Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: NATO Nations Can Never Escape: Even Left-Wing Governments and Parties are Infiltrated by Atlanticists

La selezione della classe dirigente europea...
 
______________________________________________
NATO Nations Can Never Escape: Even Left-Wing Governments and Parties 
are Infiltrated by Atlanticists
Post Categories: U.S.
Wayne Madsen | Tuesday, July 31, 2012, 23:43 Beijing
 
France and Greece were the only NATO nations to successfully quit the 
military structure of the Western «defense» organization. In 1966, 
President Charles de Gaulle pulled France out of NATO’s military command 
structure and expelled NATO’s headquarters from outside of Paris. 
France has been a full-fledged member of the military wing of NATO since 
2009 when Nicolas Sarkozy, with only verbal grandstanding from the 
French Socialist Party, reversed de Gaulle’s nearly four-decade old 
policy. In fact, in 1966, the French Socialist Party moved to censure de 
Gaulle for pulling France out of NATO’s military structure. Socialist 
President Francois Hollande has shown no inclination toward re-adopting 
de Gaulle’s policy and withdraw France from NATO’s military command. 
Hollande, like Sarkozy and the last Socialist President Francois 
Mitterand, is a committed Atlanticist.
 
In 1974, Greece withdrew from NATO’s military command structure in 
protest over the Turkish occupation of northern Cyprus. However, 
conservative New Democracy Prime Minister Konstantine Karamanlis, a 
fervent supporter of NATO, rejoined NATO’s military command structure in 
1980.
 
Declassified Central Intelligence Agency documents point to a major 
program by the United States to woo leaders of European NATO countries 
to support the alliance, even though they may have been committed 
left-wingers and, at least in public, against NATO policies.
 
A case example of a country where the CIA successfully co-opted 
left-wing leaders to support NATO’s agenda is Denmark. A formerly 
Confidential CIA memorandum, produced by the agency’s National Foreign 
Assessment Center and dated January 31, 1980, details the CIA’s program 
to ensure that Denmark’s left-of-center Social Democratic Party refrain 
from defense budget cuts and supported NATO’s decision to modernize its 
theater nuclear force (TNF) by deploying 572 ground-launched cruise 
missiles (GLCM) and Pershing II nuclear-armed missiles in Western 
Europe.  The decision by NATO was seen in Moscow as a major reason to 
launch an invasion of Afghanistan because Soviet leaders felt they had 
nothing to lose by responding to NATO’s missile deployments in Europe.
 
The CIA obviously viewed Denmark’s Social Democratic government, with 
its strong pacifist tendencies as a threat to the NATO TNF modernization 
program. It is also clear that Danish Prime Minister Anker Jorgensen, 
who, on the surface appeared to be left-wing, was firmly in NATO’s camp. 
The CIA memo points out:  «Jorgensen is likely to face growing pressure 
on defense issues including NATO’s theater nuclear forces from the more 
pacifist parliament elected in October».
 
The October election strengthened the Social Democrats at the expense of 
the conservative. Pro-NATO parties and brought an end to the previous 
coalition between the Social Democrats and the conservative Liberal 
Party.  The CIA set out to rally its supporters, including Jorgensen, to 
the NATO cause and to neutralize the parliamentary power of the 
committed anti-NATO parties of the left, including the Radical Liberals, 
Left Socialists, and Socialist People’s Party. The CIA had the 
conservative parties under its control and it was from the ranks of one 
of them, the Liberal Party, that NATO’s current Secretary General, 
Anders Fogh Rasmussen, rose to the post of Prime Minister, where he was 
a loyal foot soldier for U.S. military aggression in Afghanistan and Iraq.
 
It is noteworthy that in the CIA document, Henning Christophersen, the 
leader of Rasmussen’s Liberal Party in parliament, is cited as «being 
very cautious in statements on Afghanistan. He has been unwilling to go 
so far as to ‘condemn’ Soviet actions there».
 
After NATO pressured Jorgensen to increase Danish defense spending by 3 
percent annually, he responded by stating that the 1978-81 defense 
budget was fixed and could not be changed. However, Jorgensen promised 
to seek a 3 percent increase in the 1981-85 budget.
It was clear in the CIA document that the agency felt it had the 
nominally-left-of-center Jorgensen in its pocket. The document states: 
«He [Jorgensen] believes that NATO is necessary and that the West must 
maintain a rough military balance with the Eastern bloc». The CIA saw 
Jorgensen as a bulwark against Social Democratic «young, radical 
first-termers in Parliament».
 
But the CIA’s ace up its sleeve on Western European TNF modernization 
was experienced Social Democratic politicians, all cited by the CIA 
document as having past and current relationships with the United 
States. The CIA document provided profiles of the Social Democrats in 
the Jorgensen government:
 
«Kjeld Olesen. Minister of Foreign Affairs.Olesen has always been 
regarded as friendly to the United States and pro-NATO. There are 
indications that he favored TNF modernization, and argued for it in 
party councils in 1979. Olesen is an ambitious politician, and given his 
party’s current leftward tilt on defense matters, he will need 
encouragement if he is to take a leadership role on behalf of NATO 
proposals». {In the CIA’s world, «encouragement» often means providing 
some sort of favors to an individual].
 
The CIA had other reliable people in the Jorgensen government. The 
document continues:
 
«Poul Sogaard. Minister of Defense.Sogaard is a specialist in defense 
matters and, like Olesen, has strong US connections . . .
 
Svend Jakobsen. Minister of Finance. A leftwing Social Democrat with 
close ties to labor, he would be a valuable convert to the cause of TNF 
modernization. He is considered friendly toward the United States . . .
 
Ivar Norgaard. Minister of Economic Affairs and Energy.Norgaard is an 
SDP stalwart who is one of the government’s most experienced officials 
on international economics and energy . . . He has not taken much 
interest in security matters, although he has worked harmoniously with 
US officials on many occasions.
 
Knud Heinesen. SDP parliamentary leader and Minister of Finance during 
1975-79.Heinesen is perhaps Prime Minister Jorgensen’s closest adviser. 
Heinesen visited the United States in 1963 under the International 
Visitor Program, and he has returned several times since then… 
Heinesen’s connections with young, leftist SDP members would make him a 
valuable ally in efforts to increase defense forces.
 
Poul Dalsager. Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries. He is believed to 
be friendly toward the United States, although he is not involved in 
security issues».
 
K.B. Andersen. Minister of Foreign Affairs during much of the 1970s. As 
Foreign Minister, Andersen was generally sympathetic to US positions on 
security issues, but like the Prime Minister he places priority on détente.
 
Lasse Budtz. An SDP defense spokesman. A prolific writer and speaker on 
defense and the Atlantic Alliance, Budtzis pro-NATO, but he also 
supports measures aimed at furthering détente».
 
The CIA wanted to offer those considered friendly to the United States 
carrots. But those who were opposed to NATO TNF modernization were also 
«noticed» by the CIA, including
 
«Svend Auken. Minister of Labor. Only 36, Auken is widely regarded as a 
possible future leader of the SDP. Except for antiwar statements 
regarding Vietnam, Auken has said little about foreign relations, but he 
probably cool toward defense spending. There is little chance that he 
can be convinced TNF is worthwhile, but any moderation of his views 
could be beneficial to the US.
 
Karl Hjortnaes. Minister of Taxation. Like many SDP leaders, he has 
shown little interest in security affairs, and ascribing less importance 
to them than to social issues. He is currently under attack by other 
parties for allegedly having underpaid his taxes».
 
When there was the slightest indication that Denmark might drift away 
from NATO, the CIA decided who among Danish politicians it had in the 
American court and which of them were off-sides. The same playbook is 
used across NATO today, which should adopt the motto: «NATO: once you’re 
in, you can’t get out».
 
http://www.4thmedia.org/2012/07/31/nato-nations-can-never-escape-even-left-wing-governments-and-parties-are-infiltrated-by-atlanticists/
 
-- 
Sostieni Rete ECO
 
http://rete-eco.it/it/sostienici.html
 
 


 
Lo sappiamo molto bene, siamo sotto occupazione.
 
Se ci dimentichiamo qualche bomba scoppia nelle stazioni.
 
Le bombe carnaio sono tutte NATO te pensa, dice Vinciguerra
 
 
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincenzo_Vinciguerra
 
 


Già.  Ed è la stessa NATO (celebre associazione di maggiordomi al 
servizio degli USA) che ha imposto la democrazia in Libia e che ora la 
sta imponendo in Siria, sempre con le bombe, ovviamente.
 
Ne consegue che i "comunisti" alla namib approvano le stragi degli anni 
di piombo quali aneliti di libertà e di democrazia.



Namib non e' comunista e' solo uno dei tanti Sionisti, chi piu' chi
meno.
 
Una patina di ben pensante di sinistra fa sempre comodo, solo comodo.
 
Parlando dei sinistrati, cosa vuoi dire di gente che sbava per Obama,
per i suoi droni, i suoi terroristi islamici, le sue guerre ovunque.
 
Dei poveri coglioni, solo qualche nazista/anglofilo li supera.
Meritano il Nobel, lo danno anche ai cani se fa comodo.