What is the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED)?

Who sits on the current NED board of directors and how do such people get away with claiming to promote democracy abroad when they are directly involved in circumventing it at home? 

August 14, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - When US-backed regime change begins in a targeted nation, many - particularly those supporting protests - will deny the US is involved.

When US involvement is no longer deniable - many will finally admit it - but backpedal and claim there is nothing wrong with the US supporting "freedom" and "democracy" abroad.

With virtually every aspect of ongoing protests in Thailand funded by the US - from the leaders like Anon Nampa of the US government-funded "Thai Lawyers for Human Rights," to fronts like US government-funded iLaw petitioning to rewrite the Thai constitution, to media fronts like US government-funded Prachatai attempting to control the narrative regarding the protests - this process of denial and backpedaling has already begun.

The protests in Thailand are mainly funded through the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED) with all of this funding appearing on the US NED's official website as well as in admissions from these groups themselves during previous interviews, and occasionally featured on their own websites when and if they make financial disclosures.

The NED and the fronts they are funding all claim to be promoting democracy. Others attempting to expose this funding claim it represents political interference and is a bad thing.

But what is the NED and how could the US promoting democracy be a bad thing?

It is Bad - Because the US NED Isn't Really Promoting Democracy 

The US has openly invaded nations, murdered sitting governments, killed hundreds of thousands of people in the process, before hand-picking favorable client regimes. The US NED is simply a subtler way of achieving regime change - but often also helps pave the way for destabilization leading to direct US military intervention as was the case during the 2011 "Arab Spring."

In fact, many of the people sitting on the US NED board of directors have signed their names to documents, op-eds, and essays calling for the invasion and regime change by force of other nations including Afghanistan in 2001, Iraq in 2003, Libya and Syria in 2011, and Ukraine in 2013-2014.

Some of them even participated directly.

This includes Neo-Conservatives like Elliot Abrams who is currently the US envoy to Iran after openly attempting to overthrow the government of Venezuela.


The London Guardian in an article titled, "US diplomat convicted over Iran-Contra appointed special envoy for Venezuela: Elliott Abrams, who was linked to failed coup against Chávez, to join Pompeo to urge security council to recognize Guaidó as head," would report (emphasis added):

Elliott Abrams was appointed US special envoy for Venezuela on Friday, as Donald Trump’s administration and European leaders on Saturday further increase the pressure on the socialist president, Nicolás Maduro, to step aside from leading the country he has taken into a deepening crisis. 

Abrams will accompany the US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, to a meeting of the UN security council in New York on Saturday, during which Pompeo will urge members to join the US in declaring Venezuela’s opposition leader Juan Guaidó as the legitimate head of state.

The  Guardian also notes (emphasis added):

Abrams is widely remembered in Central America, but particularly from his time in the Reagan administration, when he tried to whitewash a massacre of a thousand men, women and children by US-funded death squads in El Salvador, when he was assistant secretary of state for human rights.

CBS News in a much more recent August 2020 article, "Elliott Abrams, convicted of lying about Iran-Contra, named special representative for Iran," would report (emphasis added):

Brian Hook, the administration's special representative for Iran, is leaving and will be replaced by Elliott Abrams, convicted of misleading Congress about the Iran-Contra affair. Abrams, who has been serving as the special representative for Venezuela, will continue in that position in addition to his new role.

Anyone of good conscience approached by NED to join a board of directors including Elliot Abrams alone would be unable to reconcile what NED claims to stand for and what it - through leadership like Abrams - is actually doing.

But the NED board of directors includes many, many other characters with open ties to corrupt corporate-financier interests and proven track records of eagerly promoting war and enabling US-backed regime change around the globe.

This includes Victoria Nuland who played a key role in leading US regime change efforts in Ukraine in 2013-2014.
Reuters in its article, "Leaked audio reveals embarrassing U.S. exchange on Ukraine, EU," would admit (emphasis added):

A conversation between a State Department official and the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine that was posted on YouTube revealed an embarrassing exchange on U.S. strategy for a political transition in that country, including a crude American swipe at the European Union. 

The article also admitted (emphasis added):

The audio clip, which was posted on Tuesday but gained wide circulation on Thursday, appears to show the official, Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, weighing in on the make-up of the next Ukrainian government.

Nuland was also the CEO of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) - a pro-war policy think tank funded by big-defense corporations including Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, Raytheon, General Dynamics, DynCorp - all alongside big-oil corporations like BP, Chevron, and Exxon - fronts posing as "liberal" and "opposed" to such interests including convicted financial criminal George Soros' Open Society Foundation - and big-banks including JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs. 

The security crisis US intervention in Ukraine created alone - and the subsequent deployment of US missiles to Europe made millions for CNAS sponsors Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. And while chaos NED director Victoria Nuland helped create is filling the accounts of US defense contractors - Ukraine remains an undemocratic, dysfunctional nation like all other targets of US regime change.

Another member of NED's board of directors is Neo-Conservative George Weigel - who like Elliot Abrams - is an enthusiastic supporter of US military aggression abroad and US-backed regime change.

Image: Just a little taste of what many NED board members lobbied for when promoting the US invasion and occupation of Iraq from 2003 onward. 

In American Magazine in a 2003 article titled, "The Just War Case for the War," Weigel would help repeat and amplify deliberate lies regarding "weapons of mass destruction" in an attempt to build justification for an otherwise unjust war.

Virtually every point Weigel made was built on deliberate lies - lies many attempted to expose before the 2003 invasion and lies now exposed to the world in the wake of the disastrous invasion and - nearly 2 decades later - an Iraq still laid waste, divided, and in chaos because of US aggression, its attempts to install a client regime, and its punitive military, political, and economic campaigns following its failure to do so.

And this is just a small sample of what sits on the NED's board of directors.

Pro-War Corporate Interests Using the Smokescreen of "Promoting Democracy"

The rest of the NED's board of directors is no better. 

There is Scott Carpenter - now at Google - who participated directly in the US invasion and occupation of Iraq as a member of the "Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq" from April 2003 to July 2004. He is also a member of the pro-war Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Image: Stefanik taking a victory lap as the gargantuan 2019 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was signed into law. The US military might that law will help purchase is augmented by "soft power" wielded by organizations like the NED she chairs - used to undermine and weaken nations ahead of more "muscular" foreign policy options. 

NED board member and Congresswoman Elise Stefanik - Republican - belonged to the rabid pro-war Neo-Conservative Foreign Policy Initiative which played a key role in promoting conflict with Iran. She also participated in Defending Defense which lobbied to maintain Washington's astronomical defense budget.

US Senator Ben Sasse - Republican - is also an NED board member. He is openly anti-Chinese - blaming China for COVID-19 and praising Canada for the arrest of Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou.

 US Senator Tim Kaine - Republican - had been an advocate for much wider US military intervention in Syria including calls for a no-fly-zone. It is now revealed that Washington's so-called "freedom fighters" were in fact extremists fighting under the banners of terrorist organizations including Al Qaeda, its Syrian franchise Al Nusra, and even the self-proclaimed "Islamic State."

Ambassador Daniel Fried was one of the central architects of NATO's enlargement after the Cold War - a chief factor driving unprecedented US-Russian tensions today.

Image: Daniel Fried at the Atlantic Council - a corporate-funded think tank promoting NATO wars and the organization's overall enlargement and perpetuation. 

NED board member Michele Dunne is the director of Carnegie’s Middle East Program and the pro-war NATO-centric Atlantic Council - both funded by big-defense, big-oil, and big-banks.

Anne Applebaum of the Washington Post takes disinformation created by fronts funded by the US NED she chairs as a director and amplifies it in the columns of the Washington Post. She also is an adviser for the disinformation outlet Coda Story which serves as yet another element in Washington and Wall Street's echo chamber - buttressing narratives promoted by the NED and prominent papers like the Washington Post.

Andrew Card Jr. served in the administrations of George Bush Sr. and George Bush Jr. He was US ambassador to Afghanistan, chairs the US Chamber of Commerce, and held various senior positions at General Motors and the Automobile Manufacturers Association which included GM, Ford, and Chrysler.

Image: The US NED is either funded by or has board members representing the following corporate and government interests. 

Other board members including Kenneth Wollack, Melanne Verveer, Nadia Schadlow, and the above mentioned Victoria Nuland are also all members of pro-war corporate-financier funded policy think tanks including the Brookings Institution and the Council on Foreign Relations.

Image: The Brookings Institution is just one of many US-based corporate-financier funded policy think tanks that engineer wars, coups, sanctions, and other forms of foreign policy abroad as well as pro-monopoly policies at home. Many of NED's board of directors are either members of Brookings or have been in the past. 

These policy think tanks short-circuit the democratic processes in the United States by funneling corporate money into the creation of policy, the mounting of lobbying campaigns for corporate-funded policy to be adopted into law by the US Congress, and the creation of media campaigns to sell these policies to a public that does not benefit from them and would otherwise oppose them.

Thus the vast majority of NED's board of directors are pro-war and represent the largest, most corrupt corporations in the United States - not to mention on Earth. They are involved in a process of denying the American people themselves of democracy at home - and so certainly are not involved in promoting genuine democracy abroad.

They are however, in great need of a smokescreen behind which to advance their agenda.

The National Endowment for Democracy is using the "promotion of democracy" as that smokescreen while engaged in political interference and regime change abroad in the pursuit of serving the corporate interests represented by the board of directors and those who fund NED directly.

For our example of Thailand - the US seeks to remove the current government and institutions from power and replace them with those beholden to Washington. This is part of a wider effort to remove pro-Beijing governments from across the region in a bid to isolate and contain China itself.

As mentioned - one US NED-funded front - iLaw - created a petition to rewrite Thailand's entire constitution. One can only imagine the backlash and response by the US should Russia or China fund organizations inside the US to call for the rewriting of the US Constitution.

The documented political interference carried out by NED against others is interference the US itself would never tolerate any nation imposing upon it. Such irony and hypocrisy is perhaps the best way of all to highlight just how dubious NED's work actually is.

The only way to claim the NED is engaged in supporting good around the globe is to completely ignore who funds it, who runs it, why, and what they've actually done and are currently doing. Or to ignore the fact that if any other nation did what the US NED does, inside the US, it would be considered an act of war. 

America's Industrialized Global Meddling

April 6, 2018 (NEO) - In this Review: In light of continued US accusations of supposed Russian meddling, we’re going to take a look at verified, even admitted US meddling taking place around the world. We'll also take a look at what happens to US proxies when Washington is done with them.

1. US Election Meddling: Smoke and Mirrors;

2. US Political Meddling is Very Real, Spans the Globe; 

3. Syria’s Kurds Share Fate of Other Washington Allies.

Read more articles and stay up to date with the latest in geopolitical analysis from New Eastern Outlook at https://journal-neo.org/ .  

Exposing and Stopping the Danger of US "Soft Power"

March 21, 2018 (Joseph Thomas - NEO) - US soft power is included in US policy papers and promoted by US politicians and diplomats on a regular basis. It is also included as the admitted purpose of US, UK and European international programmes like Chevening and Fulbright scholarships.

Foreign Affairs magazine, published by big-business-funded US policy think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations, would reveal in a review of Joseph Nye's book, "Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics," that (my emphasis):

...the term "soft power" -- the ability of a country to persuade others to do what it wants without force or coercion -- is now widely invoked in foreign policy debates.

The United States can dominate others, but it has also excelled in projecting soft power, with the help of its companies, foundations, universities, churches, and other institutions of civil society; U.S. culture, ideals, and values have been extraordinarily important in helping Washington attract partners and supporters.

And in reality, US domination and its soft power work together to create what is modern day empire and the foundation of US global hegemony.

The United States' many organisations, from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to its Young Leaders Initiatives targeting the Americas (Young Leaders of the Americas Initiative/YLAI), Africa (Young African Leaders Initiative/YALI) and Southeast Asia (Young Southeast Asian Leaders Initiative/YSELAI), all seek to indoctrinate and co-opt the populations of targeted nations to serve the interests of Wall Street and Washington rather than their own.

While the US does this often under the guise of promoting "democracy," it is clearly engaged in precisely the opposite. While democracy is generally understood as a process of self-determination, through US soft power, the process is co-opted and abused to allow Wall Street and Washington to determine the policies and direction a targeted nation takes rather than its own people.

Often times victims of US soft power are youths who are indoctrinated in university programmes or targeted by US-funded fronts posing as nongovernmental organisations (NGOs). They believe they have arrived at their conclusions and adopted their personal set of principles on their own, unaware of the amount of time, money and energy invested in ensuring they adopt a worldview and a set of political proclivities that serve US interests rather than those of their own nation, people and those of the individuals themselves.

The use of soft power is not new. It is a practice as old as empire itself.

The ancient Romans engaged in sophisticated cultural colonisation we could easily describe as soft power.

Ancient Roman historian Tacitus (c. AD 56 – after 117) would adeptly describe the systematic manner in which Rome pacified foreign peoples and the manner in which it would extend its sociocultural and institutional influence over conquered lands.

In chapter 21 of his book Agricola, named so after his father-in-law whose methods of conquest were the subject of the text, Tacitus would explain (my emphasis):

His object was to accustom them to a life of peace and quiet by the provision of amenities. He therefore gave official assistance to the building of temples, public squares and good houses. He educated the sons of the chiefs in the liberal arts, and expressed a preference for British ability as compared to the trained skills of the Gauls. The result was that instead of loathing the Latin language they became eager to speak it effectively. In the same way, our national dress came into favour and the toga was everywhere to be seen. And so the population was gradually led into the demoralizing temptation of arcades, baths and sumptuous banquets. The unsuspecting Britons spoke of such novelties as 'civilization', when in fact they were only a feature of their enslavement.

In a very similar manner, youths today in nations targeted by US soft power describe the notions of "democracy" and "human rights' as well as Western-style neo-liberal politics and institutions as "civilisation." They often seek out every opportunity to disparage the culture and institutions of their own nation, describing them as backwards and demanding they be promptly replaced with new notions and institutions modelled after or directly beholden to those in the US and Europe.

We can see across the whole of Asia this full process of soft power coming to fruition. Years and millions of dollars spent in infiltrating universities, indoctrinating youths through programmes like YSEALI or the British Chevening scholarships and funding and directing fronts posing as NGOs has led to the creation of entire political parties contesting power, comprised of indoctrinated youths beholden both to the notions of Western culture and institutions as well as the money and technical support nations like the US and UK directly provide these parties.

Hong Kong's "Demosisto" political party is made up entirely of youths and NGO representatives that have been created and funded for years by the US, UK and various other European interests.

Myanmar's ruling National League for Democracy has the top echelons of its party run by former journalists, activists and politicians cultivated, funded and trained by US-funded programmes for decades. This includes the current minister of information, Pe Myint.

Case Study: Thailand

The recently formed "Future Forward" opposition party headed by Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, the heir of a multi-million dollar auto-parts business, has overtly advertised itself as an amalgamation of Western-style neo-liberal political ideology.

While the supposed "founders" of the party appear to fully represent various social issues, the immense amount of money needed to perform "Future Forward's" campaigning indicates the true founders (and financial sponsors) have chosen to remain behind the scenes.


Reuters in its article, "Thai auto heir launches new party, promises to heal political rift," would admit:

Thanathorn introduced other party co-founders on Thursday, including a filmmaker and a number of activists involved in LGBT and environment causes, among other issues. 

Party co-founder Piyabutr Saengkanokkul, a law lecturer at Bangkok’s Thammasat University, said the party hopes to transcend Thailand’s political divide, a sentiment echoed by the student-led groups that have held anti-junta protests across Bangkok in recent weeks. 

But some say the party might find it difficult to appeal to grassroots voters. 

“Will they, academics and NGOs ... be able to connect with grassroots people, which is a large part of the electoral base?,” asked one Twitter user.

To create that electoral base, the US is currently funding programmes inside Thailand specifically to infiltrate and co-opt local, regional and national concerns. Everything from environmental issues regarding the building of dams and power plants to women's rights and access to education have been used as vectors by US-funded organisations seeking to co-opt and knit together various genuine individual pragmatic causes into a singular, national political clearinghouse.

Part of this singular front's responsibilities will be to serve as a voting bloc to place parties like "Future Forward" into power.

NED and YSEALI are two examples of how single US organisations are targeting and cultivating youths much in the way Tacitus described in Agricola. These individuals are cultivated to be "leaders" who then create their own organisations (often US funded) to begin recruiting and indoctrinating additional members.

Like a pyramid scheme, the efforts' structure enables the US to recruit and indoctrinate Thais faster than any single US organisation could do on its own. While programmes like YSEALI boast of thousands of leaders who undoubtedly have infected thousands more with US-funded indoctrination, its still isn't likely enough to create a voting bloc big enough to place "Future Forward" into power.

But it doesn't need to be. The US is still depending on existing political machines of politicians like US proxy Thaksin Shinawatra to create the support needed to propel "Future Forward" and other parties like it politically. 

Future Forward: The Evolution of a US Proxy  

While Reuters admits that Future Forward has been accused of ties to US proxy Thaksin Shinawatra, the article fails to mention the substantial evidence those making the accusations are citing.

Piyabutr, mentioned by Reuters as the party's co-founder, had previously abused his academic credentials to organise and host an indoor event for Thaksin Shinawatra's United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) also known as red shirts. The event held at Thammasat University, included Thaksin Shinawatra's lobbyist Robert Amsterdam given a front row seat during the proceedings.

The red shirts are Shinawatra's street front whose reputation had become a political liability after back-to-back riots and deadly armed violence the front carried out in 2009-2010.

Piyabutr and fellow academics endeavoured to rehabilitate the UDD's public image by transforming it into a more academic movement, papering over the crass populism and demagoguery used to create it in the first place. While the "red shirt" street front is still used to give emerging successors to Shinawatra's political machinery the numbers they need at public events, protests and rallies, this new, more academic face is what is being presented to the public, and the world.

Soft Power's Final Destination: Consume All, Including Allies  

The US will continue attempting to create a voting bloc independent of traditional political figures like Thaksin Shinawatra and his own networks of patronage. While Thaksin Shinawatra has been a loyal servant of US interests for years, the US would prefer a political party and a voting bloc it controls entirely on its own. By Shinawatra supporting the creation of parties like "Future Forward" he is in reality sealing his own political fate.

Special interests sponsoring "Future Forward's" political activities are also creating a monster that will eventually consume them both politically and economically in the future. As demonstrated in nations around the world subjected to the full cycle of US meddling, co-opting, infiltration and domination, even those special interests that eagerly assisted US ambitions find themselves unwelcomed competitors once the US finally succeeds.

Those who believe they can "ride the tiger" of US hegemony into power often find themselves the target of the very domestic networks of agitators and activists they helped the US create.

Protecting Against US Soft Power 

Clearly, the soft power process has nothing to do with any genuine interpretation of democracy. It is simply using democratic themes and procedures to lend legitimacy to what is modern day imperialism and the very sort of soft power employed by the Romans against the ancient world centuries ago.

Thailand and other nations targeted by US soft power can only defend themselves by being able to both effectively expose US soft power methods, and by countering them through the work of indigenous institutions and genuine NGOs filling Thailand's political, activist, educational, information and economic space sufficiently enough so that no room remains for foreign-funded alternatives.

As to why the US is so interested in co-opting and controlling Thailand politically, the answer lies in Washington's larger Asia-Pacific agenda which includes the encirclement and containment of China with nations that do business with and are entirely under the influence of Washington. A political party run by the products of decades of US cultural colonisation and soft power efforts taking office in Thailand would directly serve Washington's wider regional ambitions and augment its efforts to co-opt and control Thailand's Southeast Asian neighbours as well.

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