The Frame-Up of Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Why?
by PROF. MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY
(PHOTO: Was the short fat randy-handed Frenchman set up?)
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24866
(May 19, 2011) The arrest of IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn has
all the appearances of a frame-up ordered by powerful members of the financial
establishment, in liaison with France's Nicolas Sarkozy, whose presidency has
served the interests of the US at the expense of those of France and the
European Union.
While there is for the moment no proof of a plot, the unusual circumstances of
his arrest and imprisonment require careful examination.
Immediately following Strauss Kahn's arrest, pressures were exerted by
Washington to speed up his replacement as Managing Director of the IMF
preferably by a non-European, an American or a handpicked candidate from an
"emerging market economy" or a developing country.
Since the founding of the Bretton Woods institutions in 1945, the World Bank has
been headed by an American whereas the IMF has been under the helm of a
(Western) European.
Strauss-Kahn is a member of elite groups who meet behind closed doors.
He belongs to the Bilderbergers. Categorized as one of the world's most
influential persons, he is an academic and politician rather than a banker. In
contrast to his predecessors at the IMF, he has no direct affiliation to a
banking or financial institution.
But at the same time he is the fall guy. His "gaffe" was to confront the
Washington-Wall Street Consensus and push for reforms within the IMF, which
challenged America's overriding role within the organization.
The demise of Strauss-Kahn potentially serves to strengthen the hegemony of the
US and its control over the IMF at the expense of what former Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld called "Old Europe".
Blocking Strauss-Kahn, the Presidential Candidate
In recent years, a major shift has occurred in Europe's political landscape.
Pro-American governments have been elected in both France and Germany. Social
Democracy has been weakened.
Franco-American relations have been redefined, with Washington playing a
significant role in grooming a new generation of European politicians.
The presidency of Nicolas Sarkozy has, in many regards, become a de facto US
"client regime", broadly supportive of US corporate interests in the EU and
closely aligned with US foreign policy.
There are two overlapping and interrelated issues in the DSK frame-up
hypothesis.
The first pertains to regime change at the IMF, the second to Strauss-Kahn as a
candidate in France's forthcoming presidential elections.
Both these processes are tied into the clash between competing US and European
economic interests including control over the euro-currency system.
Strauss-Khan as a favorite of the Socialist Party, would have won the
presidential elections leading to the demise of "Our Man in Paris" Nicolas
Sarkozy. As documented by Thierry Meyssan, the CIA played a central undercover
role in destabilizing the Gaullist party and supporting the election of Nicolas
Sarkozy (See Operation Sarkozy: How the CIA placed one of its agents at the
presidency of the French Republic, Reseau Voltaire, September 4, 2008)
A Strauss-Kahn presidency and a "Socialist" government would have been a serious
setback for Washington, contributing to a major shift in Franco-American
relations.
It would have contributed to weakening Washington's role on the European
political chessboard, leading to a shift in the balance of power between America
and "Old Europe" (namely the Franco-German alliance).
It would have had repercussions on the internal structure of the Atlantic
Alliance and the hegemonic role of the US within NATO.
The Eurozone monetary system as well as Wall Street's resolve to exert a
decisive influence on the European monetary architecture are also at stake.
The Frame-Up?
Fifty-seven percent of France's population, according to a May 17 poll, believe
that Strauss-Kahn was framed, victim of a set-up. He was detained on alleged
sexual assault and rape charges based on scanty evidence. He was detained based
on a complaint filed by the Sofitel hotel where he was staying, on behalf of the
alleged victim, an unnamed hotel chamber-maid:
The 32-year-old maid told authorities that she entered his suite early Saturday
afternoon and he attacked her, New York Police Department spokesman Paul J.
Browne. She said she had been told to clean the spacious $3,000-a-night suite,
which she thought was empty.
According to an account the woman provided to police, Strauss-Kahn emerged from
the bathroom naked, chased her down a hallway and pulled her into a bedroom,
where he began to sexually assault her. She said she fought him off, then he
dragged her into the bathroom, where he forced her to perform oral sex on him
and tried to remove her underwear. The woman was able to break free again and
escaped the room and told hotel staff what had happened, authorities said. They
called police.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/7565485.html#ixzz1MfFWFlnY
Challenging the Washington Consensus
What is at stake in the immediate wake of Strauss Kahn's demise is "regime
change" at the IMF.
The Obama administration has demanded his replacement by a more compliant
individual. U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, former CEO of the New York
Federal Reserve Bank is pushing for the replacement of Dominique Strauss-Kahn,
"suggesting he can no longer perform his duties" as IMF Managing director.
"Geithner called for greater formal recognition by the IMF board that John
Lipsky, the fund's second-in-command, will continue serving as temporary
managing director for an interim period. Although Strauss-Kahn has yet to
resign, sources say the IMF is in touch with his legal counsel to discuss his
future at the organization."
What lies behind the frame-up scenario? What powerful interests are involved?
Geithner had a close personal relationship with Strauss-Kahn.
On the floor of the US Senate (May 18), Senator Mark Kirk of Illinois, called
for the resignation of DSK while calling upon the IMF's deputy managing director
John Lipsky to "assume full responsibility of the IMF" as interim managing
director. The process of "permanent replacement should "commence at once," he
said.
John Lipsky is a well connected Wall Street banker, a former Vice Chairman at
JPMorgan Investment Bank.
While the IMF is in theory an intergovernmental organization, it has
historically been controlled by Wall Street and the US Treasury. The IMF's
"bitter economic medicine", the so-called Structural Adjustment Program (SAP),
imposed on countless developing countries, essentially serves the interests of
creditor banks and multinational corporations.
The IMF is not the main architect of these devastating economic reforms which
have served to impoverish millions of people, while creating a "favorable
environment" for foreign investors in Third World low wage economies.
The creditor banks call the shots. The IMF is a bureaucratic entity. Its role is
to implement and enforce those economic policies on behalf of dominant economic
interests.
Strauss Kahn's proposed reforms while providing a "human face" to the IMF did
not constitute a shift in direction. They were formulated within the realm of
neoliberalism. They modified but they did not undermine the central role of IMF
"economic medicine". The socially devastating impacts of IMF "shock treatment"
under Strauss-Kahn's leadership have largely prevailed.
Dominique Strauss Kahn arrived at the helm of the IMF in November 2007, less
than a year prior to September-October 2008 financial meltdown on Wall Street.
The structural adjustment program (SAP) was not modified. Under DSK, IMF "shock
treatment" which historically had been limited to developing countries was
imposed on Greece, Ireland and Portugal.
Under the helm of DSK as Managing Director, the IMF demanded that developing
countries remove food and fuel subsidies at a time of rising commodity prices on
the New York and Chicago Mercantile exchanges.
The hikes in food and fuel prices, which preceded the September-October 2008
Wall Street crash, were in large part the result of market manipulation. Grain
prices were boosted artificially by large scale speculative operations. Instead
of taming the speculators and containing the rise in food and fuel prices, the
IMF's role was to ensure that the governments of indebted developing countries
would not in any way interfere in the "free market", by preventing these prices
from going up.
These hikes in food prices, which are the result of outright manipulation
(rather than scarcity) have served to impoverish people Worldwide. The surge in
food prices constitutes a new phase of the process of global impoverishment.
DSK was complicit in this process of market manipulation.
The removal of food and fuel subsidies in Tunisia and Egypt had been demanded by
the IMF. Food and fuel prices skyrocketed, people were impoverished, paving the
way towards the January 2011 social protest movement:
Fiscal prudence remains an overarching priority for the [Tunisian] authorities,
who also see the need for maintaining a supportive fiscal policy in 2010 in the
current international environment. Efforts in the last decade to bring down the
public debt ratio significantly should not be jeopardized by a too lax fiscal
policy. The authorities are committed to firmly control current expenditure,
including subsidies,... (IMF Tunisia: 2010 Article IV Consultation - Staff
Report; Public Information Notice on the Executive Board Discussion; and
Statement by the Executive Director for Tunisia)
"[The IMF] encouraged the [Egyptian] authorities to press further with food and
fuel subsidy reforms, and welcomed their intention to improve the efficiency and
targeting of food subsidy programs. [meaning the selective elimination of food
subsidies].
"Consideration should be given to introducing automatic adjustment mechanisms
for domestic fuel prices to minimize distortions [meaning dramatic increases in
fuel prices without State interference], while strengthening cash-based social
programs to protect vulnerable groups. (IMF Executive Board Concludes 2008
Article IV Consultation with the Arab Republic of Egypt Public Information
Notice, PIN No. 09/04, January 15, 2009)
Under the helm of DSK, the IMF also imposed sweeping austerity measures on Egypt
in 2008, while supporting Hosni Mubarak's "efforts to broaden the privatization
program".(Ibid)
The Frank G. Wisner Nicolas Sarkozy Connection
Strauss-Kahn was refused bail by Judge Melissa Jackson, an appointee and protégé
of Michael Bloomberg, who in addition to his role as Mayor is a powerful figure
on Wall Street.
Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. charged (using scanty evidence)
Strauss-Kahn "with seven crimes, including attempted rape, sexual abuse,
forcible touching and unlawful imprisonment".
Who is Cyrus Vance Jr.?
He is the son of the late Cyrus Vance who served as Secretary of State in the
Carter administration.
But there is more than meets the eye. Nicolas Sarkozy's step father Frank G.
Wisner II, a prominent CIA official who married his step mother Christine de
Ganay in 1977 served as Deputy Executive Secretary of State under the helm of
Cyrus Vance Senior, father of District Attorney Cyrus Vance Junior.
Is it relevant?
The Vance and Wisner families had close personal ties. In turn Nicolas Sarkozy
had close family ties with his step father Frank Wisner (and his half brothers
and sisters in the US and one member of the Wisner family was involved in
Sarkozy's election campaign).
It is also worth noting that Frank G. Wisner II was the son of one of America's
most notorious spies, the late Frank Gardiner Wisner (1909- 1965), the
mastermind behind the CIA sponsored coup which toppled the government of
Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran in 1953. Wisner Jr. is also trustee of the
Rockefeller Brothers Trust.
While these various personal ties do not prove that Strauss-Kahn was the object
of a set-up, the matter of Sarkozy's ties to the CIA via his step father, not to
mention the ties of Frank G. Wisner II to the Cyrus Vance family are certainly
worth investigating.
Frank G, Wisner also played a key role as Obama's special intelligence envoy to
Egypt at the height of the January 2011 protest movement.
Did the CIA play a role?
Was Strauss-Kahn framed by people in his immediate political entourage including
President Obama and Secretary of the Treasury Tim Geithner?
Fair Trial?
Innocent before proven guilty? The US media has already cast its verdict. Will
the court procedures be manipulated?
One would expect that Strauss-Kahn be granted a fair trial, namely the same
treatment as that granted to thousands of arrests on alleged sexual aggression
charges in New York City.
How many similar or comparable alleged sexual aggressions occur on a monthly
basis in New York City? What is the underlying pattern? How many of these are
reported to the police? How many are the object of police follow-up once a
complaint has been filed?
What is the percent of complaints submitted to police which are the object of
police arrest? How many of these arrests lead to a judicial procedure? What are
the delays in court procedures?
How many of these arrests lead to release without a judicial procedure?
How many of the cases submitted to a judicial procedure are dismissed by the
presiding judge?
How many of the cases which are not dismissed are refused bail outright by the
presiding judge? What is the basis for refusing bail?
How many are granted bail? What is the average amount of bail?
How many are imprisoned without bail based on scanty and incomplete evidence?
How many of those who are refused bail are sent to an infamous maximum security
prison on Rikers Island on the orders of Michael Bloomberg.
Diplomatic Immunity
Press reports state that full diplomatic immunity does not apply to officials of
the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions, namely that the US did
not ratify the protocol.
"U.N. convention on privileges and immunities for international agencies that
most countries have ratified. It gives the heads of U.N. agencies broad immunity
in the countries where they are based. But the U.S. government never became a
party to that treaty. Employees of international agencies are covered by a U.S.
statute that gives only limited immunity."
The relevant question is how has this limited immunity provision been applied in
practice? Namely how many people with limited immunity (UN officials, officials
of the Bretton Woods institutions) have been arrested and sent to a high
security prison?
Has Strauss Kahn been given the same treatment as those arrested under the
provisions of "limited immunity"?
Does the Strauss Kahn arrest fit the pattern? Or is Strauss Kahn being treated
in a way which does not correspond to the normal (average) pattern of police and
judicial procedures applied in the numerous cases of persons arrested on alleged
sexual assault charges?
Without a frame-up instrumented by very powerful people acting in the
background, the head of the IMF would have been treated in an entirely different
way. The mayor of New York Michael Bloomberg and Timothy Geithner would have
come to his rescue. The matter would have been hushed up with a view to
protecting the reputation of a powerful public figure. But that did not happen.