LUMPENPROLETARIAT—Dr. Michel Chossudovsky is a Canadian economist and author. He is a professor of economics at the University of Ottawa and the president and director of the Centre for Research on Globalization, known online as GlobalResearch.ca.
Dr. Chossudovsky has acted as an economic adviser to governments of developing nations and has worked as a consultant for international organisations, including the United Nations Development Programme, the African Development Bank, the United Nations African Institute for Economic Development and Planning, the United Nations Population Fund, the International Labour Organization, the World Health Organisation, and the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. 
On this week’s episode of Guns and Butter, free speech radio host Bonnie Faulkner broadcast a recent interview with Dr. Michel Chossudovsky spanning a broad range of topics of contemporary political economy, police state repression, and imperial wars. 
[Official programme summary from the KPFA audio archive webpage for Guns and Butter for Wednesday, 16 MAR 2016]
State Terrorism: Franco American Style with Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky’s most recent research on the alleged ISIS terror in Paris, as well as the Radisson Hotel terror in Bamako, Mali, is discussed. Analysis of current state sponsored terror in general, within a larger global geopolitical and economic framework, is addressed. Topics include the fundamental contradiction in the official narrative of the War on Terror versus the Islamic state or ISIS; Islamic State, a creation of U.S. intelligence; the geopolitical agenda; the militarization of Africa; the Berlin Conference in the late 19th century; foreknowledge of the Paris terror; French military escalation against Syria planned before the attacks; replication of the 9/11 discourse as a pretext to justify a new wave of bombing against Syria; attack by a foreign power justifies a state of war; the Doctrine of Collective Security, Article 5 of NATO; the Muslim community subjected to a witch hunt; the criminalization of the state and the financial system; the end of the French Republic.
Links and Resources:
[Working draft transcript of actual radio broadcast by Messina for Lumpenproletariat and Guns and Butter]
GUNS AND BUTTER—[16 MAR 2016] “This is Guns and Butter. [intro theme music]
DR. MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY: “But the thing is that to enforce an imperial agenda, you scrap the Republic. Now, Julius Caesar understood that perfectly well. I can’t remember the exact quote. But he said: You don’t build an empire with a republic. And I think that, in effect, what’s happening is that the republic is being scrapped. It’s not only being scrapped in France, it’s being scrapped in America.”
BONNIE FAULKNER: “I’m Bonnie Faulkner. Today on Guns and Butter, Michel Chossudovsky. Today’s show: ‘State Terrorism: Franco American Style.’
“Michel Chossudovsky is an economist and is a founder, director, and editor of the Center for Research on Globalization based in Montreal, Quebec. He’s the author or eleven books, including The Globalization of Poverty and the New World Order, War and Globalization: The Truth Behind September 11th, America’s “War On Terrorism”, The Globalization of Terror: America’s Long War Against Humanity. 
“Today, we discuss his most recent articles on the alleged ISIS terror in Paris as well as the Radisson Hotel terror in Bamako, Mali, a former French colony. We analyse current state-sponsored terror in general within a larger global geopolitical and economic framework.
“Michel Chossudovsky, welcome.” (c. 2:09)
DR. MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY: “I’m delighted to be on Guns and Butter.”
BONNIE FAULKNER: “On November 13, 2015, shootings and suicide bombings were staged in five different locales in Paris, the capitol of France. 130 people were killed. Less than a week after the Paris gun-and-suicide-bomb attacks, a group of heavily armed gunmen stormed the Radisson Blu hotel in Bamako, the capitol of Mali, a former French colony, in which 21 people were killed.
“There have been a string of recent high profile terror attacks, from bombings in Beirut and the downing of a Russian airliner over the Sinai desert.
“Where do you think we should begin in trying to address all of these recent terror attacks?” (c. 2:59)
DR. MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY: “I think there’s a fundamental contradiction in the official narrative, both, of the United States and, of course, of France and its allies. The United States is leading a War On Terrorism, which is directed against the so-called Islamic State. Yet, the evidence amply confirms that the Islamic State and the various al-Qaeda-related terrorist organisations are creations of US intelligence.  They’re what are called, in intelligence parlance, intelligence assets.
“And the other dimension, of course, is that, in effect, Obama is not waging a campaign against the terrorists because these terrorists are, in fact, the foot soldiers of the western military alliance in Syria. And they are, in fact, protecting these terrorists. This is amply confirmed.
“And it’s come to our attention, since the onset of the Russian bombing. And the Russians are going after the real terrorists. So, that when an occurrence, such as that of Paris or Bamako is presented, then, to the media, although the media analyses these events, what they do is simply copy and paste official narratives without presenting an understanding of who is actually behind these terrorist organisations. (c. 4:47)
“Almost immediately, in the wake of the terrorist attacks in Paris, the French media went into overdrive stating, unequivocally, and that was prior to the conduct, even, of a police investigation, that the Islamic State was indelibly behind these attacks.
“And, then, the president François Hollande ordered by decree a national emergency, the suspension of civil liberties, the right to enter homes and arrest people without a warrant, and, at the same time, he closed down the borders.
“Now, this, as I recall, was announced a few minutes before midnight on November 13th, local time, prior to any consultation with any of his cabinet colleagues. He actually confirmed that the cabinet meeting was to take place subsequently. And, in his speech, he says: We know who they are. And, immediately, the French media says: This is the French-style 9/11. And they, in other words, say in French: Le 11 septembre à la française.
“And following from that, the official story prevails. But the official story is based with the fundamental contradiction. You can’t, on the one hand, say you are the victim of the Islamic State, when, in fact, you are the creator of the Islamic State. It’s a non sequitur. You cannot say that the attacks—and he was very explicit—the attacks from outside France, from Syria, originating from Syria, you can’t say that the attacks originating from Syria, directed against the French Republic and, at the same time, support covertly these same terrorists. And there’s ample evidence that, not only, the United States and its allies supported the I.S.I.S. and its affiliates, such as the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.  So, is France, with weapons, with training, with financing, and so on.
“So, that is the situation. And what the French public and western public, in general, have been led to believe is that these terrorists are involved in crimes against humanity, without realising that, in fact, their intelligence services, which are under the auspices of an elected government, are manipulating these terror organisations, are supporting them, are providing them with weapons.” (c. 8:09)
BONNIE FAULKNER: “You write that: The Islamic State, ISIS, the alleged architect of the Paris Attacks, was originally an al-Qaeda-affiliated entity created by U.S. intelligence with the support of Britain’s MI6, Israel’s Mossad, Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), and Saudi Arabia’s General Intelligence Presidency (GIP).
“You write that, quote: ‘From the outset of Obama’s bombing campaign in August-September 2014, the U.S.-led coalition has not bombed ISIS rebel positions.’
“Has the U.S. counter-terrorism campaign been fake?” (c. 8:54)
DR. MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY: “Well, absolutely. (c. 8:57) [SNIP] [Dr. Chossudovsky explains that the so-called War On Terror is only a false pretext to push for a regime change in Syria. The initiative for the western military alliance was started by NATO. The USA and its allies are involved in a criminal undertaking. Now, the bombing campaign is really in response to the fact that government forces had managed to pacify large portions of territory. So, the western bombing is actually designed to destabilise the region. However, nations such as Saudi Arabia are allied with the western powers. And the actual terrorists continue to be trained in Afghanistan and Pakistan. In fact, the proclaimed architect of the bombing of the Hotel in Bamako, Belmokhtar, was recruited by the CIA in 1991, when the Soviet-Afghan War was already over. Yet, the CIA was still recruiting intelligence assets, which it could exploit in the Middle East/South Asia. Many of these assets have been used by NATO towards US/NATO imperialist ventures, including training from the CIA.] There’s CIA all over the place. (c. 16:18)
“And they cannot deny, because the evidence is so compelling, that the intelligence services of western countries are supporting the terrorists and, at the same time, the governments of western countries are waging a campaign, allegedly, against the Islamic State, when, in fact, they are also supporting the Islamic State. And they are using this as a pretext to bomb a sovereign country, resulting in tens of thousands of casualties, a refugee crisis, the destruction of entire cities, and so on, during a period of four years.” (c. 17:02)
BONNIE FAULKNER: “[inhales]”
DR. MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY: “That is the picture. And we don’t need to start engaging in any kind of conspiracy theories to underscore the fact that, if the intelligence services of France and the United States are supporting I.S.I.S., and I.S.I.S. is designated as the threat to the security of the French nation, there’s an obvious contradiction because you can’t support the I.S.I.S. and, then, make a speech at 12 o’clock at night—I’m talking about president Hollande saying: We know who they are. They’re attacking us. They’re killing our people.
“So, I think, to put it mildly, president François Hollande has blood on his hands.” (c. 17:52)
BONNIE FAULKNER: “I’m speaking with economist and director of the Centre for Research on Globalization, Michel Chossudovsky. Today’s show: State Terrorism: Franco American Style. I’m Bonnie Faulkner. This is Guns and Butter.
“Now, you’ve been referring to the Bamako, Mali attacks, the most recent terror attacks. News media report that the Bamako terror operation was coordinated by Mokhtar Belmokhtar, whom you have mentioned. What do you think is the significance of the Bamako attacks? And were the Mali attacks in Bamako related to the Paris terror? For instance, what was France’s role in the Libyan War and the take-down of Muammar Gaddafi? Is this all related?” (c. 18:46)
DR. MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY: “Well, let me put it this way. Both attacks, both, the Paris Attacks as well as the Bamako attacks, have geopolitical implications.
“First, with regards to Paris, it’s worth noting that one week before these attacks occurred, Paris, the Hollande government had ordered the deployment of the Charles de Gaulle Aircraft Carrier Group to the Mediterranean, to the east of the Mediterranean. And this was in support of the alleged campaign against terrorism in Syria. So, that they were, actually, even before these attacks occurred, they’d already been preparing to send their, this powerful Navy and Air Force deployment to the Middle East in support of Obama’s campaign against the I.S.I.S. (c. 19:44)
“And, in the wake of the Paris attacks, as we recall, the French Air Force went in and bombed the alleged headquarters of I.S.I.S. And the official declaration from the Ministry of Defence was that they had actually targeted the command post. We got information from Syria that, in fact, what they targeted were health clinics, a museum, and a stadium, in other words, the country’s civilian infrastructure. And that has been persistent throughout the last year, since the United States started to bomb Syria. (c. 20:24) [SNIP]
[Dr. Michel Chossudovsky also elaborated on the geopolitical implications of the Bamako attacks, namely to “create a pretext and a justification for the intervention of France and the United States in Sub-Saharan Africa.” Again, argued Dr. Chossudovsky, all of the so-called terrorists are western intelligence assets. The end goal is a recolonisation and militarisation of the African continent via AFRI-COM. Dr. Chossudovsky also argued that French president François Hollande is a U.S. proxy, who acts in a subordinate role on behalf of Washington, D.C. to pave the way toward the U.S. colonisation of the African continent, which was originally colonised by the European empires. The Berlin Conference carved up the African continent amongst the European imperialists, France, Portugal, Belgium, et al.] (c. 23:56) The dollar will eventually replace the CFA Franc, which is a proxy currency linked to the French—well, it’s linked to the French Treasury, but it’s tied in to the Euro.
“And, so, that is the—I think that is the scenario. It’s the conquest of the African Continent, which is supported by the mandate, the self-proclaimed mandate of the Obama administration to go after the terrorists in Sub-Saharan Africa: Boko Haram, AQIM, and so on.
“And they’re doing that in all the various areas where they want to extend their zone of influence. So, you have, of course, in south-east Asia you will have Jemaah Islamiyah, in Indonesia and Malaysia. And, then, you’ve got, of course, various other jihadist organisations in the western parts of China, which are involved, again, in insurgencies. And they’re also supported by western intelligence via Pakistan’s ISI.” (c. 25:04)
BONNIE FAULKNER: “It sounds like the United States and France are working very closely together. And that there is, then, evidence that the French military escalation directed against Syria was planned before the November 13th terrorist attacks.
“What evidence is there, if any, of official foreknowledge of the Paris terror itself?”
DR. MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY: “Well, you’re absolutely right that France has been participating in the bombing raids right from the outset. (c. 25:38) [SNIP]
[Dr. Chossudovsky cautiously approached the question of foreknowledge, citing an article in 1994 in a “widely read” “tabloid”, which is somehow “authoritative”. This tabloid, argues Dr. Chossudovsky, predicted a 9/11-like attack in France. Dr. Chossudovsky argues that French authorities used the bombings as a pretext to engage in US/NATO imperialism in target regions, particularly in Syria, citing Article 5, even though France was not under attack by a ‘foreign power’, even though the bombings were a police matter, not a military matter.]” (c. 29:11)
“But they’re doing exactly the same. They’re replicating the discourse, the 9/11 discourse, the fact that this is an attack from a foreign power. It just so happens that that foreign power is in northern Syria somewhere.
“And they’re using this as a pretext to escalate the war against Syria, not against their proxy terrorists in Raqqa, and to justify a new wave of bombing by coalition forces. And I think that is, ultimately, the agenda.” (c. 29:51)
BONNIE FAULKNER: “I’m speaking with economist and director for the Centre for Research on Globalization, Michel Chossudovsky. Today’s show: ‘State Terrorism: Franco American Style.’ I’m Bonnie Faulkner. This is Guns and Butter.” (c. 30:09)
DR. MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY: “Then they have to confront Russia because Russia is also—Russia is going after the real terrorists. Okay? (c. 30:16) [SNIP] [Dr. Chossudovsky goes on to argue that US/NATO imperialists need a pretext to undermine Russia’s endeavours, which consist of destroying the foot soldiers of the western military alliance, i.e., the intelligence assets, which are the terrorists supported perversely by the CIA, MI6, and the Mossad. Isreal is also behind the terrorists, as they’ve admitted that “they have a facility in the Golan Heights, which provides hospital treatment to wounded terrorists.] (c. 31:45)
“So, the issue is that none of what we’re discussing here will be given coverage in the mainstream media. And the public is drowned with a humanitarian discourse. Innocent people are being killed. And it’s those events, where terrorists attack innocent people, which, ultimately, creates within everybody this feeling of solidarity, of fear as well. Ultimately, when people die we feel it. Okay?
“And, then, what we do is we side with the government. Okay? That’s what they’re doing. And everybody’s siding with the French government, even people who hate them—François Hollande. They’re siding with the French government because the French government is there to protect them. And they are shocked and concerned about the loss of life. And that concept, or that procedure there, is well-entrenched, in fact, in U.S. military doctrine. (c. 33:03)
“I should remind listeners of what was called Operation Northwoods. It was during the Kennedy administration. It was a secret plan by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to start killing people in the Miami Cuban community as well as in Washington with a view to justifying a war of retribution against Cuba.
“And I quote from the official document. They said, We kill people in Miami and that creates, quote, ‘a useful wave of indignation’—okay?—‘indignation of U.S. public opinion,’ which is a normal thing. Everybody has indignation when people are killed.
“And, then, they say: Well, Cuba, Fidel Castro, has attacked America. We have to attack Cuba in retribution. Now, that is the logic of these so-called false flags.
“And Operation Northwoods, the documents are there. People can go and consult them because those secret documents have been declassified after half a century. And we know that the U.S., that the U.S. military were contemplating this. It was turned down by Kennedy. And it was also turned down by the Defense Secretary McNamara, at the time. Okay?
“So that, in effect, it was a plot from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, no doubt also supported by U.S. intelligence at the time. (c. 34:44) [SNIP] (c. 36:05)
BONNIE FAULKNER: “I’m glad you mentioned Operation Northwoods because we are actually recording this interview on November 22nd , which is the 52nd Anniversary of the assassination of the president in the United States. Of course, we have seen endless war ever since.
“In terms of the media coverage of the Paris terror attacks, it seems like the notion of revenge is being used as a motivating factor. And, of course, this is a contradictory claim. Right?”
DR. MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY: “Well, you know, revenge, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, has been with us for several thousand years. You need a pretext to wage war. And war, in the modern context, and the political leaders know that war is the ultimate crime under Nuremberg. Whatever is the underlying motive, the only war, which is allowed, is a war of self defence. Okay?
“You are allowed to defend yourself against aggression. But, under Nuremberg, any act of war against a foreign country is a criminal undertaking. (c. 37:19) [SNIP]
[SNIP] (c. 59:59)
Learn more at GUNS AND BUTTER.
[This transcript will be expanded as time constraints, and/or demand or resources, allow.]
 For more on Dr. Michel Chossudovsky, see:
A bio of Dr. Michel Chossudovsky, published by the Venezuelan Consulate in Montreal:
Born in Canada in 1946. He graduated as an Economist from the University of Manchester, England, and obtained a PhD at the University of North Carolina, USA; he is professor of economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa.
Chossudovsky has been a visiting professor in countries throughout Western Europe, Southeast Asia and Latin America. Also, he has been involved with consulting several different international organizations and has been an advisor to governments of developing countries.
He was the President of the Canadian Association of Latin America and the Caribbean. He is an active member of the anti-war movement in Canada and has written extensively on the war in Yugoslavia. After the September 11 attacks, he has been involved in highlighting the historical events between the Government of United States, Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.
His most outstanding work titled “The Globalization of Poverty” was published in 11 languages. It is also a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. In 2003 Chossudovsky won the prize for human rights for the protection of civil rights and human dignity in Berlin. Profesor Chossudovsky is President and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), an independent research and media organization based in Montreal, Canada. This centre maintains a website that promotes different views about policies and international relations between the United States and NATO.
A bio of Michel Chossudovsky, published in the Ottowa Citizen, “Battling Mainstream Economics” by Juliet ONeill.
The faint moans of his daughter’s cello practice barely break the hush of Michel Chossudovsky’s household.
The kitchen, bathed in winter light, is gleaming. It is here, at a well-worn wooden table, that the University of Ottawa economics professor wants to talk.
The sunken-leather sofas of the living room — with its gallery of African masks, Peruvian pottery, Chinese teapots and other treasures from some of the 100 countries he has visited –would be “too comfortable.”
Stiff-backed chairs do feel more appropriate for the subject at hand: How poverty is increasing around the world and how this is not by accident, but by the design of a small, powerful banking and business elite at whose behest the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund have provoked “economic and social collapse” in many countries.
The discussion is about widespread complacency toward what Mr. Chossudovsky calls a global financial crisis — in which private speculators wield more power than governments over central bank coffers — that may swerve into a crash far worse than the Dirty Thirties, jeopardizing pension and retirement savings funds.
It is about how so many people, expert and layman alike, accept a dominant “neo-liberal” economic dogma which makes suffering and sacrifice — from unemployment and social service cuts in Ontario to mass destitution in Russia — seem inevitable, if not justifiable and acceptable.
“Absurdity,” he says. “I have difficulty in understanding why the dismantling or closing down of productive assets — hospitals and schools — could constitute the key to prosperity. But that is what is actually being conveyed. The official mainstream economic agenda is that you have to close down, downsize, lay off, and that is the key to prosperity.”
Mr. Chossudovsky, a 52-year-old author who has learned to speak 10 languages and writes in three (English, French and Spanish), has persisted for three decades with an increasingly unfashionable perspective on world events.
It keeps him on the margins of mainstream commentary in Canada but wins praise from such equally anti-establishment social theorists as American Noam Chomsky.
He agrees to being described as having a leftist perspective, but emphasizes that he is not allied with any political party, including socialists, at home or abroad.
“One doesn’t know who the socialists are any more because the socialists are all in favour of the neo-liberal agenda,” he says. “If you look at socialists in Europe, what are they doing? They’re adopting austerity measures. I wouldn’t want to put a political label on myself because the neo-liberal consensus is supported by right-wing and left-wing parties alike, including the New Democratic Party.”
Raised in Geneva, Switzerland, Mr. Chossudovsky followed in his father’s footsteps by becoming an economist. But his father, a Russian emigre, made a career as a United Nations diplomat, while Mr. Chossudovsky put his economics training to use as a teacher and analyst. He came to the University of Ottawa in 1968, attracted by the promise of a bilingual lifestyle.
It was as a young visiting professor at the Catholic University in Santiago, Chile, that Mr. Chossudovsky’s interest in “economic repression” was first pricked.
Augusto Pinochet’s military junta, which overthrew Salvador Allende in 1973, quadrupled the price of bread and introduced other measures that would now be referred to as “a structural adjustment program.”
Mr. Chossudovsky set out, with a doctor, to study the malnourishment resulting from the bread price hike. He wound up with a paper that held the Pinochet regime responsible not only for conventional forms of political repression but for “economic repression” that impoverished three-quarters of Chile’s population.
Since then he has documented the purposeful impoverishment of people in dozens of countries. His latest book, the Globalization of Poverty, contains case studies of the collapse of economies and social structures in Somalia, Rwanda, Vietnam, India, Brazil, Peru, Russia and the former Yugoslavia. In some of these countries, IMF/World Bank intervention preceded violent conflict.
He refers often to “the hidden agenda” of the big banking and financial organizations. They orchestrate collapses, he says, by demanding payment of debt service charges and then lending money to cover the charges but only on condition the recipient country impose such measures as austerity, privatization and currency devaluation. The impact is usually destructive: mass shutdowns, huge unemployment, a wipeout of savings and pensions and purchasing power, a loss of social services.
Such economic shock therapy, he says, has pushed Russia, for one, “back to the medieval era,” impoverishing millions of people, deepening the country’s foreign debt, driving more than half the country’s industrial plants into bankruptcy and allowing organized crime to flourish in the banking, real estate and other sectors of the economy.
Mr. Chossudovsky generally condemns “the criminalization” of the global economy in which increasingly large amounts of drug money and other illegally obtained funds are deposited in the world’s 55 offshore havens, escaping taxation. The funds are laundered through an international banking system in which capital movement is easier than ever owing to the revolution in digital communications.
“This critical drain of billions of dollars in capital flight dramatically reduces state tax revenues, paralyses social programs, drives up budget deficits and spurs the accumulation of large public debts,” he writes.
An end to offshore tax havens is one of the few solutions Chossudovsky advocates. He also says the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and commercial banks should not be allowed to “pillage” the central banks of troubled countries.
He is much stronger on description than prescription. But his descriptions alone constitute a defiance of mainstream economic scholarship in which “critical analysis is strongly discouraged.”
It has not, however, stopped him from teaching for 30 years at U of O and as a visiting professor in several other countries, as well as publishing several books, the latest appearing in nine languages. And while the mainstream media in Canada do not publish his commentary, he is published frequently in Le Monde Diplomatique and smaller magazines that don’t have investors or business advertisers.
Prof. Michel Chossudovsky has documented impoverishment of people in dozens of countries.
 Terrestrial radio transmission, 94.1 FM (KPFA, Berkeley, CA) with online simulcast and digital archiving: Guns and Butter, hosted by Bonnie Faulkner, for Wednesday, 16 MAR 2016, 13:00 PDT.
 Also see a selected Chossudovsky bibliography here.
 With regard to “the evidence”, of which Dr. Michel Chossudovsky speaks, perhaps, we should begin with the research available at his website for the Centre for Research on Globalization, or Global Research.
[17 MAR 2016]
[Last modified 23:29 PDT 17 MAR 2016]