Μερικά αποσπάσματα από άρθρο του George Soros, για την «αυθόρμητη» επανάσταση στην Ουκρανία.
Δεν μπορεί να κρύψει την χαρά του …από την άνοδο των «νεοναζί» πρακτόρων του Ισραήλ στην κυβέρνηση.
Αποποιείται την άμεση εμπλοκή, αλλά παραδέχεται ότι ΥΠΕΡΑΣΠΙΣΤΗΚΕ αυτούς που δέχθηκαν επίθεση από τους «κακούς» του Γιανούβιτς.
…Κι επειδή στον κόσμο τους …το άσπρο είναι μαύρο…
…καταλαβαίνουμε φυσικά ότι τα «ιδρύματά» του ήταν εκεί…
…όπως αποδείχτηκε πολλές φορές το προηγούμενο διάστημα, από τα βιβλία με τις οδηγίες χρήσεως, από τους Ισραηλινούς εκπαιδευτές και διοργανωτές των επεισοδίων, αλλά κι από την στήριξη των «αυθόρμητων» διαδηλωτών, στους σιωνιστές Τιμοσένκο και Κλίτσκο. Ολόκληρο το εγκώμιο του Soros στους νεοναζί εδώ:
NEW YORK – Following a crescendo of terrifying violence, the Ukrainian uprising has had a surprisingly positive outcome. Contrary to all rational expectations, a group of citizens armed with not much more than sticks and shields made of cardboard boxes and metal garbage-can lids overwhelmed a police force firing live ammunition. There were many casualties, but the citizens prevailed. This was one of those historic moments that leave a lasting imprint on a society’s collective memory.
How could such a thing happen? Quantum mechanics offers a fitting metaphor. Physicists know that subatomic phenomena can manifest themselves as both particles and waves; similarly, human beings may behave both as individual particles and as components of a larger wave. In other words, the unpredictability of historical events like those in Ukraine has to do with an element of uncertainty in human identity.
People’s identity is made up of individual elements and elements of larger units to which they belong, and peoples’ impact on reality depends on which elements dominate their behavior. When civilians launched a suicidal attack on an armed force in Kyiv on February 20, their sense of representing “the nation” far outweighed their concern with their individual mortality. The result was to swing a deeply divided society from the verge of civil war to an unprecedented sense of unity.
Whether that unity endures will depend on how Europe responds. Ukrainians have demonstrated their allegiance to a European Union that is itself hopelessly divided, with the euro crisis pitting creditor and debtor countries against one another. That is why the EU was hopelessly outmaneuvered by Russia in the negotiations with Ukraine over an Association Agreement.
True to form, the EU under German leadership offered far too little and demanded far too much from Ukraine. Now, after the Ukrainian people’s commitment to closer ties with Europe fueled a successful popular insurrection, the EU, along with the International Monetary Fund, is putting together a multibillion-dollar rescue package to save the country from financial collapse. But that will not be sufficient to sustain the national unity that Ukraine will need in the coming years.
>>>>I established the Renaissance Foundation in Ukraine in 1990 – before the country achieved independence. The foundation did not participate in the recent uprising, but it did serve as a defender of those targeted by official repression. The foundation is now ready to support Ukrainians’ strongly felt desire to establish resilient democratic institutions (above all, an independent and professional judiciary). But Ukraine will need outside assistance that only the EU can provide: management expertise and access to markets.<<<<<<<
In the remarkable transformation of Central Europe’s economies in the 1990’s, management expertise and market access resulted from massive investments by German and other EU-based companies, which integrated local producers into their global value chains. Ukraine, with its high-quality human capital and diversified economy, is a potentially attractive investment destination. But realizing this potential requires improving the business climate across the economy as a whole and within individual sectors – particularly by addressing the endemic corruption and weak rule of law that are deterring foreign and domestic investors alike.
Ιn addition to encouraging foreign direct investment, the EU could provide support to train local companies’ managers and help them develop their business strategies, with service providers remunerated by equity stakes or profit-sharing. An effective way to roll out such support to a large number of companies would be to combine it with credit lines provided by commercial banks. To encourage participation, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) could invest in companies alongside foreign and local investors, as it did in Central Europe.
Ukraine would thus open its domestic market to goods manufactured or assembled by European companies’ wholly- or partly-owned subsidiaries, while the EU would increase market access for Ukrainian companies and help them integrate into global markets.
I hope and trust that Europe under German leadership will rise to the occasion. I have been arguing for several years that Germany should accept the responsibilities and liabilities of its dominant position in Europe. Today, Ukraine needs a modern-day equivalent of the Marshall Plan, by which the United States helped to reconstruct Europe after World War II. Germany ought to play the same role today as the US did then.
I must, however, end with a word of caution. The Marshall Plan did not include the Soviet bloc, thereby reinforcing the Cold War division of Europe. A replay of the Cold War would cause immense damage to both Russia and Europe, and most of all to Ukraine, which is situated between them. Ukraine depends on Russian gas, and it needs access to European markets for its products; it must have good relations with both sides.
Here, too, Germany should take the lead. Chancellor Angela Merkel must reach out to President Vladimir Putin to ensure that Russia is a partner, not an opponent, in the Ukrainian renaissance
Soros heavily invested in Ukraine crisis
Billionaire George Soros is heavily invested in Ukrainian activism, establishing a center in Kiev that donates large sums of money to the country’s nongovernmental organizations while advocating closer ties to the European Union.
Last week, Soros weighed in on the Ukraine crisis, recommending EU intervention to help save Ukrainian financial markets.
“The EU, along with the International Monetary Fund, is putting together a multi-billion dollar rescue package to save the country from financial collapse,” he wrote in a piece for Project Syndicate.
“But that will not be sufficient to sustain the national unity that Ukraine will need in the coming years. … Ukraine will need outside assistance that only the EU can provide: management expertise and access to markets.”
Soros first involved himself in Ukrainian affairs in 1989, when he established the Ukrainian International Renaissance Foundation, or IRF, two years before Ukraine became an independent nation. Since then, Soros has provided more than $100 million to support Ukrainian groups, mostly through the IRF and the Open Society Institute.
Soros’ IRF, headquartered in Kiev, not only supports numerous non-governmental organizations, it holds regular seminars and training sessions for local groups regarding such topics as “open borders” and the transformation of the region via the European Union.
One conference held in Kiev in May 2012, for example, sought to strengthen the capacity of Ukrainian NGOs to absorb EU financial support.
The IRF in 2009 created a consortium of experts to help reform the government and develop a coterie of so-called progressive politicians.
Another IRF initiative is its electronic governance, or e-governance, program, described as “interaction between government and citizens, government and business, and within government using computer networks.”
The IRF partnered with state and U.N. groups in the Crimea to launch a joint program called “Facilitating the introduction of e-governance, electronic democracy and informatization of local government in Crimea.”
A key initiative for Soros’s IRF is removing visa barriers between Ukraine and the EU while integrating Ukrainian experts within EU groups.
The IRF is also heavily involved in what it calls human rights campaigns, supporting numerous local groups and launching initiatives such as a “Legal Empowerment for the Poor” program.
The IRF also runs a program to develop what it refers to as “socially responsible journalists” in Ukraine.
Within the purview of its local work, the IRF supported at least one of the main groups now protesting in Ukraine.
The Spilna Sprava activist organization, which has been central in leading some of the protests, took in a $3,000 IRF donation in 2009. Spilna Sprava, or Common Cause, has been in the news repeatedly in recent days for seizing numerous government buildings.
Meanwhile, Soros’ Open Society Institute in 2012 launched a “Grassroots Justice: Ukraine” project to help “ordinary people assert their rights under the law.”
Also tied to Soros is the International Center for Policy Studies, which bills itself as one of Ukraine’s “top independent think-tanks involved in developing and analyzing public policy.”
Since 2003, the group has been part of the Soros-funded Policy Association for an Open Society.
With additional research by Brenda J. Elliott.