FROM EIR DAILY ALERT
James Jatras Makes Case That U.S. Must Get Off British Leash
Oct. 14, 2018 (EIRNS)—Former diplomat and advisor to the Republican Senate Leadership James George Jatras published a hard-hitting analysis Oct. 13 demanding that a
“massive, coordinated hybrid campaign of psy-ops and political warfare conducted not by Russia, but against Russia, concocted by the U.K. and its Deep State collaborators in the United States... must stop.”
The article, titled “Britain on the Leash with the United States—But at Which End?” was the featured story in the Oct. 13 the Journal of the Strategic Culture Foundation.
Jatras says
“But for far too long, largely for reasons of historical inertia and elite corruption, we’ve allowed that [British] government to exercise undue influence on our global policies in a manner not conducive to our own national interests.”
Now, he says, the British are
“employing every foul deception that earned it the moniker Perfidious Albion, seeks to embroil us in a quarrel with the only country on the planet that can destroy us....”
Jatras points out there are countries that may be run by Washington, but that is not true of Britain. Specifics of the peculiar U.S.-U.K. relationship stem from the period of flux at the end of World War II. The U.S. emerged from the war economically and financially stronger than the British, who lacked the resources to play that leading role. The U.S. had the resources, but could not be trusted in that role without British guidance. Jatras cites the British “scribble during negotiations regarding the U.K.’s postwar loan:
“In Washington Lord Halifax
“Once whispered to Lord Keynes:
“ ‘It’s true they have the moneybags
“But we have all the brains.’ ”
With Churchill’s 1946 “Iron Curtain” speech, close ties between sister agencies such as MI6, OSS, CIA, GCHQ, and the NSA were formed, and “sister agencies—perhaps more properly termed daughters of their U.K. mothers—were set up in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand,” which became “Five Eyes,” he says. In view of the history, “what then would policymakers in the United Kingdom think about an aspirant to the American presidency who not only disparages the value of existing alliances—without which Britain is a bit player—but openly pledges to improve relations with Moscow? To what lengths would they go to stop him?
“Say ‘hello’ to Russiagate!...
“Either way, it’s clear that while evidence of Russian connection is nonexistent, that of British agencies is unmistakable, as is the U.K.’s hand in a sustained campaign of demonization and isolation to sink any possible rapprochement between the U.S. and Russia.”
Jatras names the plotters Andrew Wood, former British Ambassador to Russia; Stefan Halper, a dual U.K.-U.S. citizen; ex-MI6 Director Richard Dearlove; Robert Hannigan, former Director of GCHQ; Australian High Commissioner to London Alexander Downer; suspected British agent Joseph Mifsud.
Nor is Russiagate the totality of British meddling to torpedo relations with Moscow, he explains. A similar pattern appears in claims of chemical weapons use in Syria, by the White Helmets, which is largely funded by the U.K. government. The campaign to demonize Russia has expanded to alleged attacks against the World Anti-Doping Agency, OPCW, the Dutch investigations into the downing of Malaysia Airlines MH-17 over Ukraine, and more.
“But it’s not only aimed at Russia; it’s an attack on the United States by the government of a country that’s supposed to be one of our closest allies....
“But for far too long...” Jatras concludes,
“we’ve allowed that government to exercise undue influence on our global policies in a manner not conducive to our own national interests. Now that government, employing every foul deception that earned it the moniker Perfidious Albion, seeks to embroil us in a quarrel with the only country on the planet that can destroy us if things get out of control.
“This must stop. A thorough reappraisal of our ‘special relationship’ with the United Kingdom and exposure of its activities to the detriment of the U.S. is imperative.” [Emphasis in original.]
