Macedonian media: patriots defeated Color Revolution

We are publishing exclusive English translation of the interview given by our regular correspondent Andrew Korybko to the Macedonian edition "NetPress” on the threat of Macedonia division, political background of Kumanovo incident and baseless ambitions of the Soros-funded opposition leader Zoran Zaev:

"Little Macedonia crushes Soros” and "This is not Ukraine” are some of the headlines in part of the world media after the failed color revolution attempt in Macedonia conducted by some Western powers and supported by Soros’ NGOs and the opposition. It seems that the state, the security forces, and the Macedonian people are constantly winning the battles, and slowly but surely, they are emerging as winners in the war against the imperialistic agenda, against Soros and the other fake democracy fighters, and against the millions of dollars poured into the domestic fifth column. According to you, what is this great and historical victory of the Macedonian people and truth attributable to?

The most important factor in effectively combating any Color Revolution, not just Macedonia’s, is a patriotic population, and Macedonians of all kinds streamed into the street to support their country during the massive rally on 18 May. They were already aware of the Color Revolution attempt by Zaev, and the presence of irredentist Albanian supporters and the Macedonia-hating Sergey Stanischev during the ‘opposition’s’ small gathering contributed to the patriotic reaction the day afterwards. What can be learned by this is that a proactive information campaign educating citizens about the looming threat to their country, coupled with soft power failures by the Color Revolutionaries, can solidify the population in opposing the regime change attempt. All of this would be for naught, however, if Macedonians didn’t already value their identity and were confident with it, since one can’t properly defend what they don’t truly love. Finally, it must be pointed out that the government’s preemptive anti-terrorist operation in Kumanovo and the sacrifices of its brave security forces foiled the terrorists’ plans to stage attacks throughout the country on 17 May (the same day as Zaev’s rally), which could have triggered such destabilization that foreign powers (Albania, Bulgaria) may have exploited it in an attempt to conventionally intervene and partition the country.

In our last interview, you emphasized the strategy to divide Macedonia between Albania and Bulgaria, and since then, some of the Greek media are also noting that all of a sudden we have intrigues, turmoil, and turbulence in all the possible Russian gas transit states in the region, except in Bulgaria and Albania. At the same time, the bodies of the dead terrorists who attacked Kumanovo were buried in Kosovo with heroic honors by people wearing the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) uniforms, while Bulgaria defensively states that in the past they have recognized our independence under the constitutional name. However, it’s not a secret that the current Bulgarian regime is quite pro-American. So, do you think that the fact that the Russian MFA S. Lavrov also shared information about the plan to divide Macedonia was in a way a definite conformation of the monstrous scenario?

Yes, it definitely was. Russia was very smart in publicizing the very realistic fears about a possible Macedonian partition because it drew immediate attention to the actions of Albania and Bulgaria, thereby making it more difficult for them to pull off their plot. It must be underscored that Albania and Bulgaria operate in a ‘good cop, bad cop’ tandem, with Albania and some of its national representatives being the openly aggressive party while Bulgaria behaves more indirectly and covertly. Bulgarian media and commentators have evoked a witty tactic of self-effacing humor in criticizing their armed forces, saying they’re in no capacity to invade anyone. That’s surely true, but what they leave out of the conversation is that a partition doesn’t necessarily have to have a conventional component in initiating it, and that possible Bulgarian involvement (even the death of one of its servicemen, for example) is a trip wire for a large-scale NATO and/or American military response, especially if terrorism is involved (whether it truly is or is simply claimed to be in order to ‘justify’ the reaction). Bulgaria makes no secret out of the fact that it’s the EU and NATO reference point for all things related to the Macedonian Crisis, so the scenario of Bulgaria being used as bait for bringing other countries into a wider military conflict is disturbingly real. Also, amidst this scandal, everyone is forgetting the conspiracy that Bozhidar Dimitrov first suggested which is a manipulated perversion of the Crimea reunification events in order for Bulgaria to occupy most of Macedonia after Albania moves in first.

Another thing I’d like to address is the manner in which Bulgaria and its media and state representatives speak about Macedonia. Despite repeating themselves over and over again about recognizing independent Macedonia by its constitutional name, Bulgaria doesn’t behave as though it truly believes what its own words. More than likely, the droning, scripted statements coming out of the country the past couple of weeks since the Lavrov scandal first broke are a defensively guilty reaction to the accusations leveled against them, as not even the US government repeats a talking point as much as the Bulgarians have repeated theirs about Macedonia. Bulgaria treats Macedonia as though it’s ‘Little Bulgaria’ and that they are the ‘big brother’ that has the right to involve itself as necessary in its ‘younger sibling’s’ affairs. After all, what else can explain Bulgaria’s repeated rhetoric about ‘friendship’, ‘brotherhood’, and ‘solidarity’, while at the same time sending Stanischev to Skopje and inviting Zaev to Sofia? Albania and its occupied Kosovo satellite may operate as the bases for any unconventional war launched by the KLA or some other affiliated terrorist organization, but Bulgaria is the rear base for engineering the Color Revolution attempt and has proven its influence over Zaev and his regime change movement. Together, these two countries’ current governments operate as treacherous neighbors for Macedonia and must be treated with the utmost suspicion and caution owing to the dangerous contemporary circumstances of their joint partition plot.

How do you comment on the fact that the opposition leader Zoran Zaev promised that Albanian will be the second official language in Macedonia and will be taught from kindergarten on up, but also the fact that a day after the Kumanovo attacks, he was smiling while making selfies with part of the KLA supporters, standing on the place where the blood from the fallen Macedonian heroes still wasn’t drained? Do you feel that this, together with the presence of the anti–Macedonian Bulgarian politician Sergey Stanishev on the opposition protest, can be regarded as a conformation of the involvement of the opposition in the dark scenario for dividing Macedonia?

For sure, that’s certainly true. Zaev’s role has always been that of a divider, not a unifier, but he tactically uses the false rhetoric of solidarity in order to promote his partition plans. Zaev by himself is nothing, but the people and powers behind him are everything, and they want to use their political proxy to usher in the federalization of the country. If this can be accomplished, then the country will already be de-facto partitioned along ethnic and geographic lines, with Skopje becoming a divided city like Germany’s Berlin once was and Cyprus’ Nicosia still is. Emboldening ethnic minority nationalism in a multicultural state is a guaranteed way to exacerbate its existing tensions and foment an international crisis, all with the intent of creating a pretext for international intervention in order to formalize the country’s division. Such outside interference doesn’t have to be military, but could also be political (ex: EU- and/or NATO-mediated talks) or economic (ex: sanctions against the legitimate government).

Regarding Zaev’s despicable actions in Kumanovo, they’re extremely uncouth and show that he truly has no shame in his pursuit for power. The man is a megalomaniac that also harbors a narcissistic syndrome (hence the happy selfies during a period of national mourning), and if he thinks that a few pictures with terrorists will increase his power and fame, then as was seen, he wouldn’t think twice about doing it. I expect Zaev to continue more of these stunts, each one being more audacious than the next. As you quite rightly pointed out, he cavorts with terrorist supporters, and this reminds me of John McCain’s photo session with ISIL terrorists in Syria. There’s really no difference when you think about it, except the fact that McCain actually has some degree of power and influence but Zaev is a lackey that’s embarrassingly desperate for both. He may look up to the top dogs, but they’ll always treat him like a bastard puppy and will abandon him if he’s no longer useful to them.

It may be for these reasons that Zaev is so public about his anti-Macedonian affiliations with the KLA and Macedonia-hating Stanischev. He could obviously manage these relationships behind the scenes and not publicize any of them, but he’s anxious to ‘prove his worth’ to the US’ regime change plans so as not to be dumped and replaced by Branko Crvenkovski (which is inevitable but naïve Zaev doesn’t see it yet since he’s so drunk with dreams of power and international fame). His outrageous actions of state betrayal are directed just as much towards reassuring his American and Western handlers as they are towards inciting the internal fifth column. Viewed through this perspective, Zaev is nothing more than a weak human being who feels that his last chances at power and fame are quickly slipping through his fingers, hence his desperate and pathetic actions of the past month.

Of course, seen from the displaced perspective of Washington and Brussels, the final realization of the Balkan Stream for them will present their capitulation in the Balkan, but that also means they won`t give up until the end. Where exactly will the end be and what can we expect next?

The US wants to do anything it can to obstruct Balkan Stream, be it in bringing about the project’s official cancelation, its covert sabotage (i.e. a secessionist terrorist war in Macedonia), or creating an indefinite delay. The most cost-effective way in bringing this about is via Color Revolutions, and each of the countries along the pipeline’s path is vulnerable in their own way. We currently see this tactic being deployed in Macedonia, but Hungary and Serbia are also susceptible to this as well. Last year’s protests against Vikor Orban were a Color Revolution test-run intended to gather intelligence about the government’s reaction to events and to strengthen the regime change social infrastructure in the country. Also, John McCain’s slandering of Mr. Orban as a ‘neo-fascist dictator’ was meant to attract negative international (Western) attention towards the country’s leader in an effort to invalidate his premiership and condition the European psyche for a forthcoming Color Revolution. Concerning Serbia, we all know that the first Color Revolution occurred there in 2000, and there’s considerable and legitimate anger against Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic’s plans to amend the Serbian Constitution to omit references to Kosovo and his possible moves in arresting Vojislav Seselj. There’s a serious fear that these popular grievances can be hijacked by Western NGOs in order to create a Color Revolution in the country and forestall the Balkan Stream project.

A picture the Skopjans missed to "enjoy”

Greece isn’t without its fair share of Color Revolutionary threats, either. If Syriza backtracks on its anti-austerity platform and capitulates to Europe in any capacity whatsoever, it’ll lose major support from its base. The result of this happening would likely be early elections that could shatter the current governing coalition and possibly create enough political disorder in the country to shelve Balkan Stream indefinitely. If Golden Dawn gains any extra support during this time, it might set the stage for heightened tension between it and the politically polar opposite Syriza, which creates a destabilizing situation where outside provocation could be used to instigate violent street fighting. Turkey, on the other hand, happens to be more domestically stable than Greece in the political sense and thus has a certain degree of resiliency to Color Revolution intrigue. That doesn’t mean, however, that it’s completely immune, since legitimate anti-government protest activity (such as that seen during the Gezi Park events) could be hijacked by supporters of the secretive Gulen movement (whose leader is currently based in the US), left-wing terrorist groups (like the Revolutionary People’s Liberation Party – Front that staged the deadly hostage crisis in April), and/or militant Kurdish nationalists, all of which could create disastrous destabilization for Turkey. While Ankara is likely strong enough to defeat each of these threats and thus continue its plans for Balkan stream, their consequences may be enormous and could cause it to second-guess the pricing compensation for the pipeline. If Turkey all of a sudden changes its mind, breaks an existing contract, and tries to renegotiate for an exorbitantly expensive rate because of the turmoil it’s going through in hosting the pipeline, it could create a financially unfeasible situation that would stop the project dead in its tracks.

Should Macedonia also consider the possibility of declaring certain NGOs founded by foreign money as undesirable when endangering the constitutional order and the national security? Such a law was signed by the Russian President Putin a few days, and also in Belgrade there is an initiative to ban the Serbian organization "Canvas”, whose activists as "revolutionaries for rent”, financed by Soros and USAID, have assignments to produce colored revolutions and to overthrow targeted governments worldwide by using force and violence. In Macedonia, in this context, they were paying 3500 dollars for a successful idea for a protest presented by "Canvas” activists, who by the way are listed as terrorist organization in the UAE.

The theoretical idea of NGOs is not bad, but unfortunately, this well-intended concept has been hijacked by Western intelligence services in order to facilitate Color Revolutions and regime change destabilization inside of targeted states. There’s plenty of proof relating to this, as I’m sure the audience is aware, and it’s in the national security interests of each and every country to monitor these groups and identify which ones have been infiltrated by the West for regime change activity. In many cases, such as the NGOs affiliated with George Soros, they’re not infiltrated for such nefarious purposes because those aims are the whole reason why they were created in the first place. This means that some NGOs are purposely created as fronts for Color Revolutions, meaning that all their operations are in one way or another directly or indirectly connected with their ultimate objective. In some cases, they may partake in ‘normal’ activities like helping the homeless or jobless to win trust among the community, but that’s just a tactical move in order to gain supporters for their eventual mission, which is to overthrow the government when the directive is given.

Not all NGO employees are ‘in on it’, so to speak, and quite a few of them have been swindled into supporting these groups (sometimes through the ‘normal’ activities I just described), but since the intent of the organization in question is hostile and against the sovereignty of the state, restrictions must inevitably be placed on the activities of all employees no matter who they are. These actions don’t completely stop anti-government NGOs from operating because they could always continue their activities underground and illegally, but it at the very least makes it difficult for them to operate and could result in the arrest and conviction of some of their ring leaders. This would send a strong signal to those who are interested in overthrowing the government that affiliation with illegal regime change groups carries with it legal consequences, and it may deter some vulnerable and impressionable youth from participating in their front activities.

Another thing to mention here is that some NGOs aren’t directly engaged in political destabilization, but instead try to divide society and change its values, ethics, and principles. Social disruption can facilitate political destabilization, and thus, it can also be seen as a legitimate threat to the state. The effort of extreme lobbying groups to enforce homosexual privilege (known as ‘gay rights’ in the West) on conservative societies is a definite provocation, as are organizations that aggressively push Western-style liberal democracy in states with their own domestic form of democracy. This is part of the larger ‘values war’ taking place between the West and the non-West, whereby the West advocates forced conformity to its subjective ideals while the non-West defiantly tries to retain its independent approach and doesn’t attempt to encroach on other’s sovereignty. One can see a clear dividing line between the unipolar (West) and multipolar (non-West) worlds in this case.

Some Greek media have revealed a plan for annexation of parts of the orthodox countries territories with the aim of creating greater Albania, emphasizing that the US strategy against Orthodoxy in Greece is being promoted by some media and the "artistic” establishment of atheist supporters, and of course, all of this is also being applied in Macedonia. Why is it that the Orthodox countries are one of the favorite targets of the Western power centers? Some argue that the background is the satanic ideology and the tendency of the new world order to promote everything that is against nature, such as the hypocritical support for GMO food, the aggressive forcing of the homosexuality, and the hard strikes against Orthodoxy and against traditional family values.

That’s definitely what it’s about. There isn’t ‘freedom of religion’ in the West, there’s ‘freedom FROM religion’, which is an important differentiation. Although there are many pious and peaceful individuals living in Western countries like the US, the government there does whatever it can to take religion out of public life or turn it into a neutral political gimmick that candidates pay irreverent lip service to whenever elections are around the corner. This extreme ideology comes from atheism and hyper Western Liberalism, both of which are dominant in the Western political classes. These militant ideologues absolutely hate the idea of religion and traditional values since they’re indoctrinated into thinking that such concepts are ‘regressive’ and ‘repressive’. Instead, they envision a future where man kills God and replaces Him with pseudo-religious belief in radical ‘human rights’ principles such as homosexual privilege, the public dissemination of pornography, and militantly extreme feminism of the "Pussy Riot” variety, all of which are actively being promoted in Western societies today.

St.Naum monastery, Macedonia

In fact, they’re going as far as rewriting the actual Bible in order to push their agenda. There’s a heretical manipulation of the Bible being sold in the West called "the Queen James Bible”, where the propagandists have literally gone in and removed ever single reference against homosexuality. The next step, mostly likely, is to change the Bible to make God a lesbian in order to justify their gay, pornographic, and militantly extreme feminism for future generations. Another thing that they’re incorporating into their anti-religious tenants is blind loyalty to the ‘god’ of global warming, using it as an unquestionable justification for all sorts of government abuses of power in so-called ‘democracies’. It’s not to say that climate change in some form isn’t a real phenomenon, but that it’s being elevated to the level of state religion in most Western European countries and being used for hypocritically anti-democratic practices against the population.

Orthodoxy and conventional Islam (to which the vast majority of Muslims adhere) are the most powerful defenses in this world against such evils, and accordingly, that’s why the West is dead set on eliminating them. As can be seen through the US’ creation of the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and now ISIL, it’s doing whatever it can to malign the reputation of actual Islam and pervert it into a violent weapon of radical destruction. The more that time goes by and the influencing reach of anti-Muslim ‘clerics’ expands, the more likely it is that the fake Islam being promoted by the US will be mistakenly associated with true Islam, much to the detriment of the actual religion’s positive attributes of peace, stability, and traditional values. Concerning Orthodoxy, the plan is to turn believers against themselves (just like the US-manufactured re-eruption of the Sunni-Shia split is meant to do to Islam) and to infiltrate the religion from within. Catholic sects are taking steps backwards by capitulating to these anti-religious plots (supporting ‘gay marriage’, female ‘priests’, etc.), and they’re meant to influence the minds and souls of Orthodox believers with time. Also, because the population of Orthodox countries is generally more impressionable to Western soft power than their Muslim counterparts, information mediums are being used to brainwash the faithful into retreating from their conservative values and ‘accepting’ anti-religious policies as ‘normal’, ‘progressive’, and in the case of homosexual privilege, ‘cool’ and ‘inevitable’.

The best way to confront this asymmetrical aggression being waged against the faithful is for Orthodoxy and conventional Islam to join forces in fighting the destructive evils being propagated and forced by the West. The US experimented with turning Orthodox and conventional Muslims against each other during the Balkan Wars of the 1990s, and having had enough time to digest and analyze the intelligence and data they gained during that period, they’re back again in an effort to roll out a ‘perfected’ version of their planned Orthodox-conventional Islam war. If peaceful Orthodox and Muslim believers can be manipulated into fighting against one another, then the anti-religious West’s divide-and-rule strategy will be a success and could spell the ultimate defeat for both religions’ widespread adherence.

orientalreview.org