Who is Zbigniew Brzezinski?
Now that Barrack Obama has captured the candidacy for the Democratic Party in this year’s presidential election, the question arises of who his advisors are. Most people who will vote for Obama in November have no idea of his advisors. Certainly they have never heard the name “Zbigniew Brzezinski.”
It is said that to understand a politician, you have to know their advisors. After Obama announced his presidential run, he named his Foreign Policy Advisor to be Zbigniew Brzezinski. So who exactly is this shadowy figure who for 30 years has been active in steering the direction of how the US conducts foreign policy, mostly from behind the scenes.
So who exactly is Zbigniew Brzezinski?
What has his role in government been the last 30 years?
What is his ideology?
Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski was born March 28, 1928 in Warsaw, Poland until coming over to the US in the early 1950’s. Brzizinski got started in politics during the 1960 presidential election where he was an advisor to the John F. Kennedy campaign. He is a Polish-American political scientist, geostrategist, and is largely known for his time as United States National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1981.
In 1973, David Rockefeller asked Zbigniew Brzezinski to put together an organization of the top political and business leaders from around the World. He called this group the Trilateral Commission (TC). The word "Trilateral" means "three-sided" - the three sides in this case being North America, Europe,and Japan. North America, Europe and Japan have several things in common. Most important is their wealth, which is derived primarily from industrial production. The Trilateral Commission is a private organization and it is widely perceived as an off-shoot of the Council on Foreign Relations. The Trilateral Commission was established to foster closer cooperation between America, Europe and Japan. The members of the Trilateral Commission are about 350 distinguished leaders in business, media, academia, public service (excluding current national Cabinet Ministers), labor unions, and other non-governmental organizations from the three regions. The regional Chairmen, Deputy Chairmen, and Directors constitute the leadership of the Trilateral Commission, along with an Executive Committee including about 40 other members. The annual meeting of Trilateral Commission members rotates among the three regions. It was held in Washington in 2008 and Brussels in 2007. The 2009 plenary will be held in Tokyo. http://www.trilateral.org/about.htm
Sen. Barry Goldwater gave an adequate explanation of the intentions of the TC in his 1979 book “With No Apologies”
"The Trilateral Commission is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States. The Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power political, monetary, intellectual and ecclesiastical. What the Trilateral Commission intends is to create a worldwide economic power superior to the political governments of the nationstates involved. As managers and creators of the system, they will rule the future."
It was at the time as Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor where Brzezinski made a name for himself. As National Security Advisor, Brzezinski was known for his assertive policies on the Soviet Union. In 1979 he started a campaign supporting mujahideen in Pakistan and Afghanistan, which were run by Pakistani security services with financial support from the CIA and Britain's MI6. The Afghan mujahideen would later become known as “al-qaeda.”
This policy had the explicit aim of promoting radical Islamist and anti-Communist forces to overthrow the secular communist People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan government in Afghanistan. The main purpose of this policy was to create what Brzezinski called “the Afghan Trap.” According to a 1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, the CIA's intervention in Afghanistan preceded the 1979 Soviet invasion. This decision of the Carter Administration in 1979 to intervene and destabilize Afghanistan is the root cause of Afghanistan's destruction as a nation. The above mention interview was in the Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998. During the interview Brzezinski was asked about the Soviet War in Afghanistan.Question:
The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct? Brzezinski:
Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.
The main purpose of this bloody war was to give the Soviet Union its Vietnam War, which would destroy both its military and economy. This in turn was a catalyst to the collapse of the Soviet Union and left the US as the world’s only superpower. According to Brzezinski the war was a huge success. It’s clear that Brzezinski used the Hegelian Dialectic (Problem-Reaction-Solution) to achieve his imperialist goals.
A 1989 article in Time Magazine lays out how Brzezinski supported Pol Pot's ultra-Maoist Khmer Rouge which killed up to 1.7 million during his regime. "I encouraged the Chinese to support Pol Pot," recalled Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carter's National Security Adviser, in 1981. "Pol Pot was an abomination. We could never support him. But China could." The U.S., he added, "winked semipublicly" as the Chinese funneled arms to the Khmer Rouge, using Thailand as a conduit. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,956883-1,00.html
This was part of a wider policy of forcing the Vietnamese out of Cambodia by funding anti-Vietnamese guerrilla groups that the U.S. helped create. Between 1979 and 1981, the World Food Program, which was strongly under US influence, provides nearly $12 million in food aid to Thailand. Much of this aid makes its way to the Khmer Rouge. In January 1980 the US started funding Pol Pot while he was in exile. The extent of this support was $85m from 1980 to 1986. Brzezinski's support of the Khmer Rouge was a continuation of the friendly relations the US had with the Khmer Rouge during the presidency of Gerald Ford. Kissinger had already asked Thailand's foreign minister in 1975 to tell the Khmer Rouge that the US would be friends with them. http://www.gwu.edu/%7Ensarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB193/HAK-11-26-75.pdf
So what is Brzezinski’s ideology? To answer this question we must look at writings and interviews straight from the man himself. Brzezinski has written more than 10 major novels on geostrategy and globalism.
Brzezinski supported the views of Marxism in his 1970 book “Between Two Ages” where he states: “That is why Marxism represents a further vital and creative stage in the maturing of man's universal vision. Marxism is simultaneously a victory of the external, active man over the inner, passive man and a victory of reason over belief: it stresses man's capacity to shape his material destiny – finite and defined as man's only reality – and it postulates the absolute capacity of man to truly understand his reality as a point of departure for his active endeavors to shape it. To a greater extent than any previous mode of political thinking, Marxism puts a premium on the systematic and rigorous examination of material reality and on guides to action derived from that examination.”
In his 1997 book “The Grand Chessboard” Brzezinski writes on Page 35: “Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is, defense spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties, even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization."
What Brzezinski fails to address is that the US was founded as a Constitutional Republic…not a Democracy. In fact the founding fathers warned us of a Democracy. Thomas Jefferson said that “A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” With so many of this nation uninformed of what’s going on, it’s no wonder that the elite want a Democracy. The US was never set up to attain international supremacy, and was certainly not set up to achieve “imperial mobilization.” The US was set up to stay out of the affairs of other nations and never wanted to use soldiers as cannon fodder to invade the planet. Brzezinski seems to be out-of-touch with what this country is all about.
During his time as National Security Advisor Brzezinski declared that, “This regionalization is in keeping with the Tri-Lateral Plan which calls for a gradual convergence of East and West, ultimately leading toward the goal of one world government. National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept.”
Apparently, Brzezinski wants to erase the “We The People” in the Constitution and replace it with a single benevolent ruler. Usually this kind of rhetoric will come from someone whose ideology is to promote and eventually try to accomplish the creation of a One World Government.
So what can we expect out of Barrak Obama with Brzezinski pulling his strings on foreign policy? Is it “Change”? Well I guess it depends on what kind of change you are talking about. There is good change and then there is bad change. With so many blindly following Obama and his promise of “Change”, how can we be so sure that he means a change for the better? With Brzezinski by his side in the White House, it’s a foregone conclusion of what kind of change we will get.