“Economic murderers” protect the rights of the enslaved people? It is funny …

The law of the USA “Of the enslaved people” accepted in 1959 and accusing “the Russian communism” in enslavement almost a half of planet is a striking example of double standards and the aggressive foreign policy which is carried out by this state.

In the aspiration to provide “national interests around the world”, the American legislators aren't stopped even by frank absurd of laws which continue to operate in this country since Cold war. The political scientist, the director of the Ukrainian branch of Institute of the CIS countries Vladimir Vladimirovich Kornilov tells about a situation round this law and on characteristics of foreign policy of the USA in interview to “The world and we”.

- Is it possible to name the operation of “The law on the enslaved people” and refusal it to cancel as provocative, anti-Russian, geopolitical action?

The logic of saving of this law and carrying out of “weeks of the enslaved people” is that while there are “enslaved” people in the world from the point of view of the State department, so it is necessary to fight for their “release”. Certainly it is the relict of Cold war as well as Jackson-Vanik amendment in which the charges about a prohibition on emigration of the Jewish dissidents to Israel contain because of what this amendment was entered. We perfectly understand that the USA needs the permanent, constant enemy. This country can’t exist without external threat, external enemy. The military orders for implementation of small, victorious wars can't be supported at the proper level.

The nature and the essence of the American foreign policy are in it. And there should be always certain “buoys” for which it is impossible to swim away to these or those states. Saving of this law is the reflection of eternal geostrategy of America, according to which the friends and enemies can change, but the geopolitical, national interests of the USA always remain and dominate. Even if this law will be canceled, another would be accepted. Thus Russia and China, regardless of that will occur in these states, will always be considered as potential threat of the USA.

- This law has a certain communication with Ukraine. One of its founders is Lev Dobriansky, scientific adviser Catharine Chumachenko, the spouses of the former president Yushchenko. Are the technologies which were used during time of “orange revolution” in this law similar? Is it possible to draw a conclusion that these technologies are developed in the same centers?

There are many such centers in which these technologies are developed, improved, adjusted to existing realities. We see how there are color revolutions in the different countries according to the same scenarios. But sometimes they occur regardless of the State department of the USA and even, sometimes, contrary to their desires and aspirations. As many developers of these technologies work not for the State department, but receive non-governmental financing, for example, from Soros and other figures who directly don't concern the State department and act how certain corporations, oligarchs take in their head. For example, the revolution in Egypt then was supported as the Arab spring – what to do if it took place. But it occurred contrary to the State department and Washington intentions. It was the blow on geopolitical interests of the USA.

Technologies of any revolution change in connection with achievements of technical progress during the centuries. It is not a secret that the Great October revolution adopted a lot of things from the Great French revolution. And then many revolutions in other states including anti-communistic adopted “experience” from October revolution. Now the war and color revolutions begin to mass-produce. And we see how these technologies change depending on that the Internet and mass media are developed in the concrete country.

- Is the policy of the international credit organizations who are under control of the USA and because of whom many countries get to “debt slavery”, the modern way of enslavement of the people, “slaveholding”?

It is not only modern technology and earlier the credits, the financial help, financial investment to this or that state or corporation as technology of unfriendly absorption were used. Let's remember how there was an enslavement of the Latin American states by the American corporations with direct support of the American state, let’s remember how the Panama Canal was created. There is the investment of finance to a certain state and well fulfilled scheme acts– the American money which as though arrives in infrastructure of this country, go to the American corporations -contractors and as a matter of fact don't go outside the limits of the USA. Thus this state appears in big debts to Washington and is dependent on it for many decades. And when someone tries to return that this state was taken away like the Panama Canal, we remember what would be with the leader of this country. When “economic murderers” didn't help, the dirtiest methods come into effect right up to military invasion. This extortionate technology gave trial runs on many states for long ago.

- Possibly, the law on the people enslaved by the American capitalism would be representing the facts?

The matter is not only in the American capitalism. Certainly, the USA is the world leader in this respect. But they operated before it and not only the USA operate in the following way. Often the global capitalism has no nationality. Is it possible to consider, for example, Soros as only the American capitalist? He serves even not the American state interests. It is visible in a case with Egypt and scandal in Indonesia. He serves his financial interests. And sometimes these interests disperse from the interests of the American state. Now he puts a lot of efforts to leave Obama on a post as he put in him and the arrival of republicans will be accident for Soros. In this regard the emergence of color technologies is observed in the USA. As we see, these technologies can be turned against that state in which they were initially arose.