Activities in Russia of the organizations “Open Society” and “Open Society Assistance Foundation”, which are part of the Soros Foundation. The reason for banning organizations is that their initiatives threaten the constitutional order and security of the Russian Federation.

The decision was made in connection with the July 8 appeal of the Federation Council to the Russian Foreign Ministry, the Prosecutor General's Office and the Ministry of Justice to inspect organizations included in the so-called “patriotic stop list.” The senators justified their appeal by the need to protect Russia from the policy of “soft aggression”, which non-profit organizations (NPOs) with foreign funding carry out by influencing Russian domestic politics.

What is the Soros Foundation?

The Soros Foundations are a network of funds, programs and institutions established by a millionaire and George Soros to help establish and develop an open society in the world. They operate in more than 30 countries. Among them: Azerbaijan, Albania, Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Hungary, Haiti, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Poland, Russia, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine , Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Yugoslavia and South Africa.

George Soros founded his first charitable foundation in 1979 in the USA. In Russia, the Open Society Institute (Soros Foundation) began work in 1995. Initially, the organization’s activities were carried out through the International Foundation “Cultural Initiative” and the International Science Foundation.

What does the Soros Foundation support?

Projects in the field of culture and art, education and healthcare, science and human rights. Projects can be very diverse, but they have one thing in common: they do not aim to obtain material benefits.

Among the recipients of Soros Foundation grants are: teachers, journalists, students, scientists, artists, lawyers, businessmen, etc.

What does the Soros Foundation not support?

The Foundation does not finance:

• any projects of a commercial nature;
• humanitarian aid projects;
• Scientific research;
• long-term internships abroad;
• reconstruction, construction and acquisition of buildings;
• publishing projects.
• restoration of monuments.

According to open sources, at the end of 2003, Soros officially curtailed financial support for his charitable activities in Russia. Already in 2004, the Open Society Institute stopped issuing grants. But the structures created with the assistance of the Soros Foundation are now actively working without his direct participation. Such projects include the Moscow Higher School of Social and Economic Sciences, the PRO ARTE Institute Institute for Culture and Art, and the non-profit foundation for the support of book publishing, education and new information technologies “Pushkin Library”.

On June 3, 2015, a law came into force in Russia allowing foreign and international non-governmental organizations to be assigned the status of “undesirable in Russia” if they pose a threat to the foundations of the constitutional order, the country’s defense capability or state security. Such organizations will be prohibited from operating in the Russian Federation, their structural divisions will be closed, and the distribution of information materials will be prohibited.

A philanthropist (from Greek φιλέω, “to love” and Greek ἄνθρωπος, “man”) is a person who engages in charity to help those in need.

SOROS FOUNDATION NETWORK

The Soros Foundations are a network of funds, programs and institutions established by the famous millionaire and philanthropist to help establish and develop open societies in the world, especially in the former communist countries of Central and Eastern Europe.

National funds today operate in more than 30 countries. Among them: Azerbaijan, Albania, Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Hungary, Haiti, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Poland, Russia, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine , Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Yugoslavia and South Africa. Each of them has its own governing bodies and runs its own programs.

The Open Society Institute initiates and supports programs for the development of an open society and coordinates the work of independent national foundations. The Institute's activities extend beyond the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, including the United States in its programs. The Institute's headquarters is located in New York.

Central European University is an international center for postgraduate education and research, which is located in Budapest. CEU was founded by George Soros in 1991. It has 8 faculties.

In 1998, in Budapest, by decision of George Soros, the Institute for Educational Policy was opened, which develops a strategy for a network of foundations in the field of education.

SOROS FOUNDATION IN RUSSIA

In 1995, a representative office of the Open Society Institute began operating in Russia (prior to this, George Soros’s charitable activities in Russia were carried out through the International Foundation for Cultural Initiative and the International Science Foundation). Some of its programs are initiated by the Institute's offices in New York and Budapest. These are programs of the Central European University, the East-East program, programs of the Soros Center for Contemporary Art and a number of others. In addition, the Open Society Institute in Russia develops and implements national programs.

The priorities of charitable activities in Russia are determined by the Supervisory Board, which includes prominent representatives of Russian science and culture who support the goals and objectives of the Open Society Institute.

The highest governing body of the Russian representative office is the Strategic Board, which develops and approves the mission of the PSI, develops criteria and procedures for assessing the activities of program areas. Each Board member oversees one or more programs.

The President of the Open Society Institute-Russia is also the Chairman of the Strategic Committee.

The Open Society Foundations and the OSI Assistance Foundation have been deemed undesirable in Russia. Both NPOs are part of the Soros Foundation, an international charitable organization founded by philanthropist John Soros. The Prosecutor General's Office saw in the work of these organizations in Russia “a threat to the foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation and the security of the state.” The Soros Foundation was previously included in the “patriotic stop list” of the Federation Council (SF).

The Prosecutor General’s Office recognized the activities of organizations in Russia as undesirable “based on the results of studying the materials received,” said Marina Gridneva, official representative of the Prosecutor General’s Office. According to her, it was found that the work of these NGOs in Russia “poses a threat to the foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation and the security of the state.” Mrs. Gridneva noted that the decision was made in connection with the appeal of the Federation Council to the Prosecutor General, the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the head of the Ministry of Justice to check the organizations included in the so-called patriotic stop list.

The Federation Council, we recall, compiled a stop list in July, in addition to the Soros Foundation, it included 12 more NGOs: the National Endowment for Democracy, the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, the MacArthur Foundation, Freedom House, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, the Education for Democracy, East European Democracy Center, Ukrainian World Congress, Ukrainian World Coordination Council and Crimean Field Mission for Human Rights. The Federation Council sent the “stop list,” which itself has no legal force, to the heads of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Justice and the Prosecutor General’s Office to check the NGOs included in it for “anti-Russian activity” and possible recognition of them as undesirable on Russian territory. At the same time, the Federation Council did not explain what the anti-Russian threat of these NGOs was (see Kommersant, July 8).

“We are shocked by today’s decision by the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office to consider the Open Society Foundation an undesirable organization,” the Soros Foundation press service said. Their message says that the Fund is larger

For 25 years he helped strengthen the rule of law in Russia and defended the rights of citizens. “Russian officials and citizens have welcomed our efforts in the past, and we regret the changes that have led to the Russian government rejecting our support for Russian civil society and ignoring the hopes of the Russian people,” the Soros Foundation press service notes.

Since 1987, the Foundation has provided support to a huge number of citizens and NGOs, including those working in the field of science and education, the Foundation has helped finance Internet connections for 33 universities across the country, helped Russian schoolchildren travel and study abroad, and created curricula for early education children and created a network of contemporary art centers, which still operates, the press service of the foundation emphasized.

“We are confident that this step is a temporary aberration; Russians’ hopes for a better future cannot be suppressed and will ultimately come true,” said fund founder George Soros.

The foundation said in a statement that it is “committed” to continuing to support those who ask for their help, consistent with its mission and within the limits the law places on them.

The Soros Foundation appeared in Russia in 1995 and until 2003 actively financed educational and human rights projects in the country. In total, the fund spent more than $1 billion. In particular, 64,585 teachers, professors and students received grants from the fund. In 1995, articles first appeared in the press that the activities of the foundation were causing damage to the Russian Federation, supporting brain drain. Then the State Duma Committee on Education conducted an audit of the foundation’s activities, and as a result, the Russian parliament officially thanked George Soros “for his contribution to the preservation and development of domestic science, education and culture.”

The president signed a law allowing foreign and international non-governmental organizations to be assigned the status of “undesirable in Russia” if their activities, in the opinion of law enforcement agencies, pose a threat to the foundations of the constitutional order of the Russian Federation, the defense capability or security of the state. Those included in the register of “undesirable” NPOs cannot open branches in the Russian Federation; they are prohibited from distributing information materials (including on the Internet) and implementing their programs on the territory of the Russian Federation. The first to be included in the register was the American National Endowment for Democracy, which was also previously included in the “patriotic stop list”.

As Kommersant previously reported, the Venice Commission (VC) of the Council of Europe (CoE) was going to check the law “on unwanted foreign and international organizations” (see Kommersant on September 25). The law was also criticized by Russian and foreign human rights activists, the Human Rights Council under the President of the Russian Federation, as well as representatives of the European Union and the Council of Europe. The Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe asked for the opinion of the HC on the compliance of this law with international standards in July.

Sergey Goryashko

Officials carry Soros out of the hut-reading room

In August, the Open Society Foundation of millionaire George Soros had not yet received the status of an “undesirable organization,” but regions have already begun to get rid of his legacy. The Ministry of Education of the Sverdlovsk Region ordered the removal of scientific history books published with the support of the foundation from school libraries. According to officials, the works of famous English scientists John Keegan and Anthony Beevor “promote stereotypes formed during the Third Reich.”

Private American hedge fund of George Soros

The history of the founding of Soros Fund Management, Open Society Foundations, the main activities of the Open Society of George Soros

Soros Fund Management LLC is private American hedge fund. The company was founded in 1969 by George Soros and is managed by it. In 2010, it was reported to be one of the most profitable companies in the hedge fund industry, averaging 20% ​​annual returns over four decades. The headquarters is located at 888 7th Avenue in New York City.

Soros Fund Management is the primary advisor to the Quantum Group of funds. A number of funds involved in international investments. The company invests in public equity and fixed income markets around the world, as well as foreign exchange, foreign exchange and commodity markets, as well as private equity and venture capital funds. The company reportedly has large investments in transportation, energy, retail, financial and other industries and holds shares in Hess Corporation, Ford Motor Company and Lattice Semiconductor.

The company was founded by President and Chairman George Soros in 1969.

In 1979, George Soros created his first charitable foundation, the Open Society Fund, in the United States. Currently, Soros spends an average of about $300 million annually on his non-profit projects.

Now he has created charitable foundations in more than 25 countries. In 1988, in the USSR, Soros organized the Cultural Initiative fund in support of science, culture and education, but the fund was later closed because the money was used for the personal purposes of certain individuals. In 1995, it was decided to organize a new Open Society Foundation in Russia. From 1996 to 2001, the Soros Foundation invested about $100 million in the University Internet Centers project, as a result of which 33 Internet centers appeared in Russia.

In 1995-2001, the monthly Soros Educational Journal (SOJ) was published under the International Soros Education Program in the Field of Exact Sciences (ISSEP). Publications of SOZh had a natural science direction; target group - high school students. The magazine was distributed free of charge to schools (more than 30,000 copies), municipal and university libraries (3,500 copies).

The cultural studies textbook and history textbook published by the Soros Foundation were subject to criticism.

They wrote a lot about them in the press. And the Russian Historical Society even held a special conference dedicated to this topic. There, the textbooks of the “Soros Foundation” were subjected not to criticism, but to a crushing defeat. The textbook on cultural studies was written by a doctor of chemical sciences, who for the first time decided to speak on public issues. And materials for studying history turned out to be filled with an insane amount of grammatical errors, inventions, conjectures and distortions. Some experts openly stated: they are called upon to instill in schoolchildren that all residents of Russia are flawed people, that the entire history of Russia is a chain of failures and shame, and that the role model is, of course, Western civilization.

Alena Mironova. “Western bureaucracy was defeated”

At the end of 2003, Soros officially curtailed financial support for his charitable activities in Russia, and in 2004, the Open Society Institute stopped issuing grants. But the structures created with the assistance of the Soros Foundation now operate without its direct participation: the Moscow Higher School of Social and Economic Sciences (MSHSEN, created in 1995 with a grant from the Soros Foundation), the Foundation for Culture and Art, the PRO ARTE Institute, the International Charitable Foundation D. S. Likhacheva, non-profit foundation for the support of book publishing, education and new information technologies “Pushkin Library”.

The famous financier's foundation was expelled from the Republic of Belarus in 1997.

As of November 2009, George Soros's fortune is estimated at $11 billion. Business Week magazine estimates that he donated more than $5 billion to charities throughout his life, with one billion of those five billion going to Russia.

In the political field, Soros has distinguished himself as a sponsor and influential lobbyist. Since 1979, Soros has actively financed democratic movements in the socialist countries of Eastern Europe - Polish Solidarity, the Charter 77 movement in Czechoslovakia, as well as Soviet dissidents grouped around Andrei Sakharov. He played an important role in the fall of communist regimes in eastern Europe during the Velvet Revolutions of 1989. He also played a prominent role in the preparation and conduct of the Georgian “Rose Revolution” of 2003, although Soros himself claimed that his role was extremely exaggerated by the press.

Mikhail Kasyanov recalled how, when Russia received support from the IMF in a difficult situation in 1998, on August 13, “George Soros made a statement that Russia needed devaluation and that the IMF underestimated the seriousness of the problem. The market opened and immediately “died.” The next day, On Friday, President Boris Yeltsin vowed that there would be no devaluation..."

In the United States, Soros was very active during the 2004 presidential campaign, spending more than $23 million to prevent the re-election of President Bush Jr., in which he failed. Since 2005, he has helped create and finance the Democracy Alliance, an organization that unites and guides American progressives within the Democratic Party.

One of the leaders of the Caucasus militants, Doku Umarov, said that money for holding the “Chechen Congress” in Poland was allocated to the head of the government of the unrecognized republic of Ichkeria, Akhmed Zakayev, by the American billionaire George Soros.

Video:

Video:

Video:

George Soros is considered in the United States “the main lobbyist for the legalization of drug trafficking in Congress.” So, in 2008, he donated 400 thousand dollars for the passage in the Massachusetts Senate and House of Representatives of an act to liberalize and mitigate penalties for the possession and consumption of marijuana (English: Massachusetts Sensible Marijuana Policy Initiative). In October 2010, Soros donated one million dollars to the DPA (Drug Policy Alliance), an organization seeking to legalize marijuana in the United States. He previously regularly funded their predecessors the Lindesmith Center and the Drug Policy Foundation, which merged to form the DPA in 2000.

USA - “FRIEND” OF RUSSIAN SCIENCE

When considering the catastrophic results of science reforms, one cannot fail to take into account the external factor that determined the situation in Russia. Says associate professor of MGIMO University, senior researcher at the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, corresponding member of the World Academy of Sciences for Integrated Security A.N. Samarin (newspaper“Vremya,” No. 11-12, 2006): “From the United States we are receiving clear instructions from the instigators of the reforms that they are going to build their order “at the expense of Russia and on the ruins of Russia,” as Z. Brzezinski clearly put it. The documents of the International Monetary Fund since the mid-90s contain recommendations about a threefold reduction in the potential of Russian science and education. In many respects, the reformers have already exceeded this instruction... The pogromists of science and education, while finishing off science, are following the instructions coming from the Washington “regional committee”, and, like all looters, they are eager to profit from the privatization of scientific institutions.”

While the destruction of science in Russia continues amid talk of “reform” of science, the United States is using all means to accelerate the development of Russia’s scientific resources. Therefore, the question asked by an Izvestia newspaper columnist to the American businessman Sher, who is busy maintaining “cooperation” between US and CIS scientists, seems strange: “Why does the US finance Russian science?” The answer is simple: it is economically beneficial for them.

In using Russian scientific achievements, the United States follows two paths:

1. organizing the departure of categories of scientists they are interested in for permanent or temporary residence in the United States;
2. development of a system of grants allocated for scientists working in Russia to conduct research in which the United States is interested, and organization of joint productions using the developments of Russian scientists.

The first path, intended mainly for young and promising scientists, should provide the United States not only with scientific personnel, but also with future young citizens. Let's give the following data:

• if in 1989 12,200 people left Russia for the United States, then in 1996 - 19,700;
• in 1990, 333,725 emigrants from the USSR lived in the United States; in the 90s (1991-1996), another 340,000 people were added to them; 70,500 people left Russia alone;
• in the 90s, the demographic composition of emigrants changed: the share of elderly people decreased to 16-18%, the share of working-age population groups increased - 40-41%;
• the largest category in terms of numbers is students, schoolchildren and preschool children, i.e. children who came with their young parents;
• Russian emigration to the United States is mainly “white-collar”; specialists here make up the bulk; the average educational level of those who arrived is significantly higher than the general educational level in the United States.

The lure for Russian scientists to leave for the United States is not only higher salaries compared to Russia, but also the provision of modern scientific equipment, better working conditions, as well as more favorable living conditions - affordable housing, cottage development in cities, good ecology, etc.

Experts from Russia make up America's intellectual elite. Thus, the finalist of the Intel Science Talent Search competition, which is called the Nobel Prize for juniors, was 17-year-old Boris Alekseev from Russia, who presented a project on the theory of next-generation computers. Similar to the Soviet Academy Town, the American Silicon Valley, which relies heavily on scientists from Russia, has 10% of all patents registered in the United States. The successful development of Silicon Valley is evidenced by the fact that in 2005 alone, 6,900 jobs were created here.

In the future, the West's need for specialists in the field of high technology will only increase. According to the General Director of the Nanoindustry Concern M. Ananyan, the need for specialists in this field of science in 2010-2015 in the USA will be 800-900 thousand, in Japan - 500-600 thousand, in Europe - 300-400 thousand ., in Southeast Asia - 100-150 thousand people. This means that these countries will continue to pursue an active policy of attracting Russian specialists, although today the situation in Russia is characterized as an acute personnel shortage. Even President D. Medvedev admits this, however, the situation of scientists is not improving enough to stop their emigration.

The second way for the Americans to exploit Russia's scientific resource is to use the Russian scientific workforce locally with the payment of small benefits in the form of grants financed by America. This path also implies the organization of scientific research on a “shift basis,” when part of the time the work is carried out by Russian scientists in the United States, part of the time in Russia. In this case, special attention is paid to scientists who previously worked for the defense of the Soviet Union both in specialized organizations and in the Academy of Sciences. Therefore, along with young scientists, older people who have higher scientific qualifications than young people, as well as scientific organizers of science who are well aware of the state of affairs not only in their narrow field, but also in Russia, are also involved in the work.

A very indicative example is the “joint Russian-American research” that took place during the development of the biochip. In the early 90s, the director of the Institute of Microbiology named after. Engelhardt, academician A. Mirzabekov (now deceased) demonstrated a working biochip. After this, he was invited to work in the USA. The Americans insisted that our specialists work in the United States on a permanent basis under their control, then all the results would belong exclusively to the United States. But the academician agreed only to create a joint working group of 30 people with a “shift work method” for our specialists in the USA. As a result, the group split, some of the researchers remained in the USA, the rest, along with the academician, remained in Russia.

Joint research took place over a period of 5-6 years, on which the American side (Department of Energy) spent several million dollars. As a result of the work, the basic patent for the biochip belonged to Russia, but Motorola and HP bought the rights to use it with a 50:50% division of income. However, American companies did not like that payments to Russia to the Institute of Microbiology were growing rapidly, and they registered their patent for the modified technology. Russian scientists could have sued, but as usual they did not get involved, but created a new, more advanced biochip technology and founded the Biochip-IMB company. Thus, everything ended well for Russian scientists here, but it seems that this is a rather rare case of Russian-American cooperation.

The main sources of American funding for science in Russia - the National Science Foundation, the State Department, private donations - have a total budget of $24 million a year. Grants have been awarded for 800 projects involving more than 5,000 scientists, including 1,000 researchers working in the Russian defense sector. If we assume that all this money goes to the salaries of Russian scientists, then this will amount to $400 per month per person. Where else besides Russia can you get what you want for such meager money? USA results of scientific developments of the highest class? In fact, a scientist involved in projects may have much less out of $400, because... 50% of the funds are used to purchase new equipment, a significant part is taken by the bureaucracy.

The 800 projects mentioned include:

• research in physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics;
• support for research in the province;
• grants that link applied science to American business;
• support for 16 Russian universities, each of which has its own subject; So Nizhny Novgorod has nanotechnology, Krasnoyarsk has the ecology of the Yenisei.

Consequently, there is a great desire on the part of the “American side” to get “for a penny a canary and let it sing in a bass voice,” meaning the almost free extraction of scientific developments, including from the Russian defense sector. It is not without reason that the US State Department also participates in the financing of Russian science, whose task is to protect US national interests, and not charity.

And one more direction of American funding for Russian science: the United States is not interested in the latest developments of Russian economists and the humanities, but, nevertheless, they invest money in the development of projects of the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, the director of which V. Tishkov is known for his anti-Russian actions.

There are also some oddities in Russian-American “cooperation”. Americans highly value the achievements of our computer specialists. Here is just one example: in 2000, two Russian hackers were arrested in the United States - V. Gorshkov (24 years old) and A. Ivanov (19 years old), who penetrated the computer networks of various foreign companies, warned management about the unreliability of protection and offered pay them a certain amount for leaving the company alone. Russian hackers stole $500,000 in 9 months

To catch them, the US CIA was forced to develop special measures like the well-known Operation Trust: a front computer company was created that invited Russian computer scientists to work. They were arrested in the United States while undergoing an interview to demonstrate their abilities.

Naturally, if the codes of commercial firms can be cracked, so can the military's communications channels: “Officials in Washington are convinced that Russia has managed to steal some of the most sensitive US military secrets, including data on strategic weapons guidance systems and secret communications codes.” naval intelligence” (“The Sunday Times”, July 26, 1999).

Let us present statements about science by a scientist who is quite difficult to qualify as Russian or American. He was born and worked in Russia; what made him an American, according to him, was his immense love for the granddaughter of American President Eisenhower. This is the former director of the Space Research Institute, academician Roald Sagdeev. At the age of 55, he married a young and by no means poor American woman. The marriage arrived just in time, when the ship of Soviet science was torpedoed by the academician’s democratic friends and began to sink. Note that R. Sagdeev was an active figure democratic “perestroika”, an ally of A. Sakharov - a man who made a significant contribution to the destruction of the country. When R. Sagdeev was asked the question: “... in fact, you prevented the collapse of Soviet science, left it before it happened “de facto”?” The answer was sincere: “In a way, yes.” Help the destroyers of our native science and get away - how academically that is!

R. Sagdeev’s scientific career developed like this: after graduating from Moscow State University, he worked at the Institute, where I. Kurchatov was the director, then for ten years at the Siberian Academic Town. Returning from there, he became the scientific director of the Institute of High Temperatures of the USSR Academy of Sciences, then headed the Institute of Space Research. At the beginning of perestroika, R. Sagdeev was part of a group formed personally by M. Gorbachev, where he was engaged in scientific substantiation of the possibilities of nuclear disarmament. Then, having married an American, the academician emigrated to the USA.

In 2003, R. Sagdeev visited Russia as a recruiter of qualified scientific personnel for the United States. His visit to his homeland gave R. Sagdeev a reason to speculate about the past of Soviet science: “There was such enthusiasm, interest in science... among children, among young people of my generation... It just seemed to me that everything that physicists do makes them, in a sense, rulers nature, the special role of physics over society - supermen, wizards... This, of course, attracted.”

And here are the arguments about space science: “Everything that was allocated for science was a small charitable screen for the giant space program... The hindrance was that science, space science, in particular, within the framework of our entire large space program, was a poor relative, and that the support that was provided was mainly connected not with interest in scientific knowledge, in new discoveries, but ... with the fact that the TASS report could be released ... then Yes, it was a PR activity.”

This is how the American professor clearly explained to us that space research in the USSR was in no way connected with new scientific and engineering developments, or with science in general, and it was just a big show. Let us remember that this is said by the man who headed the Space Research Institute. In those years he sang other songs. Surely he said that rocket and space programs gave impetus to the development of materials science, communications, medicine, physiology, biology and many others. other branches of scientific knowledge. However, in order to understand this, you do not need to be either the director of an institute or an academician.

R. Sagdeev forgets what invaluable assistance Russian scientists, faithful students and followers of the academician, provided to American science and technology, for a pittance they transferred to them the experience of creating and operating space stations, the experience of preparing astronauts for long stays in conditions of weightlessness, and much more, which allowed the American “friends” to save tens of billions of dollars.

The presenter in the film “The Tail of the Comet,” dedicated to R. Sagdeev, was embarrassed to ask the Russian academician, the keeper of many scientific and industrial secrets, the question: “How did the CIA treat you and what is the price of your comfortable existence in the USA?” “What happened to me is simply the realization of a youthful dream of flying to other planets,” says the romantically inclined academician, who realized his youthful space dream by marrying a rich American.

R. Sagdeev formulated his attitude to the state of affairs in today’s Russian science in a 2003 interview with the Izvestia newspaper entitled “The intelligentsia lost to the C-grade students”: “Seven academicians work in the USA, and several hundred of our scientists are on permanent positions. The weather is made by those who are 35-40 years old. Over the past two years, our team has received a dozen very prestigious awards. Respect for Russian science has remained. How long? Americans divide humanity into two categories - winners and losers... And then the cross. The Great Prokhorov told me that without new instruments we would be able to hold our position for another five years, no more. The situation in Russian science is reminiscent of a sign on the village council: “Everyone has gone to the front. There are old people and children left...” Let us note that the five years indicated by Academician Prokhorov are already running out.

However, R. Sagdeev offers Russian science a way to survive by directing all its efforts exclusively to cooperation with the West. To the journalist’s question: “What is the situation with science in Novosibirsk? Are there any young people left there?” The academician answers: “The situation in Novosibirsk, in my opinion,more or less prosperous. Several foreign companies have landed there; young scientists can work for them. My colleagues at the Institute of Nuclear Physics, thanks to the idea of ​​an electron accelerator for creating irradiation left by its founding director Academician A. Budker, created such an accelerator and use it, for example, to disinfect grain stored in elevators. I think now Budker accelerators need to be installed in all post offices in America - to process letters from anthrax...”

Let us summarize the statements of R. Sagdeev:

• The academician clearly understands what his American compatriots are doing, speaking of the “landing” of foreign companies in Novosibirsk as an enemy landing. Let us recall that in Soviet times, access to this area for American intelligence services was strictly prohibited.
• The idea of ​​installing Budker accelerators in the USA smacks of a desire to earn good commissions.
• The academician is not concerned that there are now from 10 to 15 academicians working in the United States (in 2003 there were seven), and out of the 100 best Russian scientists, 50 live in the United States. He is only concerned with the desire to bring the system of awarding academic degrees to world standards, leaving only the candidate's dissertation, which should facilitate the accelerated export of young scientists from Russia.
• The main conclusion can be drawn from the academician’s statements: he doesn’t care about the fate of science in Russia.

In December 2006, Sagdeev turned 70 years old. To the correspondent’s question: “Are you happy in your marriage to Susan?” he answered like this: “I’m very interested in her! We have many common interests, often there is not enough time to discuss different topics... I have two children from my first marriage, a son and a daughter. Both graduated from Moscow State University at one time and now live with their families in the States. They have two children each. The eldest grandson became a university student this year... The youngest granddaughter... was born four years ago, is already here...” Of course, the academician is very interested in his American wife, bearing in mind not only her financial capabilities, but also her connection with the US State Department, which is certainly , was useful when organizing the move of R. Sagdeev’s children to the USA. Let us note that the academician’s children did not disdain Russian higher education; they received it at Moscow State University, of course, for free.

An interesting picture is observed in democratic Russia: the state security agencies do not care about the travel abroad of major scientists and holders of state secrets. Neither R. Sagdeev, the former head of the USSR space programs, nor the son of N. Khrushchev, who at one time occupied a prominent position in our rocket science, who left without hindrance, attracted the attention of the state security authorities. AND Minister A. Fursenko does not care at all that his already poor ministry generously finances the education of future US citizens at the most prestigious university in Russia. And the leadership of the Russian Academy of Sciences affectionately welcomes its former fellow academician, who arrived in his homeland to take abroad talented young people who are so lacking in empty Russian research institutes.

Academician R. Sagdeev did not hear a word of condemnation in his homeland. He remains a full member of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Surely his native Academy of Sciences transfers his academic allowance to an American bank. For his work for the benefit of Russia. Although the leadership of the Russian Academy of Sciences should deprive academicians working in the USA of their titles, thereby saving at least some money for survival Russian science.

The most prominent figure in Russian-American “scientific cooperation” is George Soros. S.A. Fridman, author of the book “Jews - Nobel Prize Laureates” (Moscow, 2000) writes: “If it weren’t for the Soros Foundation, Russia’s best scientists would have left, and schools, libraries, universities, the talented youth of our country would have lost a significant material and technical support.”

The author is being disingenuous: the Soros Foundation sponsored not science, but the destruction of Russia: activities aimed at almost free acquisition by the United States of advanced scientific developments, often constituting a state secret. The Soros Foundation has flooded Russia with textbooks that distort Russian history, so that the coming generations will forget to whom they owe their lives. The Soros Foundation contributed to the fact that I. Brodsky, V. Aksyonov (Ginsburg) and other persons of democratic nationality were declared classics of Russian literature. The Soros Foundation was one of the initiators of the departure of Russian scientists not only to the United States, but also to “developing” countries such as Mexico and Thailand.

Who is George Soros? The future American billionaire was born in Budapest in 1930, in the family of Tivadar Schwartz, a lawyer and active figure in the city’s Jewish community. Soon the family changed their surname Schwartz to the Hungarian version - Shoros (Soros), and in 1947 emigrated to the UK using false documents. In our time, J. Soros is one of the richest people in the United States, suspected of receiving secret information from high-ranking politicians, financiers and intelligence services of different countries and being a representative of a powerful group of international financiers. The core of this group is believed to be the Rothschild family, and George Soros carries out his largest actions in agreement with the US government.

J. Soros is much more famous as a philanthropist than as a financier and stockbroker. At the end of the 70s, he began active charitable activities. Soros founded his first foundation, the Open Society Foundation, in New York in 1979, his first Eastern European foundation was created in Hungary in 1984, and in 1987 a branch of the Soros Foundation was opened in the Soviet Union. . In 1995, a representative office of the Open Society Foundation began operating in Russia, and before that, J. Soros’s charitable activities in Russia were carried out through the International Foundation for Cultural Initiative and the International Science Foundation.

The book by J. Soros, published in 1990, is called: “The Discovery of the Soviet System.” In it, he sets out in detail his philosophical principles and strategy for creating “free”, that is, uncontrolled by the state and society, structures in “closed” (that is, sovereign) countries that allow transnational financial corporations to carry out their operations.

All branches of the Soros Foundation scattered around the world are characterized by extreme secrecy. Employees' off-duty contacts with foreigners are carefully controlled. Some publications provide data on connections between employees of Soros structures in Eastern Europe and the CIS countries with representatives of the corresponding stations of Western intelligence services.

Here are excerpts from the article “George Soros without demonization” (Almanac “East”, issue No. 11(23), 2004). “In Russia, one of the most important activities of the Open Society Institute for a long time has been the development of non-profit information networks intended for scientific and educational purposes. And there were some oddities here. The computer network laid in Moscow in 1994 was built in such a way that messages going from one part of the city to another had to pass through servers located in the United States.”

Another area of ​​Soros’ activity in Russia is assistance to scientists, which was initially carried out through the International Science Foundation, and then through the Open Society Institute. It is important to note that we were talking about the allocation of grants to individual researchers, and not about investments in Russian research centers that would help them get on their feet and survive in market conditions. The mechanism of targeted assistance to Russian scientists is in fact a system for collecting comprehensive intelligence information about Russian science and its achievements of the Soviet period.

The procedure for selecting grant recipients made it possible to accumulate personal data on almost all Russian scientists of interest to the United States and track their activities in real time. This made it possible for Soros and his partners to quickly and at minimal cost obtain valuable intelligence information, as well as use Russian scientific potential to implement their own goals. The profits that are derived from this information many times cover the amount of assistance provided by Soros to Russian science. In other words, we are talking about intellectual espionage.

The activities of the Open Society Institute to support Russian education are even stranger. The project “Development of Education in Russia” carried out by the Institute is associated exclusively with the teaching of social sciences. Soros is not interested in Russian education in general, but only in that part of it that is important for the formation of the socio-political views of the new generation of Russians.

The fact that Soros’ educational programs are aimed at introducing specific values ​​and ideas into the Russian mass consciousness has been known for a long time. It is difficult to call these values ​​Western - in most Western countries, the indifferent and contemptuous attitude towards native history and culture demonstrated in Soros-sponsored textbooks and other materials is unthinkable.

Here we are dealing with a grandiose “active event” in which the organization behind George Soros is interested. The colossal scale of funds at the disposal of this organization makes it possible to solve problems of a geopolitical scale and implement long-term political and information and sabotage programs.

In other words, we are talking about open ideological sabotage, supported by Russian officials of the highest rank. In this regard, their goals completely coincide with the goals of Soros - to educate the younger generation of “Russians” in the spirit of disregard for the history of the Motherland, for native cultural values, in the spirit of rootless cosmopolitanism. Officials are ready to do this for American money.

It is no secret that the Russian public is highly suspicious of philanthropists. Many do not believe in the sincerity of Soros’s concern for our science, believing that the American is engaged in intellectual espionage. George Soros is not a great philanthropist. Each of his so-called charitable programs pursues far-reaching practical goals, reflecting the interests of powerful financial and political interests. The purpose of the Soros Foundation’s activities in Russia was “voiced” by biologist Alexander Goldfarb, who emigrated (according to D. Soros for his connection with B. Berezovsky) from the post of manager of this fund in Russia. from the USSR in the late 70s: “I worked with George for almost ten years, spending $130 million of his money on charitable projects designed to help reforms in Russia, facilitate the transformation of a communist dictatorship into a liberal democracy, transform a closed society into an open one.”

That is, the goal of the billionaire’s “charity” is not to support Russian science and education, as advertised by his liberal propagandists, but to create Western “liberal democracy” and a market economy uncontrolled by the state (“open society”).

At the same time, J. Soros directed his finances and efforts to those institutions where the top of the cosmopolitan “open society” is being formed. Thus, out of the $56 million invested in Russia in 2000, Soros spent:

• 18 million - for the creation and maintenance of an information network controlled by him;
• 9.5 million - for the development of a “correct” education system;
• 5 million - to support “liberal” newspapers and TV;
• 4.5 million - for the development of “culture”.

In June 1999, an extremely sensitive event for some part of Russian science occurred: George Soros officially announced a sharp reduction in support for Russian science from his charitable foundation. The most painful decision of Soros is that from now on individual grants, which have fed many Russian scientists in recent years, will be completely cancelled. Approximately this text was stated in the official statement published by many central media outlets. The message quite correctly spoke about “Russian” science, since the overwhelming majority of scientists benefited by Soros grants were Russian, not Russian scientists.

The report also said that the total amount of George Soros's donations to the Russian science fund was about $250 million and that the cessation of funding was a disaster for Russian researchers, since only this money allowed many to continue serving science.

Why was the program of targeted support for Russian scientists terminated? There may be at least two reasons for this:

1. “Russian” scientists, who gladly received Soros grants, due to the lack of specific data and the possession of “collectively” titles, were not of particular interest to foreign intelligence services;
2. The grant system made it possible to select a part of scientists, mostly of democratic nationality, with whom further in-depth work could be carried out, giving specific tasks and paying increased rewards for their implementation, in other words, creating a spy network with a well-functioning information transfer system.

Although the Soros Foundation is considered private, its activities correspond to the goals that the United States sets for itself.

• Financing in Russia organizations, parties, and movements opposed to “socialism” and “nationalism” (patriotic forces).
• Dissemination of ideas, concepts of a “free society” through the creation and financing of education systems, schools, “liberal” press and TV.
• The creation of a “non-profit” sector, that is, organizations that gradually “take over” cultural, educational, social, and charitable functions from the state, with the ultimate goal of ensuring the loss of national identity.
• Formation of a Western-style “civil society” based on a cosmopolitan and liberal ideology of human rights.
• Creation and financing of schools, universities for training lawyers, social sector workers; revision of existing programs, drafting new laws.
• The fight against xenophobia, anti-Semitism and Russian chauvinism, against infringement of the rights of “non-traditional” faiths.

So the goals and objectives of the “philanthropist” Soros are absolutely clear. It is not clear why the officials who helped promote the Soros Foundation to Russia have not yet been punished for treason, why did they retain their posts? Although this is understandable: the “fifth column” has not become a thing of history, but is operating safely in the vastness of the Russian Federation.

In 2008, at the disposal of the newspaper I received an interesting document. It was handed over by a person who, according to the publication, is directly related to counterintelligence agencies. According to an unnamed source, he has documents from which it follows that the Americans gave grants to our scientists, covertly directing them to work against their own country. In particular, employees of Russian research institutes were asked to talk about the creation of position areas for missile divisions, the size of the combat positions of silo-based intercontinental ballistic missiles of the “single launch” type, and the organization of the service of combat support and security battalions.

Grantors attracted Russian scientists to work on a joint project “Study of the lethality of manpower,” which involved the analysis of data obtained as a result of weapons tests and military operations. In turn, the project “Study of operationally important areas of the World Ocean (Russian coastal sea areas)” was considered from the point of view of “effective joint actions of the Russian and US fleets.” It was proposed to organize a data bank on hydrophysical characteristics to increase the efficiency of underwater observation systems. The Americans were also interested in Russian forces for anti-submarine warfare.

But perhaps the most cynical proposal from the Americans was a scientific work that involved modeling the possible consequences of a nuclear explosion in a tunnel system. Moreover, the “thermodynamic and mechanical characteristics of soft water-saturated soils of sedimentary origin” in which the Moscow Metro structures lie were taken as the initial data! The information published by the newspaper sounds completely sensational, and if it is confirmed, it is difficult to even imagine the scale of the damage that such “research” has caused to our country.

At the same time, this material makes us think about how the Americans and our other Western “partners” benefited from our timelessness. Sergei Komkov, President of the All-Russian Educational Foundation says: “The main sources of information leakage are not scientists. Information leakage occurs at another level. The main people who leak information in our country are officials. Especially officials working in the field of education and science. Expenditures on science today are not comparable with expenses on corresponding scientific research in the leading countries of the world. For example, our spending on science does not exceed 2% of GDP, while spending on science in South Korea, Japan, and the UK exceeds 20% of their GDP.

When a scientist does not have the material resources, when a scientist does not have laboratory equipment, when a scientist does not have testing stands, when a scientist does not receive payment for his work that would allow him to live a full life, he naturally looks for some options. And most Russian scientists, by the way, are not looking for options to satisfy their own needs, but are looking for options that would allow them to work, that is, to carry out developments.

That is why in the 90s, most scientists, especially from such fields as applied physics, astrophysics, geophysics, applied mathematics and mechanics, left for the United States, Sweden, Great Britain, etc. They, of course, took with them their personal developments, which, in general, the state could not lay claim to, since it simply did not finance them. It was a personal intellectual product. Many of these scientists, having moved to the West, patented these inventions, discoveries and developments. But they have already patented them as British, Swedish, German or American developments. By the way, many developments in the field of robotics, automated lines, and computer technology belong to scientists who have Russian roots, but today work abroad.”

Let’s finish this section with a quote from Academician I. Shafarevich from his work “The Russian People in the Battle of Civilizations”: “The dramatic changes that we witnessed in the 1990s represent the high point of the tide of the “Westernizing” trend, which began a long time ago, and in the “revolutionary “form - since 1917. But the tide is always followed by an ebb... And now, indeed, one can see many signs of the “ebb”, “Western civilization” itself is clearly heading towards decline...”

V.I. Boyarintsev and L.K. Fionova. Author's edition.

Tags: