Washington Post Covers Up US Meddling in Malaysia

September, 3 2018 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - The Washington Post has now repeatedly used its platform to systematically cover up extensive US political interference across Southeast Asia.

Last month, the Washington Post attempted to deny US interference in Cambodia. Its article - however - did more to reveal US meddling in the process - exclusively citing opposition organizations and individuals either funded by Washington or literally living in Washington.

The Washington Post in its more recent article titled, "In Malaysia, a victory for democracy — and an opportunity for the U.S.," would likewise attempt to paper-over US meddling in Malaysia's recent general elections which placed US-backed opposition into power after decades of Washington investment.

The article begins by claiming (emphasis added):

While Washington wasn’t looking, democracy won a major battle over authoritarianism in Malaysia, a Muslim-majority nation that just voted out its crooked, illiberal leader and has embarked on a peaceful transition to a new era of hope. The unexpected change has given the Trump administration a chance to reverse a policy of benign neglect toward the region, support democracy — and gain a rare win over China. 

The United States had little to do with last month’s overwhelming election victory by a multiracial, multiparty opposition coalition in Malaysia.

Of course - this is categorically untrue. Virtually every aspect of Malaysia's opposition, from pro-opposition media organizations like Malaysiakini, to street fronts like Bersih, to legal organizations like "Lawyers for Liberty," and even the defacto opposition party leader himself - Anwar Ibrahim (PDF) - are recipients of extensive US government support spanning well over a decade via the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and its many subsidiaries and affiliates.

President of NED subsidiary, the International Republican Institute (IRI) Daniel Twining - almost as if wounded by the Washington Post's omission of his organization's extensive political meddling in Malaysia - would boast on social media while linking to the Post article, that:

[IRI] has worked to strengthen Malaysian opposition parties since 2002. For 1st time since 1957 they won & are in power. Democrats around the world can play a long game confident that sooner or later, their time will come.

It is clear that evidence and even admissions by those dispersing US government money to Malaysia's opposition expose the Washington Post's article as categorically untrue - but it is also intentionally untrue. At least one member of the Washington Post's editorial board literally serves as member of the US NED's board of directors. Washington Post editor Anne Applebaum even has her own webpage on NED's site.

Thus, it is also clear that the Washington Post not only faces a serious conflict of interest regarding its responsibility to accurately report on political developments around the world while its editorial board is directly involved in influencing those developments - it is actively involved in exploiting these conflicting interests by using its media platform to cover up the actions of organizations its editorial board are involved in.

And almost as if to contradict its own initial premise, the Washington Post article admits the US Department of Justice's primary role in opening and perpetuating investigations into the former government's finances - producing a scandal many have cited as at least partially responsible for aiding the US-backed opposition's victory.

The Post claims (emphasis added):

The U.S. government could help the new Malaysian government to dig out of the mess that Najib left by helping it reform civil society, return to a free press and bolster the country’s economy. The United States can also help recover the billions Najib’s clique plundered from Malaysian coffers. The U.S. Justice Department is already deep into its investigations of those scandals.

Considering the extensive amount of backing the US government has provided the Malaysian opposition, it is difficult to imagine the US Department of Justice only coincidentally fixated on alleged financial impropriety in Malaysia, ahead of general elections the US government sought victory in for its proxies.

All About China 

The Washington Post also reveals the motives behind the extensive US political meddling it is attempting to conceal, mentioning China's growing regional influence throughout the article.


The Post would claim:

There’s also a key opportunity for the United States to score a rare victory over China in Asia — one the Trump administration didn’t intentionally pursue. Mahathir has either paused or canceled several major Chinese-funded investment projects amid allegations of kickbacks to Najib and predatory deal terms. Beijing was heavily invested in Najib, and the Malaysian people resent it.

Despite the Washington Post's attempts to conceal extensive US funding funneled into Malaysia's opposition spanning multiple US presidencies - specifically to transform the nation into an obedient client state vis-a-vis Beijing - is does admit the central issue driving US meddling across Southeast Asia. China was also mentioned by a previous Washington Post article attempting to conceal and dismiss accusations of similarly extensive meddling in Cambodia.

Efforts to co-opt and compromise other nations in the region can be seen unfolding in Myanmar where ethnic conflicts are being cultivated and leveraged by Washington and London to divide the population and undermine stability, compromising a myriad of Chinese investments including major infrastructure projects.

US-backed protests have attempted to gain momentum in neighboring Thailand - with a similar array of US-funded media groups, street demonstrators, and opposition leaders seeking to create momentum based on the victory of US-backed opposition in Malaysia. They seek to reinstall billionaire fugitive ex-prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra into power. Shinawatra had served US interests stretching back to before he became prime minister in 2001. His political survival has depended on extensive support through US-funded fronts operating in Thailand, and the unwavering support of the Western media.

It is likely that the Washington Post will soon be writing articles to dismiss growing awareness and outrage over US meddling in Myanmar and Thailand as well - eager to head-off obvious claims of hypocrisy leveled against Washington as it baselessly accuses Russia of "influencing" its political affairs while openly installing entire governments into power around the globe.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.   

How US Influence is Co-Opting Malaysia's Governance

July 21, 2018 (Joseph Thomas - NEO) - The Diplomat, which claims to be "the premier international current-affairs magazine for the Asia-Pacific region," has recently published a piece granting credit for Malaysia's recent general election results to what it calls, "everyday activists."

The article is in fact titled, "The Everyday Activists Behind Malaysia’s Democracy Struggle." The article begins by claiming:

Audiences worldwide have been transfixed by the Shakespearian twists and turns that saw Malaysia’s opposition defeat the world’s longest-ruling coalition. But the unprecedented May 9 win was also the culmination of a decades-long civil rights movement by activists who took great personal risks to bring about change.

The article cites Maria Chin Abdullah who headed Malaysian street front Bersih, online media platform Malaysiakini, political cartoonist Zulkiflee Anwar Ulhaque (also known as Zunar), Malaysia Muda and legal group Lawyers for Liberty as examples of those that have finally helped make Malaysian democracy "work."

Yet there is something else all of these examples cited in The Diplomat's article have in common. They are all either directly funded by the United States government through the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), or their activities are facilitated by other organisations in Malaysia that are. 

From Abdullah to Zunar, Funded by the US Government 

In essence, The Diplomat's piece is arguing that the organisations they covered represent the custodians of Malaysian democracy, and thus play a role in determining Malaysia's future. Yet the disturbing common denominator among them indicates a paradoxical dilemma. If these custodians themselves are a function of foreign influence, how could they possibly play a role in the Malaysian people determining for themselves a path that serves their own best interests and not those of these organisations' foreign sponsors?

We begin with Maria Chin Abdullah, now a newly elected member of the Malaysian parliament. She had previously been chief of the Bersih street front whose rallies were regularly led by opposition politicians including Anwar Ibrahim who is now the defacto leader of the victorious Pakatan Harapan party.

In 2011, The Malaysian Insider would report in its article, "Bersih Repudiates Foreign Christian Funding Claim," that:

[Bersih 2.0 chairman Ambiga Sreenevasan] admitted to Bersih receiving some money from two US organisations — the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and Open Society Institute (OSI) — for other projects, which she stressed were unrelated to the July 9 march.

The article would also cite Maria Chin Abdullah as well, claiming:

Fellow Bersih steering committee member, Maria Chin Abdullah, explained that both NDI’s and OSI’s funding were specifically for to the electoral watchdog’s delineation projects.

The NDI is a subsidiary of the NED. Details of funding provided to Bersih were disclosed on the NDI's website, stating (our emphasis):

In July 2005, NDI organized a national-level workshop for party leaders on election reform. NDI has since conducted workshops across Malaysia to promote electoral reform in collaboration with Research for Social Advancement (REFSA), the secretariat for BERSIH. In 2006, NDI conducted a workshop for BERSIH that focused on pimproving the action plancs of each participating organization or political party. In 2007, NDI and BERSIH conducted a series of workshops in the politically neglected provinces of Sabah and Sarawak to educate previously disenfranchised political aspirants.

It is clear that Bersih's leadership, including Maria Chin Abdullah attempted to first conceal their US government funding from the public, then attempted to downplay the implications this funding had regarding their work.

Bersih faces fair criticism over their stated objective of "clean, free and fair elections" contradicting the foreign interference their dependence on US government funding represents.

The Diplomat next makes mention of Malaysiakini which describes itself as "independent media." However its financial disclosures reveal it instead heavily dependent on foreign funding.

Like Bersih, Malaysiakini is funded by both the NED and the Open Society Institute. It also receives funding from the Canadian government, the Asian Foundation (which in turn is funded by the US State Department) and the Media Development Loan Fund (which in turn is funded by Open Society).

While political cartoonist Zunar's financial sponsors are unknown, The Diplomat itself notes that work like his would not be published were it not for US government-funded media platforms like Malaysiakini.


More specifically, The Diplomat states:

The advent of online media was vital in amplifying alternative views such as Zunar’s in Malaysia where the major newspapers and broadcasters have been under tight state control. “New technology, independent websites such as Malaysiakini, and social media, have played a really important role for people who would otherwise be unable to voice their opinions,” said Tricia Yeoh, an analyst from the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs, a Malaysian think tank.

The Diplomat also makes mention of Malaysia Muda researcher, Fadiah Nadwah Fikri. While Malaysia Muda's funding is not disclosed anywhere among its online presence, its activities include attendance at events sponsored by US NED-funded organisations.

This includes the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS), also mentioned above in The Diplomat's article. Under funding, IDEAS lists both the NED and NED subsidiary, the International Republican Institute (IRI), among its many foreign donors.

Last on The Diplomat's list is Lawyers for Liberty. It has received tens of thousands in US NED funding for years and while this funding is not disclosed anywhere on Lawyers for Liberty's website, it is disclosed on NED's.  Lawyers for Liberty's Eric Paulsen can be seen on social media using his US government-funded platform on a daily basis to demand policy changes from the Malaysian government, both before and after the recent elections.

In essence, an article supposedly about Malaysian democracy "finally working," seems to be missing the important qualifier, "for Washington."

A US Client State: if not Today, Tomorrow

With many analysts are in agreement that the new government's current leadership headed by veteran Malaysian politician Mahathir Mohamad will bring greater balance to Malaysian policy, it appears there are interests who would like to continue to expand both the reach and grasp of US-funded organisations.

Like in other nations now fully integrated into Washington's international order, these organisations are meant to operate first in parallel to existing state institutions, then replace them entirely. Examples of this can be seen elsewhere in Southeast Asia where Myanmar's government is now run by senior politicians who have received training and support from similar networks of US government-funded influence interfering in Myanmar's internal political affairs.

Failing a successful transformation into a US client state, these increasingly influential vectors of US interests can be used to create instability and pressure, leaving growing regional powers like China with dysfunctional states it is unable to partner and grow with.

The most fundamental of all prerequisites of a truly "working" democracy is self-determination. Such self-determination is not possible if a nation's institutions are dominated by individuals and organisations dependent on donations and directives from Washington.

Joseph Thomas is chief editor of Thailand-based geopolitical journal, The New Atlas and contributor to the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Extensive US Meddling in Malaysia's General Election Revealed

May 18, 2018 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - After now 2 years of accusations and constant headlines regarding allegations of still unproven "Russian influence" in the 2016 US presidential election, it is difficult to imagine that real political meddling or election interference anywhere around the globe could go unnoticed.

This is especially true regarding the Western corporate media who has portrayed itself as deeply aware of the unethical and undemocratic nature of one nation interfering in the elections of another.

Yet during Malaysia's recent general election - hailed by the Western media as a "historic win" for an opposition the Western media clearly favored - not a single story was written by media organizations like Reuters, AFP, CNN, the BBC and many others covering foreign interference during the elections.

Despite the lack of Western attention regarding foreign election meddling, it is revealed that Malaysia's opposition is almost entirely comprised of US government-funded fronts - ranging from opposition leaders themselves, to political street fronts and organizers, to media organizations posing as "independent" Malaysian journalists, and "rights advocates" leveraging human rights advocacy to support the opposition and compromise Malaysia's Barisan Nasional (BN) party.

Malaysia - a former British colony - faces the incremental expansion of US and European "soft power" within its borders - transforming it from a sovereign nation into a subordinate, modern Western client state.  As the US is attempting to do all throughout Southeast Asia from Cambodia to Thailand and the Philippines to Myanmar - the final goal is surrounding China with nations hostile to it politically, economically, and even militarily.

US-Funding and Support Propped up Malaysia's Opposition 

Malaysia's victorious opposition party - Pakatan Harapan (Alliance of Hope) - is openly headed by "de facto leader" Anwar Ibrahim.

Anwar Ibrahim was Chairman of the Development Committee of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) in 1998, held lecturing positions at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University, was a consultant for the World Bank, and a panelist at the Neo-Conservative dominated and Wall Street-funded National Endowment for Democracy's (NED) "Democracy Award" and a panelist at a NED donation ceremony

His service to Western institutions and the corporate-financier interests that created them - including NED - explains the unanimous support he has received for years throughout the entirety of the Western corporate media.

Before his imprisonment in 2015, he led the Bersih street front, a movement Western media sources like the Guardian cited as being pivotal to unseating the ruling BN party.

In a 2012 Guardian's article titled, "Anwar Ibrahim's moment of truth looms," it reported that:

Elections are expected to be called any time in the next nine months, and even those who do not openly back Anwar often support what he stands for: relief from an autocratic and out-of-touch government they say has ruled Malaysia for too long. In April many tens of thousands of Malaysians took to the nation's streets to demand electoral reform at rallies organised by Bersih, an opposition-backed coalition of civil-society groups whose name means "clean" in Malay. 

In another 2012 Guardian article titled, "Malaysian police fire teargas at electoral reform protesters," it admitted Anwar Ibrahim's role in leading Bersih:

Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, who many hope will win the upcoming election, rallied the enthusiastic crowds as one of Bersih's leaders, Ambiga Sreenevasan, said: "We all want change today." 

The above mentioned Ambiga Sreenevasan - who has played a key role in this year's general elections in Malaysia - has received extensive US government funding for her activities, including US State Department money from NED subsidiary, the National Democratic Institute (NDI), provided for training and support for Bersih specifically.

The NDI on its own website would describe its funding:

In July 2005, NDI organized a national-level workshop for party leaders on election reform. NDI has since conducted workshops across Malaysia to promote electoral reform in collaboration with Research for Social Advancement (REFSA), the secretariat for BERSIH. In 2006, NDI conducted a workshop for BERSIH that focused on pimproving the action plancs of each participating organization or political party. In 2007, NDI and BERSIH conducted a series of workshops in the politically neglected provinces of Sabah and Sarawak to educate previously disenfranchised political aspirants. 

In other words, the US State Department worked with Malaysia's opposition to build up its support base in an obvious effort to influence elections in their favor.

US-funded NGOs and Media 

NED's official website often erases, deletes, and replaces financial disclosures regarding its political and election meddling around the globe. During the recent Malaysian elections, its disclosure for activities in Malaysia was coincidentally offline and instead, an ambiguous "search" page was offered.

However, NED's activities in Malaysia are extensive - ranging from direct support for opposition parties as illustrated through its support of Bersih, to the funding of pro-opposition media fronts, legal firms dedicated to protecting opposition members and targeting BN politicians, and fronts posing as "human rights" advocates.



On NED's website, it lists the following under "Malaysia 2017":

Combating Corruption and Promoting Accountability

Centre to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4)$60,000To promote good governance and accountability and to combat corruption. This multifaceted project will encourage public participation in efforts to combat corruption, including research on various forms on corruption in Malaysia; education around the Auditor General’s reports on the national budget; advocacy focused on strengthening the independence of public institutions; training workshops for youth on various aspects of corruption; and the promotion of online tools to build public participation in promoting transparency.

Promoting Governmental Accountability and Strengthening Anti-Corruption Efforts 

Institute for Democracy & Economic Affairs$40,000To promote transparency and accountability within the Malaysian government and strengthen institutions working on issues of corruption. The organization will publish a series of articles, opinion pieces, and a book focused on efforts to combat corruption, produce infographics, and conduct roundtables and on proposed reforms designed to strengthen institutions and promote civic education on anti-corruption and good governance.

Promoting Human Rights and Access to Justice

Lawyers for Liberty$45,000To support a community of lawyers dedicated to the advancement of human rights through strategic litigation. The primary focus of the project will be the litigation of a variety of cases with important human rights implications and the conducting of public information campaigns and empowerment trainings. 

Promoting Pluralism

Projek Dialog$25,000
To promote open, reflective, and meaningful conversations among youth on diversity and inclusion in Malaysia. The organization will seek to promote an appreciation for pluralism through interactions between Malaysian young people and marginalized communities, including representatives of indigenous populations, refugees, and members of the Shia community.

Public Opinion Research

Merdeka Center for Opinion Research$65,000To carry out independent, objective public opinion research that will enable policy makers and civil society representatives to formulate policies and programs. The grantee will conduct public opinion surveys across peninsular Malaysia and Sabah and Sarawak to gauge the Malaysian public’s opinion on a variety of public policy issues.

Strategic Litigation and Human Rights Advocacy

Liberal Banter Sdn Bhd$40,000To provide the Malaysian public, especially young Malaysians, with a forum to discuss critical political issues in the country and to support the advancement of human rights through strategic litigation. Project activities will include a series of initiatives designed to improve young people’s human rights advocacy skills and encourage their involvement in political processes, support for a variety of legal cases with important human rights implications, and maintenance of a resource center for Malaysian youth.

Strengthening Political Parties and Citizen-Responsive Democratic Governance

International Republican Institute (IRI)$395,000To strengthen political parties’ ability to campaign and govern responsively and democratically. The institute will bolster the skills of political parties in the areas of coalition operations, citizen-responsive and data-driven platform and policy formulation, messaging, and leveraging new media. It will also help to bridge the gap between parties and citizens by providing youth with the platforms and skills necessary to voice concerns and engage in discourse on issues related to Malaysia’s democratic development.

And while the US State Department NED website lists an extensive amount of meddling in Malaysia's internal politics, legal system, elections, and media - there are actually many more organizations it has failed to disclose.

This includes the prominent pro-opposition "independent" media organization, Malaysiakini.

Under its donors page, it lists Asia Foundation, Canadian International Development Agency, Free Voice, Dutch Embassy in Malaysia, Freidrich Naumann Foundation, International Centre for Journalists, Media Development Loan Fund (MDIF), NED, and George Soros' Open Society as financial sponsors.

It claims that it accepts no more than 10% from any of the 9 foreign government and corporate foundation sponsors that fund it. However, it is clear that all 9 of the listed foreign organizations funding Malaysiakini are themselves a combine of Western corporate-financier interests.

Asia Foundation is funded by banks, weapons manufacturers, and big-oil. It also funded by the US State Department itself. MDIF is funded by Soros' Open Society. The International Centre for Journalists runs programs funded by Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, and chemical giant BASF.

Thus, regardless of Malaysiakini's attempts to divide up its sponsors to claim it is "independent," at least 90% of its funding comes from US-European corporate-financier interests.

Malaysiakini - like all NED fund recipients - undermines their own credibility by claiming corporations like Boeing, Chevron, Goldman Sachs, and BASF are interested in "promoting democracy" and "free speech" and not simply spreading their corporate monopolies into developing nations under the guise of both.

Double Standards, Not Democracy 

While the Western media has depicted a small number of Facebook ads from a nebulous Russian-based organization operating on a budget literally a thousand times smaller than 2016 US presidential election campaign budgets, as "Russian influence" - the US State Department is spending millions of dollars on efforts in Malaysia alone to build up the opposition's support base and swing elections in their favor.

While the Western media clearly understands the unethical and undemocratic nature of such meddling as exemplified by their nonstop coverage of "Russian influence" since 2016 - they have failed categorically to even mention overt and extensive US meddling in Malaysia's elections, let alone condemn it on equal terms with their accusations against Russia.

The Implications for Malaysia and Asia 

US-funded agitators in neighboring nations across Southeast Asia enthusiastically celebrated the victory of the US-backed opposition in Malaysia. These groups, while claiming to fight for "democracy" in their respective nations - represent a pan-regional effort to impose US interests upon Asia. They often coordinate their campaigns, defend each other during their setbacks, and create synergies as they move their singular, foreign-sponsored agenda forward.

This represents a risk to nations like Cambodia and Thailand where US meddling is also present and equally extensive. Protests in Thailand are funded by the US government and supported by US-funded media fronts and "rights" groups. The opposition party in Cambodia had gone as far as openly brag about conspiring with the US government to seize power.

For Malaysia itself - it remains to be seen which direction the opposition will go. Policies that aim to confront China, provide the US with a foothold in a region it is being systematically evicted from, or assistance provided to militants operating in Thailand's deep south will indicate a regime dominated by US-funded proxies, executing policy on behalf of Washington, not the Malaysian people.

There is a possibility that the new government will include coalition members that keep its worst impulses in check. It is also possible that Malaysia's ruling government will allow the opposition to absorb public anger for a certain period of time - as few of the opposition's actual campaign promises are likely to improve the lives of average Malaysians - before taking power back in the near future.

Either way, the notion of democracy is first and foremost defined as self-determination. If a political party or opposition movement is funded and directed by foreign interests, the nation they seek to control is no longer determining its own destiny, but having it determined for them by their foreign sponsors. This is why it is universally recognized as illegal, unethical, and undemocratic for one nation to meddle in the politics of another.

For the US who has committed serial acts of international crime - including the invasion of Iraq in 2003, its current nearly two decade occupation of Afghanistan, its destruction of Libya and its ongoing proxy war in Syria - violating international norms and laws to meddle in another nation's elections while accusing others of doing so to the US seems to indicate a partner genuine pro-democracy and pro-human rights advocates would avoid at all costs. Those embracing the US and its deep pockets cannot be trusted to honestly represent their true agenda and should be expected to camouflage it

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.   

Asia Shutting Down US-Turkish Ugyhur Terror Pipeline

April 27, 2018 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - The US government and organizations it funds posing as "human rights advocates" have decried Malaysia's recent decision to deport 11 Uyghurs suspected of links to terrorism back to China. 

The US State Department's Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty in its article titled, "U.S. Voices Concern Over 11 Uyghurs Beijing Wants Malaysia To Deport," would report:

The United States on February 9 voiced concern over Malaysia's possible deportation of 11 Uyghur Muslims to China. 

The Reuters news agency reported on February 8 that the 11 ethnic Uyghurs from China, who were among 20 that escaped from a jail in Thailand last year, have been detained in Malaysia, and that Beijing was in talks with Malaysia over their deportation.

Human Rights Watch, a front posing as human rights advocates funded by convicted financial criminal George Soros and his Open Society Foundation, would also decry Malaysia's decision.

In a statement titled, "Malaysia: Don’t Send 11 Detainees to China - Group Members Face Possible Torture, Ill-Treatment," HRW would claim (emphasis added):

The government of Malaysia should ensure that 11 detained migrants are not forcibly deported to China, Human Rights Watch said today. The migrants should have urgent access to refugee status determination proceedings by the United Nations refugee agency. 

The detainees appear to be among a group of 20 people who escaped from immigration detention in Thailand in November 2017. China claims that they are Uyghurs, a predominantly Muslim, Turkic minority that originates from western China. After group members were initially detained in Thailand, they identified themselves as Turkish citizens and asked to be sent to Turkey.

It is important to note Turkey as the suspected terrorists' alleged destination. They are part of a pipeline run by US-Turkish intelligence agencies to funnel foreign fighters into Syria. They, along with foreign fighters from around the globe, stage in Turkey, where they are armed, trained, and eventually sent into Syrian territory.

The HRW statement would even concede that (emphasis added):

Malaysia is one of several countries that in recent years has forcibly returned Uyghurs to China in violation of international law. In September 2017, Malaysia’s deputy prime minister, Zahid Hamidi, said Malaysia had arrested 29 Uyghur “militants” involved with the Islamic State (also known as ISIS) since it began sharing biometric data with China in 2011. 

The US government - which itself routinely detains, tortures, and extrajudicially executes what it considers "terror suspects" globally - has attempted to impede Malaysian-Chinese joint security in dealing with the threat of Chinese-based terrorists transiting the region, moving onward to Syria.

By doing so, the US is attempting to strain Malaysian-Chinese ties as well as jeopardize the security of the entire region.

In 2015, when the Thai government deported 100 suspected terrorists back to China, the United States government and its "human rights" fronts similarly decried the move. Months later, Ugyhur terrorists detonated a bomb in downtown Bangkok, killing 20 - mostly Chinese tourists.

The New York Times in an article titled, "Thailand Blames Uighur Militants for Bombing at Bangkok Shrine," would admit:

Nearly a month after the deadliest bombing in recent Thai history, Thailand’s national police chief made his most explicit comments on Tuesday about who carried out the attack here and why. 

The perpetrators, he said, were linked to Uighur militants, radical members of an aggrieved ethnic minority in western China, who struck to avenge Thailand’s forced repatriation of Uighurs to China and Thailand’s dismantling of a human smuggling ring.

The attack was professionally planned and executed with the target picked to maximize tensions between Bangkok and Beijing - suggesting that it was designed to serve high-level US strategic objectives.

US State Media Admits Uyghurs are Fighting in Syria 

In a December 2017 Associate Press article titled, "AP Exclusive: Anger with China Drives Uighurs to Syria Fight," it would admit (emphasis added):

Since 2013, thousands of Uighurs, a Turkic-speaking Muslim minority from western China, have traveled to Syria to train with the Uighur militant group Turkistan Islamic Party and fight alongside al-Qaida, playing key roles in several battles. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's troops are now clashing with Uighur fighters as the six-year conflict nears its endgame. 

AP would also admit that Ugyhur terrorists traveled specifically through Southeast Asia on their way to Turkey and then onward to Syria, stating (emphasis added):

As Uighur refugees traveled along an underground railroad in Southeast Asia, they said, they were greeted by a network of Uighur militants who offered food and shelter — and their extremist ideology. And when the refugees touched down in Turkey, they were again wooed by recruiters who openly roamed the streets of Istanbul in gritty immigrant neighborhoods like Zeytinburnu and Sefakoy, looking for fresh fighters to shuttle to Syria.

With the Western media admitting thousands of Uyghur terrorists are travelling through Southeast Asia on their way to Syria to fight alongside Al Qaeda and assumably its affiliates including the so-called "Islamic State" (ISIS),  it is obvious that attempts to decry Malaysian and Thai cooperation with China in closing down this "underground railroad" are meant to perpetuate not only the threat to Syria, but also the threat to China and the rest of Asia when these battle-hardened militants return home.

AP would explain:

...the end of Syria's war may be the beginning of China's worst fears.

"We didn't care how the fighting went or who Assad was," said Ali, who would only give his first name out of a fear of reprisals against his family back home. "We just wanted to learn how to use the weapons and then go back to China."

Other groups, funded directly by the US government and based in Washington D.C. - such as the World Uyghur Congress (WUC) - have also attempted to impede Asia's collective efforts to stem the tide of terrorism flowing through their territory and onward to Syria. Organizations like WUC have been key in advocating separatism driving terrorism inside China's Xinjiang province.

The US Protecting Terror Pipeline Behind Faux-Rights Groups 

And in both Malaysia and Thailand - two nations taking the forefront in disrupting the terror network in Southeast Asia - the United States government is also funding fronts to condemn local government efforts to work with China . These organizations are also attempting to impede local security operations under the pretext of defending "human rights."

In Thailand, organizations funded by the US State Department via the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) including iLaw, Prachatai, Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, Fortify Rights, and others have conducted coordinated campaigns aimed at pressuring the Thai government to allow terrorists to travel onward to Turkey where they will link up with Al Qaeda in Syria.

In Malaysia, "Lawyers for Liberty" headed by Eric Paulsen is also funded by the US NED. It too has attacked local government efforts to stem the flow of Uyghur terrorists through its territory and onward to Syria.

In one post on social media, Paulsen would exclaim:

Hundreds of other Uighurs who were previously deported from Thailand & Malaysia were imprisoned or not seen again, their whereabouts unknown & unaccounted for. [Malaysia] must resist China's demands, as these men have not committed any genuine crimes in Malaysia.

Paulsen's qualifier, "as these men have not committed any genuine crimes in Malaysia," comes to full light when understanding their presence in Malaysia is merely to transit onward to Syria where they will be engaged in a multitude of crimes including terrorism within the ranks of Al Qaeda and ISIS.

Additionally, as the Associated Press pointed out - these same men fully intend to take their training and experience in Syria - and return to China where they will continue carrying out criminal behavior, including terrorism. And as seen in Bangkok in 2015, should this network of terror be disrupted, these terrorists will carry out attacks on other nations when and where they desire.

While the United States attempts to divide China and Southeast Asia over the Uyghur terror issue, it appears to be having the opposite effect. As US influence wanes in the region and its activities become more overtly disruptive and dangerous, cooperation between Thailand, Malaysia, and China only increases as all three nations, along with the rest of Southeast Asia remain targets of US subversion in Washington's bid to maintain primacy over the region.

The US also runs the risk of overplaying its "humanitarian" ploys in defense of its networks of terror and subversion worldwide. With the Western media openly admitting Ugyhurs being caught in Thailand and Malaysia are recruits for Al Qaeda and ISIS fighting in Syria, while simultaneously demanding they be allowed to travel onward to Syria under the pretext of "human rights," the US has once again exposed its use of "human rights" advocacy as a smokescreen for trampling both genuine human rights, and international law.

Southeast Asia by allowing an army of terrorists to pass through its territory today, further compromises Syria's security today. Tomorrow, Asia's collective security will be endangered when this army of terrorists returns home. Asia's only choice is to collectively resist, expose, and dismantle not only this Western-sponsored terror pipeline, but also the faux-rights groups the US is using to protect it.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.  

US Regime Change in Malaysia: Bersih 5

November 24, 2016 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Malaysia finds itself weathering yet another foreign-backed color revolution, with the color of choice being the "yellow shirts" of Bersih supporters.

Bersih was created by the United States government and the political alliance of convicted and currently jailed Malaysian politician Anwar Ibrahim. The front organized its first rally in 2007, and has since then organized four more with the most recent taking place this month.

Over the years, Bersih has morphed, being  co-opted both by elements of the very government it is attempting to overthrow, and by legitimate opposition fronts who either are cynically exploiting the movement's size and foreign funding, or who genuinely are unaware that Bersih's core leadership is composed of US-funded agitators seeking to divide and destroy both Malaysia and ASEAN, as a means of reasserting US primacy in the region vis-a-vis China.

Bersih's Core Leadership is US Funded 

The Malaysian Insider reported on June 27, 2011 that Bersih leader Ambiga Sreenevassan:

admitted to Bersih receiving some money from two US organisations — the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and Open Society Institute (OSI) — for other projects, which she stressed were unrelated to the July 9 [2011] march. 

A visit to the NDI website revealed indeed that funding and training had been provided by the US organization - before NDI took down the information and replaced it with a more benign version purged entirely of any mention of Bersih. For funding Sreenevassan claims is innocuous, the NDI's rushed obfuscation of any ties to her organization suggests otherwise.

Sreenevassan is now not only a senior Bersih leader, but also heads or is associated with a number of "nongovernmental organizations" (NGOs) allegedly supporting Bersih, including  HAKAM (National Human Rights Society). Despite claiming to be a "human rights" organization, HAKAM's content is entirely focused on exclusively promoting and defending Bersih and its membership under the guise of human rights advocacy - a tactic used by US-funded opposition fronts worldwide. 

Image: Ambiga Sreenevassan marches shoulder-to-shoulder with Anwar Ibrahim during Bersih 2.0. 

Other NGOs listed by Bersih as supporters include Lawyers for Liberty and the Islamic Renaissance Front, both funded by the US State Department's National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Additionally, there is  Pacos Trust which is partnered with the US State Department, USAID, EU, and Wall Street-funded Asia Foundation. 

Various members of the Association for Progressive Communications (APC) which is funded by US and European corporate foundations are also listed as endorsing Bersih. So too is Institut Rakyat which is openly partnered with HAKAM and the above mentioned Lawyers for Liberty as well as compromised Western human rights advocates like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.

Other organizations listed by Bersih as "endorsing NGOs" have websites that either do not disclose their sources of funding or affiliations, or appear to be linked to various opposition political fronts or organizations that have fallen for Bersih's superficial rhetoric. 

In other words, Bersih represents the same organizations or approximations of other US-backed regime change operations unfolding worldwide. And while Bersih claims to be fighting for "Clean and Fair Elections," it is and has been for several years now, openly calling for regime change via the resignation of the current Malaysian government. 

Why Does the US Want to Overthrow the Government of Malaysia? 

The corporate-financier funded and directed policy think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) published a 2015 paper titled, "Revising U.S. Grand Strategy Toward China," penned by Robert Blackwill - a Bush-era administrator and lobbyist who has directly participated in Washington's attempts to maintain hegemony over Asia.

Blackwill's paper states clearly what interests the US has in Asia (emphasis added):

Because the American effort to 'integrate' China into the liberal international order has now generated new threats to U.S. primacy in Asia—and could result in a consequential challenge to American power globally—Washington needs a new grand strategy toward China that centers on balancing the rise of Chinese power rather than continuing to assist its ascendancy.

The CFR paper constitutes a US policymaker openly admitting that the US perceives itself as possessing and seeking to maintain "primacy in Asia," primacy being defined by Merriam-Webster as, "the state of being most important or strongest."

Malaysia's current government, like many across Asia-Pacific, is uninterested in America's attempts to reassert itself geopolitically in the region. Attempts to draw Malaysia into the US-manufactured South China Sea confrontation with Beijing have all but failed.

Malaysia also represents a particularly independent nation, with developed infrastructure, domestic industry including its own auto company, and military ties with Russia and China. 

Headlines like Reuters' "Malaysia to buy navy vessels from China in blow to U.S.," CNN's "Malaysia reaches 'significant' defense deal with China, takes shot at West," and the New York Times' "Leader of Malaysia, Miffed at U.S., Visits China With a Deal in Mind," all from this year, represent Malaysia's disinterest in dealing with Washington and its efforts to contribute to an Asia where American "primacy" does not rule. 

Bersih is Not a Path to Reform or Revolution 

In order to reverse this trend, the US has attempted to place pressure on not only Malaysia, but respective governments throughout Asia resisting its attempts to reassert itself. 

While the US backs Bersih in Malaysia, it has sponsored the opposition government in Thailand headed by exiled ex-prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and a myriad of US-funded faux-NGOs. The opposition headed by Sam Rainsy in Cambodia as well as political agitators in Vietnam are also openly US-backed.

The US-backed government of Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar, which despite running on a platform of "human rights" and "democracy," has begun brutally repressing Myanmar's Rohingya minority and locking up dissidents and members of the media in an ironic twist of hypocrisy. 

While Malaysia's government has provoked legitimate concerns among many groups in Malaysia, working with the  government to resolve them and challenging the government during elections is the obvious solution. Street mobs openly funded by foreign interests - particularly the United States - is an effort to reform and improve the nation in name only. 

Like Myanmar, or victims of US-backed regime change across North Africa and the Middle East, regime change in Malaysia facilitated by US-backed fronts will only invite in a regime that is not only as bad if not worse than the current government, but invite in a government beholden to American special interests, not the interests of the Malaysian people - not even its ruling elite. 

Bersih represents a political tool wielded by Washington, not a genuine manifestation of the Malaysian people's will to improve their own nation - even if Malaysians legitimately interested in improving their nation have been drawn into the protests. While many genuine people have joined Bersih's ranks, they have only done so because they have been lied to and have failed categorically to scrutinize the opposition front's leadership as carefully as Bersih demands the current government be scrutinized. 

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.” 

US vs China: US-Backed Mobs Seek to Overthrow Malaysian Government

August 24, 2015 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - Malaysia's "Berish" movement - an umbrella organization for various opposition groups opposed to the current government of Prime Minister Najib Razak - plans its fourth street demonstration in 8 years to unfold at the end of August.

While Bersih's alleged goal is "clean and fair elections," it is openly led by the government's opposition headed by the now imprisoned US-proxy Anwar Ibrahim and a myriad of US-funded and directed nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). The US State Department, through its US National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and its subsidiary the National Democratic Institute (NDI), along with convicted financial criminal George Soros' Open Society Institute (OSI), have funded both Bersih directly, and many of the NGOs that constitute Bersih's core leadership.

Several NGOs currenlty openly funded by the US NED - i.e. Islamic Renaissance Front and Lawyers for Liberty - can be found also listed on Bersih's current "endorsees" list.

Despite years of immense US-funding, Bersih has recently pleaded for donations and now claims they've received over a half million Ringgit (over 100,000 USD). More recent reports claim the amount could be as high as 1.2 million Ringgit.

And while they claim they seek simply to reform Malaysian politics, Bersih's new leader, Maria Chin Abdullah openly admitted their goal for "Bersih 4.0" is to call for the resignation of Malaysia's current government. In a Facebook post she claimed:

"Reforms - we will continue to demand and this time Yes it's a tall order to ask the PM to resign but if we dont try we will never push the boundaries for clean & fair elections."

Apparently by "clean & fair elections," Bersih's leadership means elections in which their opponents have been undermined and otherwise eliminated, and in which they can take power - or in other words, another textbook case of US-backed regime change.

Image: To Berish, "clean and fair elections" means eliminating all of your opponents through a US-backed campaign of sedition and seizing power. 

Bersih's core leadership seeks to seize power in Malaysia from behind a facade built upon alleged reforms. It is seeking donations from the Malaysian public despite immense funding from the United States government and demonstrable support from across the West's extensive global media network. It is difficult to discern how a movement built on lies, fraud, thievery, and sedition represents a step forward for Malaysia which might explain why, after three previous staged demonstrations, those behind Bersih have yet to succeed in their true goal of overthrowing the current political order.

US' Bersih and America's Wider War on China 

Malaysia's Bersih movement is yet another example of so-called American "soft power" in action. The use of US-organized and funded street mobs to carry out political destabilization and regime change has likewise transpired in similar fashion in Thailand through the use of US-backed Thaksin Shinawatra and his "red shirt" street mobs, and in Myanmar with Aung San Suu Kyi and her legions of anti-Rohingya, violent "saffron monks."


The goal is to string together a united front across all of Asia with which to encircle and contain China's rise. US policy papers openly admit this, with the most recent published by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) declaring America's goal in Asia is to maintain primacy over all other nations - especially China.

Titled, "Revising U.S. Grand Strategy Toward China," the report states in no uncertain terms:

Because the American effort to 'integrate' China into the liberal international order has now generated new threats to U.S. primacy in Asia—and could result in a consequential challenge to American power globally—Washington needs a new grand strategy toward China that centers on balancing the rise of Chinese power rather than continuing to assist its ascendancy.

The report admits that China's rise will benefit the Chinese people, their regional neighbors, and bring stability along China's peripheries - and also admits this must be stopped in order to maintain US "primacy in Asia." 

Many of the report's recommendations involve US "allies" expending significant amounts of money and political capital to confront China on Washington's behalf. Many of the recommendations are already being carried out by America's few remaining allies in the region - to little effect. Trade agreements like the unpopular Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) are admittedly being implemented for the sole purpose of bolstering US hegemony in Asia versus China's growing economic clout - not for any perceivable benefits - if any - the deal actually brings to its signatories. The report states:

...[the TPP will be] a vivid demonstration that the United States is determined to compete on the Asian economic playing field. By the same token, U.S. grand strategy toward China will be seriously weakened without delivering on the TPP. 

It is no wonder the "pivot toward Asia" has stumbled, where every option facing America's "allies" or potential "allies" include unattractive compromises made simply to bolster US hegemony. Regional leaders genuinely interested in their respective nation's best interests have attempted to walk a tightrope between provoking the US and forgoing the obvious benefits of doing business with China.
Malaysia, who has jailed US-proxy Anwar Ibrahim and has resisted or ignored attempts by the US to coerce Malaysian foreign and domestic policy, in particular has suffered recently a rash of suspicious incidents, including the lost of 3 passenger airliners in a single year, including MH370 lost mysteriously while en route to China, MH17 shot down during NATO's proxy war in Ukraine, and an AirAsia plane crash which claimed 162 lives.

Reuters would report in their article, "Bodies, debris from missing AirAsia plane pulled from sea off Indonesia," that: 

Three airline disasters involving Malaysian-affiliated carriers in less than a year have dented confidence in the country's aviation industry and spooked travelers across the region. 

Malaysian Airlines Flight MH370 went missing on March 8 on a trip from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing with 239 passengers and crew on board and has not been found. On July 17, the same airline's Flight MH17 was shot down over Ukraine, killing all 298 people on board 

Other nations resisting US attempts to install client regimes include Thailand, which recently suffered the worst terrorist attack in Bangkok in recent memory, with 20 killed and over 100 injured in a bombing almost identical to smaller incidents carried out by supporters of US-backed, ousted dictator Thaksin Shinawatra.

It appears the much vaunted US "pivot to Asia" has disintegrated into a brawl where violence, terrorism, and street mobs bent on regime change have taken the place of the US' initially optimistic, positive, if not entirely disingenuous rapprochement to the region. 

Malaysia: More to Anwar Ibrahim Than Meets the Eye

Image: US' client political front in Malaysia is headed by
Anwar Ibrahim. They've even given him his own US-funded
"color revolution" known as "Bersih." 

March 13, 2015 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) The most recent chapter in Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim's legal troubles has been framed by the Western media as everything from a politically motivated witch hunt, to discrimination against homosexuality and a violation of "human rights."

CNN would report in their article, "Malaysia court upholds sodomy conviction against opposition leader," that:

Malaysia's top court on Tuesday upheld the conviction of opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim on the charge of sodomizing a former political aide, prompting criticism from human rights activists. 

The decision appeared likely to be the final chapter in a lengthy and politically contentious legal battle, taking Anwar out of contention for elections for the foreseeable future.

CNN also added:

After the court decision Tuesday, Anwar said he "will not be silenced," vowing to continue to "fight for freedom and justice." 

"I will never surrender," Anwar told CNN by phone, although he conceded that his task will be made a lot harder by the confines of a prison cell.

And Ibrahim's vow to "fight for freedom and justice" was made with the confidence that this "fight" will be subsidized and fully backed by the US State Department, thus revealing the true motivations behind the Malaysian state's lengthy attempts to remove him from the nation's political landscape.

Enduring Treason, and Malaysia's "Soft" Counterstroke 

In reality, Ibrahim's sodomy conviction is probably the most indirect approach Malaysia can use in handling a politician who is essentially guilty of immense and enduring treason against the nation's sovereignty and national interests.

Also, in reality, the West's feigned outrage over the violation of Ibrahim's "human rights" is yet another example of foreign interests using nobler principles to couch their hegemonic, meddling agenda behind.

Malaysia has only been independent from British colonial rule for about a generation. It gained independence from the UK in 1957 but still remains part of its Commonwealth of Nations. Anglo-American interests, however, have remained entwined with Malaysia's fate, unabated, as have attempts to steer Malaysia's current course socially, politically, and economically.

As the West has done elsewhere, it has cultivated an opposition front in Malaysia to represent its interests. It has also spent immense amounts of resources, time, and energy to groom and install into power a client regime headed by Anwar Ibrahim himself.

This has manifested itself most recently as the so-called "Bersih" "clean and fair elections" street movement, which had initially claimed to be independent of any political party, but has since been revealed to be openly led by Ibrahim and his political party.

Bersih itself is also a construct of Western interests. Before it began widespread street protests, monkeying Western-backed "color revolutions" taking place elsewhere around the world, the US State Department's National Democratic Institute (NDI) - a subsidiary of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) - openly documented its financial and political support for the group on its official website. In efforts to obfuscate this fact in fear that it would undermine Bersih's legitimacy, US funding now goes undisclosed - ironically only garnering further suspicion amongst the more well informed in Malaysia and around the world.

Ibrahim himself has maintained close ties to Washington and Wall Street. Not only has his Bersih movement been fully backed by NED and its subsidiaries, but he himself  was literally in Washington D.C. in person, attending various NED functions. This includes serving as a panelist for NED's "Democracy Award" and a panelist at a NED donation ceremony - the very same US organization funding and supporting his Bersih street movement - casting irrefutable doubt on their official agenda for "clean and fair elections."

Clearly, Ibrahim, his political party, and its street front are in actuality a singular US-backed political front seeking power in exchange for Malaysia's sovereignty.

Corrupt, wealthy, mafioso politicians and business magnates in China are regularly arrested, charged, and put to death at breakneck pace. In comparison, the indirect methods Malaysia has used to undermine and remove Ibrahim and his foreign-backed political front from the nation's political landscape are relatively tame.

Despite his enthusiastic vow to "fight" back, Ibrahim, it is suspected, will melt away politically and take with him his political front. Malaysia, in turn, must ensure that not only is Ibrahim fully and permanently removed from politics, but it must also expose and neutralize the tentacles of Western meddling reaching into Malaysia with which other political opposition members might attempt to interface. 

In neighboring Thailand, the realization that its political problems are owed largely to Western meddling is becoming a more accepted mainstream talking point. The US' unswerving support for dictator, mass murderer, and infinitely corrupt billionaire Thaksin Shinawatra has transcended normal international relations and diplomatic protocols, exposing a concerted effort by the US to manipulate and meddle in Thailand's internal political affairs. Likewise, Malaysia suffers from such meddling. Likewise, this reality must become a mainstream talking point and that opposition parties, no matter how much they may oppose the current government, are obliged to but Malaysia's sovereignty first. 

Trading one unfavorable government for another, particularly one that answers to interests abroad, is leaping from the frying pan and into the fire. 

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.

ASEAN Economic Community - Why, For What, and By Whom?

November 26, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - On TV, upon the magazine rack, in schools, and on billboards around the country, the coming ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) is being heralded everywhere across Southeast Asia. 

Upon ASEAN's official website, the AEC is described as: 

The ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) shall be the goal of regional economic integration by 2015. AEC envisages the following key characteristics: (a) a single market and production base, (b) a highly competitive economic region, (c) a region of equitable economic development, and (d) a region fully integrated into the global economy.

The AEC is an unquestionable inevitability - and more alarmingly - an inevitability absolutely none of the many hundreds of millions of Southeast Asian citizens have asked for, voted for, or have any direct say in regards to. So inevitable is AEC's unfurling in 2015, that few have even bothered to ask "why?" "for what?" and "by whom?"

A Cheap EU Knock-Off Destined for Catastrophic Failure  

If AEC's premise as described by ASEAN itself sounds suspiciously similar to the European Union (EU), that's because it is. It is not only driven by the same immense global spanning corporate-financier special interests that consolidated Europe's economies, currencies, and institutions, but for the very same goal of collectively looting the region if and when it is successfully consolidated.

The EU now writhes in debt, endless proxy wars fought on behalf of Wall Street and London, and socioeconomic strife caused by EU regulations forced upon various populations against their will. While it was always difficult for citizens of respective European nations to have their voice truly represented within the halls of their own respective national governments, it is more difficult still for the EU's ruling elite assembled in Brussels to be held accountable and made to actually work for the  European people. 


Instead, the EU serves the immense corporate-financier interests that cobbled this supranational consolidation together in the first place. The European people were not allowed to vote on entering into the EU, and those that did repeatedly voted against it until threats, economic extortion, and propaganda finally succeeded in overcoming resistance. In Southeast Asia, nothing of the sort has even been proposed, and most Southeast Asians are oblivious to what ASEAN and the AEC even represent. Like the International Monetary Fund's (IMF) incursion into Asia during the late 1990's, it won't be until catastrophic failure has already swallowed the whole of Southeast Asia that people begin to realize what has been foisted upon them. 

Already, many across Southeast Asia are being effected by bilateral free-trade agreements (FTAs) that allow local markets to be flooded by cheap foreign goods. Socioeconomic disparity, even across Southeast Asia and greater Asia itself can devastate communities and industries already just barely making do. Special interests driven to ink FTAs generally make no provisions to prepare local markets about to be devastated, and no provisions after FTAs take demonstrable tolls. FTAs inked by ousted Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra with China, for example, devastated Thai farmers when cheaper Chinese produce flooded Thai markets. Some farmers including those who grew garlic, were driven almost entirely out of business.

The AEC will multiply this by creating similar conditions across all industries and between all of ASEAN's members. Additionally, the AEC then seeks to integrate ASEAN into the greater "global economy," or in other words, FTAs with the US and EU. Industries just emerging in each respective ASEAN member state will be utterly crushed, bought out, or overrun by foreign corporate-financier monopolies. For local tycoons laboring under the delusions that somehow there is a place around the "global elite's" table for them, the current state of the EU should serve as a cautionary reminder that indeed, no there is not. 

Why, For What, and By Whom? 

In addition to buying out and monopolizing all that resides within Southeast Asia, Wall Street and London desire to use Southeast Asia as a bulwark against China's rising power. These special interests may have even used the rise of China as a means to extort cooperation from respective ASEAN member states in the creation of the AEC.

Again, those ruling political orders across Southeast Asia need only look at NATO and how each member within that alleged "alliance" is strong-armed into one undesirable, highly destructive, and costly conflict after another - not only in direct opposition of each respective NATO member's own population, but in opposition of international law and norms. 

An ASEAN AEC fleeced by the West and driven as a proxy into the maw of neighboring China would cost everyone - from the general population to the ruling elite of each of ASEAN's respective member states - just as is seen across the EU. 

The dream of consolidating and exploiting Southeast Asia as a single geopolitical bloc against China is a long documented conspiracy the United States and its partners in the United Kingdom have worked on for decades. 

As early as the Vietnam War, with the so-called "Pentagon Papers" released in 1969, it was revealed that the conflict was simply one part of a greater strategy aimed at containing and controlling China.

Among many important quotes, is one that outlines the immense regional theater the US was engaged in against China at the time, stating: 

“there are three fronts to a long-run effort to contain China (realizing that the USSR “contains” China on the north and northwest): (a) the Japan-Korea front; (b) the India-Pakistan front; and (c) the Southeast Asia front.” 

While the US would ultimately lose the Vietnam War and any chance of using the Vietnamese as a proxy force against Beijing, the long war against Beijing would continue elsewhere. The use of Southeast Asia as a consolidated front against China would continue on up to and including until today.

This containment strategy would be updated and detailed in the 2006 Strategic Studies Institute report “String of Pearls: Meeting the Challenge of China’s Rising Power across the Asian Littoral”where it outlines China’s efforts to secure its oil lifeline from the Middle East to its shores in the South China Sea as well as means by which the US can maintain American hegemony throughout the Indian and Pacific Ocean. The premise is that, should Western foreign policy fail to entice China into participating in Wall Street and London's “international system” as responsible stakeholders, an increasingly confrontational posture must be taken to contain the rising nation. The use of nations in Southeast Asia to check China's regional power plays chief among this posture. 

Other US policymakers have articulated the use of Southeast Asia as a proxy against China in more direct terms. Neo-Conservative, pro-war policymaker Robert Kagan in his 1997 piece titled "What China Knows That We Don't: The Case for a New Strategy of Containment," noted: 

Chinese leaders worry that they will "play Gulliver to Southeast Asia's Lilliputians, with the United States supplying the rope and stakes.

Kagan would later serve as an adviser to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who would herself declare a campaign to do just that - supply Southeast Asia with "rope and stakes." Called the "pivot to Asia," Clinton would make a hegemonic declaration in Foreign Policy magazine titled, "America's Pacific Century," stating that: 

...the United States has moved to fully engage the region's multilateral institutions, such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, mindful that our work with regional institutions supplements and does not supplant our bilateral ties. There is a demand from the region that America play an active role in the agenda-setting of these institutions -- and it is in our interests as well that they be effective and responsive.

Clinton's reference to America playing "an active role in the agenda-setting of these institutions," referring to ASEAN and APEC, and the rest of her very lengthy editorial reflect a nearly verbatim update of Kagan's 1997 piece - if only stated a bit more diplomatically than Kagan's very straight forward "containment of China" proposal. One must wonder how anyone could learn of America's desire to set the agenda of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, and not immediately identify overt aspirations of extraterritorial neo-imperialism.  

As part of this desire to set the agenda for Southeast Asia, the US has worked hard through its various NGOs to manipulate, influence, and outright overthrow the political orders in place across the region in order to install compliant regimes that reflect America's goal of consolidating and commandeering theses nations both to wholesale loot them economically, and in pursuit of its containment strategy versus China. 

There's a Reason the AEC is not up for Debate 

Clearly, if the AEC's implementation is merely the consolidation and exploitation of the peoples and resources of Southeast Asia, the process of its implementation will neither be up for debate, nor put to a vote. While the United States and the many overly optimistic proponents of the AEC ceaselessly harp upon the tenants of "democracy" and "human rights," these most basic concepts have been utterly absent in the creation of this new supranational bloc.  

The people of Southeast Asia did not ask for ASEAN nor the AEC. Much of what both represent are in fact openly opposed by many grassroots movements across the region - not to mention by many around the world. There is a reason the AEC is not up for debate and an endless torrent of full spectrum propaganda is undulating the media in efforts to market the AEC to the general public - no one would buy it otherwise. 

In a democratic society, the people are to vote and in return are to be represented by those they voted for. These representatives are to take the needs and desires of the people and turn them into local, national, and international policy. Instead, the AEC represents a conspiracy cobbled together by special interests and then dishonestly marketed toward the general public to accept. In other words, it represents democracy in reverse - it is the supposed representatives telling the people what they "want" rather than the people telling their representatives what to do. Democracy in reverse could also be defined as "dictatorship" - and in that regard, ASEAN and its AEC would not be a national dictatorship, but rather a supranational one magnifying the abuses and ramifications of such abuses accordingly.   

For this reason, whether one is a conservative nationalist or a liberal democrat, the idea of an AEC forced upon the people without their input, consent, or even expressed desire for such a system should be appalling and surely protested against. However, many must already know that such protests would be futile. But this futility itself only further exposes the unwarranted influence and power that truly drives the AEC's undemocratic and intolerable implementation.

Instead, it will be up to groups within each respective ASEAN member, and up to each community within to expose, boycott, and replace with local alternatives both the national and multinational special interests involved. While such a campaign will be difficult, the only other choice is to do nothing and suffer the same indignation, socioeconomic decay, and perpetual war the EU now suffers. The people of Southeast Asia have many advantages including the advantage of time on their side to mitigate a repeat of the EU's slow-motion collapse - but it is only an advantage if people begin acting now. 

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.