Overthrowing non-compliant weak states = making future vassals
- “Shy U.S. Intellectual Created Playbook Used in a Revolution” by Sheryk Gat Stolberg (The New York Times; 2011.02.16) – http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/17/world/middleeast/17sharp.html
- Gene Sharp’s ideas were used by series of movements used to overthrow governments of Georgia, Serbia, Ukraine, Tunisia and Egypt.
- “When Egypt’s April 6 Youth Movement was struggling to recover from a failed effort in 2005, its leaders tossed around “crazy ideas” about bringing down the government, said Ahmed Maher, a leading strategist. They stumbled on Mr. Sharp while examining the Serbian movement Otpor, which he had influenced.“
- “From Dictatorship to Democracy” by Gene Sharp – http://www.aeinstein.org/organizations/org/FDTD.pdf [PDF]
- “198 Methods of Nonviolent Action” by Gene Sharp – http://www.aeinstein.org/organizations103a.html
- These methods were compiled by Dr. Gene Sharp and first published in his 1973 book, The Politics of Nonviolent Action, Vol. 2: The Methods of Nonviolent Action. (Boston: Porter Sargent Publishers, 1973). The book outlines each method and gives information about its historical use.
- Source: Gene Sharp, The Politics of Nonviolent Action, Vol. 2: The Methods of Nonviolent Action (Boston: Porter Sargent Publishers, 1973) – http://www.aeinstein.org/organizations3e7d.html
- Lessons for the Future of Civic Resistance: Georgia and Ukraine” (United States Institute for Peace) – http://www.usip.org/publications/lessons-future-civic-resistance-georgia-and-ukraine
- Albert Einstein Institution – http://www.aeinstein.org/ – Mr. Sharp’s front end
- United States Institute for Peace – http://www.usip.org/
- Serbia 2000: Otpor (= “Resistance!”) movement:
- at WikiPedia – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otpor
- “Otpor members were instrumental in inspiring and providing hands-on training to several other civic youth organizations in Eastern Europe and elsewhere, including Kmara in the Republic of Georgia (itself partly responsible for the downfall of Eduard Shevardnadze), Pora in Ukraine (which was part of the Orange Revolution), Zubr in Belarus (opposing the president Alexander Lukashenko), MJAFT! in Albania, Oborona in Russia (opposing the president Vladimir Putin), KelKel in Kyrgyzstan (active in the revolution that brought down the president Askar Akayev), Bolga in Uzbekistan (opposing Islom Karimov) and Nabad-al-Horriye. in Lebanon. A similar group of students was present in Venezuela against Hugo Chávez. In 2011, an April 6 Youth Movement emerged in Egypt during the 2011 Egyptian protests using the same symbols as Otpor.“
- Otpor’s challenge to Milosevic (BBC News; 2000.05.15) – http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/749469.stm
- at WikiPedia – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otpor
- Georgia 2003/2004: Kmara movement = “Rose Revolution”:
- Ukraine 2004: Pora (=”it’s Time!”) movement = “Orange Revolution”:
- Pora at WikiPedia – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pora
- Orange Revolutionat WikiPedia – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_Revolution
- “The Orange Revolution” by Paul Quinn-Judge and Yuri Zarakhovich (Time Magazine; 2004.11.06) – http://www.time.com/time/europe/html/041206/story.html
- “Book Excerpt: The Orange Revolution” by Adrian Gostick and Chester Elton (Business Week; 2010.09.24) – http://www.businessweek.com/print/managing/content/sep2010/ca20100924_731486.htm
Arab winter 2011
- “What name will history give the Middle East Revolution?” – http://sahibagill.wordpress.com/2011/02/06/what-name-will-history-give-the-middle-east-revolution/
- “Colour revolution 2.0 …” (Bet Aljazair’s Chronicle; 2011.02.14) – http://bentaljazair.wordpress.com/2011/02/14/808/
- “The last of the colored revolutions goes south” by Ian Bremmer (The Foreign Policy; 2010.04.08)- http://eurasia.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/04/08/the_last_of_the_colored_revolutions_goes_south
- From: “Tunisians Drive Leader from Power in Mass Uprising” (Cryptogon.com; 2011.01.15) – http://cryptogon.com/?p=19903| also in “Egypt Protests: America’s Secret Backing for Rebel Leaders Behind Uprising?” (Cryptogon.com; 2011.01.29) – http://cryptogon.com/?p=20232.
- Excerpt: At times like this, it’s generally a good idea to keep a copy of The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives by Zbigniew Brzezinski handy:
- As the imitation of American ways gradually pervades the world, it creates a more congenial setting for the exercise of the indirect and seemingly consensual American hegemony. And as in the case of the domestic American system, that hegemony involves a complex structure of interlocking institutions and procedures, designed to generate consensus and obscure asymmetries in power and influence. American global supremacy is thus buttressed by an elaborate system of alliances and coalitions that literally span the globe. …
- American supremacy has thus produced a new international order that not only replicates but institutionalizes abroad many of the features of the American system itself.
- First, to identify the geostrategically dynamic Eurasian states that have the power to cause a potentially important shift in the international distribution of power and to decipher the central external goals of their respective political elites and the likely consequences of their seeking to attain them; and to pinpoint the geopolitically critical Eurasian states whose location and/or existence have catalytic effects either on the more active geostrategic players or on regional conditions;
- Second, to formulate specific U.S. policies to offset, co-opt, and/or control the above, so as to preserve and promote vital U.S. interests, and to conceptualize a more comprehensive geostrategy that establishes on a global scale the interconnection between the more specific U.S. policies.
- In brief, for the United States, Eurasian geostrategy involves the purposeful management of geostrategically dynamic states and the careful handling of geopolitically catalytic states, in keeping with the twin interests of America in the short-term preservation of its unique global power and in the long-run transformation of it into increasingly institutionalized global cooperation. To put it in a terminology that hearkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are
- to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals,
- to keep tributaries pliant and protected,
- and to keep the barbarians from coming together.
He writes that two steps are required for the, “Formulation of American geostrategy for the long-term management of America’s Eurasian geopolitical interests.”
- The Grand Chessboard
- Amazon – http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0465027261
- Wikipedia – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Chessboard
- quotes – http://www.takeoverworld.info/grandchessboard.html