Foreign Digest: European Union, Russia and Ukraine, and Iran

European Union: Several European Union States officially formed a disinformation response agency, together with media services, to counter disinformation by the Russian Federation, led by tyrant Vladimir Putin, an ex-Soviet intelligence officer trying to restore the Soviet Union. Russia has been interfering in the elections in foreign States, especially Europe, and also the United States. Russia and Ukraine: After Ukraine’s successful counteroffensive against invading Russian troops and heavy Russian losses in the Russo-Ukrainian War begun six months ago when Russia committed aggression against the former Soviet Republic of Ukraine, Russian leader Putin initiated conscription into the military. There have been protests across Russia against mobilization. Russian authorities, as usual, have not been tolerating the freedom of peaceful assembly, or other basic freedoms, and have arrested several hundred Russians. Today, ethnic Russian breakaway parts of eastern Ukraine, which have been backed by Russia since Russia invaded part of Ukraine in 2014, are conducting referendums on joining Russia, absent any free debate. The international community, including the U.S., will not recognize such sham referendums. Iran: There have been demonstrations against the Islamist Iranian regime because of the death of a female prisoner who had been arrested for not abiding by the Islamic Republic’s strict requirement for covering in public. The Islamist theocracy responded with deadly force, as usual.

Italian Parliamentary Elections: Far-Right Populists Seek to Take Advantage of Crises

Italians vote today for the Parliament, which determines which party will form the government led by a prime minister. The right-wing bloc of parties is favored to form a coalition government, as the main center-left party is only attracting a few parties to its left or the center, while the left-leaning populists, whose popularity has declined, are running on their own after bringing down the popular national unity government with which they had been in a coalition government. The right-wing bloc includes the center-right Forza Italia party of former Premier Silvio Berlusconi, the far-right anti-migrant Trumpist League party and another far-right party, the Brothers of Italy, with roots in a post-war fascist party. The Brothers are the largest party and the one whose leader will likely become prime minister. The Brothers, which are running about even with the center-left party, was the only major party in the opposition to the popular national unity government, and had helped bring it down with its bloc partners and the populists, yet will likely be the largest party in a majority government because the Italian election law favors coalitions and rewards the largest one with a bonus of seats to give it a majority. The post-fascist party has been trying to reassure Italians and Europeans that it is no longer fascist, despite its retention of its fascist symbol, its nativist anti-migrant platform and admiration for authoritarians. The leader of the Brothers has pledged to continue the unity government’s reforms that have been necessary for massive European Union pandemic recovery funding, to remain in the EU and to keep the euro as the Italian monetary unit, despite her past views and frequent criticism of the EU, to remain in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and to keep sanctions on Russia and continue sending arms to Ukraine, despite her bloc partner the League’s objections to the last two platform planks. The League’s leader was an admirer of Russian tyrant Vladimir Putin, the ex-Soviet intelligence officer trying to restore the Soviet Union before his full-scale invasion of Ukraine this year. Russia has been overtly interfering in Italy’s election by urging voters to punish governments for the economic sanctions on Russia, necessary to stop Russian aggression, that have led to inflation and slower economic growth, hoping to bring sympathetic parties to power. The League and Brothers’ leaders admire Hungary’s self-described “illiberal” autocrat. The likely incoming premier falsely claims that the Hungarian President won his re-election freely, which undermines confidence that her bloc will stand with the EU against authoritarianism and corruption in EU members Hungary and Poland and raises the question of whether she and her party have truly rejected fascism. Berlusconi’s party promises to anchor the bloc to Europe, NATO and the Atlantic alliance with the United States, with which Italy is a close ally, but his party is the smallest of the fractious bloc. Italy has a history of fractious coalitions being unable to complete their five-year terms without having to form new coalitions or submit to early elections, such as today’s. If the right-wing bloc wins a supermajority of parliamentary seats, they can amend the Constitution without having to submit the proposed amendments to referendum. They want the popular election of the President, instead of currently by an electoral college, while the center-left opposes the populist proposal, as it would give too much unchecked power to the people. Turnout is expected to be less than usual.

A European Union Report Declares Hungary's Autocracy a Systemic Threat to EU Values

The European Union Parliament approved by a large majority a report that found the Hungarian Government a “systemic threat” to the EU’s values, in an unprecedented move towards an EU member. The vote also invoked a provision of the EU Charter to require an intervention of the European Council because of twelve areas of concern and to determine a grave risk of violations of EU values, which could lead to a cut-off of billions of dollars in EU funding of Hungary. The report refers to the Hungarian far-right anti-migrant Government as an “electoral autocracy,” a new hybrid form of government that takes power through elections, but then governs autocratically. As I have posted, some leaders are elected and then restrict liberty to such a degree that subsequent elections, in which they retain power, are no longer free and fair. The Soviet imperialist Vladimir Putin of Russia, the Socialist Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, and the Islamist Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey have been the most noteworthy examples. Hungarian leader Viktor Orban was an admirer of Putin.

United States Intelligence Report Finds Massive Russian Financing of Foreign Politicians and Parties

A United States intelligence report finds that the Russian Federation, under tyrant Vladimir Putin, an ex-Soviet intelligence agent who is trying to restore the Soviet Union, has covertly spent at least $300 million financing politicians and political parties in dozens of representative States around the world since 2014, not including its successful campaign to influence American politics. The report notes the total money spent could be a multiple of the reported figure. The partly declassified report names particularly several States on different continents. Some far-left organizations and far-right pro-Putin Western European parties are known to have accepted Russian funding. The timeframe coincides with the launch of Putin’s “active measures” operation to influence politics abroad that include both overt and covert propaganda and disinformation. That same year, Russia invaded Ukraine, in violation of its agreement to recognize the former Soviet Republic’s independence, sovereignty and self-determination, in exchange for Ukrainian relinquishment of Soviet-era nuclear weapons. Currently, Russia is interfering in foreign elections by openly urging electorates to vote against governing parties that have imposed sanctions on Russia because of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine earlier this year. Putin’s interference is designed to urge voters to punish their own countries’ governments for the economic shock of the sanctions, instead of accepting the sacrifices as necessary for national security to thwart Russian aggression.

Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom and other Realms, in Memoriam

Queen Elizabeth II of the House of Windsor-Mountbatten, who reigned for 70 years over the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, as well as 14 other realms around the world, and lead the 56-member Commonwealth of Nations, died earlier this month at the age of 96 at her castle in Scotland. Her devotion to public service was extraordinary. Princess Elizabeth served in the military as a mechanic during the Second World War, when her parents opted to remain in London with their suffering subjects during the German blitz, even while their palace was bombed. Elizabeth then served as a monarch since 1952, the longest-reigning Sovereign in history. Her duties, which she performed under advice from her Governments, required her to provide royal assent to British legislation; make many appointments in the United Kingdom and its dependencies and territories, including Prime Minister, and of Governors-General in her other realms that were in personal union with her; receive and make state visits; make an annual speech before Parliament expressing her Government’s platform; as well as providing royal imprimatur to numerous organizations by granting them their charters and appearing at their events. Elizabeth II was the greatest exemplar of a constitutional monarch, particularly one who is expected to remain above politics through strict political neutrality, as the Head of and symbol of the State. She performed her duties by maintaining worthy traditions, but adapting when prudent, and by always exhibiting propriety, both in her public and private life. The British Monarch is the head of the Church of England, but the Queen maintained friendly relations with the Popes. The rule requiring royals to marry only Anglicans was lifted during her reign. The Queen’s reign was a period of decolonization, but Elizabeth II remained solicitous of the Commonwealth and maintained friendly relations with many former colonies. Her visit to Philadelphia for the Bicentennial of American Independence from the U.K. in 1976 was particularly noteworthy. Elizabeth II engaged in great philanthropic endeavors. As during the War, she exhibited strong leadership by example during the Coronavirus Pandemic and exhorted her subjects with her inspirational speeches, as she did throughout her long reign. Queen Elizabeth II’s son is now reigning over the U.K. and his other realms as Charles III and leads the Commonwealth. The King, who was heir-apparent longer than anyone in history, is continuing his mother’s devotion to duty to public service under the British Constitution. The United Kingdom, a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, is a close ally of the United States, as are some of Elizabeth’s other realms, such as Canada and Australia.

Foreign Digest: Chile, Iran and Albania

Chile: Chilean voters last week rejected a referendum proposed by the leftwing Government for a new constitution to replace the one approved during the military dictatorship of General Agusto Pinochet. Pinochet took power after an American-led coup in 1974 overthrew an unpopular Communist Government that had been elected by a relatively small plurality and had proceeded to socialize Chile, after which the Communist President committed suicide. The General led Chile until 1990, during the Cold War and tense relations with Argentina, which falsely claimed Chilean territory, keeping Chile independent, relatively peaceful and prosperous, despite his authoritarian rule and human rights violations. Pinochet’s relinquishment of power began a transition to liberty and representative government, which has fostered more peace, freedom and prosperity. The Chilean Government invoked a provision in Pinochet’s Constitution for a plebiscite to replace it, thereby validating it, despite the leftists’ disagreement with it and its undemocratic origin. The vote is thus a rejection of the Left’s favorable view of the Communist Government and of leftwing anti-Americanism. It was not an affirmation of the military dictatorship, but of the promises of the Chilean Consittution and the transition to liberty and representative government Chileans have enjoyed for over three decades. Iran and Albania: The Islamic Republic of Iran recently engaged in a cyberattack against Albania, in apparent retaliation for hosting a conference of certain exiled opposition organizations. Albania, a majority Muslim State, is an ally of the United States as a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. In response to Iran, Albania cut off diplomatic relations with the theocratic Iranian revolutionary regime last week. The U.S., which, like several foreign States, did not recognize the Iranian regime, also sanctioned Iran for its cyberattack on its ally. Iran responded with another cyberattack on Albania. Iran is the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism and foments Islamist revolutions throughout the Islamic world.

Twenty-First Anniversary of the September 11 Terrorist Attacks

It was 21 years ago today that al-Qaeda Islamists committed the deadliest terrorist attacks in world history in the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks on New York, Washington and over Pennsylvania that killed nearly 3,000 people. As always, we remember those killed in the attacks and who sacrificed in the Global War on Terrorism that began after the attacks. And we express our gratitude to all the public servants and ordinary citizens who have participated in every way in opposing terrorism. Their efforts have prevented any attack on nearly the same scale as September 11 anywhere around the world. Because the Taliban regime that tyrannically ruled most of Afghanistan had harbored al-Qaeda, the United States led a successful international coalition to overthrow them by 2002 and to deny safe haven to al-Qaeda. Afghanistan thus became the first campaign of the War on Terrorism that continues today, although at a diminished intensity and without reference to the War. The leaders of al-Qaeda have been killed, but the mastermind of the attacks remains untried in a military prison. Meanwhile, although al-Qaeda suffered heavy losses in Afghanistan as did its affiliates around the Islamic world, it remains a global threat, as does its offshoot, the Islamic State. The return to power in Afghanistan last year of the Taliban, after the American-led withdrawal of international advisors, allowed the Taliban, who are intertwined with terrorists, to provide safe harbor again to terrorists, as it recently did al-Qaeda’s leader. Safe harbor allows terrorists to communicate freely, plot attacks and train. The September 11 mastermind and other al-Qaeda terrorists should be tried in military trials, convicted and receive the maximum sentences. The War on Terrorism must continue on every geographic front necessary, and in every manner, namely diplomacy, countering Islamist propaganda and disinformation, financial restrictions, security, intelligence, law enforcement, and, when necessary, military action. The U.S. and all foreign States must continue not to recognize the Taliban diplomatically and their funds should continue to be frozen, as they have violated their promises not to harbor terrorists, to persecute opponents and to be more inclusive in the ethnically and religiously diverse State. Neither Afghanistan, nor any other state, must never be allowed to become a haven for terrorists.

The Media’s Misleading Labels for Soviet Dictator Mikhail Gorbachev

The professional media has long referred to dictators by their official titles, including even the self-given titles of autocrats, and including those who seized power by force. They refer to “President” so-and-so, and the like, no matter how repressive or tyrannical he is, despite not being subject to free and fair elections, and they continue to use such labels even after the authoritarian is deposed or dies. These titles are misleading because they equate authoritarians with heads of governments that are representative and free, which legitimizes dictators. For years, after referring to the last dictator of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (the Soviet Union), Mikhail Gorbachev, as “President” and “leader,” I expected the professional media, as well as many politicians and political commentators to do the same after he died, which they did last week. The liberal media particularly has long been enamored with Gorbachev, as have many liberal politicians and commentators. Bill Clinton, for example, regarded the Soviet dictator as his political hero. But Gorbachev, whose hero was the first Soviet tyrant, Vladimir Lenin, was doing nothing other than following Lenin’s advice that it was sometimes necessary to take a step back before taking two steps forward in advancing Marxist Communism. Gorbachev recognized that the Soviets could no longer compete militarily and economically with the United States and its allies and also recognized the foolishness of risking a nuclear war, for which he does deserve credit. He made reforms, not to weaken the Soviet Union, which was the unintended result, but out of the hope of strengthening it to make it more competitive. But the introduction of openness and political competition unleashed man’s irrepressible longing for freedom in the Communist Bloc, which led to his loss of power, the fall of Communism in the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe and some other States, and ultimately to the breakup of the Soviet Union. Liberals misunderstood Gorbachev’s reforms as sincere, wishfully overlooking his hostility and tyranny. The last Soviet dictator continued the disinformation campaign against the West, kept political prisoners incarcerated and continued military campaigns for years in Afghanistan in support of the Afghan Communist dictatorship, among many examples, before his later concessions and the treaty he signed with U.S. President Ronald Reagan to eliminate intermediate range nuclear weapons. But what is most disturbing is how his liberal admirers praise Gorbachev for supposedly being tolerant of peaceful protests in the Eastern Bloc, while ignoring that he had reacted with deadly violence against peaceful protestors in the Baltic States calling for independence from the Soviet Union, which had invaded and conquered them under Josef Stalin during the Second World War. That he later recognized that more bloodshed would have been counterproductive and damaging to his and the Soviet image and that holding onto the Baltic States was untenable does not deserve nearly as much credit as he is given, as if he had some better vision for the world and had rejected Marxist-Leninist ideology and the Soviet Empire, which he did not. Gorbachev should instead be judged more accurately, giving him both the credit and blame he deserves, like everyone else. Furthermore, the excessive praise of him diminishes proper understanding of the “Evil Empire,” as Reagan put it and feeds the Soviet nostalgia that is one of the political pillars of current Russian tyrant Vladimir Putin, who seeks to restore the Soviet Union. Instead, the Soviet Union should rightly remain, as Reagan predicted, on the “ash heap of history.”