Archive for January, 2020


January 18, 2020

The Federalist on October 22, 2019, reviewed an important book (“Stealth War: How China Took Over While America’s Elites Slept” by U.S. Air Force Brig. Gen. Robert Spalding (Ret.). Excerpts below:

Recent events indicate that all U.S.-China policy for nearly 50 years was incorrect: Support for China’s rise and for its integration into the post-war international order has [not liberalized China] .

Businesses Manipulated by America’s Enemy

Spalding served as the chief China strategist for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as senior U.S. Defense official and defense attaché to China in Beijing, and later in the Trump National Security Council (NSC), where he was the chief architect of the NSS’s framework for national competition.

According to Spalding, even organizations that would seem to have a vested interest in exposing China’s malign behavior remain mum.

The willingness of American organizations to remain silent about Chinese Communist tyranny can be seen against a correlative backdrop of a burgeoning cancel culture of the U.S, the censorship of Big Tech, and general decline of devotion to First Amendment principles alongside the Long March of political correctness through [its] institutions.

China poses arguably the greatest threat of any foreign actor to [American] liberties of all,..

The United States Has Begun to Respond

The Department of Justice’s efforts to thwart national security-threatening Chinese activity bore fruit as a Chinese national was sentenced for conspiring to illegally export military- and space-grade technology from the United States to China. The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a complaint against a number of Chinese individuals and associated entities alleging they engaged in a massive market manipulation scheme—affecting the prices of more than 3,900 securities—that resulted in millions of dollars in ill-gotten profits. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts filed criminal charges against two of the traders involved.

These law enforcement actions come against news that both Congress and the Trump administration may be considering actions that would affect the access of Chinese companies to capital markets, the lifeblood of the Chinese economy on which the CCP relies. The State Department revealed that it would require all Chinese foreign missions to “notify the Department of State in advance of official meetings with state officials, official meetings with local and municipal officials, official visits to educational institutions, and official visits to research institutions.” The purpose was to create a level of reciprocity, given the comparative inability of U.S. diplomats to meet with such Chinese counterparts.

Such actions represent a tiny snapshot of an accelerating whole-of-government approach to reverse the policies that have led to America’s aiding and enabling of China’s non-peaceful rise.

Is a Conscious Uncoupling the Best Course?

Today the West’s stifling of its own speech in the face of Red China, and Red China’s stifling of the speech of its own citizens, suggests that Xi and the CCP are strong. The longer civil society actors in the West remain wedded to Chinese profits and Chinese money, the stronger the CCP will grow, at America’s long-term expense.

If America desires to retain its liberties, Americans, and all Westerners, have to ask …some tough questions: Do we want to be active collaborators with a regime that ultimately seeks to dominate us? Is there any way to engage in commerce in areas of strategic import or societal influence without the CCP corroding us, while we strengthen it? Can one have a “win-win” relationship with a regime whose chief ambition is global hegemony, and that believes in engaging in unrestricted warfare to achieve it?

Or, is decoupling—among other things, restructuring the world economic architecture developed over the last 40 years, including ripping apart global supply chains—or at a minimum the credible threat to do so, the only ultimate option to cause fundamental change? President Trump suggested so in August 2019: “Our great American companies are hereby ordered to immediately start looking for an alternative to China…”

As the stakes get bigger and bigger for China, opportunities big and small are going to continue emerging for Americans to choose freedom or Communist tyranny. The United States must choose rightly.

Given its geographic and digital reach, economic and military might, the scope of its malign activities and deep-seated commitment to Communism, the case that China poses the greatest external threat to American liberties of all is strong.

Comment: No doubt the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) today poses a dangerous threat to the West similar to the one posed by the Russian communists during the Cold War. From the end of the 1940s to 1991 it was of utmost importance not to trade with the Soviet Russian tyranny and the subjugated states. The West has now reached a point when the war of the CCP must be countered. The alternative would be decoupling from at least the CCP tech economy.

The United States is in the position to be able to decouple and trade with neighboring countries in North and South America. Civilizations rise or fall depending mainly on their geographic position. America’s fortunate geopolitical situation has historically served as protection against invasion. The United States has been favorably placed in the healthful northern temperate zone. That has kept it away from the Eurasian conflict zone. It is a center for seafaring with excellent harbors, internally navigable rivers and large resources of natural and energy sources. Consolidation of control over the rich lands from the Atlantic to the Pacific has historically been important.

Support in Scandinavia for the Subjugated Nations of the Soviet Russian Empire 1943 to 1991. Part IV

January 15, 2020

Chapter 6 A Democratic Alliance of Anticommunist Insurgencies in the 1980s

In 1969 (with a Social Democratic and Communist Party majority) the Swedish parliament expressed support of revolutionary movements in Southern Africa. These movements often had a Marxist-Leninist agenda and waged an armed struggle. The Soviet Union provided weapons and the revolutionaries had political support from the Soviet and the communist regimes in China.

This Swedish standpoint was not surprising. People in the far left faction of the Social Democratic party like Olof Palme and Pierre Schori were in control of the foreign policy of the party. This was a period in modern Swedish history when Social Democrats, Communists and Maoists dominated in media and parliament was under pressure by radical public opinion.

Later the Swedish government established an advisory committee on humanitarian support for the radical movements in Southern Africa. The Swedish parliament was given very little information on this committee. Public knowledge was also limited. When the center-right came to power in 1976 the humanitarian assistance to the revolutionary groups continued.

Support in Sweden for UNITA, a freedom fighter organization that battled the Marxist regime in Luanda, was from 1984 headed by journalist and author Tommy Hansson. Named Svenska Angolagrupperna (SAG; Swedish Angola Groups) it published the bulletin Angola Rapport (Angola Report). UNITA representative in Sweden was Luis M. Antunes, who later left Sweden and is now living in Lissabon. A group of Swedish parliamentarians (around 20) supported UNITA in the Swedish parliament and was critical of Swedish official support for marxist MPLA. The most prominent of these was Member of Parliament Birger Hagard, who was honorary president of SAG. The first motion of Mr. Hagard and other on Angola in parliament was submitted in January 1985. Dr Hagard’s first contact with UNITA was in 1984, when he was introduced to Mr. Antunes. At that time Angola could more or less be regarded as under communist control. Massive support came flooding into the country from the Soviet Union and Cuban troops operated there.

With another MP, Goran Allmér, Dr. Hagard initiated a campaign in support of Angola, Svenska Angola-hjalpen (Swedish Angola Aid).

In April 1989 Dr. Hagard visited the capital of liberated Angola, Jamba. He was very impressed by especially education and discipline. From both a military and civilian view it seemed to the visiting Swedish MP an impressive core of a state administration. The UNITA leadership naturally saw Sweden as an ally of the Communist powers on this battleground of the East-West conflict.

During the1980s I closely followed the worldwide struggle of freedom fighters against Communist regimes. In 1987 Contra Publishing House in Stockholm published my book Frihetskampar (Freedom Fighters), a book on the anticommunist guerrilla movements in Ukraine, Afghanistan, Cambodia, Angola and several other countries.

During the 1980s I came to study the question of armed resistance on communist territory, which then was an important component of the Reagan Doctrine. The United States supported anticommunist insurgents in a number of countries all over the world .

In June 1985 he presented a paper at a conference at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in the United States (“Ukraine during World War II”). The subject of that paper was “Ukrainian Resistance 1942 – 1952 as a Model for Modern Combat on Communist Territory”.

After the German invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) was formed to fight both Nazi and Soviet occupiers of Ukraine. In 1943 UPA controlled large areas of Ukraine (an estimated 100 000 square miles) and a conference was held that year (“United Liberation Struggle of the Oppressed Nations”) when Ukrainians met with other peoples resisting Soviet subjugation: Bashkirs, Cossacks, Belorussians and Armenians to mention a few.

The resistance of UPA continued until around 1952, when Soviet and Polish troops managed to force the remaining UPA units to retreat to the West and seek asylum.

In 1987 used his paper from the Urbana-Champaign conference as source for the first chapter in the book in Swedish on the anticommunist freedom fighters mentioned above.

Just before the freeing on Nelson Mandela in South Africa I visited the liberated areas of Angola and the UNITA provisional capital of Jamba in southern Angola and spoke at a an anticommunist rally at a sports stadium.

Some of the countries where freedom fighters fought for liberation of their nations are still under Communist control: Vietnam and Laos. Afghanistan i still fought over but the Soviet occupation left a long time ago. Angola and Mozabique for many years after the collapse of the Soviet Union had Marxist-Leninist regimes.

Leftist forces in the West fought intensely against support politically and financially for the freedom fighters. This is the reason why some of the home countries of the freedom fighters of the 1980s are still under Communist control.

Appendix 1 Swedish-Ukrainian Relations – Yaroslav Stetsko, former Prime Minister of Ukraine, and Slava Stetsko in Stockholm 1964

At a visit in Stockholm exiled Ukrainian President Yaroslav Stetsko of Ukraine celebrated the memory of King Charles XII by placing a wreath on the tomb of the King. He expressed his gratitude to Sweden in the following way:

We, the Ukrainians, Estonians, Lithuanians, Georgians and other peoples subjugated by Russia, to day honor the memory of the heroic King of the Swedes, Charles XII. Two hundred and fifty years agao this great statesman and European foresaw the danger to Europé from Russia and strove to prevent it.

In this common struggle by the Swedish people under Charles XII and the Ukrainians led by Hetman Ivan Mazepa, our countries were abandoned by the rest of Europe.

In the memory of our nations Charles XII remains for ever the defender of our rights and freedoms, the defender of the ideal of independence for our nations.

Today, here, in the name of the Ukrainian, Estonian, Lithuanian, Latvian, Georgian and other nations of Eastern Europe, we express our recognition and gratitude to the Swedish people for the sacrifices made by them on the battlefield of Poltava in 1709 and on other battlefields in Eastern Europe for our independence.

Appendix 2 Further Reading Suggestions

“Baltiska Kommittén 1943 – 2008 – En minnesskrift – Ur Birger Nermans otryckta memoarer” (The Baltic Committee 1943 – 2008 – Memorial Publication – From the Unpublished Memoars of Professor Birger Nerman), ed. Dr S. Gunnar Edlund with a foreword by Professor, former Member of Parliament Birger Hagard, Chairman of the Baltic Committee from 1971 to 2008), Stockholm, 2008, 80 pages (with an index of names).

The Baltic Committee in Sweden with a membership of Swedes and exiles active for the subjugated peoples in East- and Central Europe but mainly for Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, has achieved almost all of its goals. The committee stood for the liberation of all nations under communist oppression and is now winding up its affairs.

The book is part of a memoir by well-known Swedish archaeologist Professor Birger Nerman (1888 – 1971) preserved in the Swedish National Archive providing a history of the Baltic Committee.

Among the statesmen, politicians and intellectuals Professor Nerman and the committee worked with were for instance German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer, Swedish Vice Premier Per Ahlmark, Danish Member of Parliament Karl Boegholm, Party Leader of Sweden’s Conservative Party Jarl Hjalmarson, Swedish author Vilhelm Moberg, Heinrich Mark Esq, Estonian President-In-Exile, Georgian Prince Niko Nakashidze, Prime Minister Jaroslav Stetsko of Ukraine, Chief Editor Herbert Tingsten of the daily newspaper Dagens Nyheter [Daily News], Stockholm, and many others.
Among the best known achievements of the Baltic Committee was its organization of protests against the visit by Soviet Premier Nikita Krushchev to Sweden in 1964 on invitation by the then Social Democratic government in Stockholm. The non-socialist parties in Sweden protested against both the invitation and the visit by the former party boss of Soviet Ukraine, a visit that was postponed several times.

Professor Nerman made a unique contribution during a long life working for the three Baltic peoples. His achievements in science, culture, politics and in the humanitarian field are great.
The proceeds from the sale of the book were donated to humanitarian work in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

“Ukraine and the Subjugated Nations: Their Struggle for National Liberation – Selected Writings and Speeches” by Former Prime Minister of Ukraine Yaroslav Stetsko (edited by John Kolasky, M.A., B.Ped., Philosophical Library, New York, 1989 (with a preface by John Wilkinson M.P. and Bertil Haggman, LL.M., author), 648 pages.

Ole Bjoern Kraft, “Ve de besejrede”, Nyt Nordisk Forlag, Copenhagen, 1962, 207 pages.


January 15, 2020

AirForceMag on January 14, 2020, reported on the swearing in ceremony of General Jay Raymond as Chief of Space operations. Excerpts below:

The White House ceremony was led by Vice President Mike Pence.

Raymond has been working as the Space Force’s first Chief since it was created on December 20, 2019. He also leads US Space Command, the combatant command that uses Space Force assets in daily operations, and managed USAF space resources as Air Force Space Command boss since October 2016.

The command is now in the process of transforming into the Space Force, the sixth branch of the military…

“The President and Congress have given us a great opportunity to build the force we need to respond to the challenges that we face in the space domain,” Raymond said. “Not only is this historical, but it is critical … to our national security and that of our allies.”

He’s the first military officer solely tasked with treating space as an area that needs protection itself and that is crucial to enabling combat operations elsewhere.

The Space Force will include about 16,000 Active Duty military personnel and civilian staffers from AFSPC at first…Those people are immediately assigned to the service, but formally transferring employees between services will require them to volunteer for and re-enlist in new jobs in the coming months.

“The Space Force’s measures of success will be that our adversaries are deterred and that our joint and coalition partners always have the space capabilities that our modern way of war and our modern way of life depend on,” Raymond said. “It’s now time to get to work.”


January 14, 2020

SiriusXM Radio on January 13, 2020, interviewed Dr. Walid Phares, Fox News National Security & Foreign Policy Expert. Advisor. Professor. Author. For excerpts see below:

“Now we have a huge change in foreign policy. And I would say that the second leg of that foreign policy, which is to engage civil society in Iran, and have them being the real force of societal change, has begun.”

Phares said that Trump had begun doing something that no president since Ronald Reagan had done, “speaking to the Iranian people themselves.”

Trump tweeted in support of the Iranian demonstrators — even tweeting in Farsi several times. His first tweet in Farsi was reportedly the most-liked Farsi tweet in the history of Twitter, with over 350,000 likes as of morning of January 13, 2019.

Phares warned that “once we engage in that path, we cannot just … cut a deal, and leave. We are now committed … all the way to the finish. But the central effort is not ours.”

“What I see right now gives me hope” for the future of the Middle East, he said.

Comment: Dr. Phares believes there is a development toward freedom in the Middle East in general. The influence of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt has decreased. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States support the Iran policy of President Trump. Stronger sanctions against Iran has an impact on Tehran’s ability to create instability in the region. Opposition demonstrations inside Iran are increasing. If high ranking military personnel start defecting it could mean the beginning of the end for the regime. European governments need to stop supporting the failed Obama treaty with Iran. There are serious questions about the 1,5 billion US dollars delivered by the Obama administration to the Iran regime. Why was it delivered in cash? Who were on the receiving end when the cash arrived in Tehran? How much of the cash was delivered to the terrorist Revolutionary Guard? Has the cash been used to fund terrorist attacks against American forces in the Middle East?

Support in Scandinavia for the Subjugated Nations of the Soviet Russian Empire 1943 to 1991. Part III

January 14, 2020

Chapter 4

Struggle for National Liberation of the Subjugated Nations: Selected Writings and Speeches of Yaroslav Stetsko

In 1989 an edition of selected writings and speeches by Prime Minister Yaroslav Stetsko was published in the United States (Ukraine and the Subjugated Nations: Their Struggle for National Liberation – Selected Writings and Speeches by Former Prime Minister of Ukraine Yarloslav Stetsko, Philosophical Library. 648 pages).

As was noted by the editor John Kolasky the material of the collection covered a period of over 30 years. Stetsko’s writings revealed his deep convictions, personal modesty and Christian faith. Kolasky (1915 – 1997) had himself left communism when he was 50 years old. Born in Canada he was a notable communist activist. In 1963 he had attended the Higher Party School of the Central Committee of the Communist party of Ukraine. He was arrested and expelled in 1965. He later published Two Years in Soviet Ukraine (1970) in which he described his defection from communism. The Soviets after Kolasky had turned anticommunist engaged in systematic character assassination of him. The Canadian born ex-communist stood firm in his view that Soviet Ukraine before 1991 underwent a process of Russification and suppression of language and culture.

The foreword was written by John Wilkinson M.P., Chairman of the European Freedom Council. He was a staunch anticommunist born 1940. In the British parliament he was one of the best-informed Conservative MPs on aviation and defence. He represented Ruislip-Northwood for 26 years. Wilkinson served on the Defence Select Committee in 1987 and chaired the Conservative party space committee. He stood down at the 2005 election and passed away in 2014. Wilkinson noted in his foreword that Yaroslav had suffered greatly for his beliefs. It was first during the Stalinist purges and then he was incarcerated at Sachsenhausen concentration camp during World War 2 when he refused to work with the Nazi regime. Yaroslav Stetsko rejected all totalitarianisms and strongly advocated national self-determination:

He was a true patriot, outstanding politician, and a great friend and colleague.

Mrs. Slava Stetsko had kindly invited me to write a preface of the book. I quoted President Ronald Reagan’s words about the former Ukrainian Prime Minister:

His life burnt brightly with the love of liberty in an age darkened by totalitarian tyranny.

Yaroslav Stetsko was a true believer in the values of Western civilization and its cultural heritage of Hellenic, Roman and Christian ideas. His opposition to the West’s policy of containment was well founded. It was the policy of surrender and in the preface I quoted Conservative foreign policy thinker James Burnham:

If the Communists succeed in consolidating what they have already conquered, then their complete world victory is certain.

In the summer of 1964 Mr. And Mrs Stetsko were in Sweden during the visit of the Soviet leader Nikita Kruschev. Always mindful of history they placed a wreath at the grave of King Charles XII to remind the world of the Swedish-Ukrainian alliance in 1708 against Russia. Media reported the Krushchev was very angry over this. In The Ukrainian Review, No, 1, 1960, pp. 3-19 Mr. Stetsko had accused Krushchev of mass murder of the Ukrainian people:

We Ukrainians accuse Krushchev of mass murders of the Ukrainian people, whom – in his capacity as First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine from January 1938 until December 1947, as Prime Minister of Soviet Ukraine in 1947, and again as First Party Secretary from January 1948 to December 1949 – he exterminated, in a most ruthless way.

We accuse him not only of the mass murders in Lviv in June 1941 and of having been responsible for other mass murders at that time in numerous towns and villages all over Ukraine, but also of the mass murders in Vinnytsa in 1938-40, where over 10,000 Ukrainians were massacred at his orders.

We accuse him of mass murders in Budapest, in Poznan and in East Germany; we accuse him of ruthlessly crushing the riots of Ukrainian internees in the concentration camps during the years 1953 – 1956 (Vorkuta, Norylsk, Magadan, Mordovia, Tayashet, and Kingir) and in 1959 in Temir-Tau. At his orders 500 Ukrainian women internees in Kingir were crushed by Russian tanks when, singing Ukrainian patriotic songs, they tried to hold up the tanks in order to prevent a massacre in the concentration camp.

We accuse him of mass deportation of young Ukrainians to Kazakhstan and Siberia. We accuse him of the treacherous Russification of Ukraine and of the perfidious persecution of Ukrainian freedom fighters.

We accuse him of the murder of the leader of the Ukrainian liberation movement, Stepan Bandera.

We accuse him of ruthlessly exterminating and fighting the Ukrainian Insurgent Army and after the war when he held the office of Moscow’s governor in Ukraine.

On the murder of Stepan Bandera in Munich in 1959 it is important to remember that the assassin, Bogdan Stashynsky, had defected to the West and on October 19, 1962, was sentenced to 8 years of imprisonment by the Federal High Court in West Germany. The court concluded that it was just and fitting to condemn him only as an assistant. The court in the sentence stated (translated from German):

The political leadership of the Soviet Union, the leadership of a world power…a member of the United Nations which entertains…diplomatic relations with the Federal Republic of Germany, considers it expedient to have a murder by poison, decided at least on a government level, committed on the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany as a state order. On the certain assumption that this deed would not come to light, this same leadership acts in defiance of all international rules of decency, of the German penal laws and of its own laws in order to liquidate a political opponent. But every political murder, like a political lie, is in the end directed against its instigator…The court is now obliged to ascertain with regret that the political leadership of the Soviet Union also officially orders and has murders carried out on German territory.

On the strength of the evidence in this trial the guilt of those from whom he (Stashynsky) received his orders is far greater. Without their system of individual political terrorism these two murders (note: Stashynsky had also murdered the Ukrainian exiled politician Lev Rebet) would not have happened. Without any scruples the Soviet Russian persons from whom he received the orders considered it appropriate to issue orders that two political murders were to be committed in the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany, and had these murders carried out, and in doing so, flagrantly violated all international principles of civilization and the obligations of international law which arise out of correct diplomatic relations between two states. The accused cannot therefore be burdened with the guilt of the high-ranking instigators of these crimes.

Yaroslav Stetsko selected writings and speeches contains much valuable advise on how the West should conduct the war of ideas during the Cold War.

In an article in July-August 1958 Mr. Stetsko called for coordinated Western Freedom Campaign against the subversive Soviet campaign against both free and enslaved nations behind the Iron Curtain.

Among his proposals were:

Launching of a resistance fight against communist infiltration and subversive activities of “the fifth columns” – the communist parties in the Free World.

Exposing the internal contradiction in the Bolshevik system.

Fighting for the exclusion of the USSR and its satellite governments from the UN.

Proclaiming in a freedom manifesto, the Magna Carta of the Independence of Nations, in which the destruction of communism as a social and political system was to be declared but also the disintegration of the Russian colonial system in order to restore independence to the nations subjugated by the USSR.

Setting up of radio stations for national liberation movements especially in the border areas of the Soviet Union, its satellites, and Red China.

In The Ukrainian Review, No. III, 1959, he called for the creation along the borders of the USSR of centers for the spread of radio propaganda and literature.

In the article “Steps to Victory” (The Ukrainian Review, No. IV, 1963) Stetsko recommended the creation of two centers and an institute for an ideological and political campaign of the Free World:

A Center of Ideological and Political Coordination of Actions.

A Center of Political-Military Action to develop a new strategy of struggle in the sense of insurgent-revolutionary concepts like those presented by Ukrainian General Taras Chuprynka (note: Roman Shukevych, 1907 – 1950, of the UPA).

A Research Institute of the Ideological, Political, Economic, Cultural and Religious Struggle behind the Iron Curtain in opposition to the Soviet Institute for the Study of History and Culture.


January 13, 2020

Fox News on January 13, 2020, reported on growing demonstrations in Iran against the dictator. See below for excerpts:

Videos emerged online January 13, 2020 that purportedly show Iranian police and security forces firing live ammunition to disperse demonstrators protesting against the Islamic Republic after the country mistakenly downed a Ukrainian airline plane shortly after takeoff from Tehran.

Trump late on January 12, 2020, tweeted in Farsi that a combination of protests and sanctions have “choked off” Iran and said Tehran will be forced to the negotiation table.

Trump insisted that he “couldn’t care less” if the regime negotiates, but he appeared to lay down non-negotiable issues that included the development of nuclear weapons and the use of deadly force against protesters.

“Don’t kill your protesters,” he tweeted.

Videos were sent to the New York-based Center for Human Rights in Iran and later verified by The Associated Press. They show a crowd of demonstrators fleeing as a tear gas canister landed among them. People cough and sputter while trying to escape the fumes, with one woman calling out in Farsi: “They fired tear gas at people! Azadi Square. Death to the dictator!”

Another video shows a woman being carried away in the aftermath as a blood trail can be seen on the ground. Those around her cry out that she has been shot by live ammunition in the leg.

“Oh my God, she’s bleeding nonstop!” one person shouts. Another shouts: “Bandage it!”

Photos and video after the incident show pools of blood on the sidewalk.

Pekings illegala narkotikahandel

January 13, 2020

År 1973 publicerade Stiftelsen för konfliktanalys boken ”Den illegala narkotikahandeln – ett hot mot Västerlandet”. Professor James Turnbull, författaren, skildrade hur den kommunistiska regimen i Peking sålde tusentals ton opium och kokain i Väst. Det var enligt Turnbull ett slags kemisk krigföring, i vilken offren frivilligt utsatte sig för kemiskt angrepp. De omedelbara effekterna var ett ökande beroende, som så småningom gjorde att narkomanen hamnade på sjukhus om han eller hon i inte avlidit tidigare.

I det engelska originalet konstaterades att det fanns lättlurade politiker i Väst, som försökte inbilla västerlänningarna att Maos Kina borde välkomnas som en ansvarsfull medlem i det internationella samfundet av nationer.

På samma sätt har vänsterliberala politiker i Väst sökt övertyga om att man kan lita på den kommunistiska makteliten i dagens Kina och tillåta obegränsad handel med en stat vars elit ägnar sig åt stöld och subversion i Väst.

I förordet skrev stiftelsens verkställande direktör Bertil Häggman att Turnbulls information inte enbart riktade uppmärksamheten på narkotikahotet från Kommunistkina utan också lämnade information om den internationella narkotikaproduktionen och handeln med narkotika. Till Turnbulls skrift fogades också en längre artikel av Peter Huang, en forskare vid Institute of International Relations, Taipei, Taiwan, Republiken Kina. Den publicerades ursprungligen i institutets tidskrift Issues & Studies, mars 1971.

Support in Scandinavia for the Subjugated Nations of the Soviet Russian Empire 1943 to 1991. Part II

January 13, 2020

Chapter 2

The Leading Personalities (EFC and the Baltic Committee)

Birger Nerman (1888 – 1971), Sweden, was a professor of archaeology and an author and a prominent chairman in the Baltic Committee which he headed until 1970.

His main writings were in the field of history and archaeology. In 1923 Dr. Nerman was appointed professor of archaeology at the University of Dorpat in Estonia. His interest during the years in Estonia was directed at exploring the presence of Swedish Vikings on the coast of Estonia. His activities were extended to Latvia in 1929 – 1930 as well as Lithuania. In 1838 he was appointed director of Sweden’s State Historical museum (Statens historiska museum). From 1967 to 1970 he chaired the Swedish section of the World Anti-Communist League. Professor Nerman’s biography has been available in the Swedish Biographical Encyclopedia from 1988.

Ole Bjoern Kraft (1893 – 1980), Denmark, was a MP of the Danish Conservative People’s Party and Minister of Foreign Affairs.

The Conservative People’s Party has been part of the Danish government many times. Kraft was MP of the Folketinget (Parliament) in Copenhagen 1926 – 1964 and minister of defensoe in the s.c. liberation government in 1945 (the first government efter Nazi occupation. Later he was Minister of Foreign Affairs 1950 – 1953.

Dr. Birger Hagård, (1932 – 2013), Sweden, was a politician and former Conservative member of the Riksdag (Swedish Parliament) from 1982 to 1998 from Oestergoetland Province. He chaired the Baltic Committee from 1971 to 2008, when preparations were made to close down the Committee.

From 1963 to 1965 he chaired the Swedish Young Conservatives (HUF) and was editor of its magazine Svensk Linje from 1957 to 1958 He held important positions in Moderata Samlingspartiet, a leading center-right political party.

Chapter 3

Lecturing in Canada in 1985

In 1985 I was invited by the ABN Canadian Chapter representing the European Freedom Council for a lecture tour that was to last from May 18 to June 9 that would also include the United States. There would also be appearances on TV programs and on radio. On May 21 it was time for the first TV talk show (The Cherington Show). Subjects discussed were international terrorism, war crimes tribunals, Raoul Wallenberg and more. Later in the afternoon I visited the Ukrainian Echo journal and was then later off for a 10-12 minute MTV Channel 47 (Toronto) interview for Canadian Ukrainian viewers. According to information I received there were at the time around 600 000 Ukrainian Canadians.

In the evening that day I gave my main lecture during the tour at the Canadian Staff School. It lasted around 45 minutes with a 30 minutes question period. The subject was advancing democracy in the protracted conflict – defensive and offensive measures. I underlined that the views presented would be that of a private citizen. Soviet and Warsaw Pact provocations in the Baltic Sea area had increased during the 1980s and one of the most dramatic incidents was that of the stranding of a nuclear armed Soviet submarine outside Karlskrona in October 1981.

After these introductory remarks came the main points presenting a short overview of the status of the Cold War and a few thoughts on possible defensive and offensive measure to stop the communist expansion.

Beginning in the 1960s I had been influenced by the geostrategic thinking of Professor Robert Strausz-Hupé, an Austrian banker who in 1923 emigrated to the United States. He became a leading political scientist in his new country and also served in a number of official positions. For a while he was American ambassador in Stockholm.

The main points of his Cold War analysis could in short be described as a warning to the West. A strategy of dynamic containment could stop communist regimes from expanding their inefficient system in the world. The superiority of the West would deter communist rulers from going to all out war. Instead they would fall back on revolutionary warfare, what Professor Strausz-Hupé termed ”the protracted conflict” The West had superior material and spiritual resources. With an alertness to the nature of the global communist strategy it could cope with the revolutionary warfare of the protracted conflict.

In his book “The Protracted Conflict” (published with three colleagues in 1959) Strausz-Hupé had made three principal propositions:

The world was suffering a ”systematic revolution” marked by challenges to the fiundamental relationships within and among nations.

The outcome of the revolution – the distribution of power in the new system – would be determined by the struggle between the West led by the United States and the communist world led by the Soviet Union.

The West had superior forces but no clear strategy to use it. The Soviets and their satellites were inferior in strength but had a definite method for waging the conflict – the strategy of protracted conflict. This strategy had operational principles among which were the indirect approach, the use of deception and distraction and a monopoly of the initiative.

Until the 1980s communism defined the rules of the conflict and the area of the protracted conflict. The Soviet Union and the satellites were a peace zone and the war zone was the area that was not yet dominate by a revolutionary power. After 1945 all non-communist territory in the world was the war zone. After 1980 there was a rise of anticommunist resistance movements on communist territory – in the war zone. Earlier the free world countries abstained from launching counterattacks into the peace zone.

During the Cold War the Soviets sought to erode the will of the free world to continue the contest using proxies, that is satellite countries, national communist parties, guerrilla movements and terrorist organizations as well as front organizations.

Deception was an important instrument of the Soviet science of war. Distraction was another method recommended by Soviet leader V I Lenin. In 1921 he had recommended to the Communist International to extend the fighting area. In his words:

The greater the area of the struggle, the greater the prospect of victory. The greater the fighting area, the more must the enemy divide and scatter his forces.

In the protracted conflict the Soviets were using alternate adoption of apparently contrary and ambigious policies to confuse the free world.

By monopolizing the initiative the Soviets influened the free world to take defensive positions.

Thus the ultimate purpose of the strategy of the protracted conflict during the Cold War was to enable the revolutionary side to wear down the enemy while building up its own strength. A demoralizing propaganda was directed at the open society while the Iron Curtain insulated the own societies from the potentially revolutionary impact of the free world.

For over 70 years after the Bolshevik coup d’etat no global democratic counter-strategy was formed. Only one document during the Cold War approached the definition of global strategy: ”United States Objectives and Programs for National Security” known in short NSC 68 from 1950.

In my lecture I pointed out that an important aspect of defensive activity of the free world in the economic field was not to extend credits and loans to communist regimes. Also it was important to stop transfer of high technology to communist countries. Sales of this kind of technology would also have to be better controlled.

Since the start of the Cold War Moscow had built a formidable international propaganda machine. In 1985 I argued that there was a need for political and psychological offensive based on Western democratic values. This offensive would have to strengthen the message of democracy, free enterprise and human rights.

In reality there had since 1917 been a worldwide global civil war. Guerrilla warfare was used by the communists to carry out what was termed ”national wars of liberation”. It was a technique to spread communist influence around the globe. In Toronto I brought up the importance of the ongoing anticommunist insurgencies in Asia, Latin America and Africa. (I will deal more in detail with this subject in Volume 3 of my political memoirs). They were important in the ongoing struggle to stop communist expansion which was then collapsing to myths of the Cold War:

First, that a population of a Soviet occupied country could not or would not support a liberations struggle against the communist rulers and secondly that there was some sort of historical irreversability of communist revolutions based on the belief that once established communism could never be removed.

It was of great importance, I concluded, that the insurgents on communist territory should be provided with a continous supply of weapons and ammunition. Containment had never functioned. It was defensive in nature and expressed the hope in the West that the fundamental character of the Soviet regime would change for the better. During the era of containment a number of countries came under communist control. A Western offensive termed ”assertive deterrence” could change the balance in favor of freedom and democracy. It had to include comatting the Soviet Union and its client states in the field of low-leve conflict.

A political offensive against the Soviet Union and its client regimes could include exposing regularly and more in detail the existing priveleges of the communist ruling elite. Radio could be used in a free world offensive using ”consumer information” for the hapless shopper in the Soviet empire with catalogs of testing of products to expose their defects. Dissenters in the subjugated nations could be provided with small, lightweight printers for the publication of anticommunist material. This was before the time of Internet and the world wide web.

I quoted President Ronald Reagan’s address to the British parliament in June 1982 which had brought up the subversive activities of the Marxist-Leninists since the coup d’etat during the first world war in St. Petersburg:

Since 1917 the Soviet Union had given covert political training and assistance to Marxist-Leninist in many countries. Of course it also promoted the use of violence and subversion by these forces…It is time that we committed ourselves as a nation – in both the public and private sectors – to assisting democratic development…What I was describing in Toronto was a plan and a hope for the long term – the march of freedom and democracy which would leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash-heap of history as it had left other tyrannies which stifle freedom an muzzle the selfexpression of peoples.

In January 1983 President Reagan had issued ”Presidential Decision number 77” calling for building upt the U.S. government capability to promote democracy. He called for fostering in the subjugated countries ”the infrastructure of democracy, the system of a free press, unions, political parties, universities, which allows a people to choose their own way to develop their own culture…” I expressed my support for establishing an International Information Committee to devise comprehensive and truthful programs and that serious academic conferences on the process of democratization of Eastern Europe were needed. In December 1983 President Reagan had unveiled the creation of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to ”promote principles of democracy”.

ABN, EFC and other organizations could in the 1980s played an important role both in influencing Western institutions to support the liberation of the subjugated peoples and to convey the message to Eastern Europe and the puppet republics of the Soviet Union.

After Toronto I visited Ottawa and was interviewed on the TV program Ukrainian Kaleidoscope. In the evening it was time for a short speech at the Ukrainian Cultural Center.

My tour then continued to Montreal where I was in interviewd by Radio Canada International. One of the subjects during the interview was a newly released film on Holodomor (the Ukrainan starvation genocide of 1932-1933, when over 10 million Ukrainian perished). My lecture that evening was at the Concordia University and it was followed by a lively question period.

Next stop was Winnipeg in Manitoba with a TV interview and an interview by a journalist from the local daily newspaper Winnipeg Sun. My lecture at the Ukrainian Institute that evening went well and questions were asked about leftist media accusations against Ukrainians in exile that they had participated in war crimes during second world war. After the Cold War various left leaning on line publications have invited an assistant history professor, Per Arne Rudling, at Lund University, to spread disinformation on the Ukrainian Resistance Army (UPA) and Ukrainian resistance leaders during World War 2. During the Cold War Soviet KGB doctored much archival material from the war to smear the Ukrainian opposition against the Soviet regime.

Continuing to Edmonton in western Canada I participated in the radio program Talk Back (CJCA) with Ron Collister, a well known radio personality. After an interview for the local daily Edmonton Sun. A lunch was followed by a press conference and in the evening a lecture was planned at the Polish Hall.

Returning from the West it was time for a short visit to the United States and a lecture at the ABN office in Warren, Michigan. The next day I lectured at a seminar in Windsor, Canada, which is close to the American-Canadian border.

On my way to a University of Illionois conference to speak on Ukrainian resistance to nazism and communis during World War 2 I made a stopover in Chicago. Before returning to Sweden there was a lunch in Washington DC with Mr and Mrs Stetsko.

”Röd terror i Vietnam”, en bok publicerad av Stiftelsen för Konfliktanalys år 1971

January 12, 2020

I bokens förord skrev stiftelsens direktör, författaren Bertil Häggman bland annat att syftet med att utge generalen, dr M.W.J.M Broekmeijers bok var att det fanns ett omfattande internationellt material om Viet Congs terror i Sydvietnam. Broekmeijer var general i det nederländska flygvapnet, motståndskämpe under andra världskriget och tidigare chef för Netherlands Defence Study Centre. Han gjorde flera besök i Sydvietnam. Generalen hade tidigare publicerat boken ”South Vietnam – Victim of Misunderstanding”.

Den kommunistiska terrorn i Sydvietnam hade flera syften. Man ville krossa samhällsstrukturen. Det var inte bara politiker, lärare, läkare, sjuksköterskor som var mål för den kommunistiska gerillans och Nordvietnams terror. Även fackföreningarna var hårt drabbade.

Stiftelsen vill fästa uppmärksamheten på de grymheter, som kommunisterna dagligen begår. Boken innehåller en rad foton som tydliggör den kommunistiska terrorn och brutaliteten.

I boken gjordes reklam för rapporten ”North Vietnam’s Blitzkrieg” publicerad av The Institute for the Study of Conflict, London, och Vietnamesiska Utrikesföreningen, Informations- och handelscenter i Sverige och presenterade också stiftelsens arbete. Sydvietnams informations- och handelscentrum stängdes 1975 sedan den amerikanska kongressen, som hade en majoritet av demokrater, hade vägrat fortsatt stöd till Republiken Vietnam.

Support in Scandinavia for the Subjugated Nations of the Soviet Empire 1943 to 1991. Part I.

January 12, 2020

Support in Scandinavia for the Subjugated Nations of the Soviet Empire 1943 to 1991

Bertil Haggman

Vol 2


Publishing House Bertil Haggman (PHBH)

ISBN 978-91-979219-8-5

All rights reserved; no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without permission from the publisher.




Chapter 1 The Organizations

Chapter 2 The Leading Personalities (EFC and the Baltic Committee)

Chapter 3 Lecturing in Canada 1985

Chapter 4 Struggle for National Liberation of the Subjugated Nations: Selected Writings and Speeches of Yaroslav Stetsko

Chapter 5 A Democratic Alliance of Anticommunist Insurgencies in the 1980s

Chapter 6 Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations Foreign Minister (Yaro)Slava Stetsko and the European Freedom Council 1967 – 1991


From the beginning of the 1960s I knew personally H.E. Prime Minister Yaroslav Stetsko and his wife Slava Stetsko. They were leaders in a struggle to set the subjugated peoples of the Soviet Union free. Yaroslav Stetsko survived the Second World War with Stepan Bandera. After the assassination of Bandera in Munich, Germany, in 1959 the Stetskos took over the heavy responsibility to lead the Ukrainians and other peoples toward freedom. Mr. Stetsko did not live to see the collapse of the Soviet tyranny but his wife Slava did. She was even elected to the Rada in Kyiv in the 1990s.

There were a number of Scandinavians who supported and worked with the Stetskos. Some of them are mentioned in this second volume of my political memoirs. It is an attempt to show the link of Sweden and Denmark with Ukraine and the Baltic countries in the fight for freedom and democracy since 1943.

When the archives of ABN-EFC will be available in the future it makes it possible to more in detail describe the struggle that started in 1943 in Ukraine. Unfortunately the archive of the Baltic Committee in Sweden was lost in the years after 1991. Thus it has been possible to reconstruct some of its work only by way of the unpublished memoirs of its first chairman, Professor Birger Nerman of Stockholm. The book Baltiska Kommittén 1943 – 2008 (Stockholm 2008) mentioned below is based on excerpts from the memoirs of Professor Nerman. It is available in Swedish only but deserves translation into both English and Ukrainian.

In Swedish historiography the Soviet view concerning the liberation struggle of the subjugated peoples seems still, in 2020, to play a role.

Glimakra in August, 2019

Bertil Haggman


The Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations (ABN), the European Freedom Council (EFC) and the Baltic Committee in Sweden were three important anti-communist organizations during the Cold War. A recent book on the Baltic Committee offers an opportunity of closer examination of these cornerstones of resistance to Soviet communism and imperialism for almost 50 years (for more information see under section Further Reading).

Prime Minister Yaroslav Stetsko (1912 – 1986), president of ABN, during his lifetime went through great injustices and hardships. He lived through the purges of Stalin’s Ukraine, fought against the German occupation during the Second World War and was for years imprisoned in the Sachsenhausen concentration camp. I remember him as a true patriot supported and encouraged by his wife Slava Stetsko. ”His life”, in the words of President Ronald Reagan, ”burnt brightly with the love of liberty in an age darkened by totalitarian tyranny.”

His crime in the face of Hitler and Stalin was his work to reestablish Ukrainian independence. Stetsko survived the ordeal and was a member of the Presidium of the Leadership of OUN-B and from 1968 headed the organization.

Stetsko before his death experienced the beginning of the collapse of the Soviet Union. For the first time in decades peoples all over the world understood that Marxism-Leninism was not the wave of the future, which Soviet leaders proclaimed. There could be no peace without freedom for the subjugated nations behind the Iron Curtain.

As a young student I had the honor of meeting Yarolslav Stetsko and his wife Slava in Sweden in 1964. It was during the visit of Nikita Krushchev. The Stetskos laid down a wreath on the grave of King Charles XII in Stockholm to commemorate the alliance of Ukraine and Sweden in the Great Northern War 1700 – 1721. This drove Krushchev into a rage during the Swedish visit and certainly contributed to his downfall shortly thereafter.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 Ukraine regained its independence but not its freedom. That happened in 2014 when Russian influence in Ukraine was finally ended. Russia has not, however, given up. It attempts to regain control of Ukraine and even invaded and occupied Crimea. Ukraine is in 2019 involved in a struggle to keep its freedom and independence.

Today, as a free nation, Ukraine actually has a secret weapon to defend itself against Russian aggression and subversion. This could in turn deter Russia from attempts to control other states that were liberated after the fall of the Soviet Union like Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.

There is no need for armed liberation. Instead the internal vulnerabilities could be used against the authoritarian regime in Moscow. Russia is stronger than Ukraine militarily but it is showing signs of decay and growing weakness inside its borders.

Ukrainians are well versed in Russia’s political cultures and other vulnerabilities that could be put to use. The capabilities are actually there to challenge the power base of Putin’s regime. It does not mean fomenting civil wars in Russia. It is just a question of showing solidarity with the still subjugated peoples of Russia.

Ukraine could be a platform for leaders and movements across European and Asian Russia that seek autonomy and even independence from Moscow.

Many Russians and other peoples realize that federalist-style autonomy is better than being controlled by Moscow. Such autonomy would threaten Putin’s internal control. Rival political factions would flourish.

Siberia has already achieved significant autonomy. The risk of Chinese influence and economic domination in Siberia is a constant threat to Russia. Siberian independence would be a severe blow to Russian imperialism. The argument for an independent Siberian republic is that Siberia makes up 77% of Russian territory (13.1 million square kilometers) and includes 40 million people. Western Siberia has rich oil and gas reserves, but the taxes go directly to Moscow. Getting extraction companies to pay taxes in the regions where they operate would benefit Siberia.

Other movements are stirring. A Buryat Mongol independence movement around Irkutsk seek closer relations to neighboring Mongolia. In the Sakha Republic with a territory almost as large as India in the Russian Far East, the Yakut people has begun to seek more freedom.

In the Caucasus there are many autonomy or independence seekers. Some have already volunteered to help Ukraine. In Russian-occupied territory of Crimea ,the Crimean Tatar nation’s leaders call on Russia to leave their homeland and return it to Ukraine. The population of the Russian Kaliningrad enclave between Poland and Lithuania is watching the growing wealth of of the neighboring countries and may want to leave the Russian Federation.

The key could be Ukraine, its secret weapon. It could support the voices for freedom and autonomy in Russia. The idea about the Republic of Siberia was born during the 19th century. During the Civil War after the Bolshevik coup in 1917 two provisional governments were formed in 1918, one in Vladivostok and one in Omsk. It then lasted only a few years but the idea of independence is still alive.

“Sibiryaki” see themselves as a distinctive people and that they can themselves resolve many social and other problems. As an independent nation Siberia with an abundance of raw materials could supply other nations.

Since the 1991 the “Sibiryak” movement has grown but there are other movements such as Rus Zalesskaya, Ingermanlandiya, Mat-Zemly in the Gorno-Altay, and many others ( visited on January 15, 2019 and Paul A. Goble’s visited on January 20, 2019).

Chapter 1

The Organizations

The Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations (ABN) was a co-ordinating center for anti-Communist political organizations from Soviet and other communist countries. The ABN attributes its existence and its ideological foundations to an underground conference of representatives of non-Russian peoples that took place during November 21-22, 1943, near Zhytomyr on the initiative of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists. It was then a platform of joint revolutionary struggle against Russian communism was formulated. The goal of the ABN was to make the Soviet Union a real union of national states. It was organized in Munich, Germany, in 1946, and soon extended its scope of activity to include the Eastern European emigration. The following organizations were members of the ABN from its start or for periods of time: ‘Free Armenia’ Committee, Bulgarian National Front, Belorussian Central Council, Cossack National Liberation Movement, Croatian National Liberation Movement, Czech Movement for Freedom (Za Svobodu), Czech National Committee, Estonian Liberation Movement, Union of the Estonian Fighters for Freedom, Georgian National Organization, Hungarian Liberation Movement, Hungarian Mindszenty Movement, Latvian Association for the Struggle against Communism, Lithuanian Rebirth Movement, Slovak Liberation Committee, National Turkestanian Unity Committee, United Hetman Organization, and the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (Bandera faction). In the 1970s two anti-Communist organizations, For the Freedom of Vietnam and Cuba Libre, joined the ABN. It had membership organizations in the United States of America, Canada, Great Britain and ABN support groups, such as the American Friends of the ABN in the United States in others countries like Belgium, Italy and Australia. Here ABN was represented by branch offices and groups. Youth sections of the ABN were active in Great Britain and the United States. The list of membership organizations above may not be complete.

The ABN was headed by Yaroslav Stetsko from the foundation to 1986, the year of his death. He was succeeded by his widow, Slava Stetsko. The chairmen of the ABN Peoples’ Council included V. Berzins, V. Kajum-Khan, F. Ďurčanský, F. Farkas de Kisbarnak, and R. Ostrowski. The long-time general secretaries were N. Nakashidze and C. Pokorný. The ABN disbanded in 1996 following the dissolution of the USSR.

The ABN conducted information-propaganda activity through its periodical and non-periodical publications in various languages, including the bimonthly ABN Correspondence (1950–96; initially in English, German, and French, later in English only). Also associated with the ABN was the journal L’est européen (Paris).

The headquarters and cells of the ABN organized mass anti-Soviet rallies, protest demonstrations, press conferences, and international congresses, and the distribution of various memoranda. The ABN co-operated with the World Anti-Communist League (WACL) and closely with the European Freedom Council (EFC). Representatives from the ABN and related organizations participated in the congresses of the WACL and EFC.

Ukrainians formed the most active group in the ABN (specifically, the OUN (b) and organizations of the Ukrainian Liberation Front) and were also the main financers of its activities.

The European Freedom Council (EFC) was formed in Munich in 1967. It was to be an international coordinating body for organizations fighting for freedom and against communism.

1968 was not only the year of the brutal Soviet aggression against Czechs and Slovaks. Also it was the year of the visit of Alexei Kosygin to Sweden on July 11 to 13. Several Swedish organizations including the Baltic Committee organized a mass rally on Sergel Square in Stockholm attended by 3,000 participants. The rally was followed by a protest march which ended in a meeting with Swedish and international speakers. Two press conferences were held. One was for foreign correspondents in Sweden and the other for the journalists attending the Assembly of the World Council of Churches in Uppsala.

In May 1970 the EFC met for an Executive Board meeting in Munich. Among the members of the board were the President Ole Bjoern Kraft, former Danish Foreign Minister, Chairman Jaroslav Stetsko of ABN, Ivan Matteo Lombardo, former Italian Minister of Foreign Trade, and Professor Theodor Oberländer, former German Federal Minister. The Board adopted a number of resolutions. One dealt with “The Year of Lenin” exposing him as one of the most cruel tyrants and perpetrators of genocide of all times and nations. It was pointed out that UNESCO, an organ of the United Nations, at the request of the Soviets, adopted a resolution proclaiming V.I.Lenin a “great humanist”.

On November 12 – 16, 1970, a joint international conference of ABN and EFC was held in Brussels. Hundreds of greetings were sent to the conference from among others Prince Albert of Belgium, Archduke Otto von Habsburg, the Spanish Information Minister Sanchez Bella, Franz Josef Strauss, head of the Bavarian Christian Social Union and former German Federal Minister, the Canadian NATO delegation and various members of parliament of the United States, Great Britain, Italy, France, Germany, India, Vietnam, Japan, Spain and from the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Polish Government in Exile (London).

President Ole Bjoern Kraft of the EFC participated along with other members of the Council Board. President Kraft took part in a joint ABN – EFC press conference on the 13th. At next day’s EFC session Malta was admitted as member of the Council. President Kraft reported on the activity of EFC. Country reports were presented. Ole Bjoern Kraft was reelected president of EFC. Yaroslav Stetsko and Ivan Matteo Lombardo were reelected chairmen of the EFC Executive Board. On November 15 a mass rally was held at the Odergem Cultural Center in the Belgian capital attended by over 1,000 people. A reception was later given. Former Prime Minister Yaroslav Stetsko of the ABN in Brussels was to meet with the former Belgian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Paul-Henri Spaak, a long time Secretary General of NATO.

At a meeting in June 1971 in Bonn, Germany, EFC adopted two resolutions. The first protested against and condemned the sequence of crimes and violations of human rights committed by the Russian Communist regime against the Ukrainian and other subjugated peoples. The second treated the responsibility to the Third World.

At an Executive Board meeting in Bonn in March1972 the EFC defended arrested writers in Ukraine and defended Human Rights and the rights of all nations to independence. EFC in the same resolution condemned Russian terrorism, wholesale persecution, and the imprisonment of freedom fighters and appealed for the release of all political prisoners in the Soviet Russian empire.

From Copenhagen at the Executive Board Meeting of the EFC in May 1973 President Ole Bjoern Kraft signed a statement protesting the mass imprisonment and harsh sentences meted out to cultural leaders and fighters for national independence and human rights in the countries subjugated in the Soviet Union. EFC also supported the strengthening of NATO.

To mark the 30th Anniversary of its foundation (on November 21-22, 1943, in Zhytomir, Ukraine) the ABN convened an international conference in London, August 24 – 27, 1973. On August 25 the EFC held a closed session with an opening address of President Kraft. Minister Kraft was then elected Honorary President of EFC and Honorary Member of the ABN Presidium. At the end of the closed session a statement was made on the international situation and the need to strengthen Western support of the oppressed nations fighting for national and human rights. An open session followed with a speech of Minister Kraft on the international situation and the tasks of EFC. On August 26 a mass rally was held at Trafalgar Square with 4,000 participants.

20 years after its founding the EFC was headed by an Honorary Presidium of President H.R.H. Otto von Habsburg, M.E.P., Sir Neil Cameron (Great Britain), Marshal of the Royal Air Force, Mr. Yaroslav Stetsko (Ukraine) – former Prime Minister of Ukraine, Mr. Manuel Fraga Iribarne, M.P. (Spain) – President of the party Alianza Popular (AP) and Senator Dr. Cihad Fethi Tevetoglu (Turkey).

The Baltic Committee (BK) was formed in April of 1943. Originally it consisted of four Baltic and four Swedish members of which one of the Swedes was Professor Birger Nerman (see below). The first task of the Committee was to publish a book on the Baltic peoples (“Har de rätt att leva? Inför de baltiska folkens ödestimma” (Do They Have a Right to Live? On a Fatal Hour of the Baltic Peoples). It had several contributors when it was published in the fall of 1943. The introduction was authored by former Estonian President and Minister August Rei. The book was followed by a series of booklets.

After the Second World War the Committee was active in trying to prevent the extradition of Baltic officers and soldiers who had fought the Soviets during the end of the war and had escaped to Sweden to avoid the revenge of the Communists. In 1955 the Baltic Committee organized a large meeting in Stockholm. The reason was the Geneva meeting of the great powers to negotiate the relations between West and East.

In 1956 a protest meeting was again organized in Stockholm. The Swedish government had invited a Soviet delegation of parliamentarians in which Baltic Communists was a part. The party leader of the Conservative Party of Sweden, Jarl Hjalmarson, spoke at the event. In November 1956 meetings to protest the Soviet crushing of the freedom rebellion in Hungary were held. At a mass rally in Stockholm a prominent speaker was the Liberal Party leader Bertil Ohlin.

Two years later the Committee protested the meeting of the Communist World Peace Council in Stockholm. The same year started what was to be an extensive Committee work on the international scene. A Swedish section of Comité International de Défence de la Civilisation Chretienne was formed.

In 1959 Khrushchev was invited to Sweden. Preparations for protests during his visit were made but the visit was cancelled. The extensive international contacts were continued.

A special June Committee was formed to protest the visit by Chrushchev in 1964 to Sweden and a book, Friheten möter diktatorn (Freedom Meets the Dictator) was published. The June committee was revived in 1966 when a visit by Soviet Premier Aleksey Kosygin to Sweden was announced. A new book was published, Frihet vid fritt hav (Freedom At a Free Sea). In the end the visit was cancelled. Kosygin, however, came to Sweden in 1968 and was met by extensive protests organized by the Baltic Committee and the June Committee.

It was in 1964 at a conference in Lund, Sweden, that I for the first time met Mrs. Slava Stetsko. First, however, a few words on an important media event in Stockholm in June 1964.

Former Prime Minister of Ukraine, Yaroslav Stetsko, and his wife, Slava Stetsko, held a ceremonial wreath-laying ceremony at the memorial of the Swedish King Karl XII. In the eighteenth century Sweden and Ukraine were allies against Russia during the Great Northern War (1700 – 1721). The message behind this gesture was clear. Khrushchev was outraged, a fact international media used with relish.

Interestingly, another fact was left nearly untouched by media: the Stetskos had not acted as simple anti-Soviet emigrants; rather, they acted as leading members of the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations (ABN).

In May 1964 an anticommunist conference was held in the university town of Lund, Sweden organized by the anticommunist organization, Inform – Free Political Information Service.

In March 1964 delegates of the Danish anti-communist organization Demokratisk Alliance, the Swedish anti-communist student organization Inform (formed in 1963 by Bertil Haggman, Sten Pålsson and Per-Erik Jangvert, three students of law at the University of Lund) and the West German organization of the international anticommunist network Comité International d’Information et d’Action Sociale (CIAS) had met in the Danish capital Copenhagen.

Even though it was mainly arranged for Swedish anti-communists, many of its participants were Ukrainian and Estonian emigrants—members of the ABN, Baltiska Kommittén (Baltic Committee), and the Estonian exile government administration. Furthermore, West Germans, members of the German territorial associations and anti-communist organizations, like the Vereinigung der Opfer des Stalinismus and the Ostpolitischer Studentenbund, attended the conference as well. Lectures were given, declarations prepared and decisions about pan-Scandinavian campaigns against Khrushchev’s visit were passed. Some of these had been with the support of Noemi Eskul-Jensen, a founding member of the Demokratisk Alliance of Denmark. It has been claimed that she had been encouraged in that effort by Alfred Gielen of the CIAS.

After the conference, selected delegates of Swedish, exiles and foreign organizations as well as several foreign experts met at a vacation home in a forest outside Lund, Sweden, to vote on ‘the actual’ next steps. Some of the participants were Mr. Mucenieks, representative of the Russian tradition union La Sentinelle in Brussel. Journalist Jon Skard, a Conservative Norwegian expert on psychological defense and warfare had to cancel his visit. Exiled Ukrainians and exiled Estonians were considerably involved as well. Concrete anti-communist activities were discussed and plans for information campaigns in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark campaigns against Krushchev were agreed upon.

I was delighted to take part in the conference as one of the organizers and pleased to meet Mrs. Stetsko, who lectured on the important nationalities question in the Soviet Union. In the beginning of the 1980s the EFC formed the Institute for a Political-Psychological Freedom Campaign (IPPFC). As its director I had the opportunity to serve first with Yaroslav Stetsko and then with Slava Stetsko. EFC made yearly statements at its conferences which I prepared.

At a London conference in 1985 of ABN and EFC it was concluded that active Western policies during the 1980s had resulted in less Soviet influence in the world. Communism was clearly NOT the wave of the future. In 1987 the statement was headlined “Educated Public, Media – Best Defense Against USSR”.

Also in 1985 I was invited to speak at the conference “Ukraine during World War II” (June 4-8, 1985, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in the United States). The paper presented at the University of Illinois treated the Ukrainian resistance from 1942 to 1952 as a model for modern combat on communist territory (see below in the chapter “Lecturing in Canada in 1985”.

Two proposals were made by IPPFC in London. The first proposal was to publish a brochure on the work of EFC in support of the liberation of the subjugated peoples behind the Iron Curtain. The second proposal was to publish a booklet titled “Who Is the Imperialist?” which would detail Soviet subjugation of a number of nations since the beginning of the 20th century.

In 1993 IPPFC issued memoranda on the possible creation of An International Tribunal on the CPSU, the Communist Political System, Ideology and their Legacy.