The Israeli card in Russian grand strategy

(Editor’s note: the following article was published by Lyndon LaRouche’s Executive Intelligence Review. LaRouche seemed to be a Fabian socialist with a penchant for blaming the world conspiracy on the British (Anglo-American) and the Jesuits, obvious disinformation, so the reader is advised to keep in mind the LaRouche biases when reading this article.)

Rafael Eitan, Benjamin Netanyahu and Ariel Sharon (Photo by David Rubinger/CORBIS/Corbis via Getty Images)

By Criton Zoakos and Mark Burdman
January 24, 1986 Anno Domini
EIR Feature

A powerful faction inside the Mossad, Israel’s intelligence organization, has deployed, in coordination with the Russian KGB, a formidable terror and assas­sination capability against the United States. The “Jonathan Pollard Espionage Affair” of “Dirty Rafi” Raphael Eytan, Ariel Sharon’s cohort, is merely the tip of the iceberg. As the accompanying report details, both Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and Lyndon H. LaRouche are among, the known largets of this Mossad operation-of that component of the Mossad which draws its inspiration from the old Irgun, and receives its orders from the Ariel Sharon-David Kimche-Rafi Eytan cabal.

The credulous among our readers may find this Russian KGB-Irgunist Mossad alignment something of a surprise. But it is no surprise either to students of Russian grand strategy, or to those who know their history of Zionism.

Not only the historian, but also the average contemporary intelligence officer is well aware of this Russian influence over the Irgun’s offspring in the Mossad. For example, the current issue of the London-published Middle East International magazine carried a story, inspired by the scandal of “false flag” Israeli-Soviet spy Pollard, recounting how the present President of,lsrael, Chaim Herzog, was once expelled from the United States for espionage. ,The item is noteworthy for the discussions it provoked among intelligence professionals. One of them remarked: “In return-ror the Soviet Union’s release of Soviet Jews for emigration, the Israelis have been passing on intelligence materials to Moscow on a quid-pro-quo basis. This has been going on for decades, and it certainly began well before the 1967 war. . . . There has been a pattern of release of Soviet Jews coinciding with the Soviets’ acquisition of militarily sensitive Western technologies.”

However, trading manpower for technology, is the least interesting area of coopera.tion between the Mossad Irgunists and the Russian KGB. The respective strategic perspectives of each of the two partners, which draw them into this 
collaboration against the United States, is of much greater significance.

Rafi Eitan, Mossad Agent (Photo by David Rubinger/CORBIS/Corbis via Getty Images)

The specifics for the present Russian-Israeli collaboration were hammered out in August 1981, during a top-secret meeting in Limassol, Cyprus, between then-Defense Minis­ter Ariel Sharon and senior officers of the Russian secret services. The talks involved general understandings respect­ ing the two governments’ longer-term strategic roles in world affairs.

In the present World strategic crisis, Russia, in its drive to establish itself as a “Third and Final Rome,” a sole world imperial arbiter by 1988, is willing to permit Israel to play the role of arbiter in Mediterranean affairs once played by Venice, provided that such a role facilitates Russian ambi­tions. By the same token, the leading Israeli strategists, Ariel Sharon, David Kimche, and the “considerable interests” be­ hind them, are willing to accommodate Russia’s “Third and Final Rome” ambitions, provided that they facilitate their own prospects of transforming Israel into the “New Venice.”

These mutual accommodations have often been dis­cussed, since at least August of 1981, between Ariel Sharon and his representatives, and senior representatives of the Russian intelligence services. More important than the de­tails of the Sharon-Russian understandings, are those ill­ concealed “considerable interests” which, over the decades, have sponsored both Sharon’s career and the network of influence which has promoted him, the old lrgun apparatus.

These “considerable interests” could, for convenience, be dubbed “The Odessa Complex,” named after the Russian port-city which originally gave birth to the darker side of the Zionist movement during the latter ‘part of the 19th century, when it was the self-assigned task of the Imperial Okhrana to create Zionism. At the top of the “Odessa Complex,” one finds the leading Jewish financial families of the Ottoman Empire, the Dwecks of Aleppo and the Recanati of Salonica, operating under the supervision of the Luzzattos of Venice. No major established financial family of Odessa itself is identified since the city of Odessa had been founded a mere one century earlier, on advice given to Empress Catherine the Great from her Venetian advisers.

From the 1881 Russian pogroms onward, these families organized a large-scale emigration of Russian Jews to Pal­estine, which was then under the control of the Ottoman Empire. The first large-scale settlement of Jews in Palestine, the first “Aliyah,” was organized, at the Russian port-city of Odessa, by these above-named Jewish financial families in the Ottoman Empire and Venice, running the famous “Odes­sa Committee,” the Zionist travel bureau. Over 90 per cent of the Jews who then settled in Ottoman Palestine were from Rus­sia, traveling through Odessa. In fact, the Ottoman govern­ment authorities of the period considered Zionism to be just another pseudo-nationalist movement, organized by Russian imperialists toward the purpose of subverting and disman­tling the Ottoman Empire. This evaluation of the Ottoman authorities of the time was not too wide of the mark.

The simple facts of the case at the time were three: First, as the Ottoman authorities saw it, virtually all of the Jewish settlers into Palestine were Russian, boarding ships from Odessa; second, virtually all of the visible leaders of the young Zionist movement were Russian Jews, most of them born and raised in Odessa; third, the leadership of the Russian secret service, the Okhrana-whose founder, Count Nicho­las Ignatiev, once served as Russian ambassador to Istan­bul—was actively and visibly supporting, promoting, and financing ZionisIp.The Ottoman administration’s immedi­ately prior experience of Russian Middle East strategic ob­jectives, that is, immediately prior to the first great upsurge of Zionist “Aliyah” of 1880-1900, was the Crimean War of 1854-56, which had grown out of Russia’s claim to protect all Orthodox Christians living in the Ottoman Empire. Istanbul, from its standpoint, had every reason to believe that “Zionism” was just another Russian imperial ploy to subvert the Ottoman Empire. However, since the defense and national security of that Empire had been transferred, by means of the Berlin Treaty of 1878, to Great Britain, and specifically to the Luzzatto-influenced British prime minister of Venetian ancestry Benjamin Disraeli (Lord Beaconsfield), Istanbul had no choice but acquiesce in the settlement in Palestine of the, Russian Jews of ‘the first “Aliyah.”

It happens to be the case that the founder of Russian Zionism, Leo Pinsker, spent all his life in Odessa. Later, many other Zionist leaders, including Vladimir Jabotinskii, the founder of the Irgun, were born and raised in Odessa. In general, Zionism, as one of the nationalist movements of the 19th century, was created exclusively in Russia and had appeal only among Russian Jews, who, contrary to their co­ religionists in Western Europe, could see no possibility of assimilating themselves in the surrounding brutality of Rus­sian Orthodoxy. When Count Nicholas Ignatiev, the legend­ ary political organizer of the Pan-Slavist movement, became Russia’s interior minister and founded the Okhrana, he con­sidered it his first priority to unleash the dreaded pogroms of 1881-82, which became the driving force for the growth of Zionism as a popular movement. Only after these pogroms did Russian Jews begin to heed the call of the handful of Okhrana-financed Odessa Zionist organizers to go and emigrate to Palestine.

Later Russian interior ministers and Okhrana chiefs con­tinued Ignatiev’s Jewish policies, which eventually became the engrained habit of the Russian state.These policies were cynically expressed by Konstantin Pobedonostsev in the fol­lowing epigrammatic way: “One-third of the Jews will die out, one-third will leave the country, one-third will be assim­ilated and melt into the surrounding population.”

Pobedonostsev, of course, was the great official popular­izer and promoter of Fyodor Dostoevskii, the father of Russian anti-Semitism and, as documents show, of official Nazi anti-Semitism as well.

Another interior minister of the turn of the century, von Plehve, once said to Theodore Herzl, the great theoretician of Zionism: “You are preaching to a convert….we would very much like to see the creation of an independent Jewish state capable of absorbing several millions Jews.”

When the aforementioned von Plehve was interior min­ister, the chief of the Okhrana was the notorious Sergei Vas­ ilievich Zubatov.This Zubatov is known for organizing the world’s most famous secret-service-controlled labor movement, which has come dowrt in history as “Zubatov Trade Unionism.” He should become equally famous for founding “Zubatov Zionism.” In this respect, it should be noted that the first Zionist organization Which the fire-eating founder of the Irgun, VladimirJabotinsky, ever joined, was controlled, and financed by Sergei Zubatov.

TEL AVIV, ISRAEL: Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon gives a speech next to a photograph of the spiritual founding father of Israel’s righ-twing ideology, Zeev Jabotinsky, as members of the Likud party show banners against and in favor of a coalition with the Labor party during the Likud convention in the Israeli city of Tel Aviv 18 August 2004. Sharon showed his determination to bring the opposition Labour faction into government Wednesday by telling his Likud party’s convention Wednesday he would negotiate with any “Zionist party.” —PEDRO UGARTE/AFP via Getty Images)

The story in summary is as follows: From 1900 on, Zubatov began to systematically encourage Zionism and do all in his power ot ensure the success of the first legal Zionist congress to take place in Russia, the 1902 Minsk Congres. He said, at the time: “Inside Jewry, such a great internal ferment is taking place, a reformation (for us not only harmless, but, owing to the circumstances of the time, also advantageous)…. It is necessary to support Zionism and, in general, to play upon nationalistic aspirations.” He hired one Manya Velbushevuch, a Jewish women who had earlier been arrested for subversive activities, as his agent. In 1900, she sent a message to Zubatov: “Congratulate me with a great victory I did not expect so soon. Now all the Zionists are our assistants. It only remains to discover how to make use of their services.” She received praise for her work from Minister of the Interior von Plehve. Vilbushevich, ca.1905, went to Paris, after having made a trip to Palestine, and raised money there from various people, including Edmond de Rothschild, for Jewish “self-defense” groups. Ultimately, Vladimir Jabotinskii, the founder of the Irgun, whom David Ben-Gurion called “Vladimir Hitler,” joined one of these Zionist groups, controlled and financed by the Okhrana’s Sergei Zubatov and his agents.

Today: Odessa and ‘The Trust’
Libya’s economy, now subject to economic warfare by the Reagan administration, is, to a large extent, in the hands of the “founding families” of Zionism, Luzzatto, Recanati, Dweck, and the junior partners whom they co-opted, at the tum of the century, in Odessa.The umbrella “management committee ” for Libya’s finances is a shady, quasi-formal grouping which has existed for the best part of this century, under the nickname “The Trust.” Three Odessa-born individ­ uals played a prominent role in shaping it in its modem form: Julius Hammer, the father of Occidental Petroleum’s Ar­mand Hammer; Alexander Helphand (Parvus); and Sidney Reilly.All played a prominent role in the 1917 Russian Revolution and in the reorganization of the Russian economy from the time of Lenin’s “New Economic Policy ” to the conclusion of Stalin’s First Five-Year-Plan-but this is an­ other story.

Most of Libya’s oil—which is the Libyan economy—is managed by three well-known heirs of “The Trust,” namely Armand Hammer, Max Fisher, and Edgar Bronfman (see accompanying article). Two of the three, Hammer and Bronfman, are playing a very prominent role, almost contin­uously since the August 1981 secret meetings between Shar­on and the KGB/GRU in Cyprus, in arranging and managing the new Russian-Israeli relationship. In the deep background, behind the names ‘Hammer, Fischer, and Bronfman, hide discretely and securely the old Venetian/Ottoman banking families: Luzzatto of Venice, Recanati of Salonica. Dweck of. Aleppo. whose role in the founding of the Zionist move­ment—and the state of Israel—is more important, though less glamorous, than that of Baron de Rothschild.

One example: Israel has bought petroleum from’Libya for many years now. The transaction is, reportedly, managed by the Venetian Luzzattos, through the mediation of a Re­canati front-man, with the oil produced by Hammer. The Recanati agent in question is a Greek shipowner by the name of John, or Giovanni, Latsis, whose corporate headquarters are in New York and who spends half his time in Italy.The chairman of the board of Latsis’s New York company is a Greek Orthodox priest, Father Basil, who is also a member of the board of directors of the Recanati family bank, the Israel Discount Bank, founded by Leon Recanati, who emi­ grated toPalestine in 1935 from his native Salonica. ‘

This is only a tiny example of what ”The Trust” is en­ gaged in, in terins of international economic and financial transactions. Hammer’s larger role, including the activities of his “Golden Mercury” organization in Luzzatto’s Venice, is perhaps slightly more indicative of the broader role of “The Trust,” inclusive of its dominant Anglo-American compo­nent, in managing a significant part of the world’s great affairs, especially in the domain of what is called “East-West relations.”

To stick narrowly to the subject at hand, the present Russian-Israeli relationship, we can simply observe that there is an unbroken continuity in the interrelationship between Great Russian Imperial grand strategy and Zionist grand strategy, in large part mediated by the broader-based “Trust,” a continuity which pre-dates the Russian Revolution, the two world wars, and the founding of the state of Israel. That continuity goes back to the coordinated way in which the 18th-century Venetian Luzzattos persuaded the 18th-centu­ry, Venice-educated Orloff brothers, to found the city of Odessa; how the 19th-century Luzzattos, Recanatis, and Dwecks persuaded the 19th-century Ignatievs, Plehves, and Zubatovs to force Russian Jews out by means of terror and pogroms—and thus to launch the Zionist movement.

NEW YORK CITY, USA – SEPTEMBER 27, 2019: United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres makes remarks at the opening of a photography exhibition in memory of Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko on the sidelines of the 74th session of the United Nations General Assembly at the UN headquarters. (Photo by Valery SharifulinTASS via Getty Images)

Grand strategies
When Israel was founded, in 1948, it was hardly Ameri­ca’s “staunchest ally” in the Middle East.The young Andrei Gromyko’s vote at the United Nations played a decisive role in overcoming British objections to Israeli nationhood. The Haganah, which secured Israeli independence by combatting Arab opposition, was primarily dependent on Soviet and Czechoslovak weapons shipments. It was also the Odessa­-originating Irgun, which organized Arab opposition and the panicked flight of the Palestinians, by means of the Deir Yassin massacre, carried out with Soviet and Czechoslovak weapons.

The “pro-Western” character of the state of Israel began taking shape under very peculiar circumstances, yet to be clarified, during the Suez crisis of 1956. It will be recalled that that crisis began when Israeli paratroopers were dropped at the MitIa Pass in the Sinai, in order to give occasion to nearby British and French naval forces to intervene and try to recapture the Suez Canal from tHe Egyptians. The opera­tion had been timed to divert world attention from the fact that, at that same time, Ambassador Yuri Andropov was crushing the anti-Russian revolution in Hungary.

It will also be recalled that this titning of the Suez crisis­—so convenient for the Russians—took place shortly after the famous “de-Stalinization” congress of the Soviet Communist Party, at which the Israeli Mossad graciously circulated to the West copies of Nikita Khrushchev’s historic “secret speech,” which indeed remained secret for several months afterward, only in the Soviet Union. The fact that the Mos­sad, or someone inside the Mossad, had access to Khrush­chev’s secret de-Stalinization speech, is important. With it, the post-Stalin Russian leadership bad signaled to the world that it was now ready, after Stalin’s demise, to resume its old business with “The Trust.”

None of this, of course, is to argue that Zionist leaders view themselves as Russian assets, though many of them certainly are, and though Ariel Shaton and Armand Hammer most especially are. The point is that the much-touted “sur­vivor” mentality so much valued among militant Zionists, has been, historically, grafted onto them by official Russian state imperial policy for over a century now, long before the “Bettelheim syndrome” was studied by Great Britain’s Tav­istock Clinic.

To better understand Arid Sharon’s and his braintruster David Kimche’s current pro-Russian, anti-American policy, one must proceed from the fact that Soviet grand strategy is seen, in Moscow, as the concluding chapter of a longstanding Russian chauvinist imperial commitment to establish Mos­cow as the “Third and Final Rome,” the center of a sole, ecumenical empire, modeled after the Byzantine Empire and its predecessor, Imperial Rome. Most of 19th-century Rus­sian policy, from the Crimean War onward, was determined by this growing impulse of the “Third Rome” perspective, which, among its features, included the “drive for warm­ water ports,” which stands as a euphemism for taking over the Middle East, and the brutal, cynical inducement to force East European Jews to embrace Zionism as their only re­maining choice for survival and self-respect.

During 1986, General Secretary Gorbachov’s govern­ment intends to remove all U.S. military presence from the Mediterranean Sea and, as a result, turn this vital artery which carries 75 per cent of Western Europe’s trade, into a Russian lake, from the standpoint of preponderate naval power. Also dur­ing 1986, Moscow intends, by means of military blackmail and appropriate arms-control proposals, to decouple the de­fense of Western Europe from that of the United States. Toward these two objectives, Moscow has assigned Israel one very important role: Israel is to ensure that no political forces friendly to the United States remain in positions of power and influence either in the Arab world, or anywhere else in the Mediterranean basin. This is the significance of last winter’s aerial bombardment of Tunisia, of the Achille Lauro crisis and its aftermath, and of the current, Mossad- triggered Libyan crisis.

From their perspective, Sharon’s Irgunist friends, ga­memaster David Kimche (the secret author of Sharon’s “Mediterranean strategy”), and the old “Trust” interests in the Zionist orbit, Recanati, Dwecks, Luzzattos, see in this vast redistribution of power in the Mediterranean and the Near East, their golden opportunity to establish themselves as the “New Venice.” Their game, in large part, depends on rapidly eliminating the last remnants of pro-U.S.A. loyalists in the region, so as to present Israel as the “sole” asset the United States will depend upon. For the weeks ahead, there is an additional twist in Sharon’s perspective: Sharon and his friends are now committed to accelerating this process of knocking the United States out of the picture before the Rus­sian gameplan has consolidated its positions, so as to make Moscow also depend, at least in part, on Israeli policies. Defense Secretary Weinberger’s continuing refusal to in­volve the United States in a set-up, losing military adventure against Qaddafi, is, at this time, the principal obstacle to Sharon’s present, accelerated gameplan.


  1. With mention of Rafi Eitan, here an enlightening essay by Dugin’s side-kick, zionist Avigdor Eskin.

    Avigdor Eskin. Russian-Jewish symbiosis of our days

    “Shortly after leaving the post of chief of the General Staff of Israel in 1983, Rafael Eitan gave an interview to Israeli radio and spoke about his musical tastes. “Most of all I like to listen to the marches of the ensemble of the Red Army,” shared the hero of all the wars of Israel with the audience. – I tried to introduce Russian fighting spirit into our army. It always helped in battle. ”

    After leaving the service, Eitan created the movement for the revival of Zionism Tsomet, who managed to get eight seats in the Knesset in the 1991 elections. The retired general was a staunch opponent of any concessions to the Arabs, advocated for the rejection of American assistance and fought against the introduction of Mondialist culture in Israeli society. In this regard, the origin of Eitan is interesting. His parents, the Orlovs, are Russian people who came to the Holy Land at the beginning of the century. Neither themselves nor their son ever accepted Judaism and considered themselves Russian. This did not stop Eitan from feeling like an Israeli, fighting for the revival of Zionism and rising to the highest post in the Israel Defense Forces.

    Russian-Jewish symbiosis permeates the entire history of the Zionist movement and the State of Israel. Created at the end of the 19th century, the Zionist movement was led at first by liberal nationalists from Germany. Herzel, Wolfson, and Nordau can be attributed to this category. They were carriers of the European spirit, divorced from Jewish roots. Their arrival in the Zionist movement was a reaction to the Dreyfus process and other manifestations of anti-Semitism in Europe at that time. “Since Europe does not want us, we need to create our own state,” they thought.

    Since the beginning of the twentieth century, the Zionist movement has increasingly smelled of the Russian spirit. The vast majority of immigrants to what was then Palestine were Jews of the Russian Empire, who quickly seized leading positions in the administration of the Zionist organization.

    It should be noted that already at the beginning of the XIX century. among the Jews, a movement began to return to the Land of Israel and the revival of their state there.

    All the forerunners of Zionism were religious devotees with a Messianic bias.”

    Here we see the Israeli/Zionist connection to Putin and the Eurasian plan, for world Jewish domination;

  2. I read this the day I saw Dia Beltran’s (an Australian YT commentator) interview worth Alexandr Dugin. These are excellent essays and comment that address the emerging synthesis of left and right. This goes way beyond Fukuyama’s end of history conceit. This is the convergence, the Communism of Vol. III of the Kapital. Dugin goes right into the pre-condition for this – the anti-thesis of classical liberalism/individualism revealing its internal contradictions and becoming the new totalitarianism of the elites (corrupt / subverted and seen to be so). The new synthesis becomes Nazbol / AltRight as the vox populi. The importance of the supreme leader / messiah figure (such as Putin) who is close to the people is one of the most important dimensions of Perestroika and Duginism This was very clear in the Beltran interview which went for almost two hours. Dugin speaks very good English. Perestroika has many layers. I think in this interview we had a rare treat of hearing the synthesis from one who has a grasp of it and can articulate it in a foreign language. Dugin is a towering intellect. Only the tradition and culture of the Church will be able to produce the minds capable of meeting him in these debates.
    Dia 91 – Russian philosopher and lecturer Aleksandr Dugin. May 27, 2020

  3. What is even worse, Antonio Guterres doesn’t even look like Portugalese, but far more like Khazaro-Mongolian, same as the royal family of Saud, which doesn’t look like Arabs at all.

    But, what is imporat again, is that pope gave up his title of vicar of christ (I don’t recognise any of his titles, but register them), why is that? It’s because the Mosiach is coming to claim them, once again scoring that vatican is in it, as well as USA and UK.

    Situation is looking even grimmer with this:
    Trump – total zionist
    Johnson – total zionist
    Macron – anti-zionism is anti-semitism, holohoax lies,
    Merkel – Hitler’s daughter, khazarian
    Francis – said saturday (day of saturn) should be the time of worship.
    Peace be with you.

Leave a Reply to MateCancel reply