Embrace Foundation is a non-profit,  
educational foundation set up to  
create better understanding  
between people of different  
religions, cultures, traditions and  
world philosophies.

Embrace Foundation works to bring  
leaders and scholars of world-wide  
religions, cultures and philosophies  
together by sponsoring forums,  
seminars, lectures and developing  
an international exchange program.  
Embrace Foundation is particularly  
concerned with reaching the world  
public through the media.
Purpose
Donations
Embrace Foundation is an all  
volunteer organization. All  
donations go directly to programs.

Embrace Foundation does not and  
has never given permission to any  
outside organization to solicit or  
receive contributions on our behalf.

All donations should be made to  
Embrace Foundation only via  
Paypal or by mail. All donations are  
tax deductible. A receipt will be  
emailed to you. Please click on the  
Pay Pal link below to Donate.
Travel As An Interfaith Act
Embrace encourages all who can  
do so, to learn about other  
traditions and cultures by traveling  
as “Grassroots Diplomats.” We  
hope that people every where  
become life long students of our  
world-wide humanity.

“ In every man there is something  
wherein I may learn of him, and in  
that I am his pupil.”
                                  R.W.Emerson
Embrace Humanity

Great Visions - TV
Guests are: Swami Satchidananda &
the Rt. Reverend Dean Parks Morton
Embrace Archives
Limited Editions Gallery
EmbraceFoundationGallery.org
Umrah - Jordan
Embrace Sacred Places
EmbraceSacredPlaces.org
Monastery of Bahira - Syria
Embrace Foundation Universal
Monk Reading - Ethiopia
EmbraceFoundationUniversal.org
Thank you for making a donation.
Embrace Foundation Archives.Org
Virginia (Embrace), Dr.Anwar Barkat (World Council of Churches, UN) & Imam I.H. Kauser
Embrace Foundation Archives. Org
Embrace Archives
NEW!: See CURRENT for Kashmir, Ladakh & Siddha Tamil Nadu in July & August   -  Embrace Palestinian Human Rights - See: BULLETIN & Embrace Rabbis & Rebs - See:  FOCUS   -   NEW! Palestinian Christians Urge World Council of Churches to Recognize the Holy Land Government as Apartheid - See: Human Rights   -   NEW! See: Traveling in Singapore 2017 in CELEBRATE HUMANITY  -  See: Traveling in Viet Nam and Traveling in Hong Kong 2017 in CELEBRATE HUMANITY   -   NEW! Traveling in Bali & Traveling in Java in CELEBRATE HUMANITY   -   NEW! Embrace Founders Trip to Indonesia (Bali & Java), Viet Nam, Hong Kong in CURRENT   -   Pentagon's Long Range Plans for Targeting Non-Western Civilians: Possibilities - Pentagon & Non-Western Nations     SEE - the New “State-Of-The-Art” Embrace Sacred Places.Org Website more than 5,000 photos  SEE: The NEW Updated and Expanded EMBRACE FOUNDATION ARCHIVES.ORG  -  The Nature of “Reality” 3 Articles on Quantum Discoveries: POSSIBILITES  - SEE Surviving Propaganda: MEDIA - Articles   SEE Who is Creating Terrorists? - Diplomacy Articles - See Syria before the Bombing  and Destruction of many of the Sights Embrace Foundation has Documented - Christian, Islamic and other antiquities - See "Traveling - Grassroots Diplomacy” in CELBRATE HUMANITY



DIPLOMACY

Articles

10 Secret Armies of the Central Intelligence Agency

Langley, Virginia (TFC) - As more and more evidence mounts that the US government was  
secretly assisting the Islamic State, it might be time to point out a few instances when the Central  
Intelligence Agency created secret armies. The current theory suggests the US secretly supported  
the Islamic State so the Islamists would destabilize the government of Syrian President Assad. If that  
seems out of the question, remember the CIA once started a war over bananas… literal bananas.

Cuba: Probably the best known secret army. Castro nationalized the assets of western companies  
after his government took power, so the US decided to overthrow the government of Cuba and  
install a puppet regime. As with most of the armies backed by the US intelligence establishment, it  
failed. Miserably. The Bay of Pigs invasion saw 1400 US-trained Cubans surrender to Castro’s  
forces within 24 hours.

El Salvador: The US-supported Salvadoran government faced opposition from communist rebels.  
US intelligence saw an obvious and simple answer: establish death squads. US intelligence trained  
and advised pro-government forces as they massacred villages and led the way to the displacement  
of over a million people. Immediately after the ceasefire, there was a general amnesty for people  
implicated in war crimes. This amnesty was ruled to be illegal, but remains in effect anyway. Those  
seeking justice are often burglarized and the evidence of CIA involvement is stolen.

Afghanistan: The US armed and trained the Mujaheddin fighters through Operation Cyclone.  
Later, many of these fighters would form the core of the fundamentalist Islamic terrorist groups we  
are fighting (or possibly supporting) today. Yes, Osama bin Laden was one of the fighters trained by  
the CIA in Afghanistan. The whole operation was carried out to stop the Soviet invasion.

Guatemala: This little CIA caper is the origin of the term “Banana Republic.” The democratically  
elected President of Guatemala decided to punish the United Fruit Company for decades of  
consorting with the country’s dictators. He began to propose legislation to end the US  
multinational’s monopoly on almost everything in the country. So what else could the CIA do? The  
agency overthrew the legal government and triggered a war… over bananas.

Congo: In the 1960s, Belgium was ending its colonial rule over Congo. Rather than allow self-
determination, the CIA staged assassinations, armed rebel forces, brought in European  
mercenaries, and even backed them up with a secret air force.

Nicaragua (the second time): In the 1980s, the leftist Sandinistas took power. The CIA backed the  
Contra militia that opposed them. The agency funneled them arms, ran cocaine for them, and  
trained the organization that become well known for child soldiers, massacres at literacy centers,  
and war crimes of just about every imaginable kind.

Angola: The CIA hired French and South African mercenaries to assist right-wing groups in their  
fight against the Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola. The group was competing with  
several other paramilitary organizations in a fight to take over the country after the Portuguese  
decolonized. The CIA’s mercenary army predictably lost.

Ukraine (the first time): During the second World War, the Nazis set up a partisan group in Ukraine  
to harass and slow the advancing Soviet forces. At the end of World War II, US intelligence began  
funding and assisting the partisan group. The Soviets wiped the partisans out in 1952.

Venezuela: In 2002, a group within Venezuela attempted to oust the government. The US flatly  
denied involvement. Of course, there is more than enough evidence to tie the Bush Administration to  
the plot. There is even circumstantial evidence a more recent second attempt.

Ukraine (the second time): The most recent revolution in Ukraine may have started organically,  
however, it was seized upon by US intelligence. The revolution became just another method of  
installing a US puppet regime. The US chose to install literal Nazis. These facts are largely ignored  
by US media.

Would US intelligence secretly back a brutal, murderous paramilitary group to destabilize a country  
on the US hit list? Of course. The US intelligence apparatus has been doing it for about 60 years.

By Justin King
The Fifth Column
February 18, 2016

The Impending Dangers of a Global Conflict:
How to Prevent World War III
The Lessons of History

By Prof. Vyacheslav Dashichev (Translated from Russian)

All indications suggest that the international community is once again  entering a period of  
increasing risk of war. It is no coincidence that Western  political analysts are writing about it more  
often. In June 2011, a book by  Prof. Michel Chossudovsky was released: “Towards A Third World  
War III  Scenario”.Even among Russian analysts there are  increased concerns about the fate of the  
world, for example, the article by Yuri  Krupnov: “The general trend is clear: The West needs a  
major war.” After the  shameful war of NATO against Libya, the U.S. and Israel are increasingly   
threatening to take action against the Iranian military. Many see in this the  risk of bringing about  
another major war.

Is there good reason for such an alarming outlook? Let us not forget how  in the past the world  
slipped into major world wars.

Are there any analogies which relate to the present? We now live in a new  era of nuclear-armed  
missiles in which fighting a war using such weapons is no  longer a rational option to achieve  
political goals simply because the attacking  side risks receiving a crushing blow as a response.

However, is it reasonable today to rely on our statesmen to carry out their  policy decisions  
rationally? The same old failings apply equally to them:  stupidity, selfishness and egoism, wanting  
to outdo their opponents, to dominate  and exploit others.

What was decisive in triggering the world wars of the 20th Century compared  to today’s situation?  
In a four-volume book “Hitler’s strategy - recipe for  disaster” I investigated the causes of this  
misfortune for mankind. In it I  name 7 factors:

1) The actions of the expanding German empire - which freely admitted their  intentions - was to  
obtain regional and then global domination and to gain  control of the resources and markets of the  
world. In a meeting at his  headquarters in 1940 Hitler said: “Today we are fighting for oil reserves,   
rubber, mineral resources, etc.” In 1941, two days before the attack on the  Soviet Union, Hitler  
signed Directive No. 32 “Preparing for the period after the  completion of Operation Barbarossa” in  
which he went over plans for defeating  the USA and Britain and following that world domination.

2) The expansionist German Reich wanted to achieve military superiority by  massive rearmament.

3) The goal of the German Reich was to upset the balance of power in the  world arena by  
defeating small and medium-sized countries and thereby increasing  its geopolitical space in its  
struggle for world domination. This involved the  annexation of Austria and the taking of  
Sudetenland and then Czechoslovakia. The  attack on Poland led them to the point of critical mass  
in the change of balance  of power. Britain and France could not let that happen so they declared  
war on  Germany. Thus, began the second World War.

4) Merging the countries into a coalition whose individual national interests  and sovereignty were  
threatened by the expansionist state. In the scheme of  international relations there is a principle  
known as defensive reaction. This  states that a potential counterbalance of forces is created that  
acts against  the state that adopts a policy of domination, violence or the desire to rule  over other  
peoples and nations by imposing his values by force. In the first  World War it was Entente, and in  
the second the anti-Hitler coalition that acted  as a counterbalance.

5) Within the innermost circle of the power elite in an expansionist state a  power structure comes  
into being that is concentrated into one single person.  Fateful decisions over war and peace are  
made by one or only a few persons.

6) The expansionist state seeks to resist the economic and systemic crisis of  capitalism. The  
solution is to go to war. In a meeting with the generals in  1939, Hitler said: Either we declare war, or  
Germany will be confronted with a  deep economic crisis.

7) Propaganda is used to systematically implant the notion of an enemy in the  minds of the  
population. The enemy are the peoples of the countries against  which the attack is being prepared.

Both world wars started in Europe and then encroached onto other regions of  the world. In  
particular, it should be noted that the expansionist state  intending to gain power by declaring war,  
each time has made a fatal mistake in  assessing its own forces, that is the moral, spiritual and  
material requirements  to achieve the set goal. In this case Germany grossly violated the law   
formulated by Clausewitz which states that the political objectives should be  strictly in accordance  
with material resources and international conditions. For  that reason in two world wars the  
expansionist state of Germany suffered severe  defeat, and the German people experienced two  
national catastrophes.

The same fatal error of setting foreign policy tasks that in no way were in  accordance with the  
available resources was made by the Soviet authorities after  the second World War. Stalin, who  
always decided alone over the fate of his  country, believed that after the outstanding victory over  
fascism, he could  easily install Soviet domination over Eastern and Central Europe.

After he had  brought the countries of this region under Soviet control he grossly violated  the  
balance of power in Europe and caused a defensive reaction in the countries  of Western Europe.  
He provoked the Cold War which hung like an intolerable  burden over the Soviet Union, its  
economy and its population. It is one of the  main reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union. And  
that’s not all. The  country was condemned to a struggle with a coalition that had far greater   
resources. In addition, it also permitted the USA, as guarantor and defender and  leading force in  
the West, to set up American domination over Western Europe -  and, after the collapse of the  
Soviet Union, also over the eastern part of  Europe.

Since the days of the Cold War with the world divided between the two  superpowers - the USA and  
the Soviet Union, both of which were nuclear powers  struggling for supremacy - there was a  
balance of nuclear fear. This kept both  powers from taking undue risks which forced them to take  
measures to avoid a  war. They also signed a series of agreements on the mutual limitation of  
nuclear  weapons and restraint in their further development. However, this did not mean  the end of  
the struggle between the superpowers. The US has shifted its focus on  information and economic  
warfare and secret acts of sabotage (subversive  activities). A pro-American lobby was setup in the  
Soviet Union. This lobby paid  bribes and recruited representatives of political parties and the state   
apparatus to work for it. All this is the strategy - developed by Liddell  Hart - of indirect measures to  
destroy the enemy and seize territory without  using military forces. This strategy played a very  
important role in organizing  the state putsch in December 1991. One of the main goals of American   
policy was to bring about the downfall of the Soviet Union and it was the  establishment of  
capitalism in the post-Soviet sphere of influence that served  as the best method of bringing down  
Russia in all spheres, but especially the  economy.

At the time of the Soviet reforms in the 80’s new foundations were developed  in Soviet foreign  
policy which permitted a series of agreements at the end of  the Cold War and the establishment of  
a new peace accord in Europe to be agreed  with the West. On 21.11.1990 the Paris Charter had  
been signed by all European  countries, the USA and Canada. It declared that the era of  
confrontation was  over. “We proclaim that in future our relations will be based on respect and   
cooperation.” It was proclaimed: “Europe free yourself from the legacy of the  past.

A new era of democracy, peace and unity approaches.” In the Charter  magnificent goals and  
standards of international coexistence were declared to  strengthen security and confidence among  
all countries, to encourage  disarmament, and that political consultations be intensified in order to  
solve  economic, social, ecological, cultural and humanitarian problems. Peace should  emanate  
from Europe. Europe must be open to all countries and cooperate with all  countries in order to  
solve current and future problems.

The importance of the OSCE should be strengthened and its 10 principles  should be followed  
strictly.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union all these wonderful formulations were  thrown out since they  
no longer suited the interests of the United States. Now  the United States was the pre-eminent  
power in a unipolar world order and did  not resist the temptation to exploit its advantage to expand  
its sphere of  influence, to impose its will and values, and to dominate all the world’s  resources. For  
the world this policy has brought a greater threat than that of  the East-West confrontation.

1) The US is clearly an expanding state. The goal of US global politics was  developed with unique  
clarity in the Project for the New American Century (PNAC  1997) by Cheney (Vice President),  
Rumsfeld (defense secretary) et al.

That means world domination in the sense of American principles and values:  “We need to accept  
responsibility for America’s unique role in preserving and  extending an international order friendly to  
our security, our prosperity, and  our principles.” These provisions were developed further in the  
following  program documents of the US administration.

2) In order to achieve and maintain world domination the project envisaged  the unprecedented  
American expansion of military force: “We must increase our  military spending significantly if we  
want to accept global responsibility, and  attain the future military strength required.” Today military  
spending amounts  to nearly $700 billion. That’s nearly half the military spending of the entire   
world. That’s significantly more than the military spending at the peak of the  Cold War.

The aim of the US is global military dominance including missile defense, so  that Russia will lose its  
ability to respond militarily, and thereby will no  longer be in a position to offer resistance to military  
and political threats.  American authors openly discuss this (Note 2: the Pentagon).

3) The US has set as its goal to decisively reset the balance of power  worldwide to its advantage.  
They broaden their geopolitical space to maintain  their position of world domination as well as their  
access to the energy and  natural resources of world markets. They do this by waging wars against   
individual states and building up a network of military bases. Since the  collapse of the Soviet Union,  
the United States has waged war against  Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya and gained  
control over many other  countries without carrying out military actions. The American military is now  
in  over 130 countries. Europe has long been under American rule and today it has  40,000 men  
under arms in Germany, including nuclear weapons. These troops are  not only an instrument of  
American domination in Europe but also serve to assert American interests in other regions of the  
world.

4) The American policy of dominance has generated strong anti-American  sentiments around the  
world as a consequence of the principle known as a  defensive reaction. But till now it has not  
developed to the point that an  anti-US coalition of states has come into being, namely those  
countries against  which the United States wants to impose its will. One explanation is that the   
political elites of Western countries were forced to accept the US dictates of  the Cold War in order  
to protect themselves from Stalin’s expansion. Today they  are still free-riding the coat-tails of  
American policy in order to gain certain  advantages. But in the consciousness of European  
countries other sentiments are  awakening.

People are not willed to accept that the United States is treating them like  satellites and exploiting  
them in its global military affairs. A famous German  politician Egon Bahr once made a well-known  
comment: “No people can live  continuously on its knees”. If the US does not stop with its politics of   
domination an anti-American coalition can be expected.

5) In the United States a small secret inner circle decides over war and  peace. To it belong some of  
the richest families. Even Brzezinski in a speech on  October 14 showed a major concern because  
most of today’s Congressmen and  Senators as well as most of the top officials belong in the  
category of very  rich, the so-called top 1% and only a small part of them decide on US  policy.

http://csis.org/publication/zbigniew-brzezinskis-de-tocqueville-prize-speech

6) We are now faced with finding a way out of the largest financial, economic  and moral crisis since  
1929/33 which has shaken capitalist society and the  social structure of US society and has now  
taken hold of the whole world.  Therefore, there is the danger that American leaders pursue the  
dangerous path  of war, for example, a war against Iran. In this way they could try to attain  their  
geopolitical goals. In this age of globalization a medium scale war could  very rapidly develop into a  
world war. However, this does not restrain the US  power elite because there are enough of them  
who believe that it is time to get  rid of a few billion unnecessary citizens of the world.

7) As far as propaganda, psychological control and the motivation of American  politics of  
predominance and the creation of enemy stereotypes are concerned the  US power elites have  
surpassed all previous records. Here we see that there is  much in common with the factors leading  
to the world wars of the 20th. Century  and the trends of today’s American politics. This is also true  
in respect of the  tendency of overestimating one’s own forces in the effort to secure global   
predominance. The overextension of the US in its imperial efforts constitutes  one of the main  
reasons for today’s financial crisis and the accumulation of  huge public debts. American hegemony  
is approaching its own demise.

Washington has enriched the international lexicon of terminology with such  terms as: humanitarian  
war, preventive intervention, superior armaments, general  meaning of American values, US  
interests above all else, “if you’re not for us,  you’re against us”, axis of evil, rogue state, checkbook  
diplomacy, selective  strikes, NATO globalization, closing vulnerable areas of the US with  anti-
missile systems, etc. The new American military doctrine has given the US  the prerogative to  
conduct preventive wars.

What does the Russian leadership think of US policy and how does it respond  to the possible  
threat?

It is known that during the reign of Yeltsin an unusual state concept  prevailed according to which  
there was no longer an external threat to Russia  anymore. This concept was supported by Foreign  
Minister Kosirev. This concept  severely damaged Russian national interests and the country’s  
defense  capability.

Later foreign policy was weakened further, reminiscent of a policy of  reconciliation.

It is hard to see why the Russian leadership did not even once bring a  proposal warning against the  
dangers of the expansionist politics of the United  States, and American hegemony and tyranny in  
the world arena, which threatened  the world and Russia. There were several broad possibilities but  
they were not  utilized. It is remarkable that neither Yeltsin nor Putin nor Medvedev made an  appeal  
to the EU, to revive the good principles of the Paris Charter. They were  not even mentioned in  
official publications although they met the essential  national interests of Russia and other European  
countries.

Another example: In 2008 I put together a project for a convention to ban the  Politics of Global  
Dominance. The project was published and submitted to the  Russian Foreign Office with the  
proposal that it be put forward at the next UN  General Assembly.
 
“We, the United Nations member states, in recognizing that the quest for  global predominance in  
the 20th Century led to world wars, resulted in countless  victims, led to colossal losses of material  
wealth, the militarization of  society and people’s consciousness, the emergence of difficult-to-
eradicate  enemy stereotypes, to post-war poverty, destruction, despair and the hardening  of  
human attitudes, the collapse of production and the decline in science. We  are aware that after  
each World War once again a large power center forms that  exercises an imperial and messianic  
rule threatening the national interests and  the freedom of the peoples of the world who must resist  
this by uniting in  opposition. In light of this and that in times of nuclear weapons and the space   
age, a new world war resulting from the politics of global domination would lead  to the extinction of  
human civilization; in the firm conviction that the  politics of predominance always goes hand in hand  
with expansion and that it is  the most dangerous factor in international relations, also that it stands  
in  sharp contrast to the democratic principles of foreign policy and ignores  international principles  
such as “unity in diversity”, “live and let live”.  Therefore, the need is recognized to remove the  
material basis for the politics  of global predominance by restricting the military expenditures of all  
UN  members up to 0.5% of their gross domestic product.

We declare our resolution for an international ban on politics that has as  its goal the domination  
over other peoples and that such politics can be  described as a Crime against Humanity.”

This international convention could - in the event of its ratification by the  UN General Assembly - be  
an important threshold in the fight of the world  community against the politics of hegemony, of  
dictates and dangerous military  despotism in international relations. But this proposal for a  
convention  elicited no response from our politicians.

The Russian leadership could also start other important proposals to  consolidate the peace, for  
example:

•     Termination and complete prohibition of military competition which the US  forces on the world,  
and restriction of military budgets to 0.5% of GDP.

•      The dissolution of NATO as a relic of the Cold War in light of the fact that  Europe today is no  
longer under threat, and the conversion of the OECD into an  energetic principal organization for  
European and Euro-Atlantic cooperation.

•     The repatriation of 40,000 American and 20,000 British troops and nuclear  weapons from  
Germany.

•     Proposals against the building of American bases in Central Asia, the  Caucasus, the Black Sea  
and the Balkans.

•     Repatriation of NATO troops from Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Regarding the US missile defense system in Europe the Russian leadership has  long held an  
absurd position, and that of cooperation with the Americans in  building the system, although the  
system is directed solely against Russia.  Medvedev should have been taking a decisive step and  
effective measures against  the threat a lot sooner and not just before the Duma elections. This  
makes it  appear only as a campaign maneuver.

These and other proposals of Russian foreign policy could counter an increase  in the military  
threat. The Chief of General Staff of the Russian army, Makarov,  spoke about them before a public  
committee on 11 November 2011. But the  proposals were not presented to the international  
organizations. One wonders  why?

Historical experience shows that those who sought to dominate Europe and the  world always  
encountered a fiasco. The same fate awaits the initiators and  perpetrators who build the American  
world empire. What is important is to  prevent a new world war being unleashed.

Prof. Vyacheslav Dashichev is a member of the Institute  of Economics, Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS).  
Moscow 
http://www.inecon.org/  
This English translation was taken from Global Research.Org

Diplomacy

Embrace Foundation Retreat Center
Embrace
.Foundation (skype messaging)    -    011+1+212.675.4500 (New York)

Click to Email Us
Embrace Foundation