<<

. 21
( 52 .)



>>


At the British Labour Party conference in 1960, Michael Foot, the party's future
leader and a member of its left wing, was accused of being a "fellow traveler" by then-
leader Hugh Gaitskell. Foot responded with a reference to Gaitskell and others of the
parry's right wing: "But who," he asked, "are they traveling with?"1
They, it turned out, had been traveling with the CIA for some years. Fellow
passengers were Frenchmen, Germans, Dutch, Italians, and a host of other West
Europeans; all taking part in a CIA operation to win the hearts and minds of liberals,
social democrats, and assorted socialists, to keep them from the clutches of the Russian
bear.
It was an undertaking of major proportions. For some 20 years, the Agency
used dozens of American foundations, charitable trusts and the like, including a few of its
own creation, as conduits for payments to all manner of organizations in the United
States and abroad, many of which, in turn, funded other groups. So numerous were the
institutions involved, so many were the interconnections and overlaps, that it is unlikely
that anyone at the CIA had a grasp of the full picture, let alone exercised broad control
over it or proper accounting. (See Appendix I for a partial organizational chart.)


103
The ultimate beneficiaries of this flow of cash were political parties, magazines,
news agencies, journalists' unions, other unions and labor organizations, student and
youth groups, lawyers' associations, and other enterprises already committed to "The Free
World" which could be counted upon to spread the gospel further if provided with
sufficient funding.
The principal front organization set up by the CIA in this period was the grandly
named Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF). In June 1950, prominent literati and
scientists of the United States and Europe assembled in the Titiana Palace Theatre, in the
American Zone of Berlin, before a large audience to launch the organization whose
purpose was to "defend freedom and democracy against the new tyranny sweeping the
world". The CCF was soon reaching out in all directions with seminars, conferences, and
a wide program of political and cultural activities in Western Europe as well as India,
Australia, Japan, Africa and elsewhere. It had, moreover, more than 30 periodicals under
its financial wing, including, in Europe:
Socialist Commentary, Censorship, Science and Freedom, Minerva, Soviet
Survey (or Survey), China Quarterly, and Encounter in Great Britain;
Preuves, Censure Contre les Artes el la Pens©e, Mundo Nuevo, and Cuadernos in
France (the last two in Spanish, aimed at Latin America);
Perspektiv in Denmark, Argumenten in Sweden, Irodalmi Ujsag in Hungary,
Der Monat in Germany, Forum in Austria, Tempo Presente in Italy, and Vision
in Switzerland.

There were as well CCF links to The New Leader, Africa Report, East Europe
and Atlas in New York.2
Generally, the CCF periodicals were well-written political and cultural magazines
which, in the words of former CIA executive Ray Cline, "would not have been able to
survive financially without CIA funds".3
Amongst the other media-related organizations subsidized by the CIA in Europe
at this time were the West German news agency DENA (later known as DPA),4 the
international association of writers PEN, located in Paris, certain French newspapers,5
the International Federation of Journalists, and Forum World Features, a news feature
service in London whose stories were bought by some 140 newspapers around the
world, including about 30 in the United States, amongst which were the "Washington
Post and four other major dailies. The Church committee of the US Senate reported that
"major U.S. dailies" which took the service were informed that Forum World Features
was "CIA-controlled". The Guardian and The Sunday Times of Great Britain also used
the service, which earlier had been called Forum Service. By 1967, according to one of
Forum's leading writers, the news service had become perhaps "the principal CIA media
effort in the world", no small accomplishment when one considers that the CIA, in its
heyday, was devoting a reported 29 percent of its budget to media and propaganda.6
Another important recipient of CIA beneficence was Axel Springer, the West
German press baron who was secretly funneled about $7 million in the early 1950s to
help him build up his vast media empire. Springer, until he died in 1985, was the head of
the largest publishing conglomerate in Western Europe, standing as a tower of pro-
Western and anti-communist sentiment. The publisher of the influential West German
weekly Der Spiegel, Rudolph Augstein, has observed: "No single man in Germany,
before or after Hitler, with the possible exception of Bismarck or the two emperors, has
had so much power as Springer." His relationship with the CIA reportedly continued until
at least the early 1970s.7


104
The originator of the American program, the head of the CIA's International
Organizations Division, Tom Braden, later wrote that the Agency placed one operative in
the CCF and that another became an editor of the CCF's most important magazine,
Encounter.8 Presumably there was at least one CIA agent or officer in each of the funded
groups. Braden stated that "The agents could ... propose anti-Communist programs to the
official leaders of the organizations." He added, however, that it was a policy to "protect
the integrity of the organization by not requiring it to support every aspect of official
American policy."9
The Cultural Freedom journals appealed to the non-Marxist left (Forum, by
contrast, was cobservative), generally eschewing the class struggle and excessive
nationalization of industry. They subscribed to Daniel Bell's "the end of ideology" thesis,
the raison d'être of which was that since no one could call for dying for capitalism with a
straight face, the idea of dying for socialism or any other ideology had to be discredited.
At the same time, the journals advocated a reformed capitalism, a capitalism with a
human face.
To the cold warriors in Washington who were paying the bills, however, the idea
of reforming capitalism was of minimal interest. What was of consequence was the
commitment of the magazines to a strong, well-armed, and united Western Europe, allied
to the United States, which would stand as a bulwark against the Soviet bloc; support
for the Common Market and NATO; critical analysis of what was seen as the intellectual
compo-nent of international communist subversion; skepticism of the disarmament,
pacifism, and neutralism espoused by the likes of the prominent Campaign for Nuclear
Disarmament (CND) in Great Britain. Criticism of US foreign policy took place within
the framework of cold-war assumptions; for example, that a particular American
intervention as not the most effective way of combatting communism, not that there was
anything wrong with intervention per se or that the United States was supporting the
wrong side.
"Private" publications such as these could champion views which official US
government organs like the Voice of America could not, and still be credible. The same
was true of the many other private organizations on the CIA payroll at this time.
In 1960, CND and other elements of the Labour Party's left wing succeeded in winning over the party's
conference to a policy of complete, unilateral nuclear disarmament and neutrality in the cold war. In
addition, two resolutions supporting NATO were voted down. Although the Labour Party was not in
power at the time, the actions carried considerable propaganda and psychological value. Washington
viewed the turn of events with not a little anxiety, for such sentiments could easily spread to the major
parties of other NATO countries.
The right wing of the Labour Party, which had close, not to say intimate, connections to the Congress for
Cultural Freedom, Encounter, New Leader, and other CIA "assets" and fronts, undertook a campaign to
reverse the disarmament resolution. The committee set up for the purpose issued an appeal for funds, and
soon could report that many small donations had been received, together with a large sum from a source
that wished to remain anonymous. Over the next year, there was sufficient funding for a permanent office,
a full-time, paid chairman and paid staff, field workers, traveling expenses, tons of literature sent to a
large mailing list within the movement, a regular bulletin sent free, etc.
Their opponents could not come close to matching this propaganda blitz. At the 1961 conference, the
unilateralist and neutralist decisions were decisively overturned and the Labour Party returned to the
NATO fold.10
Supporters of the CIA have invariably defended the Agency's sundry activities in Western Europe on the
grounds that the Russians were the first to be so engaged there and had to be countered. Whatever truth
there may be in this assertion, the fact remains, as Tom Braden has noted, that the American effort spread
to some fields "where they [the Russians] had not even begun to operate".11 Braden doesn't specify which
fields, but it seems that political parries was one: The CIA had working/financial relationships with
leading members of the West German Social Democratic Party, two parties in Austria, the Christian



105
Democrats of Italy, and the Liberal Party, in addition to the Labour Party, in Britain,12 and probably at
least one party in every other Western European country, all of which purported to be independent of
either superpower, something the various Communist parties, whether supported by the Soviet Union or
not, could never get away with.
The media provides another case in point. Neither Braden, nor anyone else apparently, has cited examples
of publications or news agencies in Western Europe”pro-Communist or anti-NATO, etc.”which,
ostensibly independent in the cold war, were covertly funded by the Soviet Union.
More importantly, it should be borne in mind that all the different types of enterprises and institutions
supported by the CIA in Western Europe were supported by the Agency all over the Third World for
decades on a routine basis without a Russian counterpart in sight. The growing strength of the left in post-
war Europe was motivation enough for the CIA to develop its covert programs, and this was a
circumstance deriving from World War II and the economic facts of life, not from Soviet propaganda and
manipulation.

Operation Gladio
The rationale behind it was your standard cold-war paranoia: There's a good
chance the Russians will launch an unprovoked invasion of Western Europe. And if
they defeated the Western armies and forced them to flee, certain people had to remain
behind to harass the Russians with guerrilla warfare and sabotage, and act as liaisons
with those abroad. The "stay-behinds" would be provided with funds, weapons,
communication equipment and training exercises. The planning for this covert
paramilitary network, code-named "Operation Gladio" (Italian for "sword"!, began in
1949, involving initially the British, the Americans and the Belgians. It eventually
established units in every non-communist country in Europe”including Greece and
Turkey and neutral Sweden and Switzerland”with the apparent exceptions of Ireland
and Finland. The question of whether the units were more under the control of national
governments or NATO remains purposely unclear, although from an operational point of
view, it appears that the CIA and various other intelligence services were calling the
shots.
As matters turned out, in the complete absence of any Russian invasions, the
operation was used almost exclusively to inflict political damage upon domestic leftist
movements.
The Gladio story broke in Italy in the fall of 1990, stemming from a judicial
investigation into a 1972 car-bombing which discovered that the explosives had come
from one of the 139 secret weapons depots kept for Gladio's forces in Italy. Subsequently,
the head of the Italian parliamentary inquiry into the matter revealed that "When Gladio
was started, the Americans would often insist... that the organization also had to be used
to counter any insurgencies." Retired Greek Gen. Nikos Kouris told a similar story,
declaring that a Greek force was formed with CIA help in 1955 to intervene in case of
Communist threat, whether external or internal. "There were ex-military men, specially
trained soldiers and also civilians. What held them together was one ideological common
denominator: extreme rightism."
As in Germany (see Germany chapter), the Italian operation was closely tied to
terrorists. A former Gladio agent, Roberto Cavallero, went public to charge that there
was a direct link between Gladio and Italy's wave of terrorist bombings in the 1970s and
early 1980s which left at least 300 dead. He said that Gladio had trained him and many
others "to prepare groups which, in the event of an advance by left wing forces in our
country, would fill the streets, creating a situation of such tension as to require military
intervention." Cavallero was of course referring to electoral advances of the Italian
Communist Party, not an invasion by the Soviet Union.
The single worst terrorist action was the bombing at the Bologna railway station
in August 1980 which claimed 86 lives. The Observer of London later reported:


106
The Italian railway bombings were blamed on the extreme Left as part of a strategy
to convince voters that the country was in a state of tension and that they had no
alternative to voting the safe Christian Democrat ticket. All clues point to the fact that they
were masterminded from within Gladio.
One of the men sought for questioning in Italy about the Bologna bombing,
Roberto Fiore, has lived in London ever since and the British government has refused to
extradite him. He is apparently under the protective wing of MI6 (Britain's CIA) for
whom he has provided valuable intelligence.
The kidnapping and murder in 1978 of Aldo Moro, the leader of the Christian
Democrats, which was attributed to the Red Brigades, appears now to have also been the
work of Gladio agents provocateurs who infiltrated the organization. Just prior to his
abduction, Moro had announced his intention to enter into a governmental coalition
with the Communist Party.
In Belgium, in 1983, to convince the public that a security crisis existed, Gladio
operatives as well as police officers staged a series of seemingly random shootings in
supermarkets which, whether intended or not, led to several deaths. A year later, a party
of US Marines parachuted into Belgium with the intention of attacking a police station.
One Belgian citizen was killed and one of the Marines lost an eye in the operation, that
was intended to jolt the local Belgian police into a higher state of alert, and to give the
impression to the comfortable population at large that the country was on the brink of
Red revo-lution. Guns used in the operation were later planted in a Brussels house used
by a Communist splinter group.
As late as 1990, large stockpiles of weapons and explosives for Operation
Gladio could still be found in some member countries, and Italian Prime Minister Giulio
Andreotti disclosed that more than 600 people still remained on the Gladio payroll in
Italy.13



16. British Guiana 1953-1964
The CIA's international labor mafia

For a period of 11 years, two of the oldest democracies in the world, Great
Britain and the United States, went to great lengths to prevent a democratically elected
leader from occupying his office.
The man was Dr. Cheddi Jagan. The grandson of indentured immigrants from
India, Jagan had become a dentist in the United States, then returned to his native
Guiana. In 1953, at the age of 35, he and the People's Progressive Parry (PPP) were
elected by a large majority to head the government of the British colony. Jagan's victory
was due in part to the fact that Indians comprised about 46 percent of the population;
those of African origin made up about 36 percent.
The PPP's program in office was hardly revolutionary. It encouraged foreign
investment in the mining sectors while attempting to institute liberal reforms such as
strengthening the rights of unionists and tenant farmers, creating a public school system
that would lessen church control of education, and removing a ban on the import of
"undesirable" publications, films and records. But the British Conservative government
was not disposed to live with such policies advocated by a man who talked suspiciously
like a socialist. The government and the British media, as well as the American media,
subjected the Jagan administration to a campaign of red-scare accusations and plain lies


107
in the fashion of Senator McCarthy whose -ism was then ail the rage in the United
States.
Four and a half months after Jagan took office, the government of Winston
Churchill flung him out. The British sent naval and army forces, suspended the
constitution and removed the entire Guianese government. At the same time, the
barristers drew up some papers which the Queen signed, so it was alt nice and legal.1
"Her Majesty's Government," said the British Colonial Secretary during a debate
in Parliament, "are not prepared to tolerate the setting up of Communist states in the
British Commonwealth."2
The American attitude toward this slap in the face of democracy can be surmised
by the refusal of the US government to allow Jagan to pass in transit through the United
States when he tried to book a flight to London to attend the parliamentary debate.
According to Jagan, Pan Am would not even sell him a ticket. (Pan Am has a long
history of collaboration with the CIA, a practice initiated by the airline's president, Juan
Trippe, the son-in-law of Roosevelt's Secretary of State, Edward R. Stettinius.)3
By this time the CIA had already gotten its foot in the door of the British Guiana
labor movement, by means of the marriage of the Agency to the American Federation of
Labor in the United States. One of the early offsprings of this union was the Inter-
American Regional Labor Organization (ORIT from the Spanish). In the early 1950s,
ORIT was instrumental the conversion of the leading confederation of unions in
Guiana, the Trades Union Council, from a militant labor organization to a vehicle of
anti-communism. Wrote Serafino Romualdi, at one time the head of AIFLD (see below)
and a long-time CIA collaborator: "Since my first visit to British Guiana in 1951, I did
everything in my power to strengthen the democratic [i.e., anti-communist] trade union
forces opposed to him [Jagan]."4
This was to have serious repercussions for Jagan in later years.
In 1957, running on a program similar to that of four years earlier, Jagan won the
election again. Following this, the British deemed it wiser to employ more subtle
methods for his removal and the CIA was brought into the picture, one of the rare
instances in which the Agency has been officially allowed to operate in a British
bailiwick. The CIA has done so, unofficially, on numerous occasions, to the displeasure
of British authorities.
The CIA set to work to fortify those unions which already tended somewhat
toward support of Jagan's leading political opponent, Forbes Burnham of the People's
National Congress. One of the most important of these was the civil servants' union,

<<

. 21
( 52 .)



>>