- Spitfire List - http://spitfirelist.com -

FTR #550 Going Native

Lis­ten:
MP3 Side 1 [1] | Side 2 [2]
REALAUDIO [3]

Intro­duc­tion This broadcast—like the pre­ced­ing three programs—might have been titled “Strange Bed­fel­lows.” In this pro­gram, we look at the use of native, “unrep­re­sent­ed” peo­ples by polit­i­cal ele­ments that don’t appear to be gen­uine­ly con­cerned with the wel­fare of those pop­u­la­tion groups. Specif­i­cal­ly, we look at a strange brew of Tibetan Bud­dhists, Islamists and Pan-Turk­ists work­ing under the aus­pices of the House of Hab­s­burg in order to pre­cip­i­tate the seces­sion of Xin­jiang province from Chi­na. It is Mr. Emory’s opin­ion that the use of unrep­re­sent­ed, “native” peo­ples by ultra-reac­tionary inter­ests like the Haps­burgs and the asso­ci­at­ed House of Liecht­en­stein is a cyn­i­cal manip­u­la­tion of these pop­u­la­tions.

Rather than sin­cere­ly cham­pi­oning the inter­ests of these groups and pro­mot­ing their wel­fare, sus­te­nance and demo­c­ra­t­ic gov­er­nance, they appear to be using these groups as vehi­cles for the desta­bi­liza­tion and par­ti­tion­ing of larg­er nations—Russia and Chi­na in par­tic­u­lar. It is for the pur­pos­es of covert desta­bi­liza­tion that the Hab­s­burgs and its roy­al­ist ally the House of Liecht­en­stein appear to be “going native.” Are the Lako­ta [Sioux] being sim­i­lar­ly tar­get­ed? (The Lako­ta are among the “unrep­re­sent­ed” peo­ples that belong to the UNPO, head­ed up by Karl von Hab­s­burg and promi­nent­ly fea­tur­ing the milieu of the Dalai Lama.) Do the Haps­burgs and their Under­ground Reich allies intend to pre­cip­i­tate a geo­graph­i­cal Balka­niza­tion of the Unit­ed States? Do the appar­ent Under­ground Reich ele­ments intend to pre­cip­i­tate a bloody repres­sion of the Lako­ta in order to [fur­ther] dis­cred­it the Unit­ed States? Or are the Native Americans—including the Lakota—intended to be used as what Lucy Komis­ar calls “off­shore ele­ments?”

Pro­gram High­lights Include: An account of the Pan-Turk­ist (and Mus­lim) bas­machi upris­ings in the for­mer Sovi­et Union short­ly after its for­ma­tion; fur­ther descrip­tion of the Uighur sep­a­ratist move­ment in Xin­jiang province of Chi­na; review of the role of the Dalai Lama and his milieu in the UNPO; review of the Dalai Lama’s asso­ci­a­tion with the Pan-Turk­ist and Islamist Uighur sep­a­ratist move­ment; review of the con­nec­tions of ele­ments of U.S. intel­li­gence to the Uighur sep­a­ratists in the 1970’s and 1980’s; review of the Uighur sep­a­ratist move­men­t’s links to Al Qae­da; review of the Bush admin­is­tra­tion’s clas­si­fi­ca­tion of the Uighur sep­a­ratist move­ment as ter­ror­ist in nature; the House of Liecht­en­stein’s close con­nec­tions to the Hab­s­burgs; the House of Liecht­en­stein’s links to the Bank Al Taqwa; the links of the House of Liecht­en­stein’s spon­sor­ship of “self-deter­mi­na­tion” stud­ies for areas of vio­lent Islamist activ­i­ty (Koso­vo, Kash­mir and Chech­nya); the links of the Hab­s­burgs to inter­na­tion­al fas­cism and the Under­ground Reich; links of the oth­er roy­al fam­i­lies of Europe to fas­cism. Note that this pro­gram, per­haps more than oth­ers, is high­ly ref­er­enced to oth­er pro­grams. It is emphat­i­cal­ly rec­om­mend­ed that lis­ten­ers use the hyper­links to oth­er broad­casts, as well as the search func­tion to sup­ple­ment their under­stand­ing of these admit­ted­ly com­plex top­ics.

1. The pro­gram begins with review of an unin­formed (and unin­ten­tion­al­ly inform­ing) arti­cle by Wayne Mad­sen, a for­mer intel­li­gence agent him­self. Mad­sen notes that the Bush admin­is­tra­tion clas­si­fied the Uighur inde­pen­dence move­ment as ter­ror­ist. As can be seen in mate­r­i­al that fol­lows, this is an accu­rate des­ig­na­tion. This clas­si­fi­ca­tion, like the Bush admin­is­tra­tion’s clas­si­fi­ca­tion of the Bank Al Taqwa as ter­ror­ist, is one of the rel­a­tive­ly few things the Bush admin­is­tra­tion has done right in the war on ter­ror. In the case of the Uighur inde­pen­dence move­ment, the impe­tus to clas­si­fy the move­ment as ter­ror­ist may well have come from State Depart­ment intel­li­gence ele­ments. In this con­text, one should note that the nation­al secu­ri­ty estab­lish­ment is not mono­lith­ic. It appears that in the case of the Uighur inde­pen­dence move­ment and Al Taqwa, some ele­ments of U.S. intel­li­gence were func­tion­ing with effec­tive­ness and accu­ra­cy. As we saw in FTRs 513 [4] and 514 [5], Bank Al Taqwa was even­tu­al­ly let off the hook when the Unit­ed States refused to pro­vide infor­ma­tion to the Swiss, who then dropped much of their inves­ti­ga­tion of Bank Al Taqwa. Links between the roy­al fam­i­ly of Liecht­en­stein and the Bank Al Taqwa are high­light­ed below.

“Super­man com­ic book fans will fond­ly recall the top­sy-turvy Bizarro world, a plan­et shaped like a cube where every­thing hap­pened back­wards and noth­ing made any sense. Wel­come now to the Bush world, where the revered Dalai Lama of Tibet may now be brand­ed by the Unit­ed States as a ‘fel­low trav­el­er’ of ter­ror­ists or, worse yet, an ‘ene­my com­bat­ant.’ On August 27, Deputy Sec­re­tary of State Richard Armitage, a shad­owy ex-Spe­cial Forces offi­cer who has been linked to every­thing from hero­in smug­gling in Bur­ma’s Gold­en Tri­an­gle to smug­gling weapons to the Iran­ian regime of Aya­tol­lah Khome­i­ni, met with senior Chi­nese offi­cials in Bei­jing. Accord­ing to Reuters, Armitage, rep­re­sent­ing the world’s sec­ond largest total­i­tar­i­an regime, told the lead­er­ship of the world’s largest one that the State Depart­ment had added a new group to its list of for­eign ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tions: the move­ment seek­ing inde­pen­dence for west­ern Chi­na’s Sinkiang region, an area that Chi­nese Uighur (pro­nounced ‘wee-ger’) Mus­lims regard as East Turkestan or Uighurstan. The only prob­lem with this des­ig­na­tion, obvi­ous­ly designed to please the Chi­nese regime pri­or to the upcom­ing Octo­ber sum­mit in Wash­ing­ton between Chi­nese Vice Pres­i­dent Hu Jin­tao and Pres­i­dent Bush, is that the new ‘ter­ror­ist group’ is a mem­ber of the same non-gov­ern­ment orga­ni­za­tion as the Dalai Lama’s Tibetan gov­ern­ment-in-exile, the Unrep­re­sent­ed Nations and Peo­ples Orga­ni­za­tion (UNPO), offi­cial­ly rec­og­nized by the Unit­ed Nations as an inter­na­tion­al human rights orga­ni­za­tion. . . .”

(“Bush’s Bizarro World” by Wayne Mad­sen; Coun­ter­punch; 8/29/2002.) [6]

2. Mad­sen’s strik­ing naivete (if that’s what it is) con­cern­ing Alptekin, the Dalai Lama and the UNPO exem­pli­fies the dynam­ic not­ed by Christo­pher Hitchens.

” . . . In fact, Erkin Alptekin, East Turkestan’s exiled leader serves as Sec­re­tary Gen­er­al of UNPO, and thus, rep­re­sents the Dalai Lama and oth­er eth­nic and trib­al lead­ers of 52 mem­bers of the orga­ni­za­tion. The Direc­tor Gen­er­al of UNPO, hard­ly a ter­ror­ist, is Karl von Hab­s­burg of the for­mer Aus­tro-Hun­gar­i­an roy­al fam­i­ly. Last Sep­tem­ber 12, Alptekin, Amer­i­ca’s newest ‘ter­ror­ist,’ stat­ed in a let­ter to Pres­i­dent Bush, ‘UNPO is great­ly shocked and sad­dened by the immense destruc­tion, injury, and loss of life which have occurred in New York, Wash­ing­ton DC and else­where in the Unit­ed States, as a result of dead­ly acts of ter­ror­ism.’ But now Alptek­in’s move­ment has been tossed into the same cat­e­go­ry as Al Qae­da and Hamas and its Tibetan and Chechen allies now risk sim­i­lar treat­ment at the hands of a U.S. admin­is­tra­tion that could be legit­i­mate­ly ruled by any psy­chi­a­trist as clin­i­cal­ly insane.”

(Idem.)

3. Note that Mad­sen him­self (for what­ev­er rea­son) gave mon­ey to the UNPO!! Anoth­er impor­tant point to note here is the fact that the Lako­ta are among the “unrep­re­sent­ed” peo­ples cham­pi­oned by the UNPO. Lat­er on in the pro­gram, we will exam­ine the pos­si­bil­i­ty that the Lako­ta may be tar­get­ed for some type of covert oper­a­tion, per­haps even the desta­bi­liza­tion and/or geo­graph­i­cal dis­so­lu­tion of the Unit­ed States itself!

“East Turkestan is rep­re­sent­ed inter­na­tion­al­ly by a num­ber of orga­ni­za­tions, now being linked by Armitage to ter­ror­ism. They include the East­ern Turkestan Nation­al Con­gress, based in Munich, Ger­many, and affil­i­at­ed groups in Istan­bul, Turkey; Bishkek, Kyr­gyzs­tan; Almaty, Kaza­khstan; and New York. With Armitage’s announce­ment, all these Uighur groups face sanc­tions and depor­ta­tion. Under the terms of the USA Patri­ot Act and oth­er U.S. crim­i­nal statutes, the State Depart­men­t’s arbi­trary des­ig­na­tion of a group as a ‘for­eign ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tion’ has severe ram­i­fi­ca­tions. Peo­ple who con­tribute to such orga­ni­za­tions and finan­cial insti­tu­tions who han­dle trans­ac­tions for such orga­ni­za­tions can face crim­i­nal pros­e­cu­tion. Any­one who con­tributes mon­ey, lodg­ing, expert assis­tance, trans­porta­tion or oth­er ‘mate­r­i­al sup­port’ to such orga­ni­za­tions can face long prison terms and seizure of their assets. Res­i­dent aliens in the Unit­ed States can be deport­ed, or worse, be declared ene­my com­bat­ants and wind up on a one-way flight to Guan­tanamo Bay, Cuba. In fact, this writer once con­tributed mon­ey to UNPO. . . . Even native Amer­i­cans are no longer safe from renewed Fed­er­al sub­ju­ga­tion. One of the mem­bers of UNPO is the Sioux Lako­ta Nation, the scene of past bloody bat­tles between encroach­ing Fed­er­al troops and FBI agent and the Sioux. [Empha­sis added.] . . .”

(Idem.)

4. Pro­vid­ing back­ground infor­ma­tion about Pan-Turk­ist and Islamist sep­a­ratism inside of the for­mer Sovi­et Union, the broad­cast high­lights the bas­machi upris­ing in the for­mer Sovi­et Union. This event helped shape the ongo­ing effort at uti­liz­ing Pan-Turk­ist and Islamist ele­ments to break off pieces of Chi­na and (in the case of Chech­nya among oth­er regions) Rus­sia as well. NOTE THAT XINJIANG PROVINCE IS RICH IN PETROLEUM AND OTHER RESOURCES. THIS NO DOUBT MAKES IT A VERY ATTRACTIVE TARGET TO POWERFUL CORPORATE INTERESTS.

“The first seri­ous Islam­ic upris­ing against the Sovi­ets in Cen­tral Asia occurred in 1918. Trad­ing in a Czarist for a com­mu­nist yoke was def­i­nite­ly a bad deal for Cen­tral Asi­a’s Mus­lims. A month after their Octo­ber 1917 vic­to­ry far to the north, the Bol­she­viks sent a detach­ment to seize the impor­tant region­al capi­tol of Tashkent. The new com­mis­sars began by req­ui­si­tion­ing all the food they could lay their hands on and seiz­ing the cot­ton crop in the name of the peo­ple’s repub­lic. A famine soon fol­lowed that would kill as many as a mil­lion Cen­tral Asians. In Feb­ru­ary 1918, Bol­she­vik troops put down a revolt in the ancient Uzbek car­a­van city of Kokand, sack­ing and slaugh­ter­ing as they went, and the bas­machi revolt was on. While the Bol­she­viks were occu­pied by con­sol­i­dat­ing their vic­to­ry else­where in the Sovi­et Union, the upris­ing spread. Vic­to­ry fol­lowed on vic­to­ry. At its height, the rebel­lion count­ed maybe twen­ty thou­sand sol­diers in its ranks, most of them peas­ant fight­ers, all of them Mus­lims. The end, though, seemed fore­or­dained. The com­mu­nists out­num­bered the bas­machi; they had heavy weapons; and after the White Rus­sians were defeat­ed, the rebels got the Reds’ full atten­tion. By 1920, the bas­machi had been dri­ven back into the moun­tains of Tajik­istan. That’s when Enver Pasha showed up.”

(Sleep­ing with the Dev­il; by Robert Baer; Copy­right 2003 by Robert Baer; Three Rivers Press [SC]; ISBN 1–400-5268–8; p. 131.)

5. Note that the min­is­ter of war for the Ottoman Empire dur­ing World War I played an impor­tant role in moti­vat­ing the Pan-Turk­ist ele­ments that attempt­ed to break off from the Sovi­et Union.

“Turkey’s min­is­ter of war dur­ing World War I, Enver Pasha fled to Berlin after the defeat of the Cen­tral Pow­ers, and then went to Moscow at Lenin’s invi­ta­tion. Lenin want­ed to use the charis­mat­ic Turk to draw Cen­tral Asi­a’s Mus­lims into the Sovi­et fold, but as it turned out, Pasha had a grander vision: a pan-Tur­kic state that would stretch from the Straits of Bosporus to Mon­go­lia. He was only thir­ty-two. In Feb­ru­ary 1922, Pasha cap­tured Dushanbe, the cap­i­tal of mod­ern Tajik­istan. By the end of spring, he had tak­en con­trol of vir­tu­al­ly all of the emi­rate of Bokhara. In July 1922, the Sovi­ets were forced to react to Pasha’s treach­ery and sent a divi­sion south to stop him. It worked. He was killed in bat­tle on August 4 of that year. But the bas­machi would­n’t be com­plete­ly snuffed out until 1934. Some of the rebels, it was thought, holed up in the remote moun­tain val­leys of Tajik­istan. Most took refuge in Afghanistan. More than a few slipped as far away as Sau­di Ara­bia. Some took up res­i­dence in Mec­ca and became dyed-in-the-wool Wah­habis.”

(Ibid.; pp. 131–132.)

6. Next, the pro­gram flesh­es out infor­ma­tion about the sep­a­ratist move­ment in Xin­jiang province, Chi­na. Note that both Islamist and non-theo­crat­ic Pan-Turk­ist ele­ments are involved in this move­ment.

“Chi­na has not been spared. Xin­jiang (south­ern Chi­na), has a pop­u­la­tion that is 55% Uighur (a Turko­phone Sun­ni eth­nic group); it has been con­front­ed with Islamist vio­lence since the begin­ning of the 1990’s. Cre­at­ed in 1955, Xin­jiang (which means ‘new ter­ri­to­ry’) is one of the five autonomous areas of Chi­na and is the largest admin­is­tra­tive unit of the coun­try. The area is high­ly strate­gic at the geopo­lit­i­cal lev­el — Chi­nese nuclear tests and rock­et launch­es take place on the Lop Nor test grounds — as well as from an eco­nom­ic stand­point, since it abounds in nat­ur­al wealth (oil, gas, ura­ni­um, gold, etc.). Against this back­drop, attacks have pro­lif­er­at­ed by inde­pen­dence-seek­ing cliques, all preach­ing ‘Holy War.’ ”

(Dol­lars for Ter­ror: The Unit­ed States and Islam; by Richard Labeviere; Copy­right 2000; Algo­ra Press [SC]; ISBN 1–822941-06–6; p. 10. [7])

7. “Some are act­ing in the name of Turk­ish iden­ti­ty, while oth­ers are fight­ing in the name of Allah (espe­cial­ly in the south­ern part of the region). As in the rest of Cen­tral Asia, in Xin­jiang we are wit­ness­ing the ris­ing influ­ence of Wah­habi groups and the increas­ing pros­e­lytism of preach­ers from Sau­di Ara­bia, Afghanistan and Pak­istan. Tra­di­tion­al­ly allied with pop­u­lar Chi­na, Pak­istan is nev­er­the­less try­ing to extend its influ­ence to this part of Chi­na, using the Islamists as it did in Afghanistan. For this rea­son Bei­jing closed the road from Karako­rum, con­nect­ing Xin­jiang to Pak­istan, between 1992 and 1995. Since 1996, the fre­quen­cy of the inci­dents has sky­rock­et­ed. In Feb­ru­ary 1997, riots explod­ed in Yin­ing (a town of 300,000 inhab­i­tants locat­ed to the west of Urumqi, near the Kaza­kh bor­der). This vio­lence caused ten deaths, accord­ing to Chi­nese author­i­ties, and the Uighurs have count­ed more than a hun­dred vic­tims.”

(Idem.)

8. “Every week in 1998 saw a bomb­ing or an attack with auto­mat­ic weapons. The region’s hotels, air­ports and rail­way sta­tions are in a con­stant state of alert. In April, Chi­nese author­i­ties in the vicin­i­ty of Yin­ing seized 700 cas­es of ammu­ni­tion from Kaza­khstan. In Sep­tem­ber, the Sec­re­tary of the Xin­jiang Com­mu­nist Par­ty declared that ’19 train­ing camps, in which spe­cial­ists return­ing from Afghanistan edu­cate young recruits in the tech­niques of ter­ror­ism, with the assis­tance of the Tale­ban,’ were neu­tral­ized. In Jan­u­ary 1999, 29 activists impli­cat­ed in the Feb­ru­ary 1997 riots were arrest­ed. On Feb­ru­ary 12, vio­lent clash­es between the police and groups of Uighur mil­i­tants wound­ed sev­er­al dozen peo­ple in Urumqi. Two hun­dred peo­ple were arrest­ed. In ear­ly March, 10,000 addi­tion­al sol­diers arrived at Yin­ing to beef up secu­ri­ty, while in Bei­jing, the Uighur Islamist orga­ni­za­tions took cred­it for sev­er­al bomb attacks.”

(Ibid.; pp. 10–11.)

9. “This Asian test-bed is sup­port­ing the emer­gence of a new type of rad­i­cal­ism. Sun­ni-ite and ide­o­log­i­cal­ly con­ser­v­a­tive, it is supra­na­tion­al in its recruit­ment and in its ide­ol­o­gy. It does not emanate out of scis­sions in the great Islamists orga­ni­za­tions, but from a rad­i­cal­iza­tion of the Afghan Tale­bans, from their sanc­tu­ar­ies and their ties with small ter­ror­ist and mafia groups, mar­gin­al­ized and rad­i­cal­ized by repres­sion (as in Egypt and Alge­ria), in a con­text of eco­nom­ic and finan­cial glob­al­iza­tion, as well as from the cir­cu­la­tion of mil­i­tants who have lost their ter­ri­to­ries. The prin­ci­pal char­ac­ter­is­tic of these net­works (except in Cen­tral Asia and Egypt) is that they recruit, estab­lish their bases, and act at the mar­gins of the Arab-Mus­lim world. In addi­tion to the Egyp­tians, Pak­ista­nis, Sudanese, Yemenites, and Fil­ipinos, recent­ly there has been a wave of immi­gra­tion to Great Britain and the Unit­ed States. Oper­a­tions take place in Egypt, cer­tain­ly, in Alge­ria and Cen­tral Asia, but also in the east and the south of Africa, in Yemen, Bangladesh, New York, etc. The favorite ‘holy wars’ are Kash­mir, Afghanistan, Chech­nya, the Cau­ca­sus and, now, Chi­na.”

(Ibid.; p. 11.)

10. Note the role that Islamists play in the multi­na­tion­al cor­po­rate glob­al­iza­tion move­ment. They are work­ing in a fash­ion that dimin­ish­es nation­al con­trol and reg­u­la­tion and accen­tu­ates lais­sez-faire mar­ket dynam­ics. (“Lib­er­al­ism” in the con­text pre­sent­ed here means “free-mar­ket” rather than tra­di­tion­al Amer­i­can polit­i­cal lib­er­al­ism.)

“Tak­ing advan­tage of eco­nom­ic lib­er­al­iza­tion, many for­mer chiefs of the ‘holy war’ have now trans­mut­ed into busi­ness­men. They make up an ‘Islamo-busi­ness’ world that has colonies in var­i­ous sec­tors: Islam­ic finan­cial insti­tu­tions, Islam­ic gar­ment indus­tries, human­i­tar­i­an and benev­o­lent orga­ni­za­tions, pri­vate schools, and so on. As polit­i­cal sci­en­tist Olivi­er Roy says, ‘Today’s Islam­ic actors are work­ing for lib­er­al­ism and against state con­trol.’ They rep­re­sent a glob­al­iza­tion of Islam, deter­ri­to­ri­al­ized, in an approach that has been uncou­pled from the Mid­dle East. A strik­ing West­ern­iza­tion of Islamism is tak­ing place or, more pre­cise­ly, of the tra­di­tion­al­ly infra-state net­works; tribes, Koran schools, etc. are link­ing up with world­wide net­works that func­tion in an extreme­ly mod­ern way and out­side the con­trol of any State author­i­ty. This evo­lu­tion results from a his­to­ry that began long ago...”

(Idem.)

11. The broad­cast reviews the fact that the Dalai Lama has col­lab­o­rat­ed with Islamists from among the Uighur pop­u­la­tion of Xin­jiang province of Chi­na. (The Uighurs refer to Xin­jiang as East or East­ern Turkestan.) With Xin­jiang province being rich in petro­le­um, the Uighurs have had lit­tle trou­ble obtain­ing sup­port from for­eign intel­li­gence ser­vices. For addi­tion­al infor­ma­tion about Uighur involve­ment with the Mus­lim Brotherhood/Al Qae­da milieu, see FTR#348 [8] as well as FTR#549 [9]. It should be not­ed that we are a long way from deal­ing with “Bud­dhists” here!! The Dalai Lama’s milieu is part of a larg­er Under­ground Reich “vir­tu­al state.” It is also impor­tant to bear in mind that the milieu of which the Dalai Lama is a part appears to focus on Cen­tral Asia—that part of the “Earth Island” seen by geopoliti­cians as key to con­trol­ling that land mass and, as a con­se­quence, the world. Note that the Uighurs are count­ed by the Pan-Turk­ists as among the “out­side Turks” to be includ­ed in a “Greater Turkestan”.

“India should have rea­sons to be con­cerned over the Dalai Lama’s hob­nob­bing with the pan- Islam­ic ele­ments in Xin­jiang. One can­not avoid sus­pect­ing that the influ­ence of these ele­ments must have been behind his par­tic­i­pa­tion in a con­fer­ence orga­nized in Chen­nai last year by some ele­ments, which have been act­ing as apol­o­gists for Gen. Per­vez Mushar­raf, the Pak­istani mil­i­tary dic­ta­tor, which was attend­ed by a rep­re­sen­ta­tive of the Huryi­at of J&K and a large num­ber of Pak­ista­nis, some of them retired Pak­istani mil­i­tary offi­cers. The Dalai Lama’s set-up sub­se­quent­ly denied or played down some of the con­tro­ver­sial remarks attrib­uted to him at the con­fer­ence. The Gov­ern­ment of India should con­sid­er con­vey­ing to the Dalai Lama its unhap­pi­ness and con­cern over his asso­ci­a­tion with pan-Islam­ic ele­ments in Xin­jiang.”

(“US & Ter­ror­ism in Xin­jiang” by B. Raman; From the web­site of the South Asia Analy­sis Group [an Indi­an intelligence/national secu­ri­ty think tank]; 7/02.) [10]

12. Note that the U.S. has main­tained a dou­ble stan­dard on Islamist and sep­a­ratist ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tions. Those per­ceived as “pure­ly indige­nous” are not clas­si­fied as ter­ror­ist, and may be receiv­ing assis­tance from ele­ments of the intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty that are at least nom­i­nal­ly Amer­i­can. It is Mr. Emory’s view that this ele­ment of the intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty is asso­ci­at­ed with the petro­le­um indus­try and, at a more pro­found lev­el, the Under­ground Reich. It appears that this same ele­ment (or relat­ed ele­ments) is at the epi­cen­ter of the drug-traf­fick­ing milieu with­in U.S. intel­li­gence. For lis­ten­ers who might find this dif­fi­cult to under­stand, con­sid­er the sit­u­a­tion vis a vis drug-traf­fick­ing. Some ele­ments of U.S. intel­li­gence are com­plic­it in the drug traf­fick­ing, while oth­er ele­ments (in con­junc­tion with law enforce­ment) are sin­cere­ly active in oppos­ing it. Not only are the ter­ror­ist and drug-traf­fick­ing sit­u­a­tions anal­o­gous, but, again, the drug-traf­fick­ing ele­ments are asso­ci­at­ed with the ter­ror­ist ele­ments. As researcher Peter Dale Scott has illus­trat­ed in his work [Drugs, Oil and War [11]], the terror/drug ele­ment is close­ly asso­ci­at­ed with the petro­le­um indus­try. This ele­ment of the intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty may well be part of the “Safari Club” milieu.

More on the Uighur involve­ment with Al Qae­da:

“10. The Islam­ic Move­ment of Uzbek­istan and the Abu Sayyaf of the south­ern Philip­pines have been des­ig­nat­ed as For­eign Ter­ror­ist Orga­ni­za­tions under the US law of 1996, but not the East­ern Turkestan Islam­ic Par­ty, though all the three are mem­bers of Osama bin Laden’s Inter­na­tion­al Islam­ic Front For Jehad Against the USA and Israel. In ini­ti­at­ing action, either for des­ig­na­tion as a For­eign Ter­ror­ist Orga­ni­za­tion or for action under the UN Secu­ri­ty Coun­cil Res­o­lu­tion No, 1373 in respect of bank accounts, the US and the Euro­pean Union have focused essen­tial­ly on ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tions, which are per­ceived by them as inter­na­tion­al in nature or which are seen as pos­ing a threat to their nation­als and inter­ests. Ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tions viewed by them as pure­ly indige­nous have been exclud­ed. These mul­ti­ple yard­sticks have been used vis- a‑vis Chi­na as well as India.”

(Idem.)

13. Note that both the Islamist ele­ment of the Uighur inde­pen­dence move­ment and its more sec­u­lar Pan-Turk­ist allies have col­lab­o­rat­ed with the Dalai Lama.

“7. Uighurs were found fight­ing with al-Qae­da in Afghanistan. We are aware of cred­i­ble reports that some Uighurs who were trained by al-Qae­da have returned to Chi­na. . . .24. The sec­ond sim­i­lar­i­ty relates to the exter­nal caus­es of aggra­va­tion of the ter­ror­ist vio­lence in Xin­jiang. Just as in J & K, in Xin­jiang too, there are two dis­tinct terrorist/extremist move­ments- ‑one resort­ing to vio­lence on eth­nic grounds to assert the Uighur eth­nic iden­ti­ty against the per­ceived Han Chi­nese dom­i­na­tion and the oth­er using reli­gious and pan-Islam­ic argu­ments to jus­ti­fy vio­lence for the estab­lish­ment of an inde­pen­dent Islam­ic State. While the eth­nic sep­a­ratist ele­ments have been the ben­e­fi­cia­ries of sym­pa­thy and sup­port from the Dalai Lama’s set-up and the Tibetan dias­po­ra abroad, and the US, Tai­wanese and Turk­ish intel­li­gence agen­cies, the reli­gious fun­da­men­tal­ist ele­ments have been in receipt of sup­port from the Inter-Ser­vices Intel­li­gence (ISI)-backed jeha­di orga­ni­za­tions in Pak­istan, the Tal­iban and bin Laden’s Inter­na­tion­al Islam­ic Front For Jehad Against the USA and Israel.”

(Idem.)

14. Accord­ing to the Raman paper, the CIA had close con­nec­tions to Erkin Alptekin, a mem­ber of the board of the Dalai Lama foun­da­tion and a func­tionary of the move­ment to estab­lish Xin­jiang province of Chi­na as an inde­pen­dent (Mus­lim) Uighur state—East Turkestan. It should be not­ed that Alptekin is an oper­a­tive of the Pan-Turk­ist move­ment, which is dis­tinct from the Islamist ele­ment in the Uighur inde­pen­dence move­ment. The Pan-Turk­ist move­ment is dis­cussed at length in AFA#‘s 14 [12] and 21 [13], avail­able from Spit­fire.

“25. In the 1970s and the 1980s, the Cen­tral Intel­li­gence Agency (CIA) of the USA had built up a net­work of con­tacts with the Uighur sep­a­ratist ele­ments and some of those, who had in the past worked for the Munich-based Radio Lib­er­ty of the CIA such as Erkin Alptekin, chair­man of the Europe-based East­ern Turkestani Union and a close Uighur asso­ciate of the Dalai Lama, are now in the fore­front of the eth­nic sep­a­ratist move­ment. . . .”

(Idem.)

15. In addi­tion to his back­ground with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty—both close­ly con­nect­ed to U.S. intelligence—Erkin Alptekin is a founder and key mem­ber of the UNPO, about which we will have more to say below. Alptekin is also on the board of the Dalai Lama Foun­da­tion.

“ERKIN ALPTEKIN is one of the fore­most human rights advo­cates for the Uighur peo­ple of East­ern Turkestan, also known as the Xin­jiang Autonomous Region of the Peo­ple’s Repub­lic of Chi­na. Mr. Alptekin was employed by Radio Free Europe/Radio Lib­er­ty from 1971 to 1994. He is one of the founders of the Unrep­re­sent­ed Nations and Peo­ple’s Orga­ni­za­tion (UNPO), and cur­rent­ly serves as its gen­er­al sec­re­tary.”

(Excerpt from the list of the board of the Dalai Lama Foun­da­tion.)

16. Anoth­er board mem­ber of the Dalai Lama Foun­da­tion is a mem­ber of the UNPO. Again, this will be dis­cussed at greater length below.

“MICHAEL VAN WALT cur­rent­ly serves as Exec­u­tive Pres­i­dent of the Peace Action Coun­cil, and Legal Advi­sor to the Office of H.H. The Dalai Lama. From 1991 to 1998 Dr. Van Walt was Gen­er­al Sec­re­tary of UNPO, the Unrep­re­sent­ed Nations and Peo­ples Orga­ni­za­tion. Dr. Van Walt holds law degrees from Europe and Amer­i­ca, and is cur­rent­ly Adjunct Pro­fes­sor of Inter­na­tion­al Law, Gold­en Gate Uni­ver­si­ty School of Law, San Fran­cis­co.”

(Idem.)

17. With the Dalai Lama and his milieu, we appear to be look­ing at man­i­fes­ta­tions of the Under­ground Reich as a “vir­tu­al state”—a state with­out for­mal geo­graph­i­cal bor­ders. We should also note that Cen­tral Asia—the area that is the focal point of the Dalai Lama’s and UNPO’s sup­port for Uighur sep­a­ratist ele­ments was viewed by geopoliti­cians as crit­i­cal for main­tain­ing con­trol of the Earth Island [14].

“The eldest son and heir of the dynasty is Karl (Kar­l’s web­site), who lives in Aus­tria and has served in the Aus­tri­an army and was a mem­ber of the Euro­pean Par­lia­ment, like his father, from 1996–1999. [Empha­sis added.] He has worked hard to keep the fam­i­ly in the pub­lic lime­light, even host­ing a pop­u­lar tele­vi­sion game show. He works qui­et­ly to change the Aus­tri­an laws of 1919 that for­bid the Hab­s­burgs from hold­ing any polit­i­cal office and has often been men­tioned as a pos­si­ble Chan­cel­lor of the Aus­tri­an Repub­lic. At this time he is the Gen­eraldirek­tor of the UNPO (Unrep­re­sent­ed Nations and Peo­ples Orga­ni­za­tion). In 1993 Karl mar­ried Francesca Thyssen-Borne­misza who is well known in Euro­pean high soci­ety.”

(Entry for Karl von Hab­s­burg) [15]

18. The broad­cast sets forth the fas­cist incli­na­tions of Otto von Hab­s­burg, the aging patri­arch of that fam­i­ly and the father of Karl von Hab­s­burg. (Younger lis­ten­ers should note that Rudolph Hess was one of Hitler’s clos­est aides and the last pris­on­er at Span­dau prison.)

” . . . The final esca­la­tion was reserved for Otto von Hab­s­burg, a CSU del­e­gate to the Euro­pean par­lia­ment and the son of the last Aus­tri­an emper­or; since 1973 he has also been pres­i­dent of the ultra-right Pan-Europa-Union and a mem­ber of the Free­dom for Rudolf Hess Com­mit­tee [Empha­sis added.] . . . .”

(The New Reich: Vio­lent Extrem­ism in Uni­fied Ger­many and Beyond; by Michael Schmidt; Copy­right 1993 by Michael Schmidt; Pan­theon Books [HC]; ISBN 0–679-42578–0; p. 137.) [16]

19. Otto von Hab­s­burg is very close to the World Secu­ri­ty Net­work. Note the biog­ra­phy of the elder von Hab­s­burg on the World Secu­ri­ty Net­work’s web site [17]. One should also be aware of the inter­view with Hab­s­burg on their web site [18]. The World Secu­ri­ty Net­work appears to be an organ of the Under­ground Reich, and is very close to the milieu of the Schmitz fam­i­ly—Joseph E. Schmitz is on their advi­so­ry board [19]. Schmitz is also among the con­tribut­ing authors of the net­work: http://www.worldsecuritynetwork.com/network/dsp_author3.cfm. Joseph E. Schmitz and his broth­er John P. Schmitz are dis­cussed at length in FTR#‘s 469 [20], 476 [21], 529 [22]. Note their appar­ent con­nec­tions to the milieu of the Under­ground Reich and 9/11.

20. Otto von Hab­s­burg’s son and heir to the Hab­s­burg throne, Karl von Hab­s­burg, mar­ried Francesca Thyssen-Borne­misza in the Zagreb (Croa­t­ia) cathe­dral. The Thyssen-Borne­misza fam­i­ly is at the epi­cen­ter of the Thyssen indus­tri­al empire, the Bor­mann cap­i­tal net­work and the Under­ground Reich. (The infor­ma­tion about the Hab­s­burg/Thyssen-Borne­misza mar­riage was orig­i­nal­ly sourced at a gene­o­log­i­cal web­site [23].)

21. The fas­cist incli­na­tions of the Hab­s­burgs are not unique among Euro­pean monar­chi­cal fam­i­lies.

“It is more than eerie. A dis­turb­ing side­bar to the polit­i­cal cul­ture of these restora­tions was how many of the would-be mon­archs, roy­al hous­es, and sup­port­ing fac­tions had been on the fas­cist side in World War II. Italy’s House of Savoy was ban­ished in part for back­ing Mus­soli­ni and sup­port­ing his 1938 race laws, tar­get­ing Jews. In Bul­gar­ia, Sime­on’s House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha fought through much of the war as an ally of Nazi Ger­many. The Ser­bian fac­tions back­ing the poten­tial Alexan­der II evoked mem­o­ries of World War II mas­sacres and eth­nic bat­tles still com­mem­o­rat­ed after six hun­dred years. The Roman­ian House of Hohen­zollern-Sig­marin­gen, sup­port­ed by the Iron Guard move­ment that blend­ed rur­al East­ern Ortho­dox reli­gion with folk­ish nation­al­ism, fought most of World War II on Hitler’s side.”

(Amer­i­can Dynasty: Aris­toc­ra­cy, For­tune, and the Pol­i­tics of Deceit in the House of Bush; by Kevin Philips; Viking [HC]; Copy­right 2004 by Kevin Phillips; ISBN 0–670-03264–6; pp. 63–64.) [24]

22. In the para­graph that fol­lows, Phillips remarks on the impe­tus giv­en to what he calls “aristophil­ia” by eco­nom­ic forces. In the con­text of this broad­cast, it is impor­tant to under­score the fact that the “Earth Island” and the parts of it appar­ent­ly tar­get­ed for covert oper­a­tions by the roy­al­ist net­works dis­cussed here are rich in petro­le­um and oth­er nat­ur­al resources. Because of that, it is not unrea­son­able to sup­pose that intel­li­gence ele­ments asso­ci­at­ed with major corporations—oil com­pa­nies in particular—may very well be involved in the desta­bi­liza­tion efforts in Xin­jiang and (per­haps) in Chech­nya and oth­er parts of the for­mer Sovi­et Union in par­tic­u­lar.

“Unfair as it may be to lump togeth­er the Hous­es of Karad­jord­je­vic, Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Savoy, and Honen­zollern-Sig­marin­gen, they sug­gest the dark side of the glob­al polit­i­cal force that has buoyed dynasty and restora­tion. The anal­o­gy to the Eng­lish-speak­ing nations is obvi­ous­ly lim­it­ed, but the caveats can­not be entire­ly ignored. And now, we must turn to the dif­fer­ent encour­age­ment giv­en to aristophil­ia dur­ing the 1980’s and 1990’s by eco­nom­ic forces. . . .”

(Ibid.; p. 64.)

23. Delv­ing into the nature of the roy­al fam­i­ly of Liecht­en­stein, the pro­gram notes the close­ness between Hans-Adam II’s clan and the Hab­s­burg dynasty that ruled the Aus­tro-Hun­gar­i­an Empire until the end of World War I.

“LADISLAV KAHOUN: To what degree does your fam­i­ly feel spir­i­tu­al­ly akin to the Hab­s­burg dynasty? Do you know that in the Czech and Mora­vian aware­ness you were always con­sid­ered the house clos­est to the Hab­s­burg dynasty? PRINCE HANS-ADAM II: My grand­moth­er was a sis­ter of the Arch­duke Franz Fer­di­nand who was killed in Sara­je­vo. This is per­haps the rea­son why in the Czech and Mora­vian aware­ness the Liecht­en­stein house is con­sid­ered the clos­est to the Hab­s­burg dynasty. His­tor­i­cal­ly one has to say that the Liecht­en­stein fam­i­ly became a for­eign dynasty with the end of the Holy Roman Empire and were there­fore quite close to the Hab­s­burg dynasty. A num­ber of those for­eign dynas­ties kept prop­er­ties in the Aus­tri­an-Hun­gar­i­an Empire after 1806 as the Liecht­en­steins did. They were also very often clos­er relat­ed to the Hab­s­burg dynasty through marriage—just think about Empress Sis­si, the wife of Emper­or Franz Joseph II. . . .”

(Inter­view with Prince Hans-Adam II by Ladislav Kahoun.) [25]

24. Next, the broad­cast reviews infor­ma­tion from FTR#442 [26]. One of the most impor­tant con­nec­tions illus­trat­ed in this pro­gram is the evi­den­tiary trib­u­tary con­nect­ing the Bank Al Taqwa and the roy­al fam­i­ly of Liecht­en­stein. Recall that Bank Al Taqwa is a prin­ci­pal finan­cial source for Al Qae­da and oth­er Mus­lim Broth­er­hood off­shoots. One should not for­get that Al Taqwa itself orig­i­nates from a firm estab­lished in Vaduz, Liechtenstein—that nation’s cap­i­tal. Liecht­en­stein is one of the prin­ci­pal “fun­ny mon­ey” cen­ters of Europe, and an appar­ent major piv­ot point for the Under­ground Reich and the asso­ci­at­ed Bor­mann cap­i­tal net­work. This infor­ma­tion should be eval­u­at­ed against the back­ground of the infor­ma­tion pre­sent­ed in FTR#‘s 352 [27], 357 [28], 359 [29], 377 [30], 378 [31]. Those broad­casts high­light the inter­sec­tion between the Al Taqwa milieu and Euro­pean far-right inter­ests, includ­ing the P‑2 and Allean­za Nationale milieu in Italy. These links with pow­er­ful Euro­pean cap­i­tal inter­ests and far-right net­works indi­cate that there is much more going on here than just Islam­ic fun­da­men­tal­ism. In light of the links between Liecht­en­stein, Crown/Alpha (Nor­bert Seeger) and the Carl Duis­berg Gesellschaft, the Asat Trust/Liechtenstein roy­al fam­i­ly con­nec­tion assumes poten­tial­ly larg­er sig­nif­i­cance. (For more about these inter­ests and their links to 9/11, see FTR#‘s 530 [32], 536 [33].) Do the var­i­ous ten­drils of the crea­ture por­trayed in this pro­gram descrip­tion con­sti­tute a Bormann/Underground Reich net­work deeply involved in 9/11?!

” . . . The pros­e­cu­tion also alleged that [alleged Al Qae­da financier Soli­man] Biheiri is linked to a secre­tive finan­cial net­work in Switzer­land and Liecht­en­stein called Al Taqwa, which Amer­i­can and Euro­pean inves­ti­ga­tors say is a finan­cial backer of the Mus­lim Broth­er­hood. The Broth­er­hood, often depict­ed as the ide­o­log­i­cal par­ent of most rad­i­cal Islam­ic groups, recent­ly has come under gov­ern­ment scruti­ny for its pos­si­ble direct role in sup­port­ing ter­ror­ism, most promi­nent­ly because of Al Taqwa.”

(“Ter­ror Fund Trail Leads to Alpine King­dom” by Marc Perel­man; For­ward; 10/17/2003; p. 2) [34]

25. A brief review of Bank Al Taqwa’s links to the Mus­lim Broth­er­hood and Al Qae­da:

“The Bush admin­is­tra­tion and the Unit­ed Nations have des­ig­nat­ed the Al Taqwa net­work and its main officials—two self-avowed Mus­lim Broth­ers and an admit­ted Nazi sympathizer—as sup­port­ers of Al Qae­da. As a result, their assets have been frozen and they are the focus of a Swiss inves­ti­ga­tion. The Al Taqwa offi­cials have repeat­ed­ly reject­ed the charges. At the [alleged Al Qae­da financier Soli­man] Biheiri deten­tion hear­ing last month, pros­e­cu­tor Steven Ward described Biheiri as the Mus­lim Broth­er­hood’s ‘finan­cial toe­hold in the U.S.’ ”

(Idem.)

26. “The pros­e­cu­tion said it had estab­lished links between [alleged Al Qae­da financier Soli­man] Biheiri and the two prin­ci­pals of Al Taqwa, Youssef Nada and Ghaleb Him­mat. Accord­ing to tes­ti­mo­ny from spe­cial agent Kane of the Bureau of Immi­gra­tion and Cus­toms Enforce­ment, the address­es of Nada and Him­mat were found in Biheir­i’s lap­top com­put­er. Kane told the court that there were ‘oth­er indi­ca­tions’ of con­nec­tions between al Taqwa and Biheir­i’s com­pa­ny BMI, includ­ing finan­cial trans­ac­tions. . . .”

(Idem.)

27. The Liecht­en­stein roy­al fam­i­ly’s involve­ment with Al Taqwa cen­ters on Asat Trust.

“. . . One com­pa­ny in the Al Taqwa galaxy that was des­ig­nat­ed by the Unit­ed States and the U.N. as a ter­ror­ist-relat­ed enti­ty is a Liecht­en­stein enti­ty called Asat Trust. Its direc­tor Mar­tin Wachter, told the For­ward this year that Asat Trust oper­ates mere­ly as a reg­istry for busi­ness­es and is not involved in the oper­a­tion of any com­pa­ny. He added that the Amer­i­can gov­ern­ment had wrong­ful­ly des­ig­nat­ed Asat Trust as a ter­ror­ist-relat­ed enti­ty because it had once rep­re­sent­ed Al Taqwa in a small real estate deal in Switzer­land.”

(Ibid.; pp. 2–3.)

28. Asat Trust’s involve­ment with Bank Al Taqwa is more sig­nif­i­cant than its apol­o­gists have main­tained:

“Still, copies of busi­ness reg­is­tra­tion doc­u­ments on file with author­i­ties in Liecht­en­stein show that Asat Trust has been inti­mate­ly involved with the Al Taqwa net­work dur­ing the last 30 years, reg­is­ter­ing changes in com­pa­ny names, per­son­nel and finan­cial struc­ture, which may explain why Asat Trust land­ed on the Amer­i­can and U.N. ter­ror­ist lists.”

(Ibid.; p. 3.)

29. The infor­ma­tion about the Al Taqwa links with the roy­al fam­i­ly of Liecht­en­stein is set forth as fol­lows:

“The records also shed light on the involve­ment of one mem­ber of the roy­al fam­i­ly of Liecht­en­stein in Asat Trust. Accord­ing to the doc­u­ments, deceased Prince Emanuel von und zu Liecht­en­stein became a board mem­ber of Asat Trust in May 1970 and stayed until Novem­ber 1990, when he was replaced by Wachter, the trust’s cur­rent direc­tor. Flo­ri­an Krenkel, a spokesman for the roy­al fam­i­ly, said Prince Emmanuel had died in 1987 and that he was a dis­tant cousin from rul­ing Prince Hans Adam II. . . .”

(Idem.)

30. In addi­tion, a bank owned by the Liecht­en­stein roy­al fam­i­ly appears to have been involved with Al Taqwa/Asat Trust’s oper­a­tions. WHY?

” . . . There also appears to be some links between Asat Trust and a bank owned by the Liecht­en­stein roy­al fam­i­ly. Sev­er­al Asat Trust doc­u­ments fea­ture on their let­ter­heads ‘Bank in Liecht­en­stein AG’ beneath ‘Asat Trust.’ The roy­al fam­i­ly bank has changed its name and is now called LGT bank. A tele­phone and an e‑mail query to the bank’s spokesman Hans-Mar­tin Uehringer went unre­turned. . . .”

(Idem.)

31. A recent endow­ment by Hans-Adam II to Prince­ton Uni­ver­si­ty estab­lished an aca­d­e­m­ic insti­tute that will con­cen­trate on areas that have been major focal points of Islamist activity—Chechnya, Koso­vo and the Balka­ns, and Kash­mir. Is this insti­tu­tion a think tank that will work as part of a NGO covert oper­a­tions milieu? Does this insti­tu­tion, in effect, con­sti­tute anoth­er link of the Liecht­en­stein roy­al fam­i­ly to Islamists (like the Asat Trust dis­cussed above)? In this con­text, one should not lose sight of the sim­i­lar­i­ty of the focus of the Liecht­en­stein Insti­tute and the UNPO. Are both of these orga­ni­za­tions part of the new “kinder, gen­tler” covert oper­a­tions par­a­digm? Bear in mind that both the Haps­burgs and the close­ly-asso­ci­at­ed House of Liecht­en­stein are con­ser­v­a­tive Catholics. Their inter­est in “native peo­ples” and “self-deter­mi­na­tion” for Islamists, Turks, Tibetan Bud­dhists and Lako­ta Sioux is all the more sus­pi­cious, under the cir­cum­stances!!

“A $12 mil­lion gift to Prince­ton from Prince Hans-Adam II of Liecht­en­stein will cre­ate the Liecht­en­stein Insti­tute on Self-Deter­mi­na­tion, which will serve as a cen­ter for research and teach­ing on issues of self-deter­mi­na­tion around the world. The gift will expand the Uni­ver­si­ty’s exist­ing Liecht­en­stein Research Pro­gram on Self-Deter­mi­na­tion, which also has been fund­ed by Prince Hans-Adam II. It will enable Prince­ton fac­ul­ty, stu­dents and out­side experts to expand their work and embark on wide-rang­ing new projects in such places as Koso­vo, Kash­mir, and Chech­nya. [Empha­sis added.]”

(“$12 Mil­lion Gift Estab­lish­es Insti­tute”; Prince­ton Week­ly Bul­letin, Sep­tem­ber 25, 2000, Vol. 90, No. 3.) [35]

32. “As a bridge between acad­e­mia and the prac­ti­cal world, the Liecht­en­stein Insti­tute will engage both in fun­da­men­tal research and in a prac­ti­cal search for solu­tions to real-world prob­lems. ‘By cre­at­ing a non-polem­i­cal envi­ron­ment for research and dis­cus­sion, we hope to help reduce the tumul­tuous and fre­quent­ly vio­lent process inher­ent in the search for increased auton­o­my,’ said Wolf­gang Danspeck­gru­ber [a nice Anglo-Sax­on name—D.E.], a lec­tur­er in the Woodrow Wil­son School of Pub­lic and Inter­na­tion­al Affairs and the found­ing direc­tor of the new insti­tute. He believes the insti­tute can advance com­pro­mis­es that rec­og­nize com­mu­ni­ty auton­o­my with­in exist­ing states along with region­al inte­gra­tion, pre­vent­ing seces­sion in all but the most extreme cas­es.”

(Idem.)

33. “Researchers at the insti­tute are begin­ning work on three major projects. An ini­tia­tive launched in June by Danspeck­gru­ber and Stephen Kotkin, direc­tor of the Russ­ian Stud­ies Pro­gram, is explor­ing state pow­er, bor­ders and self-gov­er­nance in the for­mer Sovi­et Union. The project is expect­ed to con­clude with find­ings and rec­om­men­da­tions pre­sent­ed at a major con­fer­ence in 2001. In the sec­ond project, which is also sup­port­ed by a grant from the Carnegie Cor­po­ra­tion of New York, researchers will devel­op strate­gies to pre­vent and man­age crises of self-deter­mi­na­tion. This project brings togeth­er Danspeck­gru­ber, Michael Doyle, direc­tor of the Cen­ter of Inter­na­tion­al Stud­ies, Jef­frey Herb­st, chair of the Depart­ment of Pol­i­tics; and Gilbert Roz­man, pro­fes­sor of soci­ol­o­gy.”

(Idem.)

34. Notice that Kash­mir is one of the areas on which the Hans-Adam-financed Liecht­en­stein insti­tute will focus. In para­graphs 11–14 above, the B. Raman paper notes that the Dalai Lama/Xinjiang separatist/Islamist milieu over­laps the inter­ests at war against India in that area.

“In the third project, researchers will search for solu­tions to the prob­lem in Kash­mir, where sep­a­ratist groups have mount­ed an 11-year strug­gle against Indi­an rule. Pre­dom­i­nant­ly Mus­lim Kash­mir has been the main point of con­flict between India and Pak­istan since the par­ti­tion of India in 1947. At the same time, the insti­tute will con­tin­ue to work to assist in find­ing a peace­ful solu­tion for con­flict in the Balka­ns. An inter­na­tion­al con­fer­ence eval­u­at­ing the impli­ca­tions of self-deter­mi­na­tion at the begin­ning of the 21st cen­tu­ry is planned for the com­ing aca­d­e­m­ic year, Danspeck­gru­ber said. . . . The insti­tute is an out­growth of the Liecht­en­stein Research Pro­gram on Self-Deter­mi­na­tion, which was cre­at­ed in 1994 and sup­port­ed by Prince Hans-Adam II. . . .”

(Idem.)

35. End­ing on a decid­ed­ly spec­u­la­tive note, the pro­gram high­lights the fact that the Lako­ta [Sioux] Native Amer­i­can peo­ple are one of the groups in which the UNPO is great­ly inter­est­ed. The Lako­ta occu­py a very impor­tant strate­gic posi­tion with­in the geo­graph­i­cal Unit­ed States. Note the map of the Lako­ta ter­ri­to­ry as por­trayed by the UNPO [36]. It is Mr. Emory’s opin­ion that the use of unrep­re­sent­ed, “native” peo­ples by ultra-reac­tionary inter­ests like the Haps­burgs and the asso­ci­at­ed House of Liecht­en­stein is a cyn­i­cal manip­u­la­tion of these pop­u­la­tions. Rather than sin­cere­ly cham­pi­oning the inter­ests of these groups and pro­mot­ing their wel­fare, sus­te­nance and demo­c­ra­t­ic gov­er­nance, they appear to be using these groups as vehi­cles for the desta­bi­liza­tion and par­ti­tion­ing of larg­er nations—Russia and Chi­na in par­tic­u­lar. Are the Lako­ta being sim­i­lar­ly tar­get­ed? Do the Haps­burgs and their Under­ground Reich allies intend to pre­cip­i­tate a geo­graph­i­cal Balka­niza­tion of the Unit­ed States? Do the appar­ent Under­ground Reich ele­ments intend to pre­cip­i­tate a bloody repres­sion of the Lako­ta in order to [fur­ther] dis­cred­it the Unit­ed States? Or are the Native Americans—including the Lakota—intended to be used as what Lucy Komis­ar calls “off­shore ele­ments?”