Nexus - 1101 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

House are recorded in Carter's official diary,” according to historian Administration: its foreign policy was also failing to meet his Robert Wood, "Carter's White House files are peppered with expectations, which was evident in the plutocrat's alarm at the correspondence from David Rockefeller"! "slippage of America's strength and leadership on the global Moreover, Carter had appointed 20 trilateralists to senior posi- scene".* The bitter disputes within the hapless President's foreign tions in his administration (Brzezinski became his National Security _ policy team, especially between fellow trilateralists Brzezinski and Advisor), effectively surrendering his administration to adherents of | Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, seemed to be producing an David's trilateralist ideology. With so many trilateralists in the incoherent foreign policy. The Carter Administration, David White House as well as heading the Defense and State Departments _ claimed, had "often fallen short" in its explanation and execution of and the Federal Reserve, David undoubtedly felt certain that there its foreign policy. In fact, he wrote that "Communication of policy would be no repeat of Nixon's mischief-making. has been confusing because policies have been conflicting"; and Yet, despite its seemingly impeccable trilateralist pedigree, the that Washington was "sending out signals that merely read zigzag, Carter Administration did not remain in favour for long. In 1978, a switch and somersault, but don't tell anybody what we're up to or new member of the Trilateral Commission took issue with Carter's what we may do next. Friends and foes alike find us unpredictable new “human rights" policy of pressuring America's Third World and undependable".” allies to stop human rights violations. Speaking to the editor of Another concern of David's was America's declining economic Trialogue, this new trilateralist warned of "great dangers" in fortunes. The failure of Carter "to put our economic house in Carter's approach, including "producing revolutions in friendly order" was proving damaging: "the international monetary system countries". Instead, the US needed to practise "selectivity" in its has been shaken and America's global leadership has been international human rights policy and be weakened". David also complained of a more lenient towards "authoritarian regimes" "regulatory rampage" emanating from (i.e., US client states), as they were more Washington, that was reducing corporate likely to evolve into democracies than were Not surprisingly, profits and productivity.” "totalitarian regimes" (i.e., Communist ah states). America's human rights policy, he David's name has come Reagan and Beyond said, "must maintain this crucial up in connection with David Rockefeller's wish for regime change distinction". q was soon realised in 1980, when the The new member was Henry Kissinger, the so-called October Republican candidate Ronald Reagan secured and his arguments struck a chord with ica" i i a sizeable victory over Carter. David—who already had demonstrated a Surprise conspiracy, in The role of the plutocrat in Carter's defeat is curious indifference to the atrocities carried which it Is alleged that already well known. David, in collaboration out by the many dictators he had dealt with i with Henry Kissinger and former CFR over the years. "I do believe," David said in elements In the Reagan Chairman John J. McCloy, had pressured 1979, "that repeated lecturing and pub- campaign—notably Carter to admit the recently deposed lic condemnation of regimes that we A Shah of Iran into the United States for find repressive are not likely to produce future CIA Director medical treatment. This act precipitated the desired results."** Under Carter, he William Casey— the hostage crisis at the US Embassy in told the World Affairs Council, . . Tehran that was immensely damaging to America's "vital interests" had been conse to disrupt Carter, although whether David antici- the attempts to negotiate the release of the hostages. "subordinated to worthy but fuzzily pated that outcome is unknown. In defined moral issues—such as human Memoirs, David makes no secret of his rights and the proliferation of nuclear motives, arguing that the Shah "deserved technologies". David insisted that more honorable treatment from the most while it was "only proper" for the US to powerful nation on earth". press the cause of human rights, "it Not surprisingly, David's name has should be prudent since our interference come up in connection with the so-called may be capable of toppling regimes "October Surprise" conspiracy, in which whose substitutes are unknown".* it is alleged that elements in the Reagan To be sure, Carter's actual record in promoting human rights was campaign—notably future CIA Director William Casey—conspired barely groundbreaking; in fact, it was marked by some major omis- to disrupt the Carter Administration's attempts to negotiate the pre- sions, especially in the case of Cambodia—where his administra- election release of the hostages, in the knowledge that an "October tion opted to support indirectly the genocidal Khmer Rouge. * Surprise" would be a sure vote-winner for Carter. Nevertheless, that David Rockefeller could publicly urge the Carter There is little evidence of David Rockefeller's direct involve- Administration to overlook human rights abuses by US allies and ment, but one of his aides at Chase Manhattan is alleged to have then be awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by Bill Clinton spoken of such disruption plans in a meeting with Casey, and a in 1998 for "fighting for human rights" is yet another of the many "Rockefeller-connected lawyer" is said to have been involved in cruel hypocrisies of our times. (Kissinger received the same award — some dubious money transactions that facilitated the disruption from Gerald Ford in 1977.) exercise.” Clinton's description of David as "a genuine humanitarian of the The Reagan Administration soon resolved many of the problems likes our nation has rarely seen" also demonstrates the truth of David had identified under Carter, even though many of its key Noam Chomsky's contention that a "culture of terrorism" pervades members were suspicious of the Trilateral Commission. Reagan the US power-elite.* It is, after all, usually only the powerful that embraced Kissinger's "crucial distinction", giving strong support to can celebrate and reward such blatant double standards.” anti-Communist dictatorships, especially in Central America, while There was more to David's growing impatience with the Carter adopting a belligerent posture against the Communist states. Not surprisingly, David's name has come up in connection with the so-called "October Surprise" conspiracy, in which it is alleged that elements in the Reagan campaign—notably future CIA Director William Casey— conspired to disrupt the attempts to negotiate the release of the hostages. NEXUS + 37 DECEMBER 2003 — JANUARY 2004 www.nexusmagazine.com