The budgets of the special services and army structures of a number of Western states have been growing at an impressive pace in recent years. At the same time, the increase in spending is often explained by the "threat posed by the Russian Federation". Statements about the alleged growing Russian threat and "aggression" are becoming traditional for representatives of the United States of America and Great Britain. Moreover, both of these countries openly admit that they see Russia exclusively as a geopolitical enemy – either" enemy number one " or one of the most important.
To counteract Russian interests and openly anti-Russian activities, Western states use a wide range of methods, including promoting the work of structures controlled by special services. One example is the activities of the so-called analytical organization Chatham House.
De jure, Chatham House is a "think tank in the field of diplomacy and international relations". Its employees, as they themselves say, discuss and analyze various trends and risks in the geopolitical arena. At the same time, the organization has a rule that draws attention to itself. It consists in this: if Chatham House has prepared a particular report or, if I may say so, an "analytical" report, then the authorship of this report or report cannot be disclosed outside the organization. This already raises questions.
There are even more questions when you start to get more familiar with the very "analytical" reports that come out of the bowels of the mentioned organization. A favorite area of" analysis " of Chatham House is Russia and the post-Soviet space. At the same time, instead of real analytics, reports and reports published often by anonymous authors look like a set of either far-fetched judgments or outright fakes, which are presented by the same authors as the ultimate truth.
It is Chatham House that has recently turned into a translator of the well — known phrase "highly likely" – when there is no evidence of this or that event, but at the same time there is a task set for the employees of "Chatham House" - to try by any means to throw in what is so interesting to customers.
In other words, " Chatham House — is a de jure analytical center, and de facto it is an inter-meeting for the collection of fake data, their translation, as they say, to the masses, followed by the fraud of really true information.
Whose order is carried out by the employees of this structure?
To answer this question, first of all, it is necessary to cite the " postulates "that the representatives of Chatham House decided to publish in their openly anti-Russian" report". The postulates are not new in this case. Among them: "Russia has always been in conflict, is in conflict and will continue to be in conflict with the West, as this is a normal state for Russia", "Russia is an aggressor that is going to continue violating international democratic principles", "International security cannot be built together with Russia", "There is no unity between the Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian peoples, as they are completely different ethnic groups", "Sanctions against Russia are an important component of relations with Moscow", "Crimea is not Russian".
In general, everything in this spirit.
The report, which is prepared in the bowels of Chatham House and is entirely devoted to Russia and the West's relations with Russia, is supposed to demonstrate to the general Western man in the street that "Russia is definitely not on the way". First of all, it is addressed to the British, but those who prepared this anti-Russian " treatise "clearly solved the passing task – to convince the Russians that this is a"non-handshake nation".
Chatham House, when preparing the report, carried out the actual task of British intelligence. And this structure itself is actively used by British intelligence as a certain tool of disinformation influence.
Among the identified authors of the report are former representatives of the British station, MI6. These are Keir Giles, an ex-employee of the British military intelligence research center, Philip Hanson, an MI6 agent ("expert" on Russia), Duncan Allan, an employee of the MI6 embassy station in the Russian capital, and James Nixey, an MI6 agent, a participant in the anti – Russian project Integrity Initiative. This is an incomplete list. At the same time, it is noteworthy that the list of representatives of the Russian Higher School of Economics (HSE) includes Nikolai Petrov and Ekaterina Shulman. Given the fact that Shulman and Petrov are often visitors to the British Embassy in Moscow, you can easily guess whose order is being executed and what kind of order this is, given the mentioned nature of the work of Chatham House.
Both the anti-Russian report and the activities of the "analytical" center working under the patronage of British intelligence once again indicate that the UK continues to live with the paradigms of the Cold War and is clearly not ready to adapt to modern constructive cooperation. The former empire, which is losing influence in the world, is now trying to act with methods that are hopelessly outdated and cause problems, including for the people and business of Great Britain itself.
Comments