Moscow and Beijing's "One Clenched Fist"

ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST ^ | January 9, 2006

[GodGunsGuts]

Monday, January 09, 2006

Final Phase Backgrounder: Moscow and Beijing's "One Clenched Fist"

(PT = Blogger's Initials)

During the days of overt communism in Eastern Europe, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the People's Republic of China feigned enmity, publicizing their hostility with manufactured border skirmishes and other diversions. On December 25, 1991 the Leninist strategists in Moscow offered the world a Christmas present: the USSR was going to implode and communism would be outlawed. Somewhere in the Kremlin there was chuckling and the tinkling of glasses of vodka.

Following the much-ballyhooed demise of communism in Russia, the "ex"-communist leaders of Russia saw fit to establish a strategic partnership with their former, openly communist "enemy" in China. The result? The Trans-Asian Axis, in which the Moscow-Beijing Axis assumes the leadership role. Fast forward to "Peace Mission" 2005, the first-ever joint military exercise between the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China. (See blog, "Communist Bloc Military Updates: Peace Mission 2005, Sino-Russian military coordination begins.")

Anatoliy Golitsyn, a KGB officer who defected to the West one December thirty years before, however, had warned the West of the ruse. Few listened. Those that did lost their jobs. Golitsyn's prediction, published five years in advance of the fall of the Berlin Wall, follows:

After successful use of the scissors strategy in the early stages of the final phase of policy to assist communist strategy in Europe and the Third World and over disarmament, a Sino-Soviet reconciliation could be expected. It is contemplated and implied by the long-range policy and by strategic disinformation on the split.

The communist bloc, with its recent accretions in Africa [PT: Namibia, 1990; South Africa, 1995; Congo, 1997] and South-East Asia, is already strong. European-backed Soviet influence and American-back Chinese influence could lead to new Third World acquisitions [PT: Venezuela, 1998; Brazil, 2002; Argentina, 2003; Bolivia, 2005] at an accelerating pace. Before long, the communist strategists might be persuaded that the balance had swung irreversibly in their favor. In that event they might well decide on a Sino-Soviet “reconciliation.” The scissors strategy would give way to the strategy of “one clenched fist.” At that point the shift in the political and military balance would be plain for all to see. Convergence would not be between equal parties, but would be on terms dictated by the communist bloc. The argument for accommodation with the overwhelming strength of communism would be virtually unanswerable. Pressures would build up for changes in the American political and economic system on the lines indicated in Sakharov’s treatise. Traditional conservatives would be isolated and driven toward extremism. They might become victims of a new McCarthyism of the left [PT: political correctness]. The Soviet dissidents who are now extolled as heroes of the resistance to Soviet communism would play an active party in arguing for convergence. Their present supporters would be confronted with a choice of forsaking their idols or acknowledge the legitimacy of the new Soviet regime.

-- Anatoliy Golitsyn, New Lies for Old: The Communist Strategy of Deception and Disinformation (New York, Dodd, Mead & Company, 1984), pages 345-346.

[GodGunsGuts]

Could this be what we are facing in the West?

[GodGunsGuts]

ping!

[GodGunsGuts]

Thought you might be interested in this--GGG

[GodGunsGuts]

Plausible?

[GSlob]

At the level of instinctive solidarity - plausible, even unavoidable, like knee-jerk reflex. Birds of feather flock together, and so do the tyrants of the world. They could, and will, have their fallings-out, but these are temporary. At the level of premeditated conspiracy, as posited by Golytsyn - impossible, not merely implausible: how could the same nomenclaturists successfully plan forward with tremendous complexity over the span of decades and then miserably fail at much simpler task of planning and executing their anti-gorbachev coup? It is as if Gary Kasparov were to lose an important chess match against a 5-yr old child who is not even sure of how a knight moves on the board.

[GodGunsGuts]

==At the level of premeditated conspiracy, as posited by Golytsyn - impossible, not merely implausible: how could the same nomenclaturists successfully plan forward with tremendous complexity over the span of decades and then miserably fail at much simpler task of planning and executing their anti-gorbachev coup?

What do you mean when you say they failed in executing the anti-Gorbachev coup?

[GSlob]

"What do you mean when you say they failed in executing the anti-Gorbachev coup?"
Pretty simple. Nomenclaturists are a selfish lot [I have seen a few myself]. Very selfish - just look at American corporate senior vice presidents who are gorging on stock options, or at Enron types - to get a faint hint on how selfish the commie nomenclaturists are. Self-sacrifice is the word unknown to them, or known in theory only, when it applies to others. Now, the KGB head Kryuchkov was a top level nomenclaturist - he had only one boss [Gorbachev] above him. Others were in, or about, the same rank. So, whatever other purposes they might have had, or proclaimed to have, in their coup attempt, their grabbing power [more power than they have already wielded], or at least not losing that power, had to be at the top of their list. And how did they end? Well, they were not shot as enemies of the people, but got their slap on the wrist - and lost their power positions. Isn't that a miserable failure?

[GSlob]

Addition to #7: after "Others were in, or about, the same rank" should follow the phrase: "So, they were not puppets - there was not enough room for a puppeteer above them.". Apologies for the omission.

[Cheburashka]

On of the plotters, Boris Pugo, blew his brains out after the failure of the Anti-Gorbachev coup.

But no, there are Freepers far too clever to be fooled by such an obvious ploy as suicide. The fall of the Soviet Union has to be a trick.

I suspect some people are eating their tin foil, instead of wearing it around their head.

[GSlob]

"The fall of the Soviet Union has to be a trick."
Well, it is and it isn't. Because of the "reversion to the norm" law, post-soviet reality tends to resemble its predecessor[s] in important features. Thus a "trick" [just like the law of gravity is a trick, for the things tend to fall down, and not up or sideways, all the time] would be naturally suspected by those needing a personification of every phenomenon. Just like the Trojan war was personified in the "Iliad" as a personal quarrel [conspiracy!] of Olympian goddesses, or that there must be a rain spirit needing personal propitiation every time there is a drought or deluge. One is dealing with a sort of religious psychology here, and thus it is practically impervious to logic.

[Romanov]

Especially in light of the distinct possibility that Golytsin was the most successful KGB-penetration of the West. It's frustating to see Americans being duped into playing the "Useful Idiots" role.

Golytsin must be laughing all the way to the bank.

[GSlob]

Pugo had brains??

[Cheburashka]

Pugo had brains??
---
Enough to know he didn't want to live in a world where he wasn't going to be a big cheese any more.

[GSlob]

Nah. It was not a brain, but a colon. One could probably know something even with it.

[Thunder90]

Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and the other 'Stans are the Soviet Union with a makeover.

[Thunder90]

Russia/Belarus/Kazakhstan is the current USSR. Evidence of this is the fact that Putin is president of Russia, Lushenko is the president of Belarus, and a commie is president of Kazakhstan.

[GSlob]

Look at the water, not at the froth on its surface. No matter whose a-hole is in the chair, the chair is always filled by an a-hole. What you need to look into is the sociologic nature of the corresponding societies, for every regime always is an adequate reflection of the socially active part of its population [society]. And then you might even find that it all started centuries before 1917 and the USSR in the early 20s.

[GodGunsGuts]

I just don't understand why people are so closed off to the revelations of a KGB officer who predicted the "collapse" of the Soviet Union in substance, sequence and detail. I would think even the skeptical would want to put Golitsyn to the test, to study him, and try to determine how and why he could so successfully predict Soviet actions when everyone else failed. Very strange.

[GSlob]

Because it is against the laws of nature. You could just as well advocate further study of a perpetuum mobile or of cold fusion. KGB was not staffed by godlike intellects, but was a regular large bumbling bureaucracy [as a former small-time dissident, on this point I have personal experience]. See # 10 on this thread.