"When Putin spoke on the anniversary of the founding of the All-Russian Extraordinary Commission [CheKa, 1917] on December 20, he began his address to his colleagues with a reference to the way former KGB personnel had pretended to be politicians, infiltrated the leadership of the country, and seized power." - Alexander Litvinenko, Blowing Up Russia
On January 26 ABC News published Murder in a Teapot. The story alleges that the British government has cracked the Litvinenko murder case. For those with a short memory, Alexander Litvinenko was a former KGB/FSB official who publicly claimed that Ayman al-Zawahri was a longtime KGB/FSB agent. According to Litvinenko, other top leaders in al Qaeda are also Russian agents. As might be expected, Litvinenko's statements were not taken seriously. At least, they weren't taken seriously in the West. In the East, however, the Kremlin thought Litvinenko (a naturalized British citizen) deserved special attention. Very special attention, as it turns out. Last Nov. 1 Litvinenko was poisoned with Polonium-210 at a bar in London's Millennium Hotel and subsequently died. According to ABC News, it was not the first attempt on Litvinenko's life.
Here are a few details: Radioactive Polonium-210 was placed in a teapot and the resulting brew was served to Alexander Litvinenko as he met with Russian "friends." Now here is the clincher: British officials have told ABC News "that the murder was a 'state sponsored' assassination orchestrated by the Russian security services." The conclusion is based on "forensic evidence and intelligence reports...."
This is a big story, and the implications are huge. The British government, as well as the Bush administration, can no longer pretend that the Russian government is "democratic" or friendly to the West. Any such pretense is so obviously stupid that only the dimmest politicians would maintain such a pose. The problem now, of course, is a matter of severe inconvenience and even embarrassment. London and Washington may want to bury this story, if only because they don't know how to react. What policy should they adopt? Here they've caught the Russian government in a conspiracy to murder a British citizen who opposed Russia's dictator, and he was murdered on British soil. (Not to mention the radioactive contamination of innocent bystanders.)
According to British investigators the Russians were confident that the assassination would not be detected. But the assassination didn't go as planned. In the first instance there were two attempts to poison Litvinenko. In the second instance, the Kremlin never thought the Polonium-210 would be traced back to Russia and the assassins. Neither did they imagine that detectable radioactive residue would be found in passenger aircraft, taxis and hotels. Ready with denials, the Kremlin wanted people to conclude that a "business man" (i.e., a capitalist villain) killed Litvinenko because Litvinenko was a blackmailer. This is the "politically correct" Marxist-Leninist solution to every high-level murder case. Those who are ideologically inclined don't need facts, just an old formula. Whenever someone important is assassinated, you automatically assume that the capitalists did it, or the CIA. The standard villains are "big oil" or "big business" or the U.S. government. In this case, however, the radioactive breadcrumbs lead to the Kremlin, despite attempts to pin the blame on an innocent third party.
Okay, so why did the anti-capitalist Kremlin kill Litvinenko? Did they kill him because he was "important" in Western government circles? No, his allegations about al Qaeda and al-Zawahri were not taken seriously. Was he killed because he defected from the KGB/FSB? That's part of it, of course. But assassinations are rarely carried out in such cases because the defectors live quietly, in hiding, under protection - and generally, after a short period of publicity, they fall silent and aren't heard from again. In Litvinenko's case, the man had not fallen silent. He was outspoken, even if people didn't believe what he was saying. And one day they might believe. One day they might take a closer look at his allegations. This would not concern the Kremlin if Litvinenko's allegations were untrue. However, if the allegations were true then something would have to be done. After all, the truth is dangerous to those who live by lies. The truth can take hold. It can grow roots. The spoken truth, even if initially disbelieved, has an effect over time. It tends to be accepted, gradually at first, and eventually recognized by millions of people.
If the Litvinenko killing was a state-sponsored assassination, as alleged by British investigators (via ABC News), then the Kremlin must have assumed that the assassination would go undetected. The right amount of radiation is known to cause a form of cancer that quickly spreads through the body. It eliminates the victim inconspicuously, without anyone suspecting murder. An overdose of radiation, however, results in radiation poisoning - a far more dramatic way to die. The Kremlin didn't want drama. They just wanted to claim their victim, without publicity. In fact, publicity was the reason for killing Litvinenko in the first place. Since there are many KGB/FSB defectors in the world, a supposed "kook" like Litvinenko merely served to show that defectors are "unbalanced people." Why not leave him in place, except that defectors aren't always unstable. Sometimes they are sick of corruption and criminality. Sometimes they have patriotic motives and love their country more than those who officially act in their country's name. Litvinenko had important truths to tell. He knew there was something unusual about the Chechen War, about the way the Russian security services inspired terrorist incidents in Russia, about the way the KGB/FSB worked with terrorists and criminals, inflaming the Chechen conflict on the eve of Putin's ascension. Litvinenko said that, "Future historians will have to answer the question of who was responsible for the brilliant succession of precisely planned moves which brought Putin to power, and who it was that proposed Putin as a potential candidate...."
The answer would unmask the real power in Russia. And knowing this real power we would know its intentions, its larger plan for the future. Perhaps it is simple enough to say that the security services took over Russia. But who, exactly, in the security services, and how was their grand plan organized and orchestrated? What ideology do they follow? As Litvinenko says, "Putin undoubtedly deserves the title of tyrant, since he deliberately destroyed the initial shoots of self-government in Russia with his very first decrees...." But Putin didn't act alone, and Putin didn't come to the Kremlin uninvited.
There is a Russian geopolitical analyst named Alexander Dugin who explains the sentiments behind Russian and Soviet power beautifully, from an almost poetic standpoint. Dugin's father was a high-ranking military intelligence officer. His proletarian credentials were attained through work as a street-sweeper; and so it shouldn't surprise us that he wrote the political program of the reformed Russian Communist Party. He founded the National Bolshevik Front and the Eurasia Party, which is said to receive clandestine support from the Kremlin as well as the Russian General Staff. While officials in Russia dismiss the humane Litvinenko as a non-person, they recognize Dugin as praiseworthy. The reason may be found in Dugin's agreement with Heraclitus' saying that "war is the father of all things." According to Dugin, "Everywhere in the world there are opposing poles: executioners and victims, men and women, coercive authority and rebellious subjects." There is no "third way" or "third force," he tells us. "The real world is built according to the law of duality." The situation of the world today, and the situation of the world tomorrow, is predicated on conflict. Though there are many contending parties, two leading forces are at war. "As long as we are dealing with a concrete world," says Dugin, "hostility remains the common denominator of existence."
According to Dugin, Russia represents the Eurasian tradition of spiritual superiority versus merchant society; of traditional hierarchy versus individualism, of socialism and fairness over capitalism and egoism. "From a geopolitical point of view, America and the West represent the forces of the sea, the Anglo-Saxon world [of non-heroic profit and interest]." On the other side, "from a geopolitical point of view, Eurasia represents a continental alliance of land forces, a giant bloc formed around Russia [and its heroic military ethic]." The formula is simple: Fate of capital = fate of sea, West. Fate of labor = fate of Land, East. The great landmass, Eurasia, opposes the Anglo-Saxon archipelago, Oceania. As Dugin explains, "The new Eurasian empire will be constructed on the fundamental principle of the common enemy: the rejection of ... the strategic dominance of the USA, and the refusal to allow liberal [capitalist] values to dominate us. This common ... impulse will be the basis of a political and strategic union." This union will include Muslims and Communists, Europeans and Asians. The enemy is America, first and foremost. Russian and American geopolitics cannot be reconciled. These represent "two all-encompassing super-worldviews, two mutually exclusive projects of the future of mankind. Between them is only enmity, hatred, brutal struggle according to the rules and without rules ... to the last drop of blood. Between them are heaps of corpses, millions of lives, endless centuries of suffering and heroic deeds." So says Dugin.
Which side will prevail? Quite obviously, war will decide. War is "the father of all things," and so it is the father of "our" thing, says Dugin. Expressing such views, this latter-day poet-theorist is admired by the Russian General Staff and the Kremlin for good reason. He expresses their deepest sentiments in stirring language. Perhaps after reading Dugin we are better prepared to understand why elite Russian Spetsnaz troops recently used Alexander Litvinenko's picture for target practice. Yes, that's right. The same troops who train for war against America are emptying rounds into Litvinenko's face. The Kremlin denies any a motive for killing Litvinenko. They deny their war preparations. They deny any links to al Qaeda. But the troops know, and their commanders know. The enemy is the enemy, and the traitor is the traitor. The cult of murder and war that governs the East, which governs the Muslim fanatic and the Russian nationalist, recognizes its main enemy.
Litvinenko was a Russian patriot and a friend to the West. He did not believe in irreconcilable geopolitical differences. But those that do believe in such things killed him. And these same people have a plan.
