Elena Ponomareva how agents of influence are trained to read. How agents of influence are recruited

The topic of USAID’s “withdrawal” from our political space opens the eyes of many to the fact that this organization was not engaged in “good deeds” on the territory of our country. Recently I had the opportunity to listen to a Vesti.FM broadcast on just this topic. Among the guests in the studio was MGIMO professor, Doctor of Political Sciences Elena Ponomareva. It’s interesting to hear such an authoritative person for the first time in my life and realize how similar her position is. As usual, the USAID leadership is all former CIA and NATO members. And, of course, most of all they want to “help” the people of Russia in achieving a “bright future.”

Recently, Elena’s publication in the magazine “Free Thought” entitled “Secrets of “color revolutions”. It describes in some detail the scheme of how “protest leaders” are recruited for the purpose of subsequent manipulation of public opinion and the implementation of well-known scenarios.

Two parts of the article can be downloaded in PDF using the links:

Below is a fragment regarding how agents of influence are recruited:

The human factor of “color revolutions”

The first stage can be called “identification”. Based on what type of information needs to be obtained (or what actions need to be provided), all persons possessing such information (capable of taking the necessary actions) are identified. Among them, the most desirable ones for recruitment are determined. And from this circle of people several (at least one) are selected as objects of the latter.

The second stage is the choice of recruitment methods. Having comprehensively studied the “objects”, they are given an extremely accurate political, moral and psychological assessment in order to determine their “pain points”, as well as methods of pressure on these points and the permissible limits of such pressure.

The third stage is “development”, that is, the recruitment process itself. The recruitment operation is a fairly long cycle that requires a high level of intellectual support. At its first stage, the main role is played by informant agents and analysts. Their task is to find those people who meet the requirements (conditions) listed above. At the same time, the greatest interest for the conspirators is from middle and senior management of security agencies and the armed forces, as well as authorized figures in government structures18. Of no less importance, and sometimes even more important, is the recruitment of workers on the “ideological front” - journalists, scientists, publicists, and now bloggers who consider themselves to be members of the intelligentsia. In Russia, in all revolutions without exception, a special role belonged to the intelligentsia. As S. N. Bulgakov wrote, the revolution is “the spiritual brainchild of the intelligentsia.” I will give just some facts of the close work of the Russian opposition under the “roof” of Western services.

On December 23, 2002, the National Passport Center in Portsmouth (USA) issued passport number 710160620 to one of the oldest “fighters against the regime” in Russia, Lyudmila Alekseeva. In addition to granting American citizenship, the facts of financing the activities of this “revolutionary” are much more important. In particular, its activities are paid for by the Ford and MacArthur Foundations, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the Open Society Institute in company with the European Union. Just last year, NED, already mentioned in the previous article, allocated two grants totaling $105 thousand to US citizen L. Alekseeva for her work in Russia21. In addition to cash injections from American foundations, which hundreds of non-governmental organizations created in Russia receive, so-called vanity mechanisms are used. For example, the right person can be invited to meetings of the Trilateral Commission or the Bilderberg Club (A. Chubais, L. Shevtsova, E. Yasin) or given the position of leading researcher at, say, the Royal Institute of International Affairs - better known as Chatham House (L. Shevtsova) .

This also includes A. Navalny’s inclusion in the list of the 100 most influential people in the world according to Time magazine. The same list includes US President B. Obama and his main competitor in the 2012 elections M. Romney, German Chancellor A. Merkel, spiritual leader of Iran Ayatollah A. Khamenei, IMF head C. Lagarde, investor W. Buffett.

The company, as they say, is what it takes. Moreover, the magazine does not distribute the figures in its hundred of influence by place and does not assign ratings, which further adds to the significance of being included in it. Navalny's personality deserves more attention.

The program's faculty included British Foreign Office veteran Lord Malloch-Brown and members of the Open Society Institute. World Fellows are funded by the Starr Foundation of Maurice R. (“Hank”) Greenberg, the former president of the insurance giant American International Group (AIG), which received a huge infusion from George W. Bush. and B. Obama in 2008-2009. As noted by the Executive Intelligence Review experts led by L. LaRouche, Greenberg and his firm C.V. Starr has been engaged in “regime change” (coups) for a very long time, starting with the overthrow of President Marcos in the Philippines in 1986.

Navalny himself writes that he was advised to apply for participation in the program by Masha Gaidar, and he received recommendations from leading professors at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow. By the way, Navalny began his anti-corruption campaign against Transneft from New Haven (that is, directly from Yale University). The comments about Navalny’s psychotype are also interesting. Thus, in public he gives the impression of a split personality, but online he gives the impression of openness itself. However, when his mailbox on the gmail.com portal was hacked and correspondence with the US Embassy and the National Endowment for Democracy regarding his funding was published, he admitted that the letters were genuine. He tries to disarm his interlocutors with questions like “do you think that I work for the Americans or for the Kremlin?” Most likely, he will turn out to be expendable for his sponsors, but so far the activities of Navalny and his closest “associates” look like an excellent illustration of J. Sharp’s manual.

However, let's return to the recruitment process. The Americans have developed a unique and very effective recruitment formula - MICE. Its name is derived from the first letters of the words: “Money - Ideology - Compromise - Ego” (“Money – Ideology – Compromise – Ego”).

It is obvious that within any social group it is possible to identify a sufficient number of people who are dissatisfied with the current state of things, who are actually in opposition to the authorities. From a moral and psychological perspective, they are all suitable for recruitment; the only question is which of these people the recruiters need. Finally, after the target of recruitment has been identified and thoroughly studied, the recruiter himself comes into play. Thanks to his work, CR scriptwriters can have access to secret political, economic and military information, and also create a “lighthouse”, a center of attraction for all dissatisfied people. As for the process of finding the “right” people, there are several mandatory rules in this matter.

For example, back in 1973, the US Department of Defense issued instructions on the “Program for Combating Dissidents,” which lists the characteristics that define a dissident. With its help, you can identify potential targets for recruitment among military personnel not only in the United States, but also in other countries. Here are some signs of “dissidents” among the military: - frequent complaints to sergeants, officers, journalists or congressmen about living conditions, unfair treatment, etc.; - attempts to contact someone, bypassing your immediate superiors, with stories about your problems; - participation in unauthorized meetings, creation of groups to express collective protests, participation in demonstrations, campaigning, feigning illnesses; - frequent minor acts of disobedience or insolence, for example, evading a military salute, slow execution of orders, etc.; - unauthorized access to military premises of civilians or attendance at their rallies outside the unit; — distribution of underground or prohibited printed publications; — dissident inscriptions carried out secretly on buildings, vehicles, property; — destruction or damage to state (military) property; - defiant behavior in connection with the presentation of symbols of power (for example, during the performance of the national anthem, raising the flag, speeches by top officials of the state on television or radio, etc.); - inflating minor incidents, exaggerating their scale and consequences, spreading rumors.

Similar criteria for identifying “dissidents” exist in relation to purely civilians. The year 2006 can be considered a turning point in the intensification of the United States’ work with dissatisfied people in target countries, when the new owner of the US State Department, C. Rice, announced new political tasks for her department. Since then, one of the most important responsibilities of every American diplomat has been to “involve foreign nationals and the media in promoting U.S. interests abroad.”

Thus, back in 2006, the requirement of direct intervention in the internal affairs of the host state was officially introduced into the practice of American diplomacy. Now American diplomats must “not only analyze policies and determine their outcomes, but also implement programs ... to help foreign citizens develop democracy building, fight corruption, start businesses, improve health care and reform education.”

So you shouldn’t be surprised by M. McFaul’s behavior - he follows the instructions of the US Department of State and pursues the interests of his country. At the same time, Russia, like any other sovereign state, has the right to protect its interests. And with all the means available to this state. Including suppression of the activities of the “fifth column”, dissidents and unwanted diplomats. Is a “color revolution” possible in Russia? “Color revolutions” do not happen by themselves, without the presence of appropriate prerequisites and without the required conditions, but most importantly, without serious preparation and significant efforts. Therefore, in order to answer the question “Is a “color revolution” possible in Russia?”, it is necessary to give the most clear and rigorous assessment of the socio-economic and political conditions and prerequisites, as well as the role of the dissident public and the “fifth column”. Only the most complete and comprehensive knowledge about the situation in the country, about existing problems and challenges can enable the authorities to effectively combat “colored” tsunamis.

Moreover, in this case we are talking not only about strict state control over the activities of Western funds engaged in subversive activities on Russian territory. But first of all, about serious changes in the country’s development model, since this is the only way to deprive the “revolutionaries” of support. If the prerequisites exist, then theoretically the implementation of the CR scenario is possible in any state; in the absence of these, consideration of such a course of events, even hypothetically, is pointless. The conditions transfer the possibility of the emergence of a “color revolution” and its success from a theoretical plane to a practical one.

“Color revolutions” do not happen by themselves, without the presence of appropriate prerequisites and without the required conditions, but most importantly, without serious preparation and significant efforts.

If these conditions are not enough, then the CR will remain a potential opportunity for tomorrow or the day after tomorrow, and not a factor in actual policy today. Among the internal prerequisites and conditions of the CR, the following can be distinguished: - “an authoritarian or pseudo-democratic state structure that significantly limits the opportunities for representatives of various social groups to enter the dominant social force and the ruling group”; - the presence of a wide layer of the population dissatisfied with the existing order, the so-called base group, from which participants in mass non-violent events are recruited; - dissatisfaction of the majority of the population with the level of benefits and opportunities offered by the ruling group, within the existing social, political and economic system, in comparison with those expected.

In this case, the population actively or passively supports the idea of a “color revolution”; — absence or weak control by the authorities over the supporting sources of CR - NGOs, media, Internet resources; — the presence in the ruling group of supporters of the “color revolution” and a strong unified opposition center led by authoritative leaders; — the absence of a legitimate political leader capable of uniting the healthy forces of society against the CR virus. At the moment, Russia does not have this set of conditions. As some analysts rightly note, the ability of the leaders of the “color” movement in Russia to organize large-scale, long-term and coordinated mass actions also raises great doubts. Thus, we can say with a certain degree of confidence that currently in Russia there is no core group for the CR. In addition, supporters of “color” changes do not have wide representation in the domestic government apparatus. At the same time, the country has serious socio-economic problems. And the possibility of a new “color” pressure depends on the degree and speed of their solution. More than two thousand years ago, the Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu said: “It is necessary to restore order when there is no turmoil yet.” Obviously, this statement perfectly characterizes modernity. If there is order in the state, then it is not afraid of realizing the interests of external interests. If this order does not exist, then the viruses of the revolution have fertile soil. It breaks where it is thin. Perhaps this is the most important secret of the “color revolutions”.

Recently, Elena’s publication in the magazine “Free Thought” entitled “Secrets of “color revolutions” attracted attention.” It describes in some detail the scheme of how “protest leaders” are recruited for the purpose of subsequent manipulation of public opinion and the implementation of well-known scenarios.

Two parts of the article can be downloaded in PDF using the links:
https://www.intelros.ru/pdf/svobodnay_misl/3-4-2012/04.pdf
https://www.intelros.ru/pdf/svobodnay_misl/2012_5_6/4.pdf

Below is a fragment regarding how agents of influence are recruited:

The human factor of “color revolutions”

The third stage is “development”, that is, the recruitment process itself. The recruitment operation is a fairly long cycle that requires a high level of intellectual support. At its first stage, the main role is played by informant agents and analysts. Their task is to find those people who meet the requirements (conditions) listed above. At the same time, the greatest interest for the conspirators is from middle and senior management of security agencies and the armed forces, as well as authorized figures in government structures18. Of equal, and sometimes even greater, importance is the recruitment of workers on the “ideological front” - journalists, scientists, publicists, and now bloggers who consider themselves to be members of the intelligentsia. In Russia, in all revolutions without exception, a special role belonged to the intelligentsia. As S. N. Bulgakov wrote, revolution is “the spiritual brainchild of the intelligentsia”19. I will give just some facts of the close work of the Russian opposition under the “roof” of Western services.

On December 23, 2002, the National Passport Center in Portsmouth (USA) issued passport number 710160620 to one of the oldest “fighters against the regime” in Russia, Lyudmila Alekseeva. In addition to the provision of American citizenship, the facts of financing the activities of this “revolutionary” are much more important. In particular, its activities are paid for by the Ford and MacArthur Foundations, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Open Society Institute in partnership with the European Union. Just last year, NED, already mentioned in the previous article20, allocated two grants totaling $105 thousand21 to US citizen L. Alekseeva for her work in Russia. In addition to cash injections from American foundations, which hundreds of non-governmental organizations created in Russia receive, so-called vanity mechanisms are used. For example, the right person can be invited to meetings of the Trilateral Commission or the Bilderberg Club (A. Chubais, L. Shevtsova, E. Yasin) or given the position of leading researcher at, say, the Royal Institute of International Affairs - better known as Chatham House (L. Shevtsova) .

Navalny himself writes that he was advised to apply for participation in the program by Masha Gaidar, and he received recommendations from leading professors at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow. By the way, Navalny began his anti-corruption campaign against Transneft from New Haven (that is, directly from Yale University) 23. The comments about Navalny’s psychotype are also interesting. So, in public he gives the impression of a split personality, but online he gives the impression of openness itself. However, when his mailbox on the gmail.com portal was hacked and correspondence with the US Embassy and the National Endowment for Democracy regarding his funding was published, he admitted that the letters were genuine. He tries to disarm his interlocutors with questions like “do you think that I work for the Americans or for the Kremlin?” Most likely, he will turn out to be expendable for his sponsors, but so far the activities of Navalny and his closest “associates” look like an excellent illustration of J. Sharp’s manual.

For example, back in 1973, the US Department of Defense issued instructions on the “Program for Combating Dissidents,” which lists the characteristics that define a dissident. With its help, you can identify potential targets for recruitment among military personnel not only in the United States, but also in other countries. Here are some signs of “dissidents” among the military: - frequent complaints to sergeants, officers, journalists or congressmen about living conditions, unfair treatment, etc.; - attempts to contact someone, bypassing your immediate superiors, with stories about your problems; - participation in unauthorized meetings, creation of groups to express collective protests, participation in demonstrations, campaigning, feigning illnesses; - frequent minor acts of disobedience or insolence, for example, evading a military salute, slow execution of orders, etc.; - unauthorized admission to military premises of civilians or attendance at their rallies outside the unit; - distribution of underground or prohibited printed publications; - dissident inscriptions carried out secretly on buildings, vehicles, property; - destruction or damage to state (military) property; - defiant behavior in connection with the presentation of symbols of power (for example, during the performance of the national anthem, raising the flag, speeches by top officials of the state on television or radio, etc.); - inflating minor incidents, exaggerating their scale and consequences, spreading rumors.

So you shouldn’t be surprised at M. McFaul’s behavior - he is following the instructions of the US Department of State and pursuing the interests of his country. At the same time, Russia, like any other sovereign state, has the right to protect its interests. And with all the means available to this state. Including suppression of the activities of the “fifth column”, dissidents and unwanted diplomats. Is a “color revolution” possible in Russia? “Color revolutions” do not happen by themselves, without the presence of appropriate prerequisites and without the required conditions, but most importantly, without serious preparation and significant efforts. Therefore, in order to answer the question “Is a “color revolution” possible in Russia?”, it is necessary to give the most clear and rigorous assessment of the socio-economic and political conditions and prerequisites, as well as the role of the dissident public and the “fifth column”. Only the most complete and comprehensive knowledge about the situation in the country, about existing problems and challenges can enable the authorities to effectively combat “colored” tsunamis.

Moreover, in this case we are talking not only about strict state control over the activities of Western funds engaged in subversive activities on Russian territory. But first of all - about serious changes in the country's development model, since only in this way can the “revolutionaries” be deprived of support. If the prerequisites exist, then theoretically the implementation of the CR scenario is possible in any state; in the absence of these, consideration of such a course of events, even hypothetically, is pointless. The conditions transfer the possibility of the emergence of a “color revolution” and its success from a theoretical plane to a practical one.

If these conditions are not enough, then the CR will remain a potential opportunity for tomorrow or the day after tomorrow, and not a factor in actual policy today. Among the internal prerequisites and conditions of the CR, the following can be distinguished: - “an authoritarian or pseudo-democratic state structure that significantly limits the opportunities for representatives of various social groups to enter the dominant social force and the ruling group”29; - the presence of a wide layer of the population dissatisfied with the existing order, the so-called base group, from which participants in mass non-violent events are recruited; - dissatisfaction of the majority of the population with the level of benefits and opportunities offered by the ruling group, within the existing social, political and economic system, in comparison with those expected.

In this case, the population actively or passively supports the idea of a “color revolution”; - absence or weak control by the authorities over the supporting sources of CR - NGOs, media, Internet resources; - the presence in the ruling group of supporters of the “color revolution” and a strong unified opposition center led by authoritative leaders; - lack of a legitimate political leader capable of uniting the healthy forces of society against the CR virus. At the moment, Russia does not have this set of conditions. As some analysts rightly note, the ability of the leaders of the “color” movement in Russia to organize large-scale, long-term and coordinated mass actions also raises great doubts. Thus, we can say with a certain degree of confidence that currently in Russia there is no core group for the CR. In addition, supporters of “color” changes do not have wide representation in the domestic government apparatus. At the same time, the country has serious socio-economic problems. And the possibility of a new “color” pressure depends on the degree and speed of their solution. More than two thousand years ago, the Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu said: “It is necessary to restore order when there is no turmoil yet.” Obviously, this statement perfectly characterizes modernity. If there is order in the state, then it is not afraid of realizing the interests of external interests. If this order does not exist, then the viruses of the revolution have fertile soil. It breaks where it is thin. Perhaps this is the most important secret of the “color revolutions”.

Elena Ponomareva

The success of “color revolutions” depends 80 percent on the human factor. “The more professionals there are in the ranks of the conspirators, the more of their own people in the enemy’s camp (informants, “figures of influence,” accomplices), the higher their chances of success.” This is why the role and importance of the human factor in “color revolutions” is enormous. But where do local “colored” enthusiasts and coordinators come from? Why are they ready to work against their country with foreign money? In fact, everything is very simple: the most important players of the CR are recruited. As one of the Illuminati ideologists, the German writer Baron Adolf von Knigge, who lived in the 18th century, said, “you can make anything out of a person, you just have to approach him from the weak side.” The recruitment process includes three main stages of working with the “object”. The first stage can be called “identification”. Based on what type of information needs to be obtained (or what actions need to be provided), all persons possessing such information (capable of taking the necessary actions) are identified. Among them, the most desirable ones for recruitment are determined. And from this circle of people several (at least one) are selected as objects of the latter. The second stage is the choice of recruitment methods. Having comprehensively studied the “objects”, they are given an extremely accurate political, moral and psychological assessment in order to determine their “pain points”, as well as methods of pressure on these points and the permissible limits of such pressure. The third stage is “development”, that is, the recruitment process itself. The recruitment operation is a fairly long cycle that requires a high level of intellectual support. At its first stage, the main role is played by informant agents and analysts. Their task is to find those people who meet the requirements (conditions) listed above. At the same time, the greatest interest for the conspirators is from middle and senior management of security agencies and the armed forces, as well as authorized figures in government structures. Of no less, and sometimes even greater importance is the recruitment of workers on the “ideological front” - journalists, scientists, publicists, and now bloggers who consider themselves to be members of the intelligentsia. In Russia, in all revolutions without exception, a special role belonged to the intelligentsia. As S. N. Bulgakov wrote, the revolution is “the spiritual brainchild of the intelligentsia.” I will give just some facts of the close work of the Russian opposition under the “roof” of Western services.

On December 23, 2002, the National Passport Center in Portsmouth (USA) issued passport number 710160620 to one of the oldest “fighters against the regime” in Russia, Lyudmila Alekseeva. In addition to granting American citizenship, the facts of financing the activities of this “revolutionary” are much more important. In particular, its activities are paid for by the Ford and MacArthur Foundations, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the Open Society Institute in company with the European Union. Just last year, NED, already mentioned in the previous article, allocated two grants totaling $105 thousand to US citizen L. Alekseeva for her work in Russia. In addition to cash injections from American foundations, which hundreds of non-governmental organizations created in Russia receive, so-called vanity mechanisms are used. For example, the right person can be invited to meetings of the Trilateral Commission or the Bilderberg Club (A. Chubais, L. Shevtsova, E. Yasin) or given the position of leading researcher at, say, the Royal Institute of International Affairs - better known as Chatham House (L. Shevtsova) .

In 2006, the project “Yes!” Navalny and Masha Gaidar began financing NED. After which the most famous blogger in Russia today accumulated, as some of his biographers suggest, 40 thousand dollars from online trading (in his own words), for which he bought several shares in a number of large Russian companies with a high share of state ownership. Thus, Navalny received the status of a minority shareholder* and a platform for his anti-corruption investigations. Under very strange circumstances, in 2010, Navalny was accepted to study at Yale University under the Yale World Fellows program. Out of more than a thousand applicants, only 20 people were selected - presumably the most promising ones. The program's faculty included British Foreign Office veteran Lord Malloch-Brown and members of the Open Society Institute. World Fellows are funded by the Starr Foundation of Maurice R. (“Hank”) Greenberg, the former president of the insurance giant American International Group (AIG), which received a huge infusion from George W. Bush. and B. Obama in 2008-2009. As noted by the Executive Intelligence Review experts led by L. LaRouche, Greenberg and his firm C.V. Starr has been engaged in “regime change” (coups) for a very long time, starting with the overthrow of President Marcos in the Philippines in 1986. Navalny himself writes that he was advised to apply for participation in the program by Masha Gaidar, and he received recommendations from leading professors at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow. By the way, Navalny began his anti-corruption campaign against Transneft from New Haven (that is, directly from Yale University). The comments about Navalny’s psychotype are also interesting. So, in public he gives the impression of a split personality, but online he gives the impression of openness itself. However, when his mailbox on the portal was hacked gmail.com and published correspondence with the US Embassy and the National Endowment for Democracy regarding its funding, he admitted that the letters were genuine. He tries to disarm his interlocutors with questions like “do you think that I work for the Americans or for the Kremlin?” Most likely, he will turn out to be expendable for his sponsors, but so far the activities of Navalny and his closest “associates” look like an excellent illustration of J. Sharp’s manual. However, let's return to the recruitment process. The Americans have developed a unique and very effective recruitment formula - MICE. Its name is derived from the first letters of the words: “Money - Ideology - Compromise - Ego” (“Money - Ideology - Compromise - Ego”). It is obvious that within any social group it is possible to identify a sufficient number of people who are dissatisfied with the current state of things, who are actually in opposition to the authorities. From a moral and psychological perspective, they are all suitable for recruitment; the only question is which of these people the recruiters need. Finally, after the target of recruitment has been identified and thoroughly studied, the recruiter himself comes into play. Thanks to his work, CR scriptwriters can have access to secret political, economic and military information, and also create a “lighthouse”, a center of attraction for all dissatisfied people. As for the process of finding the “right” people, there are several mandatory rules in this matter. For example, back in 1973, the US Department of Defense issued instructions on the “Program for Combating Dissidents,” which lists the characteristics that define a dissident. With its help, you can identify potential targets for recruitment among military personnel not only in the United States, but also in other countries. Here are some signs of “dissidents” among the military: - frequent complaints to sergeants, officers, journalists or congressmen about living conditions, unfair treatment, etc.; - attempts to contact someone, bypassing your immediate superiors, with stories about your problems; - participation in unauthorized meetings, creation of groups to express collective protests, participation in demonstrations, campaigning, feigning illnesses; - frequent minor acts of disobedience or insolence, for example, evading a military salute, slow execution of orders, etc.; - unauthorized admission to military premises of civilians or attendance at their rallies outside the unit; - distribution of underground or prohibited printed publications; - dissident inscriptions carried out secretly on buildings, vehicles, property; - destruction or damage to state (military) property; - defiant behavior in connection with the presentation of symbols of power (for example, during the performance of the national anthem, raising the flag, speeches by top officials of the state on television or radio, etc.) P.); - inflating minor incidents, exaggerating their scale and consequences, spreading rumors. Similar criteria for identifying “dissidents” exist in relation to purely civilians. The year 2006 can be considered a turning point in the intensification of the United States’ work with dissatisfied people in target countries, when the new owner of the US State Department, C. Rice, announced new political tasks for her department. Since then, one of the most important responsibilities of every American diplomat has been to “involve foreign nationals and the media in promoting U.S. interests abroad.” Thus, back in 2006, the requirement of direct intervention in the internal affairs of the host state was officially introduced into the practice of American diplomacy. Now American diplomats must “not only analyze policies and determine their outcomes, but also implement programs ... to help foreign citizens develop democracy building, fight corruption, start businesses, improve health care and reform education.” So you shouldn’t be surprised at M. McFaul’s behavior - he is following the instructions of the US Department of State and pursuing the interests of his country. At the same time, Russia, like any other sovereign state, has the right to protect its interests. And with all the means available to this state. Including suppression of the activities of the “fifth column”, dissidents and unwanted diplomats. Is a “color revolution” possible in Russia? “Color revolutions” do not happen by themselves, without the presence of appropriate prerequisites and without the required conditions, but most importantly, without serious preparation and significant efforts. Therefore, in order to answer the question “Is a “color revolution” possible in Russia?”, it is necessary to give the most clear and rigorous assessment of the socio-economic and political conditions and prerequisites, as well as the role of the dissident public and the “fifth column”. Only the most complete and comprehensive knowledge about the situation in the country, about existing problems and challenges can enable the authorities to effectively combat “colored” tsunamis. Moreover, in this case we are talking not only about strict state control over the activities of Western funds engaged in subversive activities on Russian territory. But first of all - about serious changes in the country's development model, since only in this way can the “revolutionaries” be deprived of support. If the prerequisites exist, then theoretically the implementation of the CR scenario is possible in any state; in the absence of these, consideration of such a course of events, even hypothetically, is pointless. The conditions transfer the possibility of the emergence of a “color revolution” and its success from a theoretical plane to a practical one. “Color revolutions” do not happen by themselves, without the presence of appropriate prerequisites and without the required conditions, but most importantly, without serious preparation and significant efforts. If these conditions are not enough, then the CR will remain a potential opportunity for tomorrow or the day after tomorrow, and not a factor in actual policy today. Among the internal prerequisites and conditions of the CR, the following can be distinguished: - “an authoritarian or pseudo-democratic state structure that significantly limits the opportunities for representatives of various social groups to enter the dominant social force and the ruling group”; - the presence of a wide layer of the population dissatisfied with the existing order, the so-called base group, from which participants in mass non-violent events are recruited; - dissatisfaction of the majority of the population with the level of benefits and opportunities offered by the ruling group, within the existing social, political and economic system, in comparison with those expected. In this case, the population actively or passively supports the idea of a “color revolution”; - absence or weak control by the authorities over the supporting sources of CR - NGOs, media, Internet resources; - the presence in the ruling group of supporters of the “color revolution” and a strong unified opposition center led by authoritative leaders; - lack of a legitimate political leader capable of uniting the healthy forces of society against the CR virus. At the moment, Russia does not have this set of conditions. As some analysts rightly note, the ability of the leaders of the “color” movement in Russia to organize large-scale, long-term and coordinated mass actions also raises great doubts. Thus, we can say with a certain degree of confidence that currently in Russia there is no core group for the CR. In addition, supporters of “color” changes do not have wide representation in the domestic government apparatus. At the same time, the country has serious socio-economic problems. And the possibility of a new “color” pressure depends on the degree and speed of their solution. More than two thousand years ago, the Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu said: “It is necessary to restore order when there is no turmoil yet.” Obviously, this statement perfectly characterizes modernity. If there is order in the state, then it is not afraid of realizing the interests of external interests. If this order does not exist, then the viruses of the revolution have fertile soil. It breaks where it is thin. Perhaps this is the most important secret of the “color revolutions”. Elena Ponomareva © * - Minority shareholder (minority shareholder) is a shareholder of a company (individual or legal entity), the size of whose shareholding does not allow him to directly participate in the management of the company...

In the latest issue of the magazine "Free Thought" I came across a brilliant article by a MGIMO professor Elena Ponomareva “The secrets of the “color revolutions”. More precisely, this is even a series of articles in which the doctor of political sciences describes in detail and scientifically all the rollers and cogs of this socio-political mechanism. first part a lot of concrete and very important things were said about “soft power”, flash mobs, social networks and other tools of “color revolutions”. A must read. But I will give an excerpt from second article , which analyzes the work of organizations recruiting agents of “color revolutions” and the mechanism for isolating and using destructive particles of society against society itself. In fact, this work is a continuation of the famous work of Sergei Kara-Murza “Manipulation of Consciousness”, but with the latest facts and examples.

In fact, everything is very simple: the most important players of the CR are recruited. As one of the Illuminati ideologists, the German writer Baron Adolf von Knigge, who lived in the 18th century, said, “you can make anything out of a person, you just have to approach him from the weak side.” The recruitment process includes three main stages of working with the “object”. The first stage can be called “identification”. Based on what type of information needs to be obtained (or what actions need to be provided), all persons possessing such information (capable of taking the necessary actions) are identified. Among them, the most desirable ones for recruitment are determined. And from this circle of people several (at least one) are selected as objects of the latter.

The third stage is “development”, that is, the recruitment process itself. The recruitment operation is a fairly long cycle that requires a high level of intellectual support. At its first stage, the main role is played by informant agents and analysts. Their task is to find those people who meet the requirements (conditions) listed above. At the same time, the greatest interest for the conspirators is from middle and senior management of security agencies and the armed forces, as well as authorized figures in government structures. Of no less, and sometimes even greater importance is the recruitment of workers from the “ideological front” - journalists, scientists, publicists, and now bloggers who consider themselves to be members of the intelligentsia. In Russia, in all revolutions without exception, a special role belonged to the intelligentsia. As S.N. wrote Bulgakov, the revolution is the “spiritual brainchild of the intelligentsia.” I will give just some facts of the close work of the Russian opposition under the “roof” of Western services.

December 23, 2002 by the National Passport Center in Portsmouth (USA) to one of the oldest “fighters against the regime” in Russia Lyudmila Alekseeva a passport was issued with the number 710160620. In addition to the provision of American citizenship, much more important are the facts of financing the activities of this “revolutionary”. In particular, her activity is paid Ford Foundations And MacArthur, National Endowment for Democracy (NED), United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Open Society Institute in company with the European Union. Just last year, NED, already mentioned in the previous article, awarded US citizen L. Alekseeva two grants for her work in Russia for a total amount of 105 thousand dollars.

In addition to cash injections from American foundations, which hundreds of non-governmental organizations created in Russia receive, so-called vanity mechanisms are used. For example, the right person can be invited to meetings of the Trilateral Commission or the Bilderberg Club (A. Chubais, L. Shevtsova, E. Yasin) or given the position of leading researcher, say, at the Royal Institute of International Affairs - better known as Chatham House (L. Shevtsova). This also includes A. Navalny’s inclusion in the list of the 100 most influential people in the world according to Time magazine. The same list includes US President B. Obama and his main competitor in the 2012 elections M. Romney, German Chancellor A. Merkel, spiritual leader of Iran Ayatollah A. Khamenei, IMF head C. Lagarde, investor W. Buffett. The company, as they say, is what it takes. Moreover, the magazine does not distribute the figures in its hundred of influence by place and does not assign ratings, which further adds to the significance of being included in it.

Personality Navalny deserves more attention. In 2006, the project “Yes!” Navalny and Masha Gaidar began financing NED. After which the most famous blogger in Russia today accumulated, as some of his biographers suggest, 40 thousand dollars from online trading (in his own words), for which he bought several shares in a number of large Russian companies with a high share of state ownership. Thus, Navalny received the status of a minority shareholder and a platform for his anti-corruption investigations.

Under very strange circumstances, in 2010, Navalny was accepted to study at Yale University under the program Yale World Fellows. Out of more than a thousand applicants, only 20 people were selected—presumably the most promising ones. The program's faculty included British Foreign Office veteran Lord Malloch-Brown and members of the Open Society Institute. Funded by World Fellows Starr Maurice R. (“Hank”) Greenberg Foundation, the former president of the insurance giant American International Group (AIG), who received huge injections from George W. Bush. and B. Obama in 2008-2009. As experts from the Executive Intelligence Review under the leadership of L. LaRouche note, Greenberg and his company "C.V. Starr" They have been engaged in “regime change” (coups) for a very long time, starting with the overthrow of President Marcos in the Philippines in 1986. Navalny himself writes that Masha Gaidar advised him to apply for participation in the program, and he received recommendations from leading professors Higher School of Economics in Moscow. By the way, Navalny began his anti-corruption campaign against Transneft from New Haven (that is, directly from Yale University).

The comments about Navalny’s psychotype are also interesting. So, in public he gives the impression of a split personality, but online he gives the impression of openness itself. However, when his mailbox on the gmail.com portal was hacked and correspondence with the US Embassy and the National Endowment for Democracy regarding his funding was published, he admitted that the letters were genuine. He tries to disarm his interlocutors with questions like “do you think that I work for the Americans or for the Kremlin?” Most likely, he will turn out to be expendable for his sponsors, but so far the activities of Navalny and his closest “associates” look like an excellent illustration of J. Sharp’s manual.

However, let's return to the recruitment process. The Americans have developed a unique and very effective recruitment formula - MICE. Its name is derived from the first letters of the words: “Money - Ideology - Compromise - Ego” (“Money – Ideology – Compromise – Ego”). It is obvious that within any social group it is possible to identify a sufficient number of people who are dissatisfied with the current state of things, who are actually in opposition to the authorities. From a moral and psychological perspective, they are all suitable for recruitment; the only question is which of these people the recruiters need.

Finally, after the target of recruitment has been identified and thoroughly studied, the recruiter himself comes into play. Thanks to his work, CR scriptwriters can have access to secret political, economic and military information, and also create a “lighthouse”, a center of attraction for all dissatisfied people. As for the process of finding the “right” people, there are several mandatory rules in this matter. For example, back in 1973, the US Department of Defense issued instructions "Anti-dissident program", which lists the characteristics that define a dissident. With its help, you can identify potential targets for recruitment among military personnel not only in the United States, but also in other countries.

Here are some signs of “dissidents” among the military:

frequent complaints to sergeants, officers, journalists or congressmen about living conditions, unfair treatment, etc.;
attempts to contact someone, bypassing your immediate superiors, with stories about your problems;
participation in unauthorized meetings, creation of groups to express collective protests, participation in demonstrations, campaigning, feigning illness;
frequent minor acts of disobedience or insolence, such as avoiding a military salute, slow execution of orders, etc.;
unauthorized admission to military premises of civilians or attendance at their rallies outside the unit;
distribution of underground or prohibited printed publications;
dissident inscriptions carried out secretly on buildings, vehicles, property;
destruction or damage to state (military) property;
defiant behavior in connection with the presentation of symbols of power (for example, during the playing of the national anthem, raising the flag, speeches by top officials of the state on television or radio, etc.);
inflating minor incidents, exaggerating their scale and consequences, spreading rumors.

Similar criteria for identifying “dissidents” exist in relation to purely civilians.

The year 2006 can be considered a turning point in the intensification of the United States’ work with dissatisfied people in target countries, when the new owner of the US State Department, C. Rice, announced new political tasks for her department. From that moment on, one of the most important responsibilities of every American diplomat was “involving foreign nationals and the media in promoting US interests abroad.” Thus, back in 2006, the requirement of direct intervention in the internal affairs of the host state was officially introduced into the practice of American diplomacy.

Now American diplomats must “not only analyze policies and determine their outcomes, but also implement programs ... to help foreign citizens develop democracy building, fight corruption, start businesses, improve health care and reform education.” So you shouldn’t be surprised by M. McFaul’s behavior - he follows the instructions of the US Department of State and pursues the interests of his country.

At the same time, Russia, like any other sovereign state, has the right to protect its interests. And with all the means available to this state. Including suppressing the activities of the “fifth column”, dissidents and unwanted diplomats.”

Today 16:25 642 6 10.29 Elena Ponomareva: How agents of influence are recruited

The recruitment process includes three main stages of working with the “object”.

Of no less, and sometimes even greater importance is the recruitment of workers on the “ideological front” - journalists, scientists, publicists, and now bloggers who consider themselves to be members of the intelligentsia. In Russia, in all revolutions without exception, a special role belonged to the intelligentsia. As S. N. Bulgakov wrote, the revolution is “the spiritual brainchild of the intelligentsia.” I will give just some facts of the close work of the Russian opposition under the “roof” of Western services.

On December 23, 2002, the National Passport Center in Portsmouth (USA) issued passport number 710160620 to one of the oldest “fighters against the regime” in Russia, Lyudmila Alekseeva. In addition to granting American citizenship, the facts of financing the activities of this “revolutionary” are much more important. In particular, its activities are paid for by the Ford and MacArthur Foundations, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the Open Society Institute in company with the European Union. Just last year, NED, already mentioned in the previous article, allocated two grants totaling $105 thousand to US citizen L. Alekseeva for her work in Russia. In addition to cash injections from American foundations, which hundreds of non-governmental organizations created in Russia receive, so-called vanity mechanisms are used.

For example, the right person can be invited to meetings of the Trilateral Commission or the Bilderberg Club (A. Chubais, L. Shevtsova, E. Yasin) or given the position of leading researcher at, say, the Royal Institute of International Affairs - better known as Chatham House (L. Shevtsova) .

By the way, Navalny began his anti-corruption campaign against Transneft from New Haven (that is, directly from Yale University). The comments about Navalny’s psychotype are also interesting. So, in public he gives the impression of a split personality, but online he gives the impression of openness itself. However, when his mailbox on the gmail.com portal was hacked and correspondence with the US Embassy and the National Endowment for Democracy regarding his funding was published, he admitted that the letters were genuine. He tries to disarm his interlocutors with questions like “do you think that I work for the Americans or for the Kremlin?” Most likely, he will turn out to be expendable for his sponsors, but so far the activities of Navalny and his closest “associates” look like an excellent illustration of J. Sharp’s manual.

For example, back in 1973, the US Department of Defense issued instructions on the “Program for Combating Dissidents,” which lists the characteristics that define a dissident. With its help, you can identify potential targets for recruitment among military personnel not only in the United States, but also in other countries. Here are some signs of “dissidents” among the military: - frequent complaints to sergeants, officers, journalists or congressmen about living conditions, unfair treatment, etc.; - attempts to contact someone, bypassing your immediate superiors, with stories about your problems; - participation in unauthorized meetings, creation of groups to express collective protests, participation in demonstrations, campaigning, feigning illnesses; - frequent minor acts of disobedience or insolence, for example, evading a military salute, slow execution of orders, etc.; - unauthorized admission to military premises of civilians or attendance at their rallies outside the unit; - distribution of underground or prohibited printed publications; - dissident inscriptions carried out secretly on buildings, vehicles, property; - destruction or damage to state (military) property; - defiant behavior in connection with the presentation of symbols of power (for example, during the performance of the national anthem, raising the flag, speeches by top officials of the state on television or radio, etc.); - inflating minor incidents, exaggerating their scale and consequences, spreading rumors.

Moreover, in this case we are talking not only about strict state control over the activities of Western funds engaged in subversive activities on Russian territory. But first of all - about serious changes in the country's development model, since only in this way can the “revolutionaries” be deprived of support. If the prerequisites exist, then theoretically the implementation of the CR scenario is possible in any state; in the absence of these, consideration of such a course of events, even hypothetically, is pointless. The conditions transfer the possibility of the emergence of a “color revolution” and its success from a theoretical plane to a practical one.

More than two thousand years ago, the Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu said: “It is necessary to restore order when there is no turmoil yet.” Obviously, this statement perfectly characterizes modernity. If there is order in the state, then it is not afraid of realizing the interests of external interests. If this order does not exist, then the viruses of the revolution have fertile soil. It breaks where it is thin. Perhaps this is the most important secret of the “color revolutions”.

* - Minority shareholder (minority shareholder) - a shareholder of a company (individual or legal entity), the size of whose shareholding does not allow him to directly participate in the management of the company...