• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Люди1091
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы794
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации93
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
Дуайт Эйзенхауэр
24 февраля, 04:07

Immigration Has Divided America. Migration May Unite It.

John Richard Cookson Economics, Americas Internal mobility has the power to rescue the U.S. economy. Immigration has divided America. A chasm has opened between those who support President Trump’s immigration pause, deportation surge and wall on the border of Mexico, and those who have protested against those policies and advocated that cities and universities become designated sanctuaries. Emigration too has become politicized, with some left-leaning celebrities casually forgetting their earlier vows to move abroad if Trump won. Today, when it comes to the migration, “united” has become something of a misnomer for America’s states. Nonetheless, there is a type of people movement that President Trump and Congress should not only tolerate but champion. Internal migration—U.S. citizens moving within the country—is in many ways the story of America. Think of Lewis and Clark, Manifest Destiny, the Oregon Trail, the transcontinental railroad, the Ford Model T and the Eisenhower interstate highway system. Dynamism has been a hallmark of the country throughout its history. That is, until recently. Internal migration has now reached historic lows. In 2016, just 11 percent of Americans moved. In the 1950s and 1960s, around 20 percent of Americans moved each year. In the 1980s and 1990s, around 15 percent did. Moreover, the distance of most moves has collapsed. Of those Americans who moved last year, 61 percent stayed in the same county. Just 14 percent of those who moved relocated to another state. One statistic reported by the New York Times sums up this trend: “the median distance Americans live from their mother is 18 miles.” Read full article

23 февраля, 20:23

Trump, top officials and CEOs talk 'workforce of the future'

The CEOs were split into four groups focusing on infrastructure, tax and trade, regulatory reform and the workforce of the future.

21 февраля, 12:14

Как мы потеряли Россию?

В своем ярком и познавательном политическом исследовании американский журналист и писатель Питер Конради попытался ответить на вопрос, содержащийся в самом названии книги, в которой он анализирует истоки и причины нынешних непростых отношений между Западом и РоссиейThe post Как мы потеряли Россию? appeared first on MixedNews.

21 февраля, 12:14

Как мы потеряли Россию?

В своем ярком и познавательном политическом исследовании американский журналист и писатель Питер Конради попытался ответить на вопрос, содержащийся в самом названии книги, в которой он анализирует истоки и причины нынешних непростых отношений между Западом и РоссиейThe post Как мы потеряли Россию? appeared first on MixedNews.

21 февраля, 12:14

Как мы потеряли Россию?

В своем ярком и познавательном политическом исследовании американский журналист и писатель Питер Конради попытался ответить на вопрос, содержащийся в самом названии книги, в которой он анализирует истоки и причины нынешних непростых отношений между Западом и РоссиейThe post Как мы потеряли Россию? appeared first on MixedNews.

20 февраля, 04:05

When America Threatened to Nuke China: The Battle of Yijiangshan Island

Sebastien Roblin Security, Asia A forgotten fight between China and Taiwan that had big repercussions. In 1955, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army embarked on a bloody amphibious landing to capture a fortified Nationalist island, only about twice the size of a typical golf course. Not only did the battle exhibit China’s growing naval capabilities, it was a pivotal moment in a chain of events that led Eisenhower to threaten a nuclear attack on China—and led Congress to pledge itself to the defense of Taiwan. In 1949, Mao’s People’s Liberation Army succeeded in sweeping the Nationalist Kuomintang (KMT) government out of mainland China. However, the Nationalist navy allowed the KMT to maintain its hold on large islands such as Hainan and Formosa, as well as smaller islands only miles away from major mainland cities such as Kinmen and Matsu. These soon were heavily fortified with Nationalist troops and guns, and engaged in protracted artillery duels with PLA guns on the mainland. In 1950, the PLA launched a series of amphibious operations, most notably resulting in the capture of Hainan island in the South China Sea. However, a landing in Kinmen was bloodily repulsed by Nationalist tanks in the Battle of Guningtou, barring the way for a final assault on Taiwan itself. Then events intervened, as the outbreak of the Korean War caused President Truman to deploy the U.S. Seventh Fleet to defend Taiwan. However, the naval blockade cut both ways—Truman did not allow Nationalist leader Chiang Kai-shek to launch attacks on mainland China. This policy changed with the presidency of Eisenhower in 1953, who withdrew the Seventh Fleet, allowing the Nationalists to build up troops on the forward islands and launch more guerilla raids on the mainland. However, the PLA was able to counter-escalate with new World War II surplus heavy artillery, warships and aircraft it had acquired from Russia. The series of artillery duels, naval battles and aerial bombardments that followed became known as the First Taiwan Strait Crisis. Read full article

19 февраля, 16:41

DON SURBER: Historians Sense Obama Failed. Only 12th best? Gee, you would think in light of t…

DON SURBER: Historians Sense Obama Failed. Only 12th best? Gee, you would think in light of the last eight years of hosannas from the press, Barack Obama would rank with Washington and Lincoln among America’s academics. But nope, he was only 12th. . . . The rankings by category show a distinctly affirmative action grading […]

13 февраля, 17:27

Переродившиеся убийцы

«Убийство — незаконно. Поэтому все убийцы заслуживают наказания. Если, конечно, они не убивают тысячами, под звуки фанфар».

13 февраля, 16:46


I Liked Ike by Lt. Gen. Clarence E. McKnight, Jr. In this period of political upheaval when comity and compromise are endangered species and many of our most sacrosanct traditions are routinely disregarded, I find myself dwelling in earlier times when there were giants in the earth who evoked the better angels of our nature and led us to greatness. I chanced upon a Norman Rockwell portrait of Dwight D. Eisenhower that appeared on the cover of The Saturday Evening Post back in October 1952 a few weeks before his first election to the Presidency. A note from his granddaughter is appended saying Rockwell was having trouble getting the great man to smile. Finally he showed Ike some pictures of his grandchildren, and that evoked the smile that brightens up the portrait. Some would point out that Ike, like the current occupant of the White House, had no previous political experience, but that would be wrong. As Supreme Allied Commander in the European Theater in World War II, Ike had the most political of jobs - keeping all those disparate political and military leaders from different countries on the same page - as survival of the free world hung in the balance. By D-Day he was living on five packs of cigarettes a day, but kept his composure and got the job done. The night before our troops went ashore in Normandy, Ike wrote out a press release to be issued if the great assault failed. In it he said all of the military people had done everything possible to achieve victory, and that responsibility for the failure was his and his alone. He was a leader for the ages. As President, Ike had a vision of what this country could become. As a young officer, he had taken a military brigade across the country and appreciated how inefficient our mishmash of highways was. He was not the first to envision a nationwide system of broad highways, but he was the driving force that made it happen - launching the Interstate Highway System. For eight years, Ike passed up one opportunity after another to lead our country into another war. He had seen enough of war. And he recognized the perils of the military-industrial complex and sought to keep it under restraint. He knew what those numbers in the annual military budget really meant, and chopped out the nonsense. Like most of his generation, Ike was a reluctant convert to racial progress, but when the Supreme Court ruled that segregation was unconstitutional, and the racist firebrands fought back, Ike sent in the troops. That was only one chapter of a centuries-long quest for racial justice, but it was a critical one. Ike could make it stick because he had enormous stature. It was a time when the American people were first coming to terms with our role as a great superpower, and taking note of our own shortcomings. We were wrestling with dynamic forces that challenged our traditional attitudes under the cloud of nuclear annihilation, but we got through it because of inspired leadership. Looking back today, I realized how blessed we really were. Lt. Gen. Clarence E. "Mac" McKnight, Jr., (USA-Ret) is the author of "From Pigeons to Tweets: A General Who Led Dramatic Change in Military Communications," published by The History Publishing Company. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

10 февраля, 21:41

Trump has some awkward exchanges with the Japanese prime minister

The two world leaders engaged in a 19-second handshake that didn't appear to end well.

10 февраля, 20:14

What Happens When White House Aides Get Too Famous?

Team Trump might want to remember the dangers of flying too close to the spotlight.

09 февраля, 06:24

Gorsuch Calls Trump's Attacks on the Judiciary 'Disheartening'

The president’s choice to fill a Supreme Court vacancy offered a harsh assessment in a meeting with a senator on Wednesday.

09 февраля, 03:08

Trump, The Supreme Court, And The Rights Of Gays And Lesbians

With the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States instead of Chief Judge Merrick Garland, and with the possibility of another Trump Supreme Court nomination at some point down the road, it is useful to reflect on the history of homosexuality in Western culture and on the pivotal role the Supreme Court has played in helping to shape our nation’s laws in this regard. The plain and simple fact is that, with two Trump appointments to the Supreme Court, should that come to pass, we can expect significant changes in the way the Court approaches the rights of gays and lesbians in the future. Before we get to that point, it is important to understand how we got to where we are today. It is only with that understanding that we can truly comprehend the magnitude of the challenge ahead. In this piece, the first of three I will post in the next week, I will briefly explore the history of homosexuality from the ancient world through the 1950s. Each of these posts, I should note, are drawn in part from my forthcoming book, Sex and the Constitution (now available on Amazon). I hope you will find this history instructive. The pre-Christian world generally thought of sex as a positive part of human nature. It did not see sex as bound up with questions of sin or religion. The ancient Greeks, for example, focused, not on sexual “sin,” but on whether an individual’s conduct was harmful to others. This extended even to homosexuality. Indeed, same-sex sex was a common feature of classical Greek sexual life, and Greek poetry, history, and literature celebrated such relationships and identified them with love, honesty, integrity, honor, and courage. Similarly, although Roman sexual life was different from that of the Greeks, the Romans too celebrated sexual pleasure and neither Roman religion nor Roman law condemned same-sex sex. The emergence of Christianity, however, produced a profound change in the prevailing understandings of sex. By the end of the fifth century, Christianity had come to condemn sexual desire as inherently shameful and as an evil temptation that must be suppressed. This shift occurred over the course of several centuries, but it was Augustine who crystallized the early Christian understanding of sex. In a critical leap, Augustine linked sexual desire to the Fall of man. Adam’s transgression, he argued, had not been one of disobedience, as the ancient Hebrews had believed, but one of sex. Augustine’s vision ultimately shaped the future, not only of Christianity, but of Western culture and law, more generally. During the next thousand years, Christian dogma attained not only religious, but also social, political, and legal authority. The sin of “sodomy” came to be seen as uniquely dire, for as the biblical story of Sodom had taught, for this particular sin God will punish not only the sinners, but also those who fail to prevent the sin. It was not until the thirteen century, though, that same-sex sex came for the first time to be declared, not only a sin, but a crime. That is, in a critical step, the Church now conscripted the secular law to extend its prohibition on same-sex sex not only to those who shared the faith, but to all persons, regardless of their personal religious beliefs. Criminal statutes against same-sex sex were now enacted throughout Europe, and because of the heinous nature of this crime, these laws called for homosexuals to be castrated, dismembered, burned at the stake, drowned, hanged, stoned to death, decapitated, or buried alive. In short, homosexuals for the first time became the object of a systematic program of extermination. By the time of the American Revolution, the American colonies, under the influence of the Enlightenment, had stopped using the criminal law to prosecute most forms of consensual sex – except for the crime of sodomy. Indeed, sodomy remained a felony in every state in the nation for the next two hundred years, although the law was almost never enforced. Until the late nineteenth-century, it was generally assumed that individuals who chose to engage in same-sex sex were no different than other individuals who chose to engage in other types of criminal or sinful behavior. Engaging in homosexual sex, like engaging in robbery or murder, was simply a choice. That assumption began to be questioned, however, in the late nineteenth-century, as medical authorities became interested in the issue. For the first time, persons drawn to same-sex sex began to be seen as individuals possessed of a distinctive psychological identity. It was in this era that the concept of the “homosexual” first came into being. Leading studies of homosexuality in the late nineteenth century posited that homosexuality was a pathology and that persons afflicted with this pathology were “strange freaks of nature.” Physicians in this era proposed a broad range of “remedies” for homosexuality, including hypnosis, psychoanalysis, sex with prostitutes, intense bicycle riding, rectal massage, burning the neck and lower back with hot irons or chemicals, electric stimulation, castration, and clitorectomy. Many doctors recommended the sterilization of homosexuals in order to prevent the condition from being passed on to the next generation, and by 1938, 32 states had enacted compulsory sterilization laws aimed at homosexuals. Also in the 1930s, the image of the homosexual took on an increasingly sinister cast. A growing public anxiety over sex crimes now recast the dominant image of homosexuals not only as individual who engaged in immoral sex with other homosexuals, but as dangerous psychopaths who were naturally inclined to commit the most unspeakable crimes. Demonized now not only as perverts, but as obsessive child molesters as well, homosexuals became the new “enemy of the people,” and arrests for sodomy increased dramatically in the 1930s. During World War II, the United States for the first time attempted to prevent homosexual men and women from entering the military, and those who were discovered in the military were discharged in proceedings that often left them branded for life. Then, with the advent of the Cold War, things got even worse. Fearful of domestic subversion, Americans turned with a vengeance against homosexuals. The conflation of “Communists and queers” seemed only logical, for Americans viewed communism as atheistic, un-Christian, immoral and degenerate. As one congressman asserted in 1950, “the Russians are strong believers in homosexuality.” By 1950, the “Lavender Scare,” as it came to be called, was well underway. Government agencies began using lie detectors to determine whether their employees were homosexuals, the FBI compiled lists of suspected homosexuals, and President Eisenhower issued an Executive Order officially declaring “sexual perversion” a serious security risk. In a society in which the dominant religion excoriated homosexuality as a heinous sin, the law branded it a vicious crime, and the medical profession diagnosed homosexuals as diseased, the vast majority of individuals who harbored homosexual impulses did their best to hide their secret shame from family, friends, neighbors, employers, and associates. The terrible fear of discovery kept the secret lives of most homosexuals invisible, even to one another. Indeed, even civil rights groups turned their backs on gays and lesbians in this era. In 1957, for example, the national board of the American Civil Liberties Union declared that “it is not within the province of the [ACLU] to question the validity of laws aimed at the suppression or elimination of homosexuals.” And that brings us to the 1960s. . . . Stay tuned. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

09 февраля, 02:56

Debasing The Office

Trump's petulant, immature tweets are now America's notes to the world. Those who've compared them to President Franklin D. Roosevelt's "fireside chats" as a vehicle to by-pass the media filter to reach "the people" forget that FDR's chats were warm and kind-hearted, educational and uplifting, and required an attention span longer than a gnat. When angered, Trump's tweets are just insults and blasts of vindictiveness aimed at his perceived enemies -- John Lewis, Lindsey Graham, John McCain, Meryl Streep, Charles Schumer. They start with a put-down targeting his opponent as "weak" or "sad" or "over-rated," followed by a diktat about what they "should be" doing instead. Every angry tweet is a new embarrassment for the nation; a disgrace, undignified, coming from someone with an authoritarian tin-pot mentality and a fragile ego. Every minute Trump is in office he debases it, turns it into a joke, reduces its stature. Trump and the cabal around him are at war with the American people. They're not so much "leading" the nation, but assaulting it with purposeful vindictive chaos. During World War Two, U.S. soldiers killed Nazis. Ike Eisenhower, the last truly "conservative" Republican president, brought his soldiers to see the death camps to remind them "what they were fighting against." Sam Fuller and other soldiers of the "Big Red One" 1st U.S. infantry division forced the German civilian residents of Falkenau to see what was going on right under their noses at a nearby death camp, dress the naked, skeletal corpses of the victims, and bury the dead. Today we have a "president" and his top henchman, Stephen K. Bannon, who are greatly admired by neo-Nazis. New York Senator Charles Schumer, who is Jewish, understood the magnitude of the moment while holding a press conference with people unjustly singled out because of their religion and victimized by Trump's Muslim ban. He became teary eyed and his voice cracked. And here's how the President of the United States responded: "Nancy Pelosi and Fake Tears Chuck Schumer held a rally at the steps of The Supreme Court and mic did not work (a mess) -- just like the Dem party!" He subsequently spoke about it and wondered aloud who was Schumer's "acting coach." So today public figures cannot even show genuine human emotion without being mocked and ridiculed by the man-baby in the White House. These Trump guys aren't only thuggish and immature; they're also stupid. For example, saber rattling against Iran makes no sense if Trump really wants to strengthen U.S. ties with Russia. Shia Iran has the most to lose with the rise of ISIS and has been fighting alongside Russia against ISIS in Syria, and even indirectly alongside the United States in Mosul. Maybe Putin will step in to be the adult in the room. Bannon, Stephen Miller, Michael Flynn, Sean Spicer and Trump himself appear to be, deep down, scared little boys -- scared of Muslims, "leftists," women, gays. Their vindictiveness and bellicosity is an attempt to mask this underlying fear. They're now in charge of the biggest military force ever assembled and can't wait to play with their new toys. They're licking their chops to use it against their perceived enemies, who they see everywhere around them. Even "We the People" are the "opposition." Their views of protesters and dissent as being "paid" agitators and "illegitimate," a cast spewed forth constantly from Breitbart, are chilling enough. But when this is combined with the "alternative facts" and Orwellian propaganda we've seen over the past two and a half weeks from this government, the only logical conclusion is that these are sick men who are in the White House, and the Washington Democrats are probably not up to the task to take them on. The world will soon find out just how crazy these people are. All they need is a proper pretext for war, a Reichstag feuer, and this country will never be the same. The good news is that millions of people are resisting and a lot of previously apolitical people seem to have woken up and are getting involved. Yet these formerly apolitical souls are also likely candidates to check out again after the long slog of protest gets too arduous. This crisis, like the Civil War, cuts to the core of who we are as a people. Do we want to be perceived in the world as nativists, racists, bullies, and misogynists? Or do we reach down deep into our past and retrieve for guidance those fleeting moments when this nation was at its best? -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

08 февраля, 15:12

JONATHAN RAUCH: For this article, I set out to develop a list of telltales that the president is …

JONATHAN RAUCH: For this article, I set out to develop a list of telltales that the president is endangering the Constitution and threatening democracy. I failed. In fact, I concluded that there can be no such list, because many of the worrisome things that an antidemocratic president might do look just like things that other […]

07 февраля, 19:10

Why the Trumps' Travel Expenses Matter

Every previous first family took vacations. No previous first family profited off of them.

06 февраля, 21:50

Do Not Extinguish The Lamp Beside 'The Golden Door'

As an editorialist of forty years' standing, I can honestly say that I've never seen anything like the first two weeks of Donald Trump's tenure in the White House. Normally, pundits are able to step back from the passion of events and offer a few words of reassurance. After all, things aren't so bad, folks, we say. Remember back in 1983 or 1968 or 1951? They seemed impossibly grim then, and we came out all right. For all of its 241 years of history, America has come out all right. Sometimes (like in 1861 or 1933 or 1939) it didn't seem certain. Too many times it took too long - most notably Jim Crow, slavery and the McCarthy Era.) But again and again, our country has been blessed with wise and cautious leaders in Congress, on the Supreme Court, and most of all in the Presidency. Names like Henry Clay, Abraham Lincoln, Eleanor and Franklin Roosevelt. Arthur Vandenberg, Earl Warren, Dwight Eisenhower, and Elliot Richardson come to mind. Barbara Jordan and Jeannette Rankin, Marlow Cook and Theodore Roosevelt also do. And even some leaders who worried us at times didn't turn out so bad. Include among them Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, who seem these days like the souls of tolerance, good sense and humor. Now, in this first week of February, I have to admit I am unable to offer similar assurances. The historically unprecedented first fourteen days of the Trump administration has been an insult to every American, whether he or she voted for the new president or not. Here we have a business tycoon who made a hit on television by yelling at people words like "loser," "You're fired!" and the like. I'm sure he would call me a "loser" and a "weakling." I am proud to be so, if he is the judge. He scowls in his official portrait. However, he did beam as he signed the executive order that snuffed the flame of freedom for untold numbers of Muslims seeking the solace from torture, persecution and even death. He beams when he cuts off low-interest loans for the poor, sticks 1,000 pins into the Affordable Care Act and fails to mention the word "Jewish" in his Holocaust Remembrance Day remarks. In other words, he is betraying, action by action, the very stuff of what it means to be an American, and a true leader. Emma Lazarus was a New York-born writer whose 1883 poem was engraved on the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty in New York Harbor. As schoolchildren, we memorized this poem in school, and we stood together recite it. How tragic that he has betrayed almost every word of it. The Statue itself is a symbol of what we as Americans hold dear. We are, as President Kennedy once said, "A Nation of Immigrants." Whether our ancestors came on their own, fled some persecution or were hauled here in bondage, the land they have inherited is the unique product of all these people. And so it remains. For now, I can only pray and hope that Emma Lazarus' words can once again inspire us, and that our America is open to all people and all faiths, even if they disagree with prevailing thought. Here is her message: The New Colossus Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame, With conquering limbs astride from land to land; Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame. "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Выбор редакции
06 февраля, 21:18


WHILE WATCHING THE CROWN WITH THE INSTA-DAUGHTER OVER CHRISTMAS, I mentioned that Eisenhower’s handling of the Suez Crisis was a debacle. Michael Totten has thoughts on how it’s still hurting us today.

06 февраля, 15:07

Без заголовка

POLITICO: ‘The Senate is coming apart’ Senate Democrats — the last line of Democratic defense — are slow-walking the installation of Trump’s Cabinet to a historic degree, so much so that Republicans haven’t even started yet on Trump’s legislative agenda. Republicans will eventually win all these confirmation battles, but it will be time-consuming and ugly. […]

05 февраля, 10:56

Про "радио свобода"

"Ра́дио „Свобо́да"" (полное название - "Радио „Свободная Европа"/Радио „Свобода"", РСЕ/РС[1]; англ. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, RFE/RL) - международная некоммерческая радиовещательная организация, финансируемая Конгрессом США через Совет управляющих по вопросам вещания (BBG)[2]. Декларирует свою миссию как "содействие демократическим ценностям и институтам посредством информационной журналистики в странах, где свобода прессы запрещена властями или недостаточно развита"[3]. С самого начала "холодной войны" руководители пропагандистского аппарата США вынашивали идею создания таких организаций, которые могли бы, в отличие от радиостанции "Голос Америки", начавшей вещание на языках народов СССР с 1947 года, вести подрывную радиопропаганду на зарубежные страны, формально не нанося ущерба репутации США. Как заявлял генерал Люсиус Клей, занимавший в то время пост главнокомандующего американскими оккупационными войсками в Западной Германии, "Нам нужен другой голос - голос, возможно, в меньшей степени регулируемый самим статусом государства и, ежели хотите, жестокий и разящий насмерть, голос... ведущий безжалостную, ничем не сдерживаемую психологическую войну, направленную на явно признаваемую цель - свержение коммунистического режима". Клея поддержал генерал Дуайт Эйзенхауэр, выдвинувший лозунг о создании "мощных радиостанций за рубежом, функционирующих без правительственных ограничений"[6]. Начиная с 1948 года под руководством Госдепартамента США и ЦРУ было создано немало "частных" организаций, нацеленных на подрывную деятельность против СССР, в том числе "Национальный комитет Свободной Европы" (англ. National Committee for a Free Europe) со своей радиостанцией. Своё вещание на страны социалистического лагеря в Европе она начала с территории Западной Германии 4 июля 1950 года. Именно с этого дня ведёт свою историю частная некоммерческая международная радиокомпания "Радио „Свободная Европа"/Радио „Свобода"". Первоначально вещание велось на Болгарию, Чехословакию, Венгрию, Польшу и Румынию, с 1975 года - также на Литву, Латвию и Эстонию[7]. Советские историки утверждают, что среди работников РСЕ были коллаборационисты Второй мировой войны: в частности, заведующим армянской редакции радиостанции являлся бывший выпускник разведшколы абвера Левон Карташян (получивший документы на фамилию "Мкртчан"), одним из дикторов являлся бывший коллаборационист Дудин (выступавший перед микрофоном под псевдонимом "Николай Градобоев")[14]. В середине 1990-х годов, в период распада Югославии, была создана балканская редакция РСЕ, вещающая на боснийском, хорватском, сербском (с 1994 года), косовском албанском (с 1999 года), черногорском (с 2000 года), македонском (с 2001 года)[20]. По мере того, как фокус американской внешней политики смещался в сторону Большого Ближнего Востока, РС/РСЕ в 1998 году начала вещание на Ирак (на арабском языке) и Иран (на фарси). В 2002 году РС/РСЕ возобновила вещание на Афганистан (на дари и пушту), которое велось в 1980-е годы, во время афганской войны. 15 января 2010 года было начато вещание на местных пуштунских диалектах для населения приграничных племенных территорий Пакистана и Афганистана[7]. (https://ru.wikipedia.org/...)