Alfred de Zayas: “Euro­pean elites are trai­tors to their own countries”


Alfred de Zayas in conver­sa­tion with Unser-Mitteleuropa

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: The USA had staged their second Demo­cracy 2023 Summit orga­nized at the end of March 2023 for selected „demo­cra­cies“. The program promised new approa­ches to streng­then demo­cracy, human rights & new part­ner­ships and stipu­lated: «The first session high­lighted USAID and our part­ners’ efforts to surge resources to refor­mers during demo­cratic openings».

How do you perceive objec­tives and goals of the U.S. for these Summits of Demo­cracy and finally the ques­tion whether fake-demo­cra­cies can mean­while be bought?

Alfred de Zayas: Demo­cracy means govern­ment by the people and for the people. This entails trans­pa­rency and accoun­ta­bi­lity on the part of govern­ment offi­cials, regular consul­ta­tion of the popu­la­tion on important matters, refe­renda in crucial issues. The US claims to have a system of “repre­sen­ta­tive demo­cracy”, but such a system could be considered demo­cratic only if the repre­sen­ta­tives actually repre­sent the popu­la­tion, if there is a corre­la­tion of the will of the people and the govern­mental poli­cies that affect them.

Accor­ding to the above defi­ni­tion the United States is not a demo­cracy and most of the parti­ci­pants at the second “Demo­cracy Summit” had fatal demo­cratic defi­cits. The “summit” was intended as a public rela­tions exer­cise, as a propa­gan­di­stic extra­va­ganza to divide the world into so-called “demo­cra­cies” and the rest, which were excluded from parti­ci­pa­tion, being unila­te­rally considered by the US as auto­cratic, that is “unde­mo­cratic”.

USAID and the National Endow­ment for Demo­cracy are tools of the US govern­ment to impose its values and prio­ri­ties on the rest of the world. Their work has nothing to do with demo­cracy, and ever­y­thing to do with desta­bi­li­zing other govern­ments in the expec­ta­tion of achie­ving unde­mo­cratic regime change. All so-called “colour revo­lu­tions” were to a greater or lesser extent subver­sive uphe­avals, financed by Western govern­ments and Western “NGO’s”. They are not home-grown, but foreign inspired and orchestrated. The so-called Euro­maidan in 2014 was a classic example.

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: The Chinese philo­so­pher Laozi is quoted as saying, „What you talk about, you don’t have.“ The word „demo­cracy“ enjoys infla­tio­nary use in Western echo cham­bers: Why is it that self-proclaimed and supposed model demo­cra­cies succumb to an almost patho­lo­gical urge to tout their model of demo­cracy around the clock, over and above ever­y­thing else and in all direc­tions and seemingly irreplaceable?

Alfred de Zayas: Propa­ganda works on the basis of repe­ti­tion, indoc­tri­na­tion, brain­wa­shing, as we know from Orwell’s 1984 and Aldous Huxley’s dysto­pian novel Brave New World. The United Kingdom and the United States have enormous expe­ri­ence in fake news, fake history and fake law. The Western propa­ganda machine is formi­dable, and many times more effi­cient than that of Goebbels.

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: Aris­totle charac­te­rized the rule of the privi­leged few as „olig­archy”.

As early as the previous century, poli­tical socio­lo­gists warned against abso­lute party rule wrapped in a fake-demo­cracy. Such theory claims, that over time party-system-demo­cra­cies tend to turn into „party olig­ar­chies,“ which attach highest importance to the self-preser­va­tion of their own power.

U.S. poli­tical scien­tists Martin Gilens of Princeton Univer­sity and Benjamin Page of Northwes­tern Univer­sity have clas­si­fied the United States as a so-called „civil olig­archy“ in which the super-rich and pluto­crats deter­mine the most important issues for the U.S. popu­la­tion. In 2015, former U.S. Presi­dent Jimmy Carter declared that the U.S. resem­bled an „olig­archy of unli­mited poli­tical bribery.“

How do you judge said American conditions?

Alfred de Zayas: Carter is right in his charac­te­riza­tion of the US as an olig­archy. The system has been comple­tely hija­cked. As I wrote in one of my reports to the UN General Assembly, those who are elected do not govern, and those who do govern are not elected. Jokingly, I also wrote that “The United States two-party system is only twice as demo­cratic as the Chinese one-party system.” 

I went on to explain that whether one votes Repu­blican of Demo­crat, you get more of the same. Both Repu­bli­cans and Demo­crats are war-mongers, both are subser­vient to the mili­tary-indus­trial complex, both are for Wall Street over Main Street, both are for Israel and against the Pales­ti­nians, both serve the super-rich and do not care a hoot about the masses of Ameri­cans who live in abject poverty and have no chances of pulling them­selves out of poverty.

For this reason, I referred to a state­ment attri­buted to Kurt Tucholsky and to Emma Goldman, “If elec­tions could change anything, they would be abolished.” In other words, elec­tions are like carni­vals, and many Ameri­cans have the illu­sion that they actually mean some­thing. This, of course, can and should be changed. First would be to legis­lated a limit to campaign contri­bu­tions, because at present elec­tions are effec­tively bought.

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: What about the state of demo­cracy in Europe?

Alfred de Zayas: Yet, what is reasonable and rational is not what neces­s­a­rily happens in poli­tics. One problem is that in matters of foreign policy no Euro­pean country behaves like a demo­cracy. Unlike Switz­er­land that has a tradi­tion of refe­renda for almost ever­y­thing, inclu­ding the Swiss entry into the UN in 2002 by virtue of a refe­rendum (prior refe­renda failed), there is no “people power” whatever Europe.

Notwi­th­stan­ding millions of Euro­pean citi­zens protesting the run-up to the Iraq war, the US and the “coali­tion of the willing” bombarded the hell out of the Iraqi people and imposed unde­mo­cratic regime change. Notwi­th­stan­ding the oppo­si­tion of many in Europe, the US sanc­tions regime is being imple­mented. Indeed, most Euro­peans leave ever­y­thing in the hands of their govern­ments, assuming that the govern­ments have demo­cratic legi­ti­macy by virtue of peri­odic elec­tions. Yet, on important matters such as the preven­tion of war, those who govern act directly against the inte­rest of their consti­tuen­cies. A refe­rendum in December 2021 whether NATO should have nego­tiated with Russia on the ques­tion of a Euro­pean secu­rity archi­tec­ture would certainly have favoured nego­tia­tion over confrontation.

I think that the so-called Euro­pean elites are in a very real sense trai­tors to their own count­ries – giving aid and comfort to the United States, a foreign entity, at the expense of the inte­rests of their own popu­la­tions. They are actually worse than Vidkun Quis­ling during the second world war. In Norway’s case, the Nazis had mili­ta­rily occu­pied the country. Today, the US econo­mic­ally and poli­ti­cally occu­pies Europe.

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: You mentioned Switz­er­land in praise. This country does not have a consti­tu­tional court: Does this give rise to the danger that the highest organs of the state can break the consti­tu­tion with impu­nity or act against the will of the people, but can always assume that they will get away with it?

Alfred de Zayas: Yes, the danger does exist. Some laws, of course, and their appli­ca­tion can be chal­lenged before the Tribunal Federal in Lausanne.

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: Flawed sepa­ra­tion of powers might turn-out counter-produc­tive: How can a true sepa­ra­tion of powers func­tion after the legis­la­tive, execu­tive and judi­cial bran­ches of govern­ment have been exclu­si­vely occu­pied by one and the same poli­tical party orga­niza­tions across all bran­ches of govern­ment? Has this misde­me­anour already rendered the original goals of the neces­sary sepa­ra­tion of powers meaningless?

Alfred de Zayas: The “sepa­ra­tion of powers” as fore­seen by Montes­quieu has never been fully imple­mented. In the United States it is woefully defi­cient. Some poli­tical scien­tists and other scho­lars have pointed this out in nume­rous books, but the power of Big Brother and the power of the main­stream media is so strong, that there is little or no chance of chan­ging this situa­tion in the short term.

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: Beside clearly visible party olig­ar­chies, a powerful and highly invi­sible power factor is still hiding above nation states: The globa­lists or one-world-prot­ago­nists with their histo­rical exper­tise of long-stan­ding global mono­po­lies and capital accu­mu­la­tion in the hands of the few in line with a pluto­cracy. What could be done against them and their hand­lers, who tend to sell-out national inte­rest like e.g. expe­ri­enced during the CoV crises?

Alfred de Zayas: I endea­voured to expose these unde­mo­cratic forces in my 14 reports to the UN General Assembly and Human Rights Council. I have further deve­loped these ideas in my book “Buil­ding a Just World Order” and in my 25 Prin­ci­ples of Inter­na­tional Order:

  1. Prin­ciple: Peace
  2. Prin­ciple: UN Charter takes priority
  3. Prin­ciple: UN Reso­lu­tions of UN Secu­rity Council are legally binding
  4. Prin­ciple: Inter­na­tional law & human rights to be applied in good faith
  5. Prin­ciple: Inter­na­tional huma­ni­ta­rian law & human rights are mutually reinforcing
  6. Prin­ciple: States must respect the spirit of law
  7. Prin­ciple: General Prin­ci­pals of law
  8. Prin­ciple: Inter­na­tional is dynamic
  9. Prin­ciple: Huma­nity and dignity are source of human rights
  10. Prin­ciple: Self-deter­mi­na­tion of peoples
  11. Prin­ciple: Terri­to­rial inte­grity is confined to sphere of states
  12. Prin­ciple: State­hood depends on popu­la­tion, terri­tory, control & external relations
  13. Prin­ciple: The state may choose its poli­tical, economic, social and cultural system
  14. Prin­ciple: Peoples possess sove­reignty over their natural resources
  15. Prin­ciple: Peoples have right to their home­land, culture and identity
  16. Prin­ciple: States shall refrain from force against poli­tical inte­grity of other States
  17. Prin­ciple: States to settle disputes by peaceful means
  18. Prin­ciple: Prin­ciple of non-inter­ven­tion is part of custo­mary inter­na­tional law
  19. Prin­ciple: States must refrain from inter­fe­ring in inter­nals of other states
  20. Prin­ciple: States have a duty to protect the natural envi­ron­ment & heritage
  21. Prin­ciple: State sove­reignty is supe­rior to commer­cial and other agreements
  22. Prin­ciple: Ever­yone has the right to inter­na­tional soli­da­rity as human right
  23. Prin­ciple: Right to know and to access infor­ma­tion is a compo­nent of democracy
  24. Prin­ciple: Viola­tions of inter­na­tional law by states do not create new laws
  25. Prin­ciple: Viola­tions of inter­na­tional law require remedies

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: After the fall of the Iron Curtain under direc­tion of the high-finance global mone­tary policy has incre­asingly put focus on casino capi­ta­lism, deri­va­tive specu­la­tions and risky invest­ment banking supported by the money press to the detri­ment of the real economy.

In the light of the war against the Russian Fede­ra­tion as well as incre­asing tensions with China, how do you see the possi­bi­lity for a funda­mental global economic reform to de-dolla­rize the world economy, which might possibly come from the BRICS countries?

Alfred de Zayas: De-dolla­riza­tion is on the way, and it is important that China, Brazil, India, South Africa, Mexico lead the campaign for de-dolla­riza­tion. The dollar has been weapo­nized and is no longer a safe currency. No one in his right mind would put his money in dollars or deposit his assets in a US bank.

When we talk about assets, let us talk about aban­do­ning Europe’s irra­tional depen­dence on the so-called US nuclear shield, its new addic­tion to the hyper-expen­sive and ecolo­gi­cally hyper-unfri­endly US liqui­fied natural gas.

This does not mean de-coupling from the US enti­rely, but Europe must think about loosening the trans­at­lantic link and gradu­ally de-dolla­ri­zing.

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: How to counter the Atlantic regime of sanc­tions best?

Alfred de Zayas: For Europe’s economy it would be important to ditch US sanc­tions against Russia and other count­ries and to protect Euro­pean busi­nessmen against the threat of penal­ties by the US Depart­ment of the Treasury – an outrage that must be resisted through the reas­ser­tion of the prohi­bi­tion of the extra­ter­ri­to­rial appli­ca­tion of dome­stic laws, which violates the sove­reignty of other states.

Europe must imple­ment the inter­na­tional law obli­ga­tion of every state to exer­cise diplo­matic protec­tion on behalf of its citi­zens, inclu­ding its busi­nessmen conduc­ting legi­ti­mate busi­ness and trade abroad.

Recently I read an opti­mi­stic analysis by CGTN that France and Germany could gingerly move in the direc­tion of greater Euro­pean auto­nomy and Euro­pean self-inte­rest. I am not as opti­mi­stic as the Chinese observer, because I see the US and Europe irre­trie­v­ably caught in an irra­tional, self-righ­teous and obso­lete cold war menta­lity — with ever­y­thing that that entails.

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: What role do the Atlantic media cartels play with regard to global conflicts and as signi­fi­cantly respon­sible drivers of unde­si­rable deve­lo­p­ments for the West?

Alfred de Zayas: These media conglo­me­rates are in the service of Washington and Brussels. They should be broken down on the basis of anti­trust and anti- mono­poly legislation.

If we want to save demo­cracy, then we must ensure that there is access to all neces­sary infor­ma­tion and a plura­lity of views and narra­tives. That is not the case today, when the news services like Reuters and AP are biased and suppress infor­ma­tion that does not support the main­stream views. Simi­larly the NYTimes, Washington Post, Times, BBC, Le Monde, El Pais, FAZ, even the NZZ.

Part of the problem lies in brain­wa­shing, propa­ganda, and public rela­tions. Notwi­th­stan­ding all the evidence readily available about the horren­dous crimes committed by the US in Vietnam, Afgha­ni­stan, Iraq, Guan­ta­namo, etc. the US still enjoys a rela­tively good repu­ta­tion in Europe (but not in the Global South) and even pretends to be the “leader” of the so-called “free world.”

This really is the triumph of daily indoc­tri­na­tion by the main­stream media, social media, tele­vi­sion, Hollywood.

We have been swim­ming in an ocean of lies for decades. We are surrounded by fake news, fake history, fake law, fake diplo­macy – which has brought us to fake freedom and fake demo­cracy.  The level of mani­pu­la­tion of public opinion can only be called “Orwel­lian”. The main­stream media, schools, peer pres­sure, groupt­hink — all have led us to the dystopia we now live in. Aldous Huxley’s novel Brave new world – is equally rele­vant.  Worth rereading.

It is time for mature persons to make an effort to consult all available sources of infor­ma­tion and evaluate diffe­rent perspec­tives on the facts. This requires consul­ting not only CNN, BBC and the NY Times, but also RT, Sputnik, CGTN, Asia Times, Xinhua, etc. It entails reading and supporting alter­na­tive media inclu­ding Coun­ter­punch, Consor­tium News, Demo­cracy Now, the Real News Network, Trut­hout, the Inter­cept, Push Back and others: We can do it!

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: How do you assess the signi­fi­cance of the sove­reign nation-state in view of the attempts of trans­na­tional forces to enforce their one-world domi­na­tion, if neces­sary by help of warlike means, and to trans­form the remai­ning more or less still sove­reign states into compliant protectorates?

Alfred de Zayas: The survival of our culture and iden­tity – the survival of Chris­tian civi­liza­tion depends on a reaf­fir­ma­tion of “people‚s power” and self-deter­mi­na­tion. Hungary under Victor Orban is a good example.

Will the Euro­peans even­tually under­stand that the US is not its friend and that essen­ti­ally it never was? The US inter­ven­tion in the first and second World Wars was driven purely by US economic inte­rests and had little to do with the welfare of the Euro­peans. Simi­larly, the Marshall Plan was for the US, not for the Euro­peans, who continue being naively pro-American instead of defen­ding their sove­reignty as Charles de Gaulle once did in France.

Unfort­u­na­tely for ever­y­body, de Gaulle’s succes­sors have betrayed France and Europe.

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: Recent deve­lo­p­ments and state excesses, such as the reck­less appli­ca­tion of emer­gency law only when called upon by supra­na­tional autho­ri­ties, as it happened under CoV, expose the exis­tence of fake-sove­reignty-states in that their govern­ments shamefully betray the inte­rests of their own citi­zens. What reform steps do you recom­mend in order to prevent such abuse of autho­rity more effec­tively in the future or, if neces­sary, to prevent it from the outset?

Alfred de Zayas: Diffi­cult ques­tion. First of all, we have to have the right diagnosis before we can talk about an action plan, before we can venture a prognosis.

One can legi­ti­m­ately ask whether and when the Euro­pean poli­ti­cians will finally under­stand that an alli­ance with the US repres­ents a liabi­lity, not an asset, that the United States, not Russia or China, consti­tute the grea­test danger for the survival of the planet, as the Global Majo­rity already knows.  The recent Pentagon leaks confirm that the US syste­ma­ti­cally spies on Euro­pean leaders and Euro­pean industry, that the US shame­l­essly uses the Euro­peans as pawns in its geopo­li­tical agenda.  The contempt that some US govern­ment offi­cials have for Europe is reflected in the recorded state­ment of Victoria Nuland in 2014 in Kiev when she told the American Ambassador in Ukraine — “Fuck the EU”.

Europe’s euphoria about the United States is a form of unre­quited love – and it will not be recipro­cated anytime soon. On the contrary. The only role that the US has for Europe is that of a lowly vassal.

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: Who are the insti­ga­tors behind the conflict of Ukraine?

Alfred de Zayas: Washington’s effort at full spec­trum domi­nance led the world to the Georgia war of 2008 and to the Ukraine coup d’état of 2014. NATO expan­sion to the very fron­tiers of Russia, its arming of Ukraine and trai­ning of its army provoked the Russian inva­sion of Ukraine in February 2022. Histo­rians will not be able to main­tain the US narra­tive of an “unpro­voked” war.

Notwi­th­stan­ding conven­tional “wisdom” and repe­ti­tion, it is not impos­sible that one day Euro­peans will realize that NATO gradu­ally morphed from a defen­sive alli­ance to a criminal orga­niza­tion within the meaning of articles 9 and 10 of the Statute of the Inter­na­tional Mili­tary Tribunal at Nuremberg.

It is obvious that since the disman­tle­ment of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, there is no justi­fi­ca­tion for NATO other than an attempt at self-perpe­tua­tion, and at usur­ping the func­tions of the UN Secu­rity Council.

Count­ries like Finland and Sweden should be more circum­s­pect about their wishes for secu­rity – some­times people end up getting what they wished and it turns out to be contrary to their inte­rests.   Finland will yet grow to regret joining this criminal orga­niza­tion because it thereby becomes complicit in the aggres­sions and war crimes committed by NATO members in Yugo­slavia, Afgha­ni­stan, Iraq, Libya and Syria over the past 30 years.

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: How to you assess the Taiwan issue and Europe‚s position?

Alfred de Zayas: Europe must stay clear of the Taiwan conflict, because any direct invol­vement would be contrary to Europe’s economic and poli­tical inte­rests.  Moreover, whether Europe wants it or not, the Chinese Belt and Road Initia­tive is a success with 150 count­ries buying into it.  Europe would be isola­ting itself it it considers depar­ting from the One-China-prin­ciple.

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: The great problems of our time have urged you to write a great trilogy of books: This coming June, the third and final volume – The Human Rights Industry – will be released:

  • Coun­tering Main­stream Narratives 
    Fake News, Fake Law and Fake Freedom
  • Buil­ding a Just World Order
  • The Human Rights Industry.

 Which reform steps from your coll­ected bundles of measures would have to be imple­mented first to pave the way, thus all subse­quent measures would fall on fertile ground and fully meet future daily requirements?

 Alfred de Zayas: First of all, it is neces­sary to ensure that the world does not end in an apoca­lypse. The war in Ukraine might develop into a nuclear war. If we can’t secure peace, ever­y­thing else would be beside the point.

It will be crucial to win the „infor­ma­tion war“ and  cope with it. We need more plura­lism, more whistle-blowers – there are enough people who know exactly how Nord-Stream was blown-up.

Whistle-blowers should be considered heroes of our time. A Charter of Rights for Whistle-blowers is needed thus people had the courage to speak the truth and bring corrup­tion in govern­ment and busi­ness to the public. Stop giving money to bogus orga­niza­tions like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty Inter­na­tional. Give money only to real human rights organizations.

Unser-Mittel­eu­ropa: Professor de Zayas, we would like to thank for the interview!

The inter­view was conducted by Unser-Mitteleuropa

About the Author: Alfred de Zayas is Professor of Law at the Geneva School of Diplo­macy and served as UN Inde­pen­dent Expert on Inter­na­tional Order from 2012 – 2018. He is the author of nume­rous books, inclu­ding his latest trilogy released by Clarity Press, 2021.

Website of Clarity Press: Here

Website with details for the long awaited volume III: The Human Rights Industry to be released June 2023: Hier


Bitte unter­stützen Sie unseren Kampf für Frei­heit und Bürgerrechte.
Für jede Spende (PayPal oder Bank­über­wei­sung) ab € 10.- erhalten Sie als Danke­schön auf Wunsch ein Dutzend Aufkleber „CORONA-DIKTATUR? NEIN DANKE“ porto­frei und gratis! Details hier.

Bitte unter­stützen Sie unseren Kampf für Frei­heit und Bürgerrechte.
Für jede Spende (PayPal oder Bank­über­wei­sung) ab € 10.- erhalten Sie als Danke­schön auf Wunsch ein Dutzend Aufkleber „CORONA-DIKTATUR? NEIN DANKE“ porto­frei und gratis! Details hier.

Kommentieren Sie den Artikel

Bitte geben Sie Ihren Kommentar ein!
Bitte geben Sie hier Ihren Namen ein