1.   Introduction

As was announced in a previous report devoted to the Armenian network which operates stealthily within the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, we reveal today the identity of Mister “X”, the pivotal figure of the clandestine network.

Mister “X” is the Latvian Nils Muižnieks, who for more than 5 years has been the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights and who was an employee for Georges Soros.

Elected in 2012 by the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly, Nils Muižnieks has since been a key figure of a network that ties European PMs, Armenian officials and NGOs directly tied to or financed by the Soros Foundation, a network devoted to the millionaire and the Republic of Armenia’s interests.

Organization of the Network

Thanks to his position within the Council of Europe, MU acquired a major role within abovementioned NGOs among which are the well-known Human Rights Watch, European Stability Initiative (ESI), Amnesty International, Human Rights House, or even Open Dialog.

The graph above summarizes the NGOs’ activities linked to or finance by the Soros Foundation within the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly for which we give details in the following spreadsheet. This intense activity has the objective of imposing on the Council of Europe as well as the European Parliament George Soros and the Armenian lobby’s political positions. The “Armenian Network” which we are analyzing aims to promulgate its positions to all the members of the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Council and endeavors for the greatest numbers of them to join their cause. The network is particularly active in its “hunt” for PMs that represent Nordic or Baltic countries, the Netherlands and the German socialists.

The following spreadsheet shows how over the past 5 years, since Nils Muižnieks has been the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights,   the Soros-linked NGOs gained visibility by organizing several events simultaneously and in parallel to plenary sessions of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

The data showed in the spreadsheet above is telling. Prior to Nils Muižnieks being appointed to the position of Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, NGO activity tied to the Soros Foundation was strikingly absent, a situation which quickly changed in April 2013 when their events multiplied.

 2.   The Key Members of the Network

If it is undeniable that Nils Muižnieks is spearheading the the operations of the NGOs tied to Georges Soros and that are engaged in the defense of the Republic of Armenia’s interests, he can also count on the help of previous allies, starting from the Polish Wojciech Sawicky, the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly Secretary General.

Muižnieks and Sawicki can also rely on the unwavering support of other MPs that we introduced in our last report:

•    Pieter Omtzigt

•    Christoph Strässer

•    Frank Schwabbe

•    Tiny Kox

•    René Rouquet

•    François Rocheblaine

Muižnieks, Sawicki and these MPs violate with umpunity the ethical principles and codes of good conduct of the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly by ensuring with discretion the defense of the specific interests of the Soros network and the Republic of Armenia. What’s even more is that they act in violation of international law. Regarding this, let us recall the 4 UN Security Council resolutions related to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict (822, 853, 874 and 884) that condemn the occupation of the Azeri territory and that denounce the forced displacement of Azeri populations.

Pieter Omtzigt, Christoph Strässer, Frank Schwabbe and Tiny Kox have specialized in organizing, in parallel to the plenary sessions of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, events aimed to ensure the promotion of interests of the Soros network and to hand out good and bad ratings to Council of Europe member states. The first victims of their recurring attacks of Azerbaijan, Russia and Turkey. Needless to say, the Republic of Armenia has been preserved from criticism and presented as a “model nation.”

Even more scandalous, Nils Muižnieks himself organized on April 21, 2015, a symposium entitled “For a Europe without political prisoners – The case of Azerbaijan.” Without having to mention the grotesque character of this shameful attack, it would have been appreciated if the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights looked into the situation of the million of Azeri refugees, more than 10% of the total population, chased from their villages by the Armenian aggression. It is obvious this dramatic humanitarian issue does not interest Nils Muižnieks.

Nils Muižnieks and Pieter Omtzigt, 2 men who never cease to criticize the Republic of Azerbaijan but who have never denounced the permanent violence of the Republic of Armenia against the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan.

Alexandra Stiglmayer, the second in command of the Soros network NGO “European Stability Initiative” during the same anti-Azerbaijan debate.

It is also important to underline the role held by Tiny Cox, the head of the Parliamentary group “Left United”,  in the symposium organized on April 21, 2015. Cox is one of the kingpins of the operation of the Soros Foundation within the Council of Europe.

Tiny Cox, a key member of the Soros network at the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly

Nils Muižnieks did not only participate in the April 21, 2015, event. He participated in numerous debates, focusing his attacks on certain member states, specifically Azerbaijan, Russia and Turkey, including above, during an anti-Azerbaijan attack conducted alongside Christoph Strässer.

Nils Muižnieks and Christoph Strässer are long-time friends and are the leaders of the Armenian network that operates with discretion within the Council of Europe. The two men participate very actively for the defense of Georges Soros’ interests and try by all means to impose a pro-Armenian rhetoric to the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly.

Nils Muižnieks and Christoph Strässer, a long-time friendship and an ideological proximity wrought by their engagement in the socialist family.

Let us note that Nils Muižnieks will be reaching the end of his mandate as Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, a prestigious position that his good friend and partner Christoph Strässer dreams of. The two men surely imagine being able to pursue their operations on behalf of the Soros network and the Armenian network with Strässer replacing his good friend Muižnieks as Commissioner for Human Rights.

In view of the information we released in our last report, it seems evident that Christoph Strässer does not have the worth to earn such a presitgious position, one that necessitates a complete independence from all partisan initiatives to dictate politics within the Council of Europe.

Since 2012, Nils Muižnieks and Christoph Strässer have weaved a complex network that ties NGOs and Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly members devoted to the interests of the Soros Foundation and the Republic of Armenia.

These high-ranking members of the Council of Europe and of NGOs directly or financially tied to the Soros network have multiplied meetings aimed at defending the specific interests we have just presented.

 On the photo above, Alecandra Stiglmayer, second in command of the ESI (left), John Dalhuisen, Director for Europe of Amnesty International, and Gerald Knaus, the Director of ESI, work together on behalf of their donor, the Soros Foundation, and of their strategy on their influence on the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly.

A few weeks after the abovementioned meeting, John Dalhuisen, the Director for Europe of Amnesty International, participated in an event organized by the socialist Frank Schwabbe, who had as unique objective to pursue a violent anti-Azerbaijan campaign by the Armenian network with the help of Georges Soros’ “men.”

3.   Who is Nils Muižnieks?

Prior to being appointed as Commissioner for Human Rights, Nils Muižnieks was the Director of the Soros Foundation in Latvia from 1994 to 2001.

 Still while working for Georges Soros, Nils Muižnieks also led from 1994 to 2002 the “Latvian Center for Human Rights,” renamed the “Latvian Center for Human Rights and Ethnic Studies.” These both private and partially state-controlled responsibilities is indicative of Georges Soros’ strategy in terms of the infiltration of State apparatus and public institutions, a reality that is clear in the following activity report of the Latvian Center for Human Rights (2000):

Below is more irrefutable proof, dating from 2002, of the financial dependency of the Latvian Center for Human Rights with regard to the Soros Foundation.

One must wonder how much funding was transferred between the Soros Foundation and the Latvian Center for Human Rights headed by Nils Muižnieks. Even more preoccupying is the silence of the current Commissioner for Human Rights who has up to now refrained from revealing his lack of independence and the inevitable conflicts of interest created by such a situation.

Nils Muižnieks’ full resume should be considered as well. The document is additional proof of the privileged relationship between the Commissioner for Human Rights and the American tycoon. 

Even more worrisome is the fact that Nils Muižnieks not only maintained this narrow relationship and financial dependency with Georges Soros during his career in Latvia. Soros and he were also intertwined at the most importune moment in 2005, as he was already trying to be appointed as Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, a position he obtained in 2012 as he was still collaborating narrowly with Georges Soros as shown in the following document:

Evidently, the above-presented documents show that Nils Muižnieks worked for Georges Soros since 1994 and was still at his side during his accession to the crucial position of Commissioner for Human Rights for the Council of Europe. It goes without saying that he was elected to this prestigious poste while hiding his 20-year-old privileged relation with the American businessman to the Parliamentary Assembly. This lack of transparency completely wronged the democratic rules of his election with the aim of discretely ensuring the representation of the interests of Georges Soros and the Armenian network within the Council of Europe.

4. Georges Soros and the “Armenian Connection”, when personal interests trump democracy

What objectives does Georges Soros have? It seems that he wants to destabilize sovereign states in order to impose his agenda and defend his financial interests. Let us recall his operations in Ukraine: the incredible importance acquired by Soros in the highest spheres of Ukrainian power^[1] whom he does not hesitate to advise, if not decide for, regarding matters of economic, financial and defense policy, even recommending training of Ukrainian armed forces in Romania, a NATO member country, by American instructors.^[2] This destabilization strategy is not limited to Ukraine, and also targets Russia, Turkey, Hungary, Macedonia and Serbia and let us not forget the Republic of Azerbaijan which suffers countless attacks by the “Soros network” and “Armenian network” whose obscure operations within the Council of Europe institutions we denounce. These two accomplices with specific yet converging interests do not hesitate to hinder the democratic choices of sovereign peoples by organizing with secrecy protests and mobilizing their active followers on media and social media.

These last months, the Republic of Macedonia became the latest victim of these destabilization operations which aim to delegitimize the majority party which is supported by Macedonian citizens. This is an anti-democratic attempt organized by the “Soros network” but which is denounced as seen below in pictures taken by Macedonian citizens.

Hungary has also been a target of the “Soros network” attacks. In this case, the American used the services of his “handyman”, Nils Muižnieks, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, who led a violent attack against the Hungarian government in the New York Times columns. His aggression lacked any analysis and represented a scandalous denunciation of a member state of the Council of Europe and the European Union. It was a unilateral denigration against a European democracy which was introduced on the international media stage as a thug state. Below, an extract of the article published by Nils Muižnieks:

“Among the countries most hostile to the European Union proposals on migration was Hungary. This comes as no surprise. Hungary’s disengagement from human rights protections and the rule of law is not new.

Prime Minister Viktor Orban has shrugged off this criticism and pushed ahead with an agenda that can be described only as institutionalized xenophobia. As if those violations were not enough, the police are recruiting an additional 3,000 members for what are officially called “border hunter action units,” which focus on patrolling the borders.

Hungary’s approach to the issue has already led to violations of human rights and unnecessary suffering. It has also undermined the values of solidarity and tolerance embodied in the Council of Europe and the European Union.

If Hungary persists in its defiant policy that flouts human rights law, it will meet with further international criticism and possible legal sanctions.”

It is clear that the Council of Europe Commission for Human Rights went beyond his position’s duties in this caricatured attack and even worse, he went against all European Union interests. Must we recall that Hungary faces an unprecedented migratory phenomenon stemming from the Iraqi crisis, the Syrian and Libyan civil wars, as well as North African and sub-Saharan jihadism? Does Nils Muižnieks want Hungary to transform into a privileged tunnel through which millions of refugees could enter the European Union?

We are not trying to belittle the suffering of these men and women escaping war but to answer rationally and reasonably to their distress. The response offered by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights in his attack against Hungary is unacceptable. He advises that Hungary renounce its sovereignty and open its borders and consequently those of the European Union to a massive and out of hand immigration.

5. Nils Muižnieks, a Commissioner for Human Rights in the service of Armenia

 As we had already shown in our first report, an obscure “Armenian network” operates within the institutions of the Council of Europe to defend Erevan’s interest and in order to do so conducts repeated baseless attacks against the Republic of Azerbaijan. This is an impossible strategy without witnesses, for which the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights is in the first row.

These destabilization operations, as useful to George Soros as to the Republic of Armenia’s interests, are conducted in a complete contradiction with the political ethics of the Council of Europe.

In order to successfully conduct this destabilization strategy, and from his position as Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Nils Muižnieks made sure to not impede on his Armenian “friends” by shedding light on human rights violations in the Republic of Armenia.

He barely authorized himself to ask questions without however weakening Erevan’s regime. During his last visit to the Armenian capital, t would have been within his purview to at least ask authorities questions about the striking issues between genders or about domestic violence. Regardless of this, and in opposition to the duties that were granted to him by the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly in 2012, Nils Muižnieks refrained from asking questions that could be upsetting.

Erevan faced 4 years of protests led by citizens who were confronted with the rise in electricity and public transportation prices, as well as Armenians who powerlessly witness the increasing financial insecurity of elders who fall victims to a pension-based system that looks similar to survival. The pacifist demonstrations were violently reprimanded, killing one last year. All questioning of the regime was ruthlessly stifled.

How did Nils Muižnieks react? He stayed impassive and in doing so became an objective accomplice of the repression organized by the Armenian regime.

Nonetheless, during the Ukrainian crisis, an issue that Georges Soros holds very dear, Nils Muižnieks placed himself in the frontlines to request an investigation on possible violations of protesters’ rights and to denounce the repression they were allegedly victims of.

Nils Muižnieks is evidently a proponent of double standards.

To underline his partisanship and lack of objectivity and professionalism, you need only compare his statements regarding the crisis in Ukraine and the Nagorno-Karabakh occupation.

From December 7, to December 12, 2014, the Commissioner for Human Rights conducted a mission in Kiev, Moscow and Simferopol to evaluate the level of Human Rights in Crimea.

Here is an excerpt of a press release with regard to this mission signed by Nils Muižnieks:

“All cases of serious human rights violations that have occurred in Crimea since February 2014, including the recent cases of abductions, must be effectively investigated and those responsible held accountable. Urgent steps must also be taken to ensure minority rights and security, as well as media freedom and journalists’ safety.”

The all-great defender of Human Rights that is Nils Muižnieks changed his tone when he considered the occupation of the Nagorno-Karabakh region by Armenian militias, an occupation that was condemned by the UN, the OSCE … and the Council of Europe of which he is the Commissioner for Human Rights.

He is an extract of his statement about this issues which still has not been resolved after 25 years of occupation:

“Any conflict in which people are killed every week, if not every day, has negative effects on human rights, at different levels. In general, human rights are sacrificed on the altar of national security when there are conflicts. But I was pleased with some of the changes that I have seen recently in Armenia, in particular the introduction of conscientious objection and development of alternative services. These are steps forward that I consider very positively.”

It is clear that the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights minimized the extreme gravity of an occupation condemned by his own institutions and the UN, the highest jurisdiction in the international community.

Adding insult to injury, Nils Muižnieks continues to spread partisan disinformation in a New York Times column published on June 28, 2015, in which he cites the Republic of Armenia as an example for the welcome of Syrian refugees. Nils Muižnieks pretends to be unaware that these refugees are of Armenian descent, making it natural for Erevan to welcome them, a hospitality that has nothing to do with the generous and neutral welcome of refugees by Germany since 2015.

Nils Muižnieks’ bias also has very negative effects within the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, as can be observed in this message sent from Thorbjørn Jagland, the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, to Pedro Agramunt, President of the Parliamentary Assembly:

When reading this message, one could assume that the 324 Council of Europe MPs are at a risk of not fulfilling their responsibilities with regard to ethics, an insulting assumption for elected officials who, for the most part, have always been respectful of democratic institutions and rules of good governance.

Thorbjørn Jagland has chosen the wrong target. The Council of Europe MPs do not deserve any lectures and should be free to debate and vote according to their own will.

The problems that are currently shaking the Council of Europe are related to the obscure networks that we are denouncing and that are supported by certain MPs and by the Commissioner for Human Rights. The countries that are victims of their doings can serve as witnesses.

Nevertheless, it is possible that Jagland’s proximity to Georges Soros prevented him from the clairvoyance that is to be expected by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe.

6. Conclusion

It is undeniable that the clandestine operations conducted by the Soros and Armenian networks hinder the projects of the Council of Europe. If one must understand and recognize the legitimacy of partisan engagements, they are only acceptable if publicly claimed. This transparency is an indispensable condition for democracy.

To guarantee the quality of the Council of Europe and its Parliamentary Assembly’s projects, it is critical to return to total transparency in the debates it holds.

The ethical requirements for such institutions will not be reached if clandestine networks operate despite them and rules of democracy.

Let us hope that Council of Europe MPs will be attentive when selecting their next Council of Europe Human Rights commissioner.

END.

Copyright© ESISC 2017