressed confidence that the U.S. Army can fight and win a conventional war against North Korea given its experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. "I’m not afraid of putting this force in the field against anybody."

WASHINGTON – It would take the Army time to "shift gears" if it needed to fight against North Korea, Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey said Thursday.

Right now, the Army is focused on the counterinsurgency efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, but North Korea...has raised the prospect that the Army might be called upon to fight a conventional war.

"I have said publicly for some time that if we had to shift gears, it would probably take us about 90 days or so to shift our gears and to train the folks up that were preparing to go to Iraq and Afghanistan to go someplace else," Casey said after a speech at a Washington think tank.

That doesn’t mean that it would take at least 90 days to send reinforcements to U.S. troops in South Korea, Casey said.

"We would move forces as rapidly as we could get them prepared," he said.

Casey declined to say how fast the Army could mobilize to meet a threat from North Korea, but he stressed the Army is "combat seasoned" and can move quickly.

"The mechanical skills of artillery gunnery and tank gunnery come back very, very quickly," he said. "The harder part is the integration — that really brigade level and above of massing fires and effects in a very constricted period of time as opposed to what you do in a counterinsurgency over a much longer extended period of time."

Looking to the future, Casey said he expects conflicts this century to look a lot like the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as the Israeli war with Hezbollah in 2006.

Regarding the latter, Casey noted that the key lesson the Israelis learned was that they were too focused on irregular warfare.

"They were working so much in the West Bank and conducting counterinsurgency-like operations that they lost their combined arms skills, the ability to integrate fires in air and tanks and artillery," he said.

The U.S. Army needs to be prepared for the "full spectrum" operations ranging from offensive, defensive and stability operations, he said.

Casey expressed confidence that the U.S. Army can fight and win a conventional war against North Korea given its experience in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"I’m not afraid of putting this force in the field against anybody," he said.
===========================
Stop NATO

* Related blogs
http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/search/label/War%20Exercise

VIDEO Fwd: NATO exercises provoke Russia.

* Text and video informed by Agneta Noberg, May 18, 2009

VIDEO: NATO exercises provoke Russia
By F. William Engdahl
Global Research, May 14, 2009
The Real News Network - 2009-05-13



'The Real News Network spoke to William F. Engdahl, economist and author of Full Spectrum Dominance. Engdahl says that the NATO exercises in Georgia are provocative to Russia because of the uncovered fact that Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili was behind the offensive in South Ossetia last August, while he was in the process of applying for NATO membership. Engdahl also says that the NATO countries are interested in securing alternatives to the Russian stronghold over European oil and explains that the missile defense program NATO wishes to install in Eastern Europe and Georgia has less to do with Iran than Russia.'

Text fwd: US Continues Military Encirclement Of Russia

Forwarded from Bruce Gagnon

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato/message/37752
Recent Words Aside, US Continues Military Encirclement Of Russia
By Rick Rozoff
Stop NATO, March 7, 2009

American Vice-President Joseph Biden at the Munich Security Conference in early February pledged to "press the reset button" with Russia.

Since then prominent Washington officials have repeated their intention to reset, reboot and so forth relations with Russia but have, starting with Biden at Munich, not relented in any substantive manner on any of the behaviors and projects that have antagonized Moscow.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recently and American President Obama is to meet with his Russian counterpart Dmitri Medvedev n London early next month.

Russia has permitted the US and its NATO allies transit rights for non-military goods to assist the West's expanding war in South Asia, though in the process is abetting the extension of the NATO military nexus from the Baltic to the Black to the Caspian Seas and hence tightening the noose around its own neck.

How are the US and NATO demonstrating their supposed resolve to mend ties with Russia, not in words but in deeds?

Starting at Russia's northwestern most border and proceeding counter-clockwise, in the following manner:

In nine days NATO will commence a ten-day military exercise, Cold Response 2009, consisting of 7,000 troops from thirteen nations in northern Norway, off the coast of the Norwegian Sea, adjoining the Barents Sea and the Russian coast.

It will be a full spectrum exercise with land, naval and air forces simulating an 'emergency' military intervention.

The Barents Observer reports:

"This year, about 700 of the participants are special forces.
The [imaginary] conflict increased in 2008 when Northland attacked and occupied Midland. After a cease-fire Northland withdraws its forces and a power vacuum which NATO has to fill, occurred."

Moving slightly southwest, NATO has just completed the four-day Baltic Host 2009 exercise in Estonia, which Russia's Novosti described as involving "a series of scenarios simulating the arrival and deployment of NATO troops in a member country."

Participating in the war games were forces from the United States, Britain, Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania in "the first exercise of this type in the Baltic region, which could become a regular event in the future to improve interoperability between NATO troops."

Continuing southward, nine days ago Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski met with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and insisted that American Patriot missiles would be deployed in his country.

The new US Patriot PAC-3 missile covers seven times the area of the original model and has double the range, enabling such missiles in Poland to hit Russian territory in the Kaliningrad region.

Two weeks ago US Defense Secretary Robert Gates signed a pact with his Polish opposite number Defense Minister Bogdan Klich "to bolster Poland's special forces and enhance how it operates within the NATO military command structure" as the US armed forces newspaper Stars and Stripes reported.

This was two days after Poland's Deputy Defense Minister Stanislaw Komorowski said, as quoted by Interfax-Ukraine, "that there is much more of a discussion right now within the alliance [NATO], to a large extent because many partners realize that the enemy unfortunately can be much closer to our borders" and "We have to take this into account when we plan the future of the alliance."

At the same time NATO announced that it was going to establish a permanent military force in Eastern Europe which would draw troops from the NATO Response Force (NRF).

Further pursuing the path south and east along the Russian border, the Chief Commander of the Ukrainian Navy, Ihor Tenyukh, announced that the annual US-led Sea Breeze NATO military exercises in Crimea would "be of a larger scale regarding the strength and number of military personnel" than any of its predecessors.

His claim was made within weeks of the signing of the US-Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership.

At the Krakow, Poland meeting of NATO defense chiefs on February 20 the Alliance's Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer pledged that "NATO remains ready to assist Ukraine in undertaking comprehensive reforms in its defence and security structures. We are determined to continue to develop this strategic partnership."

Down the Black Sea coast, NATO's annual Cooperative Longbow/ Cooperative Lancer month-long Caucasus military exercises are to be held in Georgia starting on May 3 and as the Georgian Times reported "Georgia’s participation in NATO trainings is seen as the first serious step NATO has taken after the August conflict and the subsequent creation of the NATO-Georgian Commission in September."

900 troops from 23 nations will participate in the exercises.

Two weeks ago US defense chief Gates reiterated that the Pentagon has a "continuing security relationship with Georgia both bilaterally and through NATO-Georgia Commission" and according to Civil Georgia "We're involved in training. We are involved in military reform in Georgia."

On the western end of the Black Sea directly across from Georgia - and Russia - the US has begun the two-week Thracian Spring 2009 joint air and infantry exercises with the Bulgarian armed forces, starting at the US's newly acquired Bezmer airbase.

Two weeks ago the US European Command spoke of its expanding military presence in Bulgaria and its Black Sea neighbor Romania: "It is larger in scale than it has been in previous years and we think that is an important consideration. If our current plans hold, we'll cycle a number of U.S. companies through both Romania and Bulgaria under battalion-level leadership to partner with the Bulgarians and the Romanians for the training that will occur roughly from July through October. So a larger presence and for a longer period of time...."

Southeast of Georgia and on Russia's southern flank, US Central Command chief David Petraeus announced that Azerbaijan would be used as a transit route for NATO arms headed to the Afghan war theater. The US has also ordered more Azerbaijani troops deployed there to serve under NATO command and the US Missile Defense Agency is considering expanding its global missile shield program to include what is now a Russian surveillance base in Garbala, Azerbaijan.

Indeed, in late February former US National Security Adviser and arch-Russophobe Zbigniew Brzezinski stated, "We should work so that Georgia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan do not become victims of the US-Russia dialogue....We should do everything to defend these countries."

Proceeding steadily toward the east, the Pentagon and NATO have recently secured transit rights for the Afghan war with Kazakhstan, which borders both Russia and China.

A year ago the US Defense Department signed a military treaty with Kazakhstan, and as US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defence Mitchell Shivers vowed, "As a member of NATO, the U.S. is committed to helping Kazakhstan in improving its inter-operability with equipment and training to U.S. and NATO standards."

In 2006 the Pentagon held a military exercise in Mongolia, Khaan Quest 2006, which also borders Russia and China.

At the far opposite end of Russia from where this survey began, the Barents Sea, the US has begun ICEX-2009 by deploying nuclear submarines for simulated warfare exercises off the coast of Alaska and into the Bering Sea and the Arctic Ocean. The last such exercise, in 2007, included US and British nuclear submarines maneuvering under the polar ice cap.

Several days earlier the chief of the Russian general staff, General Nikolai Makarov, warned that "Russia will respond to any attempts to militarize the Arctic," as Reuters reported.

A news dispatch of two days ago mentioned a recent poll that demonstrated half of all Russian adults fear military aggression from foreign nations. Small wonder, notwithstanding ingenuous blandishments from the likes of Joseph Biden, Hillary Clinton and Robert Gates.
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Daily digest option available.

Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato/messages
==============================

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
http://www.space4peace.org
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://space4peace.blogspot.com (Blog)