Ex-UN Expert: Kissinger's Solution to Ukraine Crisis is Safer for US & EU Than Soros' Gamble
16:52 GMT 28.05.2022 (Updated: 16:18 GMT 08.12.2022)
© AFP 2023 / WOJTEK RADWANSKI
Subscribe
Retired UN independent expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order, Alfred-Maurice de Zayas, has discussed with Sputnik the stark differences in views on the Russo-Ukraine conflict of ex-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and financier George Soros.
Two diametrically opposite visions of the Ukraine crisis were expressed at the latest World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos by ex-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and American financier George Soros. According to Kissinger, Russia remains an important element in the European state system and it's time for Ukraine to think about a diplomatic settlement of the conflict, even if that means territorial concessions. For his part, Soros echoed the Biden administration's stance by claiming that Russia must be exhausted and defeated.
Sputnik: What's your take on former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger's proposal at Davos to start negotiations with Russia over Ukraine in order to avoid "upheavals and tensions that will not be easily overcome"?
Alfred de Zayas: I endorse Kissinger's proposals on Ukraine, although I always was and remain critical of Kissinger's responsibility for grave war crimes committed by the US in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. Any reasonable person who understands world history and can assess the impending dangers of the NATO-Russia confrontation knows that we must de-escalate and reduce tensions, which already are very difficult to overcome.
Humanity needs more than just a settlement over Ukraine. The Ukraine conflict is only a symptom of a much larger geopolitical imbalance that can and must be solved peacefully. The alternative is Apocalypse.
Hence, the UN secretary-general should convene – in the name of all of Humanity – a World Peace Conference that will address the root causes of the NATO-Russia conflict and establish a sustainable security architecture for the entire globe, including outer space. I am thinking of a new "Peace of Westphalia" (1648) that followed the slaughter of the Thirty Years' War, or a new "Congress of Vienna" (1814-15) that closed the Napoleonic aggressions against all its European neighbours.
Such a World Peace Conference should be based on the existing "World Constitution", the UN Charter, the letter and spirit of which has been systematically undermined by NATO. A compromise must be made in the name of the survival of humanity, and all sides must make concessions in good faith, including Russia. A World Peace Conference could draw from my 25 Principles of International Order, which I submitted to the UN Human Rights Council in 2018 and reformulated in my book "Building a Just World Order" (Clarity Press, Atlanta, Georgia, 2021).
Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger is interviewed by Neil Cavuto on his "Cavuto Coast to Coast" program, on the Fox Business Network, in New York, Friday, June 5, 2015
© AP Photo / Richard Drew
Sputnik: Did Henry Kissinger express his own personal view or is this view maintained by some group within the US establishment? Who (what lobbies and political forces) could this group be comprised of?
Alfred de Zayas: Whether we like him or not, Kissinger is a statesman of the statute of a Klemens von Metternich. He is a profound thinker and possesses enormous historical and political experience. He is no puppet of any of the so-called think tanks in the US, which are financed by the military-industrial-financial complex. He is not toeing anyone's line, but giving an opinion that should be taken seriously.
Of course, the moment one does not toe Washington's political line, one is exposed to personal smears and other below-the-belt ad hominem attacks. The lobbies and organisations such as the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Brooking Institution, AIPAC, etc. are responsible for brainwashing the American public and managing the narrative that everyone echoes – to the disadvantage of the American people and the world. The mainstream media is complicit in the disinformation of the public.
FILE - In this Sept. 24, 2011, file photo, George Soros speaks during a forum at the IMF/World Bank annual meetings in Washington. The AP reported on May 26, 2017
© AP Photo / Manuel Balce Ceneta
Sputnik: Another Davos speaker, George Soros, supported the Biden administration's incentive to bleed Russia white regardless of possible consequences. What risks is George Soros' stance fraught with? What forces does he represent?
Alfred de Zayas: For decades, George Soros has been undermining the purposes and principles of the UN Charter through a network of well-financed proxies. Soros represents the billionaires of the world, who have only contempt for the common people. Soros has financed and continues to finance non-governmental organisations that destabilise countries and subvert the will of the people.
Essentially, his world vision is one of "full spectrum dominance", whereby the Western "elites" will continue dictating policy to the entire world, in contravention of the right of self-determination of peoples, with the purpose of imposing a Western-style "regime change" and subsequent rule by puppet governments. At its core, his vision is the antithesis of democracy and an attempt to establish a neo-colonial world order that takes its orders from Washington and Brussels. His vocal support for sanctions against many countries has resulted in the dislocation of their economies, scarcity of foods and medicines, and consequent death of tens of thousands of innocent human beings, especially among the most vulnerable.
Bleeding Russia is a short-sighted policy, which is fraught with criminal consequences, bearing in mind that the war against Russia is destroying Ukraine and will result in famine in Africa and the world. The gravity of the consequences of the Soros ideology and "collateral damage" would justify the International Criminal Court (ICC) in indicting many Western leaders for committing "crimes against humanity" pursuant to article 7 of the Statute of Rome.
But, of course, the ICC serves the purposes of the West, and will never indict Biden, Blinken, Johnson, Scholz, or Soros himself. Bottom line: Soros and his network have been subverting core principles of international order and weaponising human rights against Russia, China, Hungary, Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Syria, etc. with adverse impacts on the entire world. And yet, the Soros network has succeeded in building a positive image of itself thanks to the "fake news" and fake narratives disseminated by the complicit mainstream media.
Sputnik: NBC News’ Keir Simmons noted that by "upheavals", Kissinger meant, in particular, a potential food crisis which could trigger a large-scale migration from third world countries to Europe. Is Soros aware of this potential scenario, in your opinion? Is a new migration crisis what Soros wants?
Alfred de Zayas: Of course Soros is aware of this potential scenario. But he supposes that, as Angela Merkel said in 2015 during the Western-caused Syrian migration crisis "Wir schaffen das" ("we can handle it"). It is thoroughly unrealistic. But Soros does not bear the consequences of his policies. He has his billions and is safe until the day he dies. Meanwhile he lives in his own ideological world and continues undermining the world order. It is a cynical game.
Sputnik: Former Russian intelligence agent Andrey Bezrukov, known by American scholars for over 20 years under his alias Donald Heathfield, suggested that the US can withdraw from the Ukraine conflict at any moment without losing face. Do you agree with that?
Alfred de Zayas: Objectively the US will lose face, as it did in Vietnam and Afghanistan. But we also have the capacity to create "irreality". For the average American, we did not really "lose face" in Afghanistan. We performed our task and did not succeed because of the evil Taliban*. We believe our own propaganda. So, if and when the US decides that it is time to abandon Ukraine, it will do so, and the mainstream media will invent appropriate narratives to make it plausible. "Fake news" will eventually mature into "fake history" and succeeding generations of Americans will continue believing that we are the "good guys" and that we have a "mission" to bring happiness and democracy to the rest of the world.
Sputnik: What view is likely to prevail, that of Henry Kissinger or George Soros, in your opinion?
Alfred de Zayas: That depends on how the Ukraine conflict plays out. While Kissinger is no "hero" of mine, I recognise that he still possesses a degree of common sense and a commitment to world peace through Realpolitik. I endorse the analysis of Professor John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago, who recently published a brilliant article in The Economist, based in part on his book "The Great Delusion" (2018). Professor Emeritus Richard Falk of the Universities of Princeton and Santa Barbara has also published insightful assessments. By contrast, Soros is a casino player – not a very wise man, much less an intellectual – Soros is a financial speculator who struck it rich and then thought he could shape the world according to his caprices and illusions. A symptom of megalomania. Soros will be forgotten, but the harm he has caused will remain for decades.
*The Taliban is under UN sanctions over terrorist activities.
