neo-imperialism

Pretexts and PNAC

By M.K. Styllinski

  “There is no telling how many wars it will take to secure freedom in the homeland.”

George W. Bush, speech on August 7, 2002


Hoodwinking the public into accepting wars is a very old tactic indeed. Under the tutelage of the British Empire, the United States of America has been one of the most violent “democracies” on earth. So-called US “interventions” as world policeman have been taking place in the most vulnerable regions of the world for well over one hundred years. Given that most of the so-called threats against Western democracy are either a) weak and debt-ridden countries; b) installed with a US-NATO proxy dictator and c) ripe for resource picking, it comes as no surprise that a huge back lash is taking place against Anglo-American hegemony. America and Britain’s record of invasion doesn’t stack up with the “axis-of-evil” regimes such as Iran who have never attacked anyone in over 200 years.

bush-rove

Another overshadowing Iago: Karl Rove

There was a reason that the Bush Administration’s then Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove had on his desk copies of The Prince by Nicolo Machiavelli and The Art of War by Sun Tzu: they are  both classics in the psychology of deception and tactics of military warfare, something dear to this man’s shrivelled heart. This was the same senior advisor of the most powerful man who believes in the idea of a “reality-based community,” or that “… solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” Rather like his colleague Michael Leeden, another Neo-Conservative authoritarian who believes in deception and lies as a way to gain the upper hand. (More on Leeden in a later post).

Rove seems to be a fine example of political psychopathy which advocates an entirely subjective reality based on Empire-desire where reality is what you make it.

Or in his own words: 

“That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” …“We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” [1]

Government-sponsored terrorism or “synthetic terror” has been a part of warfare since before Sun Tzu’s Art of War from the 6th Century BC. If the enemy is too large then the abiding manoeuvre is always to divide in order to conquer. Since “All warfare is based on deception” it stands to reason that secrecy under the guise of freedom must underlie all operations, where future plans are as:

“… dark and impenetrable as night …” and where the public are programmed to: “Engage … with what they expect; it is what they are able to discern and confirms their projections. It settles them into predictable patterns of response, occupying their minds while you wait for the extraordinary moment — that which they cannot anticipate.” [2]

The September 11th attacks was one such moment.

The focus of deception was gradually transferred from the battle-field and mercenary colonialism to the civilian populations as targets. Western democracy began to rise through electoral politics and International banking and their weapons manufacturers had to move with the times by using propaganda and social science to deliver jingoistic consent for globalism. After all, if a British or American Empire is seeking new countries to invade, convert and exploit you need a ready supply of willing young men to die for it.

From the British Empire to Pax Americana, once the belief that “God is on our side” is promoted as self-evident through the progress of power, then targeted countries inhabited by “savages”, “communists” or “Islamists” are then cultivated and demonised as “evil,” the beliefs systems of which have been purposely assisted to manifest extremes in order to make it easy for the mass mind. Bombing and black ops can begin so that Christian democracy can elevate a backward nation and control its destiny for resource management. The public consciousness is then flooded with propaganda in press, film and chat shows to “stiffen the sinews” and “conjure up the blood” so that they might find themselves in a condition of self-righteous indignation and actually demand that their governments take action. It becomes as easy to equate the Sandinistas of Nicaragua with an insidious plot to topple American freedoms as it is to fuse Osama bin Laden with Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destructions with Iraq.

US-Israeli hegemony steered by the hidden hand of British banking interests has made the business of neo-imperialism the number one reason for conflict in the world. As long as the cosy relationship with arms manufacturers and US defence Dept. continues to buy Congress, which in turn, restricts any alternative economic models then the Empire can continue to expand under the guise of “intervention.”

So, why the constant reference to pearl harbour when people mention the Neo-Cons and 9/11?

Lt. Commander Arthur H. McCollum, head of the Far East desk of the Office of Naval Intelligence designed an eight step plan for President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in order to provoke an attack from Japan and thus involve the United States in the War. The October 1940 memorandum called for an economic embargo, stopping weapons shipments to Japan’s adversaries and the blockade of Tokyo’s ports preventing access to essential raw materials. This could only lead to a confrontation with America.

The FDR government and the US Navy had foreknowledge of the attack in much the same way as factions within the Bush Administration and related shadow government agencies knew about 9/11 and perhaps had a hand in its planning.  US cables tracked the Japanese fleet to Pearl Harbour, keeping tabs on its course right up to the “surprise attack”. While top US Navy personnel were barred from accessing intelligence reports regarding the approach of the Japanese destroyers and their pilots. The deaths of over three thousand American service men; massive destruction of the US Navy fleet and the transformation from huge public resistance to the war to unbridled horror and outrage at such a dastardly act, ensured entry into the War, central to US dominance in the Asia-Pacific. [3]

PNAC_logo

The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was an American think tank with a blueprint for a contemporary Pearl Harbour writ large in Neo-Conservative lettering. PNAC signatories and members included Florida governor Jeb Bush; Cheney’s chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, who was indicted for perjury in October 2005; Elliot Abrams, who became Bush’s top Middle East aide at the National Security Council; John Bolton, Bruce Jackson, Norman Podhoretz, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Dr. Dov S. Zakheim, chairman William Kristol, directors Robert Kagan and the Dark lord Dick Cheney himself, were all hawks desperate for perpetual war as policy.

PNAC’s 1997 statement of principles wished to remind Americans of past “lessons” and “consequences” which called for a “Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity.” Signatories believed: “we need to increase spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future.”

Reading beneath the euphemistic verbiage, it means they desperately wished to increase defence expenditure in order to float their imperialistic visions or in other words : “strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values.” This translates as power-sharing with countries who think the same, but only insofar as it supports their objectives for global dominance. Regime change equates to “challenging” nations which do not agree with US foreign policy having little to do with humanitarian and democratic values. Thus the: “need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad” means an expansion of covert strategic, tactical and psychological operations or “dirty tricks.” This is all wrapped up in the polite, civilised language of politicians seeking only a benign form of interventionism which actually masks a ponerological injunction of decidedly grim intentions. They state a: “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.” [4]

The term “Neo-Conservatism” was coined by political scientist Michael Harrington in the mid 1970s to describe a new form of conservatism which incorporated elements of intellectual liberalism and socialist principles. It claimed to be anti-Utopian yet was even further removed from the pragmatism and reality consensus it professed to embody. Jewish Intellectual and former Trotskyist Irving Kristol has been dubbed the “godfather” of Neo-Conservatism and generally recognised as being responsible for its genesis. As discussed in the World State Policies  and World Revolution series, Neo-Conservatism is an exact fusion of Fabian socialism, Keynesian/neo-liberal economics and the ideology of international revolution suffused with a Christian Zionist bias. In other words, it is a new form of neo-fascism most obviously through the complete corporatisation of the State which is then exported internationally through the geopolitics of coloured revolutions. It is little wonder it has attracted turbo-charged psychopaths like bees to honey. It is political psychopathy writ large, or as exactly as psychologist Andrew M. Lobaczewski described such channels of pathology in the title of his profoundly important book: Political Ponerology: The Science of the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes. 

kristol1

Irving Kristol circa 1965

Getting high on Irving Kristol’s intellectual justification for a new kind of conservatism wasn’t the only major influence for the rise of Neo-Conservatism and the subsequent formation of PNAC. A bedrock of inspiration and ideology can be found in an 1999 essay called “Leo Strauss and the World of Intelligence (by Which we do not mean Nous)” written by Neo-Conservative academic Abram Shulsky and PNAC co-founder Gary Schmitt. Both of these intellectuals studied under the Jewish political philosopher Leo Strauss who arrived in the United States in 1938 and a key figure in Neo-Conservative ideology. Given that he believed that all intelligence work comprises of deception and counter-deception across governments and society at large, the essay can be seen as a subtle exercise in the importance of understanding the vagaries of cultural differences assigned to “regimes” and how such knowledge could institute a form of change. It doesn’t take an academic’s mind to reveal that the type of change sought for is distinctly fascist in flavour,  with a high proportion of its advocates straddling both Zionist and Conservative Establishment circles. Thus, “Zio-Conservatives” is often a more appropriate label.

Kristol maintains, it is not an ideology but a “persuasion,” a way of thinking about politics rather than a compendium of principles and axioms. [5] The importance of concealing one’s true intentions from the public while informing the party faithful with coded words is also a part of the the art of deception. In terms of polity and the intelligence apparatus, it has never been clearer that this is the only thing that mattered. Necessity is not the mother of invention for Neo-Conservatives; rather necessity gives birth to deception as a means to policy ends. [6]

Schmitt and Shulsky admit that political life: “… may be closely linked to deception. Indeed, it suggests that deception is the norm in political life, and the hope, to say nothing of the expectation, of establishing a politics that can dispense with it is the exception.” So, they chose to embrace this deception fully and completely,  which is hardly a surprise given that Strauss was an advocate of secrecy, hierarchy and Elite authoritarianism where the psychology of leaders was of little consequence.

Straussian principles of “Might is Right” and the “Ends justify the Means” is music to the ears of authoritarian personalities which channel their frustrated energies into modern think-tanks, much like PNAC forerunner. Secular democracy was contemptuous for Strauss and in true authoritarian form he believed in the fusion of Church and State as a means to exert control over the masses, but not necessarily to prop up any religious belief in the architects themselves. Ordinary people once again, are seen as a mass of uncontrolled instinct to be sternly managed by Papa Strauss.

leostrauss

Leo Strauss

And this brings us back to Pearl Harbour. What is perhaps most telling in the context of 911 and PNAC is the Machiavellian nature of Straussian belief which was twisted into something beyond the mere philosophical. Shadia B. Dury Professor of political science at the University of Calgary and author of Leo Strauss and the American Right (1999) states: “Perpetual war, not perpetual peace, is what Straussians believe in,” which stems from Strauss’s belief: “… that a political order can be stable only if it is united by an external threat,”… he maintained that “if no external threat exists then one has to be manufactured.[7]

Military pre-eminence via the changing face of technology is the subject explored in the figurehead document of PNAC which we have mentioned before: “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” (1997) and which discusses “… the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor”. The Pearl Harbour event is mentioned again later on in the document: “Absent a rigorous program of experimentation to investigate the nature of the revolution in military affairs as it applies to war at sea, the Navy might face a future Pearl Harbor – as unprepared for war in the post-carrier era as it was unprepared for war at the dawn of the carrier age”. [8]

Though the emphasis is on the unpreparedness of military technology, when taken with Neo-Conservative politicising as a whole, this is merely cover for a pre-emptive doctrine which, if not signalling a nudge and a wink towards the planning of a monumental false-flag operation of which only a select handful may have been aware, then it was the tacit support of such a scenario, should the opportunity present itself.

911-terrorist-attack-Pearl_harbour

9/11: The New Pearl Harbour?

From banking, think-tanks and the military the same script is being followed. The reference to “catastrophic and catalyzing event” can be found by arch-esoteric writer for the Elite crowd Zbigniew Brzezinski in his book, The Grand Chessboard and his discussion on America where he states: “… it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstances of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.” This is no throw-away comment coming from one of the creators of the Al-Qaeda network, alongside the CIA involvement in the Soviet-Afghan conflict. Tracing this meme further, we can find his comrade David Rockefeller in an address to the United Nations Business Council in 1994 touting the same fervent desire: “We are on the verge of global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.”

execu3

Executive laws laid down by the Bush Administration and ready to enforce for President Barack Obama (click on above text for greater resolution) Source: Infrakshun.

Following the PATRIOT Act and PATRIOT Act II was the Home Security Act which was recently updated by former human rights lawyer President Barack Obama. The executive orders currently in the Federal Register can be passed without a whiff of red tape should a National emergency suddenly materialize. And most importantly, prior congressional approval is not needed for such directives – they are instantly effective once the National Emergency is implemented.

The body responsible for enforcing these orders is the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) which has long been recognized as being a whole lot more than just an administrative agency during times of environmental disaster or National emergency. In fact, it has the most extraordinary capabilities that would leave any dictator beaming with anticipation. The true nature of FEMA has been nurtured for its role in overseeing the coming police state by branches of a Shadow Government that have been working steadily behind the scenes in conjunction with the military to ensure that a potent National Emergency can be engineered as part of the Plan for World Order. These branches include the National Security Council, Joint Chiefs of Staff and the National Program Office, all of which have an interesting history of deception. FEMA is a hermetically sealed symbol of totalitarian muscle, answering only to the National Security council, which in turn answers only to the Shadow Government.

100_3257© infrakshun

Executive laws are immediately enforceable but they cannot be restricted or altered by any department or individual – not even congress. If we follow the narrative from commentators in the last ten years from all sides of the political divide are we to expect, at some point in the future, a “terrorist attack” on Congress? Striking at the heart of a perceived democracy would put paid to any ideological resistance at home, and to certain degree, abroad. Remarkably, there already exists a commission to take over in the event of all or most of congress somehow being unable to fulfil their civic duty. Ingeniously named the “Continuity of Government Commission” they had this to say on their main page:

“In the fall of 2002, the Continuity of Government Commission was launched to study and make recommendations for the continuity of our government institutions after a catastrophic attack. September 11th raises the possibility that foreign enemies might seriously disrupt the filling of vacancies in Congress, presidential succession, and achieving a quorum for the Court so much so that our basic institutions might not function in a normal constitutional manner.” [9]

Behind these apparently measured PNAC proposals was masked a virulent form of war-mongering. In January 1998, PNAC published an open letter to President Clinton urging “the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power”, by military force if necessary in order to protect: “… our vital interests in the Gulf.” Clinton, running along more Fabian lines did not like to be pressured by anyone, least of all the Zio-Cons who were commonly known by lower level CIA personnel as the “Crazies.” Nevertheless, these signatories which included Abrams, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Richard Armitage, and U.N. ambassador John Bolton went on to become the main backers of the 2003 genocide in Iraq and their dreams of conquest. [10]

A few days after the 9/11 attacks, a PNAC letter pressured President Bush to extend the parameters of engagement regarding the War on Terror by including Saddam Hussein and Lebanon’s Hezbollah. The need to encompass any and all – even if entirely unconnected – was a driving force in the minds of PNAC members. So, too were the groups true colours revealed in relation to the prevalence of Zionism and its agents. In an April 2002 letter to Bush on Israel, Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority (PA) were deemed “a cog in the machine of Middle East terrorism,” and that America must therefore end support for not only the PA but the Israeli-Palestinian peace process itself. And peace is the last thing Zio-Conservatism wishes to see, being counter to the policy of perpetual war and the theocracy of Zionist visions.  PNAC members wrote that: “Israel’s fight against terrorism is our fight,” calling for Bush to “accelerate plans for removing Saddam Hussein from power.” [11]

Though The Project for a New American Century hung up its armchair warmongering in 2006 in part due to bad press, it was unlikely that Neo-Con hawks would simply fade into the background. True to form, Son of PNAC made its debut in 2009 yawningly named The Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) founded by the same Straussians William Kristol, Robert Kagan and former Bush minion Don Senor. Unbelievably, the faintest whisper of humility and caution was notably absent when it sponsored a conference pushing for a U.S. “surge” in Afghanistan and a greater involvement of the US military in the country. As reporters Daniel Luban and Jim Lobe write: “… the formation of FPI may be a sign that its founders hope once again to incubate a more aggressive foreign policy during their exile from the White House, in preparation for the next time they return to political power.” [12]

They have never left however. A May 2010 report (PDF) from the a Washington, DC think tank, Brookings Institute state quite clearly that Neo-Conservatives such as former Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Irving Kristol’s son Bill Kristol and writer and former politician Richard Perle are working their (black) magic within the Obama Administration.

Keep in mind that just because a fusion between certain elements of the Three Establishment Model (3EM) defined the 1990s and early 2000s does not mean the pathology behind it has suddenly been replaced. Obviously, no such redemption was forthcoming since Obama-Biden administration has brought with it the same strains of pathology with even more disasterous results. That ideological baton has merely been passed to the Liberal Establishment who have exactly the same objectives of globalism as the Conservatives and Zionist arms, they just differ in the means to get there. Once again, what is at stake here is the choice, not between different parties or ideologies – that is an illusion – but the choice between a world locked into a perpetual high-level psychopathy that normalises greed, hatred and destruction to erode the human spirit, or the clawing back of a state of equilibrium where such extreme negativity is called out for what it is – evil. As the US police state gains momentum it seems that they are, once again, a step closer to their ideal.

For the PNAC and FPI teams the September 11th Attacks were so well timed it was miraculous.

The question is, do you believe in miracles?

 


Notes

[1] ‘Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush’. By Ron Suskind, The New York Times Magazine.October 17 2004.
[2] Sun Tzu, The Art of War, Ch. VII.
[3] Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor By Robert Stinnett. Published by The Free Press, First Edition, 1999. ISBN-10: 0684853396.
[4] http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
[5]‘Leo Strauss and the World of Intelligence (by Which We Do Not Mean Nous)’ by Gary J. Schmitt and Abram N. Shulsky 1999.
[5] Ibid.
[6] ‘Leo Strauss’ Philosophy of Deception’ By Jim Lobe, AlterNet, May 18, 2003. | Leo Strauss and the American Right by Shadia B. Drury, 1999. Published by Palgrave MacMillan ISBN-10: 0312217838.
[7] PNAC, Rebuilding America’s Defenses ( p.51) | Ibid. (p.53)
[8] Continuity of Government: Current Federal Arrangements and the Future Harold C. Relyea Specialist in American National Government Government and Finance Division: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/RS21089.pdf
[9] PNAC Letter to President Clinton on Iraq, January 26, 1998 -www.newamericancentury.org/lettersstatements.htm
[10] PNAC Letter to President Bush on Israel, Arafat and the War on Terrorism, April 3, 2002. http://www.newamericancentury.org/lettersstatements.htm
[11] ‘Neo-Con Ideologues Launch New Foreign Policy Group’ By Jim Lobe and Daniel Luban, Inter Press Service News Agency http://www.ips.net

Dark Green VIII: Waldheim’s UN, Lebensräum and Sustainable Development

The-United-NationsBy M.K. Styllinski

“Governments must take action to support institutions and mechanisms that will improve coherence, as well as bring about integrated policy and action across the social, economic and environmental pillars.

Current understanding supports the creation of a Sustainable Development Council within the UN system to integrate social, economic and environmental policy at the global level.

There is also strong support for strengthening global governance by including civil society, business and industry in decision-making at all levels.”

State of the Planet Declaration


Strains of eco-fascism have been worming their way through the insides of the United Nations and genuine initiatives since it first arrived on the scene, care of Rockefeller funding. The Malthusian influence didn’t fully get underway until 1967 with the Trust Fund for Population Activities, a result of the 2nd World Population Conference in Belgrade, two years earlier. After this, a steady outflow of population bomb hysteria linked with environmentalism, education, international aid and health began to emerge. Ever looking for a way to push through its “scientific technique” of humanism, UNESCO held their conference on the Scientific Basis for the Rational Use and Conservation of the Resources of the Biosphere in 1968, complementing the publication of Paul Erhlich’s book The Population Bomb in the same year. The World Population Conference in Bucharest followed in 1974. [1]

Pertinent to our exploration of Elite-induced eco-fascism, Austrian-Czech Kurt Waldheim seems to have played an important part in its genesis when he became General Secretary of the United Nations from 1972 – 1981. When we look at his background it is not hard to understand why.

After the German annexation of Austria in 1938 Waldheim was attending the Boltzmangasse Consular Academy and the University of Vienna’s Law Faculty which had built a tradition of Nazi recruitment and indoctrination. [2]In the same year, 20-year old Waldheim became a member in the National Socialist German Students’ League (NSDStB), a division of the Nazi Party. Not long after, he applied to become a member of the mounted corps of the SA but it is not clear if he actually became a member. [3]In early 1941, he then served as a squad leader in the Wehrmacht on the Eastern Front and soon discharged from further service after being wounded, spending the rest of the war studying for a law degree at the University of Vienna. He also married Elizabeth Ritschel in 1944 who was uncompromising in her belief in Nazism. [4]

It seems Waldheim did rather well as an intelligence officer of the Wehrmacht obtaining the rank of Oberleutnant. According to The International Commission of Historians Waldheim’s functions in the German Army Group E from 1942 – 1945 were as: “… an Interpreter and liaison officer with the 5th Alpine Division (Italy) in April/May 1942, O2 officer (communications) with Kampfgruppe West in Bosnia in June/August 1942, Interpreter with the liaison staff attached to the Italian 9th Army in Tirana in early summer 1942, O1 officer in the German liaison staff with the Italian 11th Army and in the staff of the Army Group South in Greece in July/October 1943 and O3 officer on the staff of Army Group E in Arksali, Kosovska Mitrovica and Sarajevo from October 1943 to January/February 1945.” [5]

Kurt Waldheim

Kurt Waldheim

By 1943 he was in Yugoslavia and embroiled in the massacres carried out by the German and Croatian military. Waldheim claimed no direct knowledge of these atrocities but had heard such things took place. He stated he had been “horrified” but believed he was powerless to prevent such things from happening, which was probably true. [6]However, as author William Walter Kay mentions, this was standard protocol in German Army units in which Waldheim served. He tells us: “In 1942 the multi-national Axis army enacted a system of reprisals for acts of resistance including punitive executions of suspects. SS units randomly lynched Serbs from Belgrade street-posts to meet quota. Worse atrocities were committed by the Axis puppet state of Croatia – a front for the genocidal Ustasha movement …”

Walter Kay also notes: On March 19, 1942, after a spike in resistance, the German 12th Army decreed: ‘The most minor case of rebellion, resistance or concealment of arms must be treated immediately by the strongest deterrent methods… It is better to liquidate 50 suspects than have one soldier killed’ ” These standards were mild. In Bosnia, where Waldheim was, ratios were: ‘100 Serbs to be executed for every German killed, 50 Serbs for every German wounded.’ ” [7]

What came under the spotlight more than any other period of Waldheim’s history is his role in Operation Kozara in 1942. Also known as Operation West-Bosnian by the Axis, fierce fighting took place around the mountain of Kozara in North-Western Bosnia involving Yugoslav Partisan resistance against the Germans, Croatians and Chetniks. Over 25,000 Serbs were sent to concentration camps and many civilian atrocities carried out by the invading forces [8]

One of the biggest and most notorious camps was Jasenovac based in Ustaše (Croatia).

In 1942, when victory over the Bosnian Resistance had been declared, Waldheim was cited for valour before joining General von Stahl’s 72,000-troop Battle Group in West Bosnia in order to rout the partisans once and for all. The General went to work in no uncertain fashion, ringing the surrounding area with barbed wire before advancing. The aftermath saw: “4,735 insurgents/suspects were executed and 70,000 civilians were shipped to camps. Rape and robbery were rampant.” Indeed, Waldheim’s role as an intelligence officer was to keep casualty statistics and to organise transportation for detainees. His name appears on a fine paper commemorative ‘list of honour’ a Wehrmacht document for distinguished service in Kozara. The Croatians awarded him a silver Crown of King Zvonimir medal “for courage in the battle against the rebels in West Bosnia.” [9]

Not exactly standing on the side-lines.

Yet, once again, Waldheim claimed ignorance even though he was in the thick of atrocities and as an intelligence officer it was his job to collate statistics and be acutely aware of the numbers game relating to all aspects of operations. One such operation took place in the Greek city port of Salonika on July 11, 1942 where: “… several thousand Jewish men were corralled into the city square and forced to perform difficult yoga positions under the hot sun while German soldiers hooted, clapped and took photographs. Elderly Jews died on the spot. The photos circulated widely in the Axis press including in a Croatian newspaper popular where Waldheim was then stationed.” [10]

If not directly involved, Waldheim was part of the enabling intelligence apparatus which had detailed knowledge of atrocities. As Walter Kay highlights: “Deporting Jews was a labour intensive operation, much discussed by the soldiers, and unavoidable to an intelligence officer like Waldheim who later pled ignorance.” [11]

Without such enthusiastic support for Croatian fascism Waldheim’s name would scarcely have appeared on the Wehrmacht’s “honor list” of those responsible. In the same year and probably as a reward for a job well done, Kurt Waldheim was allowed time off to complete his PhD thesis ‘The Concept of Reich according to Konstantin Frantz.’” In it he argued that “… the Germanic Reich was the new ‘body of Christ’ inspired by the theory of Prussian statesman Konstantin Frantz (1817-1891) who was part of the Lebensräum ethic of a Greater Germany extending to across Western and central Europe. Poland, Belgium, Switzerland, the Balkans, and the Netherlands were all to be absorbed into the Reich according to Waldheim’s thesis.[12]

Part of the problem with Waldheim’s denial of his own history is the access he had to military information, special briefings, reconnaissance reports, logistics and statistics. As an intelligence officer he was at the sharp end of covert operations. This was best represented by his position as an “O3” officer which: “… were the army’s best informed men.” Walter Kay’s research reveals that Yugoslavian authorities accused Waldheim of involvement in the destruction of villages and massacring civilians, stating: “Orders were planned in detail with the cooperation of the [intelligence] unit at the army corps headquarters, and in particular with the collaboration of Lieutenant Waldheim.” They relied on numerous direct witnesses including three officers from General Loehr’s staff who confirmed Waldheim’s job was “to offer suggestions for reprisals, the fate of prisoners of war and imprisoned civilians.” [13]

After the war in 1947 Waldheim’s record was formally presented to UN War Crimes Commission by the Yugoslav delegation. 75 percent of Yugoslav prosecution requests were rejected by the British-chaired UN Commission. Yet the following year prosecution was recommended in part from British and US veterans’ eyewitness reports and persistent allegations of “putting hostages to death and murder.” [14]And here’s where Waldheim managed to get away with the biggest conjuring trick of his life, which would eventually result in the helmsman ship of the United Nations.

After the summer of 1945 where he had spent most of it in a POW camp he cut a deal with Anglo-American Intel and offered all he knew. In return, Waldheim gained safe passage back to Austria and a new life knowing that various intelligence agents had powerful bargaining chips over his destiny. With the War Crimes Commission concluded by the end of the 1940s with over 36,000 accused Nazi criminals dismissed without trial communism took over as the new bogeyman and Nazis disappeared into the system. His fate was very much in their hands. Like the Nazis of Operation Paperclip and those that fled to Brazil and Argentina it was life that could be both lucrative and powerful provided you would play ball. Waldheim was no different to many who had their war experiences washed cleaned in return for determining policy for vested interests. The next step was to get Waldheim into a position where he could be useful.

After Austria joined the UN in 1955, it was Waldheim who led Austria’s UN delegation until in 1965, whereupon he took up the post of Austrian diplomat in Czechoslovakia. With a failed bid for the Austrian Presidency with an ultra-right wing People’s Party in 1971, he was ushered into pole-position as an authentic candidate for UN Secretary-General.

Quite apart from the fact that Waldheim had a negative reputation within the UN itself (in one individual’s opinion: “a scheming, ambitious, duplicitous egomaniac ready to do anything for advantage or public acclaim.”) he presided over the greening of the institution in ways that established a cast iron, bureaucratic platform for the global warming industry and subsequent green washing in general. [15]In effect, Waldheim used the UN to usher in his global Lebensräum, a practical expression of Nazi land ethic and race theory. EU states supplied 40 percent of the UN’s budget and 50 percent for funding and programmes with most UN head offices located in Europe and two-thirds of environment offices and staff situated in Europe, prominence and complete bias of European Elite dominated the UN during his tenure. American and Russian influence was eroded by allowing mini-states to enter the consensus building process and creating complex and protracted meetings within the UN General Assembly (UNGA).

Meanwhile, Waldheim allowed a particular brand of European environmentalism to take precedence within the UN. Euro-Environmentalism and the UN are now one and the same with the UN’s Economic Commission of Europe (ECE) – which works closely with European Environment Agency (EEA) headquarters in Copenhagen – forging major treaties and subsidiaries for their implementation sourced from a £30 million annual budget. It is linked to the UN Millennium goals project by overseeing better coordination and continuing to usurp its otherwise economic mandate by making sure the “rational use of natural resources and sustainable development” continues apace. [16]

UN Agenda 21 and sustainable Development being the pinnacle of elite objectives. More on this in future posts.

In 1971, Maurice Strong had commissioned a report on the state of the planet, entitled “Only One Earth: The Care and Maintenance of a Small Planet” co-authored by Barbara Ward and Rene Dubos. 152 experts had given their analyses as to the “State of the Earth”, the first report of its kind. This was to act as a foundation report for the first major UN meeting on the environment in Stockholm the following year.

When Waldheim chaired the Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment in 1972 it was attended by 113 states, setting for a global environmental textbook for a new industry of activism, operations, institutions and organisations. Twenty-six principles were listed which member states needed to focus their attention, with education, overpopulation, awareness of biodiversity and conversation as the key proponents of a green campaign. Science and society did not feature. The framework for change was predicated on maintaining a capitalist system but placing the ecological principles in the consciousness so that they may be later expanded. In other words, exploitation of resources was fine as long as reserves were not depleted or the environment polluted.

UNESCO’s roots in depopulation, eugenics and humanism was dipped in Waldheim-Green and found to fit remarkably well. Mass education on the perils of global warming and ecological disaster was implemented. The world was running out of oil and radical change was needed in societies. Climate change became an eco-cause.

1971-72 saw a veritable explosion of environmental awareness. Limits to Growth was published, and Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) headed by Maurice Strong all arrived just a few months apart. The UNEP covers a complex range of issues including: the atmosphere, marine and terrestrial ecosystems, environmental governance and green economy. Developing international environmental conventions, promoting environmental science, information and policy integration with national governments, regional institutions and in conjunction with environmental NGOs occupies the headquarters, six regional offices and various country offices around the world. Based in Nairobi, Kenya, with offices worldwide, UNEP’s task was to: “organize regulation of industrial agricultural products, gather data on the detriments of mining, and formulate a global energy balance sheet. UNEP’s inaugural budget financed 100 air pollution measuring stations and 10 stations to record environmental change.” [17]We will be coming back to the UNEP presently. For now, we must jump forward fifteen years.

dreamstime_l_33071801© Cienpiesnf | Dreamstime.com – Go Green Transparent Colorful City

Happy colours! Volunteering and a bright fresh, SMART future for all! I wish that was the reality. This isn’t about tearing down optimistic, and sincere concern for our environment. It’s about calling out elite pathology masquerading as constructive discourse and positive action – and it goes deep indeed. Stay with me here as it’s going to be a long haul.

The term “sustainable development” emerged from the 1987 report of the UN’s World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (otherwise known as the Brundtland Commission) chaired by CoR member Javier Perez de Cuellar, of which Maurice Strong was also a member. (Surprise!) The report was entitled: “Our Common Future” and placed sustainability and the focus on environmental resource management at the forefront of UN projects.

The report stated that the governments of the world have a responsibility to “… maintain eco-systems and ecological processes for the functioning of the biosphere, shall preserve biological diversity, and shall observe the principle of optimum sustainable yield in the use of living natural resources and eco-systems.” [18] Sounds logical and responsible, as all these initiatives do until you read the small print and place it in context. The report defined sustainable development (SD) to mean: “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” This means that: “Sustainable global development requires that those who are more affluent adopt lifestyles within the planet’s ecological means.” Which is an admirable desire though contradicted when: “Sustainable development can only be pursued if population size and growth are in harmony with the changing productive potential of the ecosystem.” Hence, the targeting of the third world and very little targeting of those who create and keep the systems in place that defines such a world.  [19]

Due to the vague definition of what constitutes SD, there is still no consensus as to what fulfills the criteria for sustainable practice. Consequently, it has been used to denote and define a wide variety of different beliefs and eco-ideologies from eco-psychology to green capitalism and even domains which have nothing to do with environmental concerns but may feature in the grand scheme of what is perceived as “sustainable.” After all, the architecture of global economics and the dynamics of geo-political strategies connected to securing the world resources can in no way be said to be sustainable. They are based on a “grab and run” mentality. But they both derive their impetus from the environmental fruits of water, energy and food. The sustainable development issue can be used to justify a form of security on the part of the Establishment in order to secure future generations (i.e. their families) with sustainable supplies, despite those resources being finite. That is not to say that SD should not be a vital part of humanity’s endeavours at the local and global level. However, “sustainable” is not synonymous with “green” but it can be a darn good pitch for neo-imperialism.

The recycling and alternative-energy industries employ millions while The World Bank and the UNEP use SD to select which projects to finance. So, if the company walks the green talk and donates to saving a patch of rainforest in the South, he receives the World Bank stamp of approval whilst the company continues to “slash and burn” the Northern section of the forest. Know that your massive mining project will be viewed with disdain by the Structural Adjustment Team? Create a tree foundation and pay the fine. Business will continue as usual, provided you have a good PR dept. Thus a new “Green Capitalism” emerged at the end of the Wall St. eighties which promoted “pollution control pays” as a slogan and where big multi-nationals realised: “environmental management is a powerful corporate tool for improving efficiency” and improving public image even if there was no real change in corporate objectives, commonly known as “green washing”. Which meant the greater the benefits the more willing corporations would be to pay a fine and everyone would be happy. This hasn’t stopped some of the biggest environmental organisations from happily snuggling up to the corporate sponsors.

Mike Wright editor of Green Futures magazine recently commented: “… when it comes to working with business in general, one thing is certain. If our society is to make the decisive shift towards a sustainable future which is so urgently needed, then we need business – including the world’s major corporations – to play a key role in making that happen.” [20] Unfortunately, the nature of the corporation and the financial architecture from which they are birthed simply cannot entertain such a “key role” no matter how hard its employees, environmentalists and the public may want it to happen. Unless that is such dynamics can be turned on its head so that new industries can be borne, tied into the exact same market wheel. If psychopaths cannot be cured and nor can business models cast in their image.

While corporations were “greening” so too was their counterparts in crime.

The World Bank, IMF and UN were tinged with green as part of the international environmental movement’s on going penetration of ecological reform set in motion by the UN’s own Kurt Waldheim. The irony is that advocates of sustainability and self-sufficiency for the developed and underdeveloped world alike see no problem working away within the Structural Adjustment Team who despite every green initiative and conference declaration remain a part of the very economic architecture they wish to dismantle. While the Establishment and the wealthy stay the same, the working class and poor bear the brunt of new ecological systems designed to bring the world closer to a sustainable vision.

One example of the SD complexity inherent in non-linear eco-systems is the latest excitement that is producing ethanol from corn to make fuel. This product was once heralded as a saviour of environmentally sound agriculture in much the same cynical way as GMO foods were for feeding the world’s poor. Although corn is a renewable resource and replacing petrol with corn ethanol seems like a reason to be hopeful. But the cultivation, harvesting and conversion of corn is extremely energy intensive. Even if you succeed in making ethanol more sustainable than petrol you will leave a trail of environmental and social carnage behind you. When you divert corn to make ethanol it translates as less corn to feed your cattle, less corn to feed people which means the cost of corn goes up. That means more land is needed to turn into farmland and depending on the country and / or region that can mean more pressure on fallow or rainforest land which is razed to the ground once more. Open to alternatives sources of fuel and energy still inside the insatiable market maw cannot work unless the root perceptions and thus the economic frameworks upon which they are based has also changed. There lies the real “World Problematique.”

Sustainable Development is a buzzword with the best of intentions behind it. But it remains to be seen how much authentic sustainability can truly take hold in the present. The depletion of natural resources is a reality as is the scope for implementing solutions from permaculture to woodland management. The dark side sees SD fall into the hands of the World State advocates and their technocrats who see it as an opportunity not just to protect Nature over man, but as another avenue from which humanity can find themselves (literally) trapped.

In the next post we will briefly look at the UN’s Rio Earth Summit where many of these ideas were firmly planted in our consciousness care of Maurice Strong. We will then return to  Sustainable Development and how it seamlessly interlocks with another domain currently being contoured away from true creativity and emancipation: SMART growth.

 


Notes

[1] p. 637; Encyclopedia of the United Nations and International Agreements By Edmund Osmancyzk, Routledge, New York, 2003 | ISBN 0415939208.
[2] ‘Austrian university confronts Nazi past’ by Wolfgang Freidl, The Lancet, Volume 356, Issue 9246, Page 1994, 9 December 2000.
[3] Report of the International Historical Commission of 8 February 1988, section on “Membership in National Socialist Organizations”, as cited for example in http://www.nationalsozialismus.at/Themen/Umgang/waldheim.htm
[4] Quoted in William Walter Kay’s article: ‘Waldheim’s Monster: United Nations’ Ecofascist Programme’ 2009. This was in turn sourced from; Waldheim; Bernhard; Rosenzweig Luc, Adama Books, New York, 1987 (p. 18)
[5] The Waldheim Report. Submitted 8 February 1988 to Federal Chancellor Dr. Franz Vranitzky (p.39).
[6] ‘Kurt Waldheim: Austrian head of the UN who as president of his country was later tainted by charges of complicity in Nazi atrocities’. The Times 15 June 2007.
[7] Ibid. (Walter Kay quoting: Herzstein, Robert; Waldheim, The Missing Years; Arbor House/William Morrow; New York; 1988 (p.60 and p. 67).
[8] Bosworth, R.J.B. (2009). The Oxford Handbook of Fascism. Oxford University Press. p. 431. ISBN 978-0-19-929131-1.
[9] op. cit. Walter Kay.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ibid. (Walter Kay quoting Cohen p.85-87)
[14] Ibid. (Walter Kay quoting Cohen p 79 – 80)
[15] Ibid. (Walter Kay quoting Hazzard, Shirley; Countenance of Truth: The United Nations and the Waldheim Case; Viking Penguin; New York; 1990( p. 91)
[16] op. cit Walter Kay
[17] Ibid.
[18] Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future, Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427 – Development and International Co-operation: Environment. (1987) http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm
[19] http://www.earthcharter.org 2009.
[20] ‘Sponsorship: green wave or greenwash?’ by Martin Wright, Green Futures, 19th July, 2012.

Outsourcing Abuse III: Dyncorp, Plan Colombia and Private Armies

By M.K. Styllinski

plan-colombia

“America provides the guns, Colombia provides the dead.”

“The pretext of Al-Qaeda infesting the country was used. It was the same propaganda employed in the invasion of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Syria and most of Africa –  in fact,  any other country which has bountiful resources. As the US government retained control, Dyncorp was airlifted in with a fat $10 million contract in the following year for “peacekeeping” and “logistical support,” thus replacing the more costly presence of US combat forces. In other words, this was a proxy army to complete the proxy government.”


Before we return to the topic of Establishment child rape networks I want to continue with the legacy of Dyncorp and other private security firms as outposts of an emerging Pathocracy.  They are important nodes in the expansion of a bankrupt empire and their links to covert drug and the sex trade. Inevitably these companies always have links back to the original source of pathological disease. Dyncorp’s role in Latin America and in particular Colombia is instructive in this regard.

impactos-del-plan-colombia-en-ecuadorThe Free Trade agreements of the Americas walked over the remains of the dead economies of South America, hacked off at the roots by years of U.S. interventionism and later under the auspices of the IMF and World Bank. The colonization has changed but is on schedule and Dyncorp is right in the thick of it to ensure its completion.

The U.S. $1.3 billion Plan Colombia was one example. Critics said that the corporation was involved in “counter insurgency” operations in the war on drugs as well as the monopolisation of oil interests in the region. Paramilitaries and mercenaries are co-mingling in a mix of dirty interests. The corporation’s activities also extend into Bolivia and Peru, Ecuador, Venezuela, Brazil and Panama where it is also carries out drug interdiction, transport, reconnaissance, search and rescue missions, medical evacuation and aircraft maintenance.

The fact that President Bush had substantial ties to Harken Energy Inc., of Houston, Texas, is well known. Bush Jr. opted for a comfortable desk job with the company in 1986 and received $2 million in stock options, a $122,000 consulting job and a seat on its board of directors for his trouble. Meanwhile, in the Magdalena Valley where Harken Energy and other oil companies peddle their business, right wing paramilitary groups comprising of Colombian military officers, drug traffickers, cattle ranchers and fighting guerrillas are paid to protect oil pipelines. Civilians in Colombia have become the prime targets as rapacious parties compete for territory. The murder of peasants is common place if they do not respond to threats and intimidation to leave land targeted for mining, oil exploration and agriculture. Harken continued to rake in the cash on the backs of dead civilians in the Magdalena Valley, with help from the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation.

Paramilitaries protected corporate interests in the region. Death squads operated on behalf of U.S. oil companies and political parties, which were closely entwined in a network of intelligence agencies with the CIA as the guiding hand. After all, Colombia is both the leading recipient of US military aid in the hemisphere and the worst violator of human rights. Connection?

“Plan Colombia” was inflicted on the country for ill-advised reasons during President Bill Clinton’s presidency. The $1.3 billion aid package which was mostly military aid to Colombia and its neighbours, was to usher in “peace, prosperity, and the strengthening of the state” [1] by proposing a military strategy to stop illicit drug cultivation and trafficking. The plan was to be carried out by providing military assistance to the Colombian armed forces and police, and the creation of three anti-narcotics army battalions. However, aside from a slight drop in cocoa plant production, it did none of those things. What it actually did was to build on the destabilisation in the region thanks to 1990s Reaganomic policies and to “increase the dispersion and proliferation of organized crime and the expansion and intensification of political crime and guerrilla warfare.” [2] The plan served to increase politically motivated killings and where “counter-narcotics operations in Plan Colombia fail[ed] to target drugs cultivation in areas under long-standing paramilitary control.” [3]

After a whopping expenditure of $4.72 billion from 2000-2006 with $3.84 billion (81 percent) going to Colombia’s military and police forces, things have only got worse. The reason being, over 50 percent of Colombia’s land is owned by paramilitaries, the monopoly of which is drawn from the paramilitary control of members of Colombia’s Congress at around 30 percent.  It suggests that the CIA, true to its colours, wished to gain control of an important financial resource rather than to decrease its influence in any genuine way.

Dyncorp wasn’t the only one slicing into the pie. AirScan, a based in Rockledge, Florida provides High-Tec air surveillance and is responsible for patrolling the Colombian jungle in Cessna Skymaster electronic surveillance planes, spotting coca plantations and guerrilla threats to the Cano Limon oil pipeline. Military Professional Resources Inc. based in Alexandria, Virginia provides a consultancy service run by former US generals. Its mercenaries were responsible for training the Colombian Army and police officers. An Alabama company working out of the Maxwell Air-force base, Aviation Development Corporation (ADC) flies Cessna spotter planes for the CIA in Peru and Colombia to help target aircraft used by drug smugglers.

droga-panelas1

Cocaine monopolisation: Funding American interests

It was this latter company that caused a brief headache for the PR branches protecting the so called “drug war” when a small plane carrying US missionaries was shot down in Peru by a military pilot killing a young woman and her seven-month-old baby girl. The missionaries’ plane was first spotted by a US Cessna Citation surveillance plane piloted not by the US military but by private contractors hired by ADC. This echoed the shooting down of a Dyncorp helicopter and the subsequent rescue of its pilots by their own search and rescue teams which culminated in a shoot-out with the rebel Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia. Nothing like a spot of Hollywood intrigue to keep the shareholders happy.

Another minor glitch in its operations was discovered in late 2001 when online news journal The Nation managed to obtain a document of a monthly DEA intelligence report from May 2000 in which officers of Colombia’s National Police force intercepted a US-bound Federal Express package at Bogota’s El Dorado International Airport with a parcel containing two small bottles of a “thick liquid” with the same consistency as “motor oil”. The communiqué reported that: “… the liquid substance ‘tested positive for heroin’ and that the ‘alleged heroin laced liquid weighed approximately 250 grams.’” DynCorp spokeswoman Janet Wineriter stated:  “… the viscous liquid that the Colombians tested was not, in fact, laced with heroin; it was simply “oil samples of major aircraft components’ that DynCorp technicians are required to take and send to the US ‘on a periodic basis.’ ” [4]

While the package was traced back to an unnamed employee of Dyncorp who was sending it on to the Andean operations headquarters at Patrick Air Force Base, Florida, the government and Dyncorp were tight-lipped regarding details as to why this was entirely innocent and the result of faulty testing equipment. After a slippery tossing of the hot potato between the US Embassy, the Colombian National Police Force (CNP) the DEA and the Colombian State Department (and of course Dyncorp) the problem was shoved under a decidedly rank carpet courtesy of the CNP whose forensic unit decided it prudent not to pursue the matter.

The testing equipment called NARCOTEX was to all intents and purposes, also found to be bogus by the International Association of Chiefs of Police’s Drug Recognition Experts. They could find no evidence of drug technology with that name. A token military doffing of its hat towards those that were intent on its eradication, was all that was needed. (Like the “War on Terror,” the “War on Drugs” is also largely bogus, a topic we will return to much later).

Dyncorp’s presence in Latin America has stuck like mud against the aspirations of its inhabitants since the early 1990s. It was during one of its contracts for helicopter maintenance that some of the long held suspicions about the multinational were further confirmed when one of those helicopters crashed in the Peruvian jungle in 1992. On board were three DynCorp employees, including Robert Hitchman, a covert-ops specialist, who had worked for the CIA in a number of operations ranging from the CIA front, “Air America,” to Libyan black-ops for Colonel Kaddafi. Hitchman was in fact, flying DEA agents and the Peruvian military on missions into guerrilla territory to destroy cocaine labs and coordinate the herbicide spraying program. True to Dyncorp services, he was also training Peruvian pilots to fly combat missions.[5] Colombia was to be a much more extensive capturing of a country’s destiny where Colombian army, paramilitary groups and toxic spraying and fumigation would be stepped up to a degree that would pay big money to ex-military veterans and black ops personnel.

 fumigaciones

Toxic spraying and fumigation

As part of this propaganda the corporation dutifully and profitably went about its $200 million[6] contract to spray 2,550 Square miles of Colombia with Monsanto’s “Round-Up Ultra” herbicide from 2000-2005, under the pretext of eliminating the illegal cocoa crops. An environmental disaster loaded on yet more suffering for the Colombian peoples already being squeezed by Bogota and the U.S. government. With 82 percent of the population living under the poverty line, growing their own food would have been one possibility to feed their families, when they often have no option but to grow cocoa for the insatiable demand in the States.

While a class-action lawsuit was filed in Washington, DC, on behalf of 10,000 farmers in Ecuador and the AFL-CIO-related International Labour Rights Fund, (ILRF) it may not save the thousands of children already suffering the effects of fumigation and spraying. After the initial veiled threats from Dyncorp CEO Paul V. Lombardi, towards Bishop Jesse DeWitt president of ILRF, the lawsuit for indigenous Quiches and farmers from the state of Sucumbío, Dyncorp subsequently used its State Department leverage to ask “…the judge to dismiss the case because it involves national security interests of the United States.” Luckily the Judge after consulting material derived from an investigation by Ecuador’s Acción Ecológica came to the conclusion that Dyncorp had “committed crimes against humanity, torture and cultural genocide.” [7] This ruling finally led to the 2003 court rulings ordering the suspension of aerial fumigation of coca and poppy crops until environmental and human impact studies can be carried out.

However, in clear violation of Colombian law, President Alvare Uribe, a U.S. puppet, continues to do the State Department’s bidding and the spraying has continued. According to Narco News, a Latin American journal that reports on the drug war and (the lack of) democracy in Latin America: “Food crops have been destroyed, rainforest ravaged, tens of thousands of peasants have been displaced because their crops, livestock and water sources have been poisoned.” [8]

Colombia’s armed conflict is the longest-running guerrilla war in the Americas, and with U.S. involvement, shows no signs of decreasing in intensity. According to the Women’s Commission for Refugee Women and Children, in 2002 alone “an estimated 5,000 to 6,000 civilians were killed in fighting; were targeted in political assassinations or were ‘disappeared.’ By comparison, the death toll was 3,000 to 3,500 in the previous year and where 4,077 children suffered violent deaths, including political violence and common crime, according to the Colombian Ombudsman’s Office (Ombudsman, Defensoría del Pueblo).” [9]

The crux of the problem in the declining fortunes of the Colombian people and the next generation of children being born into such chaos is U.S. sponsorship and support of guerrilla groups, paramilitaries, government armed forces and national police that have consistently perpetrated violence and abuses against civilians, particularly children and adolescents. There is widespread grievous bodily harm (GPH) and instances of rape in conflict and in domestic life.

Human Rights Watch place the incidences of rape of adolescent girls as 2.5 per every 1,000 young women. “Rape, sexual torture and other forms of sexual violence against women and girls are used as tactics to destabilize the population.” Despite a 2006, $20 million budget to help fund Colombia’s paramilitary demobilization process; the commercial sex trade is gaining ground, with estimates ranging from 20,000 to 35,000 children forced into commercial sexual work. [10] A steady unchecked business in arms trafficking and an equally plentiful supply of child soldiers parallels the figure of over 3 million children who do not attend school. A high percentage of indigenous and Afro-Colombian child soldiers of Between 11,000 and 14,000 are often targeted for recruitment. The U.S. State Department becomes uncharacteristically silent on the subject of support for Uribe and government armed forces that are known to use children as informants and “counter-insurgency” propaganda activities. [11]

403px-Álvaro_Uribe_Vélez

Former president Álvaro Uribe Vélez

Paramilitary leaders unilaterally declared a cease-fire in late 2002, with much trumpeting of the U.S. negotiations which were heralded as more evidence of the US bending over backwards to “assist.” If we look deeper, this “assistance” represents more attempts to find ways to circumvent the maze of interests that continue to carve up Colombia. Most paramilitary leaders at the negotiating table are there due to the possibility of extradition to the U.S. under the demobilisation laws and are haggling away their wealth that was illegally-acquired. Paramilitaries and drug barons are putting themselves forward as human bargaining chips to avoid imprisonment should the need arise. In truth, before 2005, demobilization had not been enforced due to the absence of a legal framework and served to act as yet another sop for Congress. Human Rights Watch reported in 2004: “…the government has been holding ceremonies in which thousands of purported paramilitaries turn over their weapons and become eligible to receive stipends and other benefits. As a result, there is a real risk that the current demobilization process will leave the underlying structures of these violent groups intact, their illegally acquired assets untouched, and their abuses unpunished.” [12]

The U.S. and the European Union actively encouraged the tragically misplaced naming of “Ley de Justicia y Paz” (Justice and Peace Law) while the United Nations Security Council sheepishly turned a blind eye. The Colombian Congress dutifully passed in June 2005 the legal framework for the demobilization of the paramilitary United Self-Defence Forces of Colombia (AUC), the worst Human rights offender responsible for 80 percent of the most appalling abuses country-wide. They have been a dominant factor in the drug trade with various AUC leaders being extradited to the United States for prosecution on drug trafficking charges. Prison sentences are limited to a maximum of eight years and prosecutors are given a very limited leeway in which to present their charges. Big-wig criminals including drug barons are often blurring the lines between paramilitary groups. It means that they are protected from extradition to the United States by legal semantics and loopholes. Furthermore, safe in the assurance that they will be protected from the harsh realities of their crimes, the turning in of arms amounts to window dressing for Congress and NGO’s because they will not be required to reveal information about the paramilitary financing and methods. On top of this, they will not be detained for any undue length of time.

The CIA and its corporate covers in the monopolisation of the drug wars wish to hold onto and protect their assets while expanding and mopping up drug operations. Drug lords are bought off and given immunity in exchange for their illegal wealth while ex-paramilitaries are “re-integrated” back into the community. The latter means, of course, that these psychopaths have been hired back into the national police and army with a ridiculous assurance that no arms will be given to these men. Given Colombia’s record, this is nonsense. It is also an interesting example of the U.S. predilection for recycling military and special ops personnel back into its cover corporations abroad. We may well have the same practice happening in Colombia, with the priority going to private security firms, replicating the standards that Dyncorp is now so famous for. It seems everyone is a winner, except that is, the citizens of Colombia and its lost children. After all, mechanics, trainers, maintenance and administrative workers, logistics experts, rescuers and pilots and CIA agents with fat pay packets are all busy helping to fleece what is left of the country on a variety of support operations. For Dyncorp and CSC, exploitation ratios are its primary measure of success.

In an article by Journalist Uri Dowbenko he includes an explication of the financial mechanics behind Dyncorp’s free reign in the “War on Drugs” propaganda. Catherine Austin Fitts, former FHA Commissioner in the Bush Sr. Administration and former CEO of Hamilton Securities outlines how they do it where she refers to the creation of Stock Value or Capital Gains as “Pop” in Wall Street jargon:

If DynCorp has a $60 million per year contract supporting knowledge management for asset seizures in the United States,” she says. “The current proxy shows that they value their stock, which they buy and sell internally, at approximately 30 times earnings. So, if a contract has a 5-10percent profit, then per $100 million of contracts, DynCorp makes about $5-$10 million, which translates into $150 million to $300 million of stock value. That means that for a $200 million contract, with average earnings of 5-10percent ($10 million to $20 million), DynCorp is generating $300 million to $600 million of stock value.

Pug Winokur of Capricorn Holdings appears to have about 5 percent ownership, which means that his partnerships’ stock value increase $15-$30 million from the War in Colombia. If the DynCorp team kills 100 people, as an example, then that means they make $1.5 – $3 million per death. That way the Pop per Dead Colombian can be estimated, or, how much capital gains can be made from killing one Colombian. Since DynCorp was also in the Gulf and in Kosovo, we should be able to calculate the relative value of killing people in various cultures and nationalities. Pug Winokur’s partnership, under these assumptions, makes $75,000 to $250,000 of Pop per Dead Colombian. [13]

Of course, Bush’s anti-terror bill injected more financial aid to President Alvare Uribe’s right-wing government and managed to destroy much of the progress on human rights of the last few decades. It also smoothed the way for a doubling of the number of US troops and US contractors allowed in Colombia such as Dyncorp and Textron (the military helicopter firm) which continued from 2005 to 2009. The displacement of an already acutely oppressed people has reached 3 million and is worsening as a direct result of U.S. policy and the outsourcing of its global agenda.

Dyncorp is nothing more than the extension of the Pentagon’s foreign policy strategies from Bosnia to Colombia, Somalia to Haiti. Regime change required? Then call in a private security firm to sow the seeds of discontent by arming and training the waiting oppositions. This is exactly what happened when Somalia had the briefest window of opportunity for a democratic peace. After warlords had controlled the country for over fifteen years the Islamic Courts Union (ICU) had managed to wrest control from these chaotic and bloody factions during the summer of 2006. Despite the very real chance of a respite from war and carnage the US was in the region busily training Ethiopian troops who then invaded Somalia in December of that year backed up by US air raids.

The pretext of Al-Qaeda infesting the country was used. It was the same propganda employed in the invasion of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Syria and most of Africa –  in fact,  any other country which has bountiful resources. As the US proxy government was placed back into power Dyncorp was airlifted in with a fat $10 million contract in the following year for “peacekeeping” and “logistical support,” thus replacing the more costly presence of US combat forces. In other words, this was a proxy army to complete the proxy government. [14]

After the CIA-backed coup in Haiti and the toppling of Haitian President Jean Bertrand Aristide, Dyncorp was drafted in by the U.S. State Department to protect Boniface Alexandre, yet another US puppet wheeled into to their bidding.  Dyncorp is now busy training police in the country. [15]

129254611_640

The U.N. General Assembly adopted the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries in 1989 where around nineteen states ratified the Convention and nine states have signed but have yet to ratify. This followed with a further amendment to the convention in 1992 which was similarly ignored. It was also declared that “the use of mercenaries is a threat to international peace and security,” and that all were “Deeply concerned about the menace that the activities of mercenaries represent for all States, particularly African and other developing States” as well as “Profoundly alarmed at the continued international criminal activities of mercenaries in collusion with drug traffickers…” [16] At least three of the countries are officially known to have flouted the Convention. [17] The twenty-two States that have completed the constitutional procedures that bind them to the Convention are: Azerbaijan, Barbados, Belarus, Cameroon, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Georgia, Italy, Libya, Maldives, Mauritania, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Suriname, Togo, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uruguay and Uzbekistan. The nine other States that have signed but not ratified it are: Angola, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Germany, Morocco, Nigeria, Poland, Romania, Yugoslavia and … The United States. [18]

The extent of this indignation and concern was shown in the 1997 report by the UN Special Rapporteur on mercenaries regarding the growth market in mercenary activity: “In what appears to be a new international trend, legally registered companies are providing security, advisory and military training to the armed forces and police of legitimate Governments. There have been complaints that some of these companies recruit mercenaries and go beyond advisory and instruction work to become involved in military combat and taking over political, economic and financial matters in the country served.” [19] With the United States maintaining a military presence in 148 of the 192 United Nations countries, it is set to remain both a lucrative and controversial field of activity well into the future. [20]0921-indep

While Dyncorp’s associations with the UN already reek of hypocrisy, these naïve protestations are further laid bare when we realize that Lifeguard Security, a company linked to Executive Outcomes, a U.K. mercenary company, was responsible for guarding U.N. offices and residences in Sierra Leone’s capital of Freetown in 2004. The refusal of the U.K. a major manufacturer of weapons and source of mercenaries to sign the Convention was given an embarrassing exercise in exposition with the Equatorial Guinea Mercenaries Coup affair. Sir Mark Thatcher and Simon Mann’s forays into the arms business were highlighted in spectacular fashion, revealing an industry that rarely gets a mention yet is so instrumental in the destinies of government coups everywhere. [21]

Let’s have a brief look at some of these companies.

The Vinnell Corporation, part of the Northrop-Grumman merger in 2000, employs ex-military and CIA personnel as well as having close connections with concurrent U.S. administrations. It has had a contractual relationship to train the Saudi Arabian National Guard since 1975. This led to Bush condemning an attack in Riyadh in May 2003 that killed at least 30 people. it was blamed, of course, on Al-Qaeda.

True to the infantile propaganda that is circulating so effectively via the U.S. media every violent event and atrocity is traced back to the insidious tentacles of Osama Bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda network. This is very often the role of security companies such as Vinnell that act as foreign policy enforcers. They are there to prop up the regime and to keep dissidents at bay, hence they become targets. This is not dissimilar to the “insurgents” in Iraq who attack those intent on planting bombs and creating the seeds of a civil war. Under cover of chaos it is far easier to go about your business of fleecing the countries resources and laying plans for future geo-political monopolies. The terror wars are fuelling the security business growth and in turn, it is ensuring that terrorism remains a global menace, much to the delight of arms dealers everywhere. Companies such as Vance International specialize in American corporate executives travelling overseas, wealthy foreigners visiting the United States and the extravagance of Hollywood stars. It is renowned for using mostly ex-military men for “asset protection.”

Global Options which provides high-end security, intelligence and investigative services, billing itself as a “private CIA, FBI, State Department and Justice Department wrapped up into one.” Not forgetting its emphasis on “defending corporate America” which should fill us all with confidence. [22] Control Risk Grp.,  and MPRI  specialise in providing training mercenaries for armies worldwide. Although many corporations would feign incredulity at such heinous accusations, security corporations all provide services of “risk mitigation” and “executive or asset protection;” hired by governments, intelligence agencies and the 1% elite to do their dirty work outside of Congressional or Parliamentary oversight. Which makes Sandline International CEO Tim Spicer’s attempt to take the moral high ground particularly ridiculous. With the winding up of his company’s operations he left a petulant message on his now defunct website bemoaning lack of “government support”:

“On 16 April 2004 Sandline International announced the closure of the company’s operations. The general lack of governmental support for Private Military Companies willing to help end armed conflicts in places like Africa, in the absence of effective international intervention, is the reason for this decision. Without such support the ability of Sandline to make a positive difference in countries where there is widespread brutality and genocidal behaviour is materially diminished.”

The reality was that Sandline got caught red-handed doing what it shouldn’t and the government pulled up the ladders and claimed no knowledge which is what they do. The fact that an historical Western corporatism and its pathocratic enablers are the original cause of endemic corruption and destablisation within those countries also seems to have escaped the colonel’s worldview.

Other security contractors making mega-bucks in 2014 include:

  • Erinys – guarded most of Iraq’s vital oil assets
  • Academi – (formerly Blackwater and Xe) owns and runs one of the most advanced private military training facilities in the world.
  • Unity Resources Group – active in the Middle East, Africa, the Americas and Asia
  • Triple Canopy – won a security contract in Iraq worth up to $1.5 billion
  • Aegis Defense Service – works with the UN, US, and oil companies
  • Defion Internacional – recruits thousands of fighters from developing countries
  • G4S (orginaly known as the Wackenhut Corp.) –  the largest security contractor in the world that has it’s dirty fingers in most of the globes conflicts.  (more on Wackenhut’s history in the next post)

Ethics are not going to be top of the list in any of these businesses that would clearly kill the local nursery teacher if the contract fee was high enough.  What is more, the nature of the US Army and Navy means that they are chock full of the kinds of psychological profiles most attracted to such work which would include psychopaths, sociopaths, jackals and skirtoids which are then used as the pool from which private security firms draw their personnel. Former FBI agents, intelligence directors, Delta-Force, Air-Force, SWAT, Army Intelligence operatives, Secret Service agents, CIA veterans, Navy Seals and ex-Marines – you name it, the demand is there for such men and women. Security services and mercenaries for hire act as funnels to the US military and secret service in order to save money, resources and to actualise foreign policy moves beyond the radar of independent media and the public. Remember of course at a certain level, there is no such thing as a former FBI or CIA agent or any government intelligence operative.

As controversy about rendition and torture continues to bubble, private security firms are merging with the free-market to produce a boom in private finance deals both in Europe as well as the US Private-sector firms are even sponsoring academics and researchers and helping to formulate government penal and criminal justice policy, no doubt tailored towards an increasing reliance on profit over public interest. Stephen Nathan, editor of Prison Privatisation Report International said, regarding then Denmark-based Group 4 and its services: “The increasing influence of the private sector in the criminal justice system means shareholders’ interests come first. Who shapes criminal justice policy? Is it professionals, politicians and the public? Or is it Group 4 shareholders?” [23]

Though the tired suggestion that it is simply market forces and intense competition that has led to the prison services adopting more aggressively commercial approaches, this does not address the issue of rising crime rates of young offenders. For those ready to provide the means to sweep problems out of sight and out of mind it promises to remains an unending money-spinner.

 


End Note: This particular piece was written almost a decade ago. Since that time, Dyncorp International has certainly smartened up its PR and marketing. It has a slick website and a special “Social Responsibility” section and even an “A” rating on the Defence Companies Anti-Corruption Index. Unfortunately, a predator is a predator. While it may do its best to change it’s spots – even extinguish internal corruption and crime about which you will read below –  it is still a corporation which outsources “guns for hire,” complete with logistical and technological know-how. As such, it continues to act as a de-facto arm of the American Empire and fans the flames of conflict simply by doing its job.

The whole idea of US policing the world and is thus an “interference” is a view offered by the progressive left and it is missing the point. It is far worse than this. Companies like Dyncorp are a hugely lucrative part of Corporate America. As the Empire becomes over-stretched, their remit is to facilitate long-term presence in countries through private means. This is not a misguided policy of over-protection and policing, as though this is somehow about good intentions gone awry. It is about the maintenance of a sprawling corporate-security complex offering further geopolitical leverage without committing further troops on the ground. It has the added advantage for military-corporate partnerships to remain a little deeper under the radar when comes to the mainstream media.

The presence of men “addicted to adrenalin” adds to the probability of civil conflict and abuse. Sure enough, this still proves to be the case, despite Dyncorp’s probably genuine attempts at instilling ethics and values training for its office workers. It even supports a children’s charity in the region which, from an historical perspective is truly ironic. Corporate philanthropy and conflict has always gone hand in hand because it’s good PR. But all this is a drop in the ocean when the overarching directive of such companies is destabilisation.  When you have ex-veterans walking around with automatic weapons, hearts pumping and looking for action; roaming around a country that has been destroyed by the very same forces – it’s hardly likely to end well. Corporations working for military, intelligence and US defence attending a children’s charity gala while acting as a stay-behind occupying force won’t work.

What Afghanistan and Iraq really need is ZERO American military presence and CIVILIAN personnel from genuine NGOs who have no political and military affiliations.

Reports in from 2011-2014 suggest that initiatives like Village Stability Operations (ALP) are a euphemism for creating a network of staging posts which maintain a massive presence in regions across Afghanistan, Iraq and other countries formerly trashed by the Anglo-American-Israeli invaders. The only reason these private armies are there is to maintain presence. Re-building infrastructure and assisting the population in recovering from Western aggression only occurs as an incidental practice. The primary objective is to create a country contoured toward Western strategies as they play out in the regions.

Mint Press News reported on the studies by the Congressional Research Service, titled “Afghanistan: Post-Taliban Governance, Security and U.S. Policy”, a report which drew attention to the negative effects private security forces have in regions suffering from civil war, tribal conflict and geopolitical sensitivity. Although, it seems to me that is precisely why such companies are there in the first place …

The report stated:

“An outgrowth of the Village Stability Operations is the Afghan Local Police (ALP) program in which the U.S. Special Operations Forces conducting the Village Stability Operations set up and train local security organs of about 300 members each. These local units are under the control of district police chiefs and each fighter is vetted by a local shura as well as Afghan intelligence. There are about 23,000 ALP operating in nearly 100 districts. A total of 169 districts have been approved for the program, and there are expected to be 30,000 ALP on duty by December 2015. However, the ALP program, and associated and preceding such programs discussed below, were heavily criticized in a September 12, 2011, Human Rights Watch report citing wide-scale human rights abuses (killings, rapes, arbitrary detentions, and land grabs) committed by the recruits. The report triggered a U.S. military investigation that substantiated many of those findings, although not the most serious of the allegations. … In May 2012, Karzai ordered one ALP unit in Konduz disbanded because of its alleged involvement in a rape there. ALP personnel reportedly were responsible for some of the insider attacks in 2012.” [24]

But you won’t hear about that on Dyncorp’s website because outsourcing the empire is unlikely to fade away any time soon. But keep pushing those values and training programs. Who knows? Perhaps that will deliver enough rationalisations for those working within a corporation which actively profits from extending America’s security and logistical reach into resource-rich countries.

We help destroy your country and make money.

Then we help rebuild it and make money.

That way the banksters are also happy. And that, as we know, is all that matters.

 


Notes

[1] The Center for International Policy’s Colombia Project http://www.ciponline.org/ The Plan Colombia (Copy obtained from the Colombian Embassy to the United States, October 1999.) ‘Plan Colombia:  Plan For Peace, Prosperity, and  the  Strengthening of the State.’
[2] Drug Trafficking, Political Violence and US Policy in Colombia in the 1990s Dr. Bruce Michael Bagley, Professor of International Studies, School of International Studies, University of Miami, CIDE ciencias socials, http://www.cide.edu/
[3] ‘Colombia: Stoking the fires of conflict’ Amnesty International, Terror Trade Times, 2001.
[4] ‘DynCorp’s Drug Problem’ by Jason Vest, The Nation, July 3, 2001.
[5] Private Warriors by Ken Silverstein, published by Verso July 2000.
[6] ‘A Plane is Shot Down and the US Proxy War on Drugs Unravels’by Julian Borger, The Guardian, June 2, 2001.
[7] ‘DynCorp Charged with Terrorism Lawsuit Unites U.S. Workers & Ecuador Farmers vs. FumigationPart I of a Series By Al Giordano ‘Lawsuit in U.S. vs. Fumigation on Ecuador Border’ Narco News narco.com.
[8] ‘Fumigations Continue in Colombia Despite Court Ordered Suspensions’ Uribe and Bush Administrations in Clear Violation of Colombian Law By Peter Gorman The Narco News Bulletin April 29, 2004. http://www.narco.com
[9] ‘Colombia’s War on Children’ February 2004, Womens’ Commission http://www.watchlist.org/
[10] ‘The Effects of Armed Conflict on Colombian Children’ October 2004, U.S. Office on Colombia http://www.usofficeoncolombia.org.
[11] Ombudsman’s Office, Human Rights Watch, Coalition to Stop the Use of  Child Soldiers, 2003,www.hrw.org/
[12] Human Rights Watch Colombia: ‘Human Rights Concerns for the 61st Session of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights,’ March 2005.
[13] Catherine Austin Fitts quoted in Dirty Tricks, Inc: The DynCorp-Government Connection 2002, by Uri Dowbenko.
[14] ‘DynCorp International’ Company profile by Phil Mattera | http://www.crocodyl.org May 19, 2010
[15] Ibid.
[16] United Nations Resolution A/RES/47/84, 89th plenary meeting, 16 December 1992. Use of mercenaries as a means to violate human rights and to impede the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination. http://www.un.org/
[17] International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries, Resolution 44/34,72nd plenary meeting 4 December 1989. United Nations General Assembly, http://www.un.org/
[18] ‘International Convention Against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries’ http://www.sourcewatch.org
[19] The Debate on Private Military companies 1997 report by the UN Special Rapporteur.
[20] ‘Ron Paul says U.S. has military personnel in 130 nations and 900 overseas bases’ Politi Fact.com Tampa Bay Times:http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/sep/14/ron-paul/ron-paul-says-us-has-military-personnel-130-nation
[21] ‘Straw: We did know of Africa coup’ By Antony Barnett and Martin Bright, The Observer, November 14, 2004
[22] http://www.globaloptions.com1047 ‘Crime pays handsomely for Britain’s private jails’ By Nick Mathiason, The Observer, March 11 2001.
[23] Ibid.
[24] Exclusive: Private Security Contractors, Fanning The Flames In Afghanistan? (AUDIO) Presence of US-backed private security in Afghanistan seems only to contribute to the ongoing violence. By Jo Erickson | October 16, 2013.

Outsourcing Abuse I

By M.K. Styllinski

[NATO soldiers, UN police, and Western aid workers] “operated with near impunity in exploiting the victims of the sex traffickers.”

– Amnesty International


un

In 2003, Kenneth Cain joined forces with former UN officials Heidi Postlewaite and Andrew Thomson, to write a book called Emergency Sex and Other Desperate Matters [1] which hit the shops in June of 2004. The book detailed widespread sexual abuse within the UN and its peace missions. It received significant exposure on many a Neo-Conservative website and newspaper and was gleefully pounced on by ardent anti-UN detractors. Mr. Cain, a Harvard law-school graduate and full time writer paints an unrelenting picture of decadence and corruption where drugs, alcohol and sex are the mainstay of some nations’ peace keeping forces. Dr. Thomson, a U.N. physician was equally unflattering about the world organization describing his missions in Haiti and the Dominican Republic as a “frustrating exercise in futility.”

An uncharacteristically vehement Kofi Annan tried to have the publication banned and then heavily censored, threatening the employees with redundancy if they did not reconsider. According to the UN they “violated staff rules” though in truth, the book is merely a distillation of widespread reports which began to gather pace long before the controversial book went to print. In 2001, about a half-dozen investigators from the U.N. Office of Internal Oversight Services in New York and investigators from the Office of the Inspector-General of the U.N. High Commissioner of Refugees finally examined the allegations. Despite the deluge of referrals and submitted cases surrounding the inquiry the book gave substantial weight to the criticism levelled at the organisation for being far too slow in its general investigations. Dileep Nair, U.N. Undersecretary General and Chief of OIOS said: “We can barely cope with the cases that are being referred to us” with over 400 cases were demanding attention. [2]

Bearing in mind that these are only the recorded cases, the findings that the UN consistently ignored claims of abuse and refused to take action, dating back as far as the late eighties parallels the same methods of denial of the Catholic Church and other institutions. Aid workers for Non-Governmental Organisations such as Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors without Borders) and Save the Children UK were also implicated. A full copy of the joint study sponsored by the UNHCR and SC-UK noted the following: “Agency workers from the international and local NGOs as well as U.N. agencies were ranked as among the worst sex exploiters of children, often using the very humanitarian aid and services intended to benefit the refugee population as a tool of exploitation.” The findings further revealed: “In order for a refugee to make a report, they would have to go through the same persons who themselves are perpetrators of sexual exploitation. Most staff appear to connive to hide the actions of other staff.” [3]

Note the ponerisation of not only UN staff but affiliated NGO agencies. This made it easy for UN officials to keep it  quiet, narrow down the scope of investigations and cover-up the abuse. Interestingly enough, the investigator himself, Dileep Nair was investigated after the UN Staff Council, the equivalent of a union, alerted Secretary-General Kofi Annan about alleged “violations of appointments and promotions rules in OIOS, as well as allegations of corrupt practices in the Office and “other misconduct” by Mr. Nair.”[4] However, no “credible” evidence of wrongdoing was found. Whether a smear campaign was enacted against Nair in order to deflect further investigations by discrediting his probe or that the allegations had some grain of truth was never established.

No place to HideNo Place to Hide (2013)

“They took us to a small house. Then they tore the clothes from our bodies and raped us. I was just 17 and still a virgin!” Joari and her friend were raped by men thought to be their saviours: UN peacekeepers. Since 1999, the United Nations has maintained a peace keeping mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo. It aims to bring stability to the region and protect the civilian population from attacks and sexual violence of the warring parties. But many of the 20,000 peacekeepers become perpetrators, exploiting the extreme distress and poverty of women and girls.In addition to showing victims of UN soldiers’ sexual attacks for the first time, the film also proves that the issue of sexual violence by peacekeepers has long been known at UN headquarters in New York. For years, the UN has been trying to combat the abuse by increasing staff training and introducing a zero-tolerance policy. Officials claim that the number of incidents has been drastically reduced. At local level however, UN insiders tell us, these measures have no effect at all.”

Over four million people have been killed by war and preventable diseases in the Democratic Republic of Congo during the past eight years, or as one UN humanitarian chief mentioned: “…the equivalent of six Rwandan genocides”, where the ‘Military and civilian authorities are still virtually unaccountable for crimes against civilians…’” [5] The institutionalised abuse by UN personnel is a large part of that desperate picture. Didier Bourguet, a U.N. senior logistics officer was charged with running an internet paedophile ring in the region, where he established a sophisticated porn studio for the procurement of young boys and girls in a multi-media operation. Videos were freely available to buy. According to Human Rights Watch, some of the female victims were as young as eleven years old.

While Bourguet had engaged in similar activity in a previous UN posting in the Central African Republic, he was not alone in his endeavours. Claude Deboosere-Lepidi, Bourguet’s lawyer, said his client admitted he assaulted minors and that his sex crime spree included other U.N. officials. He was insistent in his belief that the UN as a whole was partly to blame for tolerating the continued attacks on Congolese women and young girls. The UN has since confirmed this belief admitting that its peacekeepers regularly raped, abused and prostituted children in their care. A range of sexual abuses from UN troops and aid workers were catalogued including: “Reported rapes of young Congolese girls by blue-helmeted U.N. troops as well as aid workers; a colonel from South Africa accused of molesting his teenage male translators; hundreds of under-age girls having babies fathered by U.N. soldiers who have been able to simply leave their children and their crimes behind. Despite the UN’s official policy of “zero-tolerance” there were 68 allegations of misconduct in the town of Bunia alone. Another case included a 14-year-old girl who had told UN investigators that “she had sex with a UN peacekeeper in exchange for two eggs. Her family was starving.” [6]

A sex trade flourished in Monuc where scores of local women and girls had been made pregnant by Moroccan and Uruguayan peace keeping soldiers as well as two UN officials. One Ukrainian and a Canadian were obliged to leave the country after getting local women pregnant and two Russian pilots based in Mbandaka paid young girls with jars of mayonnaise and jam in order to have sex with them. [7] It appears that a virtual industry has grown up, including the production and selling of pornography and bartering goods for sex.

The lack of screening of UN peace keeping soldiers provided a new opportunity for rebuilding more than just infrastructure and aid. It can hardly be surprising if sexual exploitation infiltrates institutions on the ground, regardless of their humanitarian intentions. It is the proverbial honey-pot for those who have no conscience, or as a Times report so aptly quoted: ‘Never forget this is Heart of Darkness country. People do things here just because they can,” one female UN employee said, in a reference to Joseph Conrad’s novel about the abuses of the former Belgian Congo.” [8]

With UN officials accused and suspended after scores of abuses, one would have thought that it may have dawned on Kofi Annan that these crimes had been occurring for a number of years. Annan was previously head of the UN’s peacekeeping force and acknowledged that “acts of gross misconduct have taken place”. Asked whether he could have, given his experience, done more to prevent abuse in Congo, he said: “You never know when you send that many people out. There may be one or two bad apples.” [9]

Annan is being a little disingenuous to say the least. There is no question that this was a systematic manifestation of variable abuse which the UN consistently hushed up for many years. As such, he is ultimately responsible and should have resigned. Instead, after 150 reported claims of abuse, many of them involving minors, he continued the tradition of secrecy and suppression further damaging what remains of the UN’s standing. A hotline set up to receive complaints about past and future abuse was a case of too little too late.

th_kofi_annan

Kofi Annan

In March of 2006 another report, this time on the military arm of the UN, concluded: “deeply flawed and recommends withholding salaries of the guilty and requiring nations to pursue legal action against perpetrators.” It also included a host of other recommendations to be fully implemented by 2007. However, as a recent report in May from the Associated Press shows, far from coming down hard on such crimes, the activities actually doubled in 2004. Though this may in part, be due to the heightened awareness of such activities, the vast majority of allegations were still levelled at UN peace keepers. In 2002, the UN was beginning to form its defence against shocking abuse allegations in the Congo. It would finally send an investigation team in 2004 after a seemingly “outraged” Annan decided enough was enough. Whether this was due to media pressure or concerns about his own image, is far from clear.

In any event, within the same year, an exact same pattern of abuse surfaced in Sierra Leone where the UN and NGOs were running programmes to reintegrate former child soldiers from the bloody civil war between the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) rebels and the Civil Defence Force (CDF) a pro-government militia known as the Kamajors. Both committed atrocities that are astonishing for their ferocity. Child protection agencies estimated that the warlords abducted as many as 6,000 children, out of which about 3,500 actually fought in the war. The rest were used for sex and for carrying weapons. Sierra Leone was plagued by the slow deployment of UN troops and the apathetic defence of civilians habitually caught in the cross-fire between the warring sides. One NGO chief executive described the reality: “These atrocities are taking place practically under the noses of government and international troops …Innocent civilians are suffering, and it’s the responsibility of these troops to protect them. They should do their job.”[10]

These atrocities included systematic rape of women and girls, some as young as ten, and the murder of whole families. Infants and children were thrown into burning houses, the hands of toddlers as young as two were severed with machetes and girls as young as eight were sexually assaulted. A newspaper reporter in Sierra Leone told Human Rights Watch: “There was rampant raping. I saw a fifteen-year-old girl raped right before me. They left her, but they captured others, and among them was a seven-year-old girl.” [11]

Amputation of limbs came to be the most prominent horror of the ten year old war but sexual abuse was actually more common. As discussed in Rape: Corporate Camouflage and Across the Gender Divide  the practice of rape as a strategic weapon is no longer rare. By forcing members of families to rape each other and to watch the atrocity, the belief was that this would reduce the likelihood of support for military operations. Even worse was the evidence of sexual atrocities being committed by troops from the regional intervention force, Ecomog, and the UN peacekeeping mission: “Women were used by all sides as chattels, kidnapped from their homes often in rural areas and forced to act as sex slaves for the troops as well as domestic maids responsible for cooking and household chores.” [12]

In 2004 The UN’s UNICEF reported that Sierra Leone, led the world in child mortality with one in four children dying before the age 5, while in Iraq, one in 10 do not make it to their fifth birthday. The UN has within its ranks those that were willing and able to mop up what was left of the shells that were once children. Yet despite the UN “Personnel Conduct Officers” representing system-wide focal points designed to deal with charges of gender-based violence and abuse, the United Nations is facing new allegations of sexual misconduct by U.N. personnel in Burundi, Haiti, and Liberia. This is probably due to the familiar buffering of the fact that such measures alert patterns of abuse but do not address the key issues as to why they arise. Even if this is known, it represents a flow that is hard to stem.

This is exacerbated by the rhetoric of Annan’s earnest bulletin setting out directives for UN personnel yet excluding military troops who are only answerable to their own national military authorities. This amounts to more tinkering at the edges of the cause. With sex workers appearing en masse at the borders needing to feed their families and with thousands of peace keeping soldiers present, the market and so will extensive forms of abuse. Reports of these abuses continued to surface though this was not limited to UN military deployments and operations.

One case in many includes the presence of a weapons inspector who led several sado-masochistic sex rings. “Harvey ‘Jack’ McGeorge, a former US Marine and Secret Service agent, [was] a founding officer of ‘Leather Leadership Conference Inc.’” and recommended by the US State Department.[13] Another report showed UN personnel who were involved in bringing girls from Thailand to East Timor as prostitutes. As abuse allegations have increased, so too the variable unsuitability of those employed by the UN. [14]

NATO forces, UN peace-keepers and the local mafia have all been implicated in sex slavery in Kosovo. UN personnel exploited the victims of sex traffickers for their own ends, adding to the already dire situation in the Balkans since NATO troops and UN administrators took over the province in 1999. The question of why patients at United Nations mental institutions in Kosovo were raped and physically attacked under the eyes of UN staff, also suggests that this was more than an isolated incident but part of a well formed network. [15]

And what of the progress being made to stem this tide? Well, UN soldiers forcing young women and minors to have sex in exchange for material aid still appears to be occurring more than ten years after these initial reports. A UN report interviewed over 200 Haitian women—a third of whom were minors and collated enough data to suggest this was systematic and organised. [16]

While the spectre of sexual abuse is being tackled by UN officials, disturbing questions still remain about the overall functioning of an institution that is seen by many to be dangerously flawed, contributing to chaos rather than the betterment of nations and their peoples. What are we to make of the United Nations that cries out to be a beacon for the world’s poor and oppressed when the reality sees it failing those who are most need of its protection and support? Is this rot from within a mere blip or a peek behind the curtain?

 


Notes


[1] Emergency Sex and Other Desperate Matters – A true Story from Hell on Earth’ By Kenneth Cain, Heidi Postlewait, Andrew Thomson 2004 published by Miramax books/Hyperion ISBN 140135201-4
[2] ‘U.N. Finally Forced to Probe Its Paedophilia Scandal’ NewsMax.com Wires and NewsMax.com, Tuesday, May 7, 2002.
[3] Ibid.
[4] ‘Thorough probe finds no evidence of wrongdoing by UN official’ 16 UN News Centre, November 2004, http://www.un.org/
[5] UN calls rape ‘a cancer’ in DRC, BBC News, 15 September 2006.
[6] Ibid.
[7] ‘UN moves to answer child sex allegations’ Sydney Morning Herald, February 18 2005.
[8] ‘Sex scandal in Congo threatens to engulf UN’s peacekeepers’ The Times, December 23, 2004
[9] ‘Secretary-General ‘absolutely outraged’ by gross misconduct by peacekeeping personnel in Democratic Republic of Congo UN Press Release, 19/11/2004. http://www.un.org/
[10] Peter Takirambudde, Executive Director of the Africa division of Human Rights Watch, quoted from Focus on Human Rights: ‘Civil War in Sierra Leone Rebel Abuses Near Sierra Leone Capital’ United Nations Should Act, Says Rights Group, (New York, March 3, 2000.www.hrw.org/
[11] Human Rights Watch, ‘Getting Away with Murder, Mutilation, and Rape: New Testimony from Sierra Leone’ (New York: Human Rights Watch, 1999), p. 50.
[12] ‘UN troops accused of ‘systematic’ rape in Sierra Leone’ by Tim Butcher, The Daily Telegraph, January 17, 2003.
[13] ‘UN weapons inspector is leader of S&M sex ring’, The Washington Post, November 30, 2002.
[14] ‘UN ship ‘carried child prostitutes’ August 21, 2003 http://www.news.com.au.
[15] ‘UN ‘ignored’ abuse at Kosovo mental homes,’ The Guardian, August 8, 2002.
[16] ‘UN peacekeepers sexually abused hundreds of Haitian women & girls – report’. RT, June 10, 2015.

Rape: Corporate Camouflage and Across the Gender Divide

By M.K. Styllinski

“When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town.  But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder.  You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.”

– Deuteronomy 20:10-14


As the above Bible quotation illustrates, whether a psychopathic God, tribal leader or armchair geo-politician such as Henry Kissinger, rape and plunder can be used as powerful political tool.

To step down the implications of ponerology we can use the standard definition of rape where a male forces a female or another male to submit to sexual intercourse against his or her will. We can see that the act of rape is both a literal and metaphorical expression of the ponerisation of social systems. Definitions of rape, rates of reporting, collection of data, prosecution and conviction has led to rape being the most contested of all crime-related statistics. It is also considered the most under-reported crime due to socio-cultural stigmas; the individual’s distrust of the authorities (as well as their culture of denial) the prospect of facing the attacker in court and his or her own sense of shame.

According to a 2001-2002 United Nations report where government statistical data was compiled from over 65 countries 250,000 cases of male-female rape or attempted rape were recorded by police annually. [1]  The rate of rape may still be conservative when we consider that in cases where women whose husbands or boyfriends force them to have sex they are unlikely to say “yes” when asked whether or not rape has occurred. To make things worse, male-female rape is the only kind reported in some countries.

Award-winning journalist and human rights activist Jan Goodwin described the horrors in the Democratic Republic of Congo over ten years ago. Her article illustrates how so called “globalisation” is largely nothing more than an excuse to export more systems of neo-imperialistic exploitation. The myth of neo-liberal democracy continues to feed on the rest of the world, most notably in the war-weary continent of Africa where rape plays a strategic role in the fortunes of tribal warfare, governments and corporations.

Goodwin writes:

Last May, 6-year-old Shashir was playing outside her home near Goma, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), when armed militia appeared. The terrified child was carried kicking and screaming into the bush. There, she was pinned down and gang-raped. Sexually savaged and bleeding from multiple wounds, she lay there after the attack, how long no one knows, but she was close to starving when finally found. Her attackers, who’d disappeared back into the bush, wiped out her village as effectively as a biblical plague of locusts.

‘This little girl couldn’t walk, couldn’t talk when she arrived here. Shashir had to be surgically repaired. I don’t know if she can be mentally repaired,’ says Faida Veronique, a 47-year-old cook at Doctors on Call for Service (DOCS), a tented hospital in the eastern city of Goma, who took in the brutalized child.

‘Why do they rape a child?’ asks Marie-Madeleine Kisoni, a Congolese counselor who works with raped women and children. “We don’t understand. There’s a spirit of bestiality here now. I’ve seen 2- and 3-year-olds raped. The rebels want to kill us, but it’s more painful to kill the spirit instead.’ [2]

And “killing the spirit” is the part of the armoury of corporate psychopathy, fostered and encouraged.

In the Eastern regions of the Congo gang rape still continues with the relatively new phenomena of “fistulas” caused by the introduction of objects such as sticks, pipes or gun barrels into the vagina, usually after repeated raping. These acts cause serious internal damage leading to the rupturing of the walls that separate the vagina and bladder or rectum. Instances of carefully shooting the victim in the vagina so that the woman or girl remains alive are increasing. Dr. Denis Mukwege, medical director of Panzi Hospital:  “The perpetrators are trying to make the damage as bad as they can, to use it as a kind of weapon of war, a kind of terrorism. Instead of just killing the woman, she goes back to her village permanently and obviously marked. ‘I think it’s a strategy put in place by these groups to disrupt society, to make husbands flee, to terrorize.” [3]

The age old, colonial formula came under some rare scrutiny by a UN Security Council panel which cited: “… eighty-five multinational corporations, including some of the largest US companies in their fields, for their involvement in the illegal exploitation of natural resources from the Democratic Republic of Congo. The commerce in these ‘blood’ minerals…drives the conflict. The brutality of the militias – the sexual slavery, transmission of HIV/AIDS through rape, cannibalism, slaughter and starvation, forced recruitment of child soldiers – has routinely been employed to secure access to mining sites or insure a supply of captive labor.” [4]

congovideowarchild.org

(click on the image above to watch the documentary)

4a9fd4d86

“A mother carries her children in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. Forcibly displaced women face grave threats and abuse in the volatile region.” – ‘ Source: The Congolese rape victims a UNHCR officer will never forget’ By Francesca Fontanini in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo | Telling the Human Story, 3 September 2009.


UNICEF works with the same multinationals, which patronize and donate to many other leading NGOs and charities. Rape has always been a weapon of war, but now it has been recognised as an intentional tool rather than a by-product of conflict. As the author states, this is an international problem where the yolk of conscience that has long since seeped away.

As of 2013, this ponerological disease has begun to spread into the social infrastructure where reports of some teachers and senior officials raping school children in their care. According to a July 6th 2013 report by the Association Africaine de Défense des Droits de l’Homme (ASADHO)  “Young girls are regularly raped in schools” in Kinshasa with local police providing statistics for the town of Matadi. As the report outlined, the abuse is met: “… with authorities and the justice system remaining silent.”

Despite these horrors, there are dedicated people on the ground achieving minor and sometimes major successes. What acts as a constant brick-wall to progress is the governmental bureaucracy and corporate complicity which handicaps the long-term effectiveness of these breakthroughs. Successful prosecutions for these crimes are pitifully small and will remain so when human rights violations serve the corporate and banking interests. Ancient tribal divisions are purposely exacerbated and brought into sharp relief in order to monopolise the rich resources available in the African continent. This is now common knowledge and easily verified. Yet, at the time of the Rwanda genocide for instance, the media sought fit to paint such a human disaster as simple blood-lust fuelled by tribal racism that simply surfaced “out of the blue”. These deep insecurities and fears were brought to boiling point and unleashed on a nation precisely because vested interests knew where to apply the pressure so that corporate plunder could continue while Africa’s citizens were fully embroiled in killing each other. The divide and rule formula is nothing new, though the effects of lighting the tinder-box and the required atrocities can burn way out of control.

In 2012 the number of rapes rose dramatically due to various rebel militia groups upping the ante. The presence of Western corporations in DRC and their indirect funding of groups and militias to intentionally keep this resource-rich country destabilized is now a matter of record and has continued despite many commentators drawing our attention to the blatant hypocrisy on show. Unfortunately, until our socio-political system changes and changes radically, we can only expect the results of this neo-colonialism and its horrific effects to continue.

Across the Gender Divide

Though as much a reality as female rape, male rape is barely acknowledged as a problem, let alone an endemic one. In East Africa, where male rape is high, bringing the issue to light is hindered by the fact that homosexuality is still seen as a crime in 38 of the 53 African nations.

In a recent Observer article journalist Will Storr reported on male rape in Africa notably from victims in and around the Congo. Storr interviewed Eunice Owiny who is employed by Makerere University’s Refugee Law Project (RLP) in Kampala, Kenya “… to help displaced people from all over Africa work through their traumas.”  The situation, while horrific for women and children is all the more harrowing for men because no one wants to know. “They will probably be ostracised by friends, rejected by family and turned away by the UN and the myriad international NGOs that are equipped, trained and ready to help women. They are wounded, isolated and in danger. In the words of Owiny: ‘They are despised.’” [5]

Slowly victims are hearing of the services offered by RLP and attendance is rising rapidly. Storr met several young men out of more than 150 who had been raped and assaulted during conflict. He recounted the tale of one Jean-Paul, a student at university in Congo, who had been studying electronic engineering when his father – a wealthy businessman – was accused by the army of aiding the enemy and shot dead. Jean Paul fled in January 2009, only to be abducted by rebels. Along with six other men and six women he was marched to a forest in the Virunga National Park. Once captured Jean-Paul was taken deep into the jungle with the other women. While they were told to make coffee and fetch water, the rebels set up camp and then turned their attention to their new captives:

 ‘You are all spies,’ the commander said. ‘I will show you how we punish spies.’ He pointed to Jean Paul. “Remove your clothes and take a position like a Muslim man.”

Jean Paul thought he was joking. He shook his head and said: ‘I cannot do these things.’

The commander called a rebel over. Jean Paul could see that he was only about nine years old. He was told, “Beat this man and remove this clothes.’ The boy attacked him with his gun butt. Eventually, Jean Paul begged: ‘Okay, okay. I will take off my clothes.’ Once naked, two rebels held him in a kneeling position with his head pushed towards the earth.

At this point, Jean Paul breaks off. The shaking in his lip more pronounced than ever, he lowers his head a little further and says: “I am sorry for the things I am going to say now.” The commander put his left hand on the back of his skull and used his right to beat him on the backside “like a horse”. Singing a witch doctor song, and with everybody watching, the commander then began. The moment he started, Jean Paul vomited.

Eleven rebels waited in a queue and raped Jean Paul in turn. When he was too exhausted to hold himself up, the next attacker would wrap his arm under Jean Paul’s hips and lift him by the stomach. He bled freely: ‘Many, many, many bleeding,” he says, ‘I could feel it like water.’ Each of the male prisoners was raped 11 times that night and every night that followed. […]

It is for this reason that both perpetrator and victim enter a conspiracy of silence and why male survivors often find, once their story is discovered, that they lose the support and comfort of those around them. In the patriarchal societies found in many developing countries, gender roles are strictly defined. [6]

The most shocking aspect was revealed to Storr when he discovered that not only is “male sexual violence a component of wars all over the world” but that international aid organisations are failing victims. He quotes Lara Stemple’s study from the University of California which cites a review of 4,076 NGOs that have addressed wartime sexual violence. “Only 3 percent of them mentioned the experience of men in their literature. “Typically … ‘as a passing reference.’” [7]

RLP director Chris Dolan was not surprised: “The organisations working on sexual and gender-based violence don’t talk about it,” he says. “It’s systematically silenced. If you’re very, very lucky they’ll give it a tangential mention at the end of a report. You might get five seconds of: ‘Oh and men can also be the victims of sexual violence.’ But there’s no data, no discussion.” [8]

The reason that there is no discussion supports the data in this blog/book that there is gender bias that is now equal if not greater towards men than women in a variety of social and cultural domains, especially within charity and non-governmental organisations or as Dolan wryly points out: “There’s a fear among them that this is a zero-sum game; that there’s a pre-defined cake and if you start talking about men, you’re going to somehow eat a chunk of this cake that’s taken them a long time to bake.”

4d6bd2826© unknown


“There are no detailed statistics, but sexual violence against men and boys is increasingly being recognized as a protection concern in conflict and forced displacement situations.”

UNHCR issues guidelines on protection of male rape victims


Dolan also mentions a November 2006 UN report that followed an international conference on sexual violence in this area of East Africa where the authors insisted that the definition of rape was restricted to women, where even:  “… one of the RLP’s donors, Dutch Oxfam, refused to provide any more funding unless he’d promise that 70 percent of his client base was female. Another serious case of male rape was referred to the UN’s refugee agency, the UNHCR who told him: “We have a programme for vulnerable women, but not men.” (Happily, things are slowly beginning to improve.  For the first time, guidelines for UNHCR staff and other aid workers were issued in 2012 on: “… how to identify and support male victims of rape and other sexual violence in conflict and displacement situations.”)

Storr is reminded of a scene described by Eunice Owiny: “‘There is a married couple,’ she said. “The man has been raped, the woman has been raped. Disclosure is easy for the woman. She gets the medical treatment, she gets the attention, she’s supported by so many organisations. But the man is inside, dying.” Dolan agrees: “Part of the activism around women’s rights is: ‘Let’s prove that women are as good as men.’ But the other side is you should look at the fact that men can be weak and vulnerable.’ ” [9]

This gender bias and overt discrimination against men is a concurrent theme and represents a serious problem in organisations tasked to help all those suffering from human rights abuses.  It will need not just a radical change in the law to change such aberrations, but equally dramatic change in the very notion of economics and the unfettered powers of international banking. This is the form of globalisation which underpins almost all of our social ills and the eventual atrocities which inevitably occur. Unless the core issues are addressed humanitarian professionals who struggle daily to cope with these iniquities will be forever submerged in the tide of trans-national profits divorced from values and any accountability for their crimes.

It would also be a mistake to see the exploitation of ancient tribal feuds as an exclusively African problem. The same atrocities were witnessed in the former Yugoslavia where the primary drive for was the control of oil, weapons sales and the creation of a geo-strategic arena called Kosovo. This was also under the guise of an humanitarian effort.

Among countries which report these statistics, the United States has the highest rape rate, 4 times higher than that of Germany, and 20 times higher than that of Japan and 13 times higher than that of England, though the latter country’s rates are increasing with 5,000 children under sixteen raped every year. [10]  In 1991 alone there were estimated to be 700,000 rapes of adult women,[11] while 1 in 3 sexual assault victims are under the age of 12. [12] The figure for reported child rapes for the same year is 1.4 million. The first comprehensive report on the financial cost of rape has the highest annual victim costs at $127 billion per year with child abuse at $56 billion. [13] Unsurprisingly perhaps: “compared to their non-crime victim counterparts, three times more likely to develop major depression; 4.1 times more likely to have seriously contemplated suicide and 13 times more likely to have actually made a suicide attempt.” [14]

By 2008, the statistical counts and rates * of rape in each country has continued to rise with the US, taking the lead, followed by United Kingdom, France, Korea, Germany, the Russian Federation and Sweden representing some of the highest counts of rape. While Belgium, New Zealand, United States, Lesotho, Trinidad and Tobago and Sweden are reaching the highest rates of rape per year. However, even the United Nations report is far from definitive when we realise that there are differences between recording and reporting as well as difficulties in bringing to trial or being convicted as well. We must also include the disparity of definitions for rape around the world and the significant amounts of data still missing. Finally, even when reports of cases making it to court can be counted, less than half of those arrested for rape are convicted.[15]

High profile cases of false rape accusations by women and the oft quoted spectre of “date rape” in Western Europe have tarnished and distorted the acute problem of rape in society fuelling the idea that all rape is merely in the imagination of the female concerned. Such fraudulent claims only do harm to objective investigation to sexual assault overall and most certainly to those accused, often ruining lives in the process. Even if those accused are subsequently cleared, the damage is done, leading to stigmatization from colleagues and friends and in some cases resulting in suicide. According to UK Home Office research, between “…3 percent and 9 percent of all reports of rape are found to be false … with 16 and 25 making up both the largest group of victims and the accused.” [16]

Given the rise in narcissism within our societies – and women in particular – this may be, in some way connected. The law is also very different in the United Kingdom and the United States. In one case the British Court of Appeal dismissed a claim by a former nurse who was jailed for two years after falsely accusing a man she had met online. The presiding judge said that false allegations damage conviction rates of genuine rapes and are “terrifying” for innocent victims where: “False complaints of rape necessarily impact upon the minds of jurors trying rape cases.” [17]

In the US no appeals can take place because no such law exists for false rape claims. Of the 90,427 forcible rapes reported in 2007, 40 percent were cleared by arrest or “exceptional means.”  This translates as those suspects whom have died before an arrest can be made (not very common) the accusation of rape has been retracted (common) the suspect is held in another state with jurisdiction and extradition has been denied or evidence for a rape is non-existent. A percentage of rape complaints have been classified as “unfounded” by the police for decades and excluded from the FBI’s statistics. [18] Not exactly a scientific way of producing definitive data on such an important issue.

An article by Bruce Gross in the Forensic examiner described this anomaly in the following terms: “…there are no formal negative consequences for the person who files a false report of rape. Not only did the false allegation serve a purpose for the accusers, they actually never have to fully admit to themselves, their family, or their friends that the report was a lie. Although there are grounds for bringing legal action against the accuser, it is virtually never done. Even should a charge be filed, in most jurisdictions filing a false report is only a misdemeanor.” [19]

Present day figures on rape have increased. According to the UK Government’s Action Plan on Violence Against Women and Girls, 80,000 women are raped a year, and 400,000 women are sexually assaulted in the UK alone. [20] In 2012, thousands of women in India took to the streets to protest “endemic and unchecked violence against women” sparked by the death of a woman named Damini who had been gang-raped, dying of her injuries a few weeks later. An article in the UK Independent highlighted the fact that it is comforting to think that this is a strictly Indian or African problem when in fact, it is a convenient myth designed to brush what is a global problem, under the cultural carpet. One example from the developed nations of Europe came from France in 1999, where: “… two then-teenagers – named only as Nina and Stephanie – were raped almost every day for six months. Young men would queue up to rape them, patiently waiting for their friends to finish in secluded basements. After a three-week trial this year, 10 of the 14 accused left the courtroom as free men; the other four were granted lenient sentences of one year at most.” [21]

As we can see, the fluctuations of gender bias manifests in many different ways.

 


* “Counts” are raw numbers; the “rate” is the statistical average from that data.


Notes
[1] ‘The Eighth United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems’ (2001–2002) – Table 02.08 Total recorded rapes.
[2] ‘Silence = Rape’ By Jan Goodwin, The Nation, 2004.
[3] “More Vicious Than Rape” by Rod Nordland, Newsweek, November 13 2006.
[4] Ibid.
[5] ‘The rape of men ’By Will Storr, The Observer, July 2011.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid.
[10] ‘Revealed: the horror of the 5,000 children under 16 raped every year’ by Denis Campbell, The Observer, May 14, 2006.
[11] ‘Minnesota Sex Offense Screening Tool – Revised’ by D. Epperson (2000) presented at Sinclair Seminars Sex Offenders Re-Offense Risk Prediction, Madison Sq. Wisconsin.
[12] The impact of violence on children. The Future of Children: 33-49.Snyder, H., Sickmund, M. Juvenile offenders and victims: 1999 national report. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
[13] In February 1996, the National Institute of Justice released the first comprehensive report on the cost of victimization. Data was gathered from criminal justice agencies, medical professionals, hospitals, insurance companies, mental health professionals, crime victim compensation programs, and crime victims, significant information is available about the immediate, short-term and long-term financial impact of victimization.
[14] US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Victims Assistance Academy 1996. Chapter 1. The Scope of Violent Crime and Victimization, Statistical overview.
[15] The Response to Rape : detours on the road to equal justice : by United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary. Congressional Sales Office, 1993. ISBN: 0160417872.
[16] ‘Forever Accused’ BBC News, February 12, 2008.
[17] ‘Prison ‘inevitable’ for false rape claims’ by Tom Whitehead, The Telegraph, October 30, 2009.
[18] Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). (2008d). Percent of crimes cleared by arrest or exceptional means, 2007. (Clearance Figure). Uniform Crime Report: Crime in the United States, 2007. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/offense/ clearances/index.html#figure.
[19] ‘False Rape Allegations: An Assault on Justice’ By Bruce Gross, PhD, JD, MBA, The Forensic Examiner, September 15, 2009.
[20] ‘Sexual violence is not a cultural phenomenon in India – it is endemic everywhere’ The Independent December 30, 2012. |/www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/sexual-violence-is-not-a-cultural-phenomenon-in-india.
[21] Ibid.