Doug Henwood wrote: > >This is a senior security adviser talking, reinforcing the Deputy > >Treasury Secretary (Summers) who would presumably be the normal > >sender of such messages. Should this be taken as a threat that if > >those economic policies are not followed, non-economic action (covert > >or military) will be taken in addition to economic? > > What would the goal of covert ops be? To destabilize Russia? Promote > capital flight? If they did, how could you tell? To undermine any return to nationalised industry, capital controls, subsidies ... even socialism. Presumably at least some of these are seriously on the agenda if the Communists gain support out of the current situation. Some are currently being talked about apparently. There are two fears the US would have. One is that it might lose the economic control (or at least subservience) of Russia it has now. The other is that of the resurgence of a credible but unfriendly nuclear power. Bill Bill Rosenberg, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
