New Middle East- A Failed US Project?
(Fake regimes and faulty democracy)
-DR. ABDUL RUFF COLACHAL
___________________
USA keeps talking about democracy and rule of law even
while it occupies Silk Route-Afghanistan, Pakistan and energy rich Arab world,
upon illegally invading on fake pretexts. Top power USA and notorious NATO
terribly failed in making Mideast a region of stable democracies, because it
only sought to get the region destabilized by civil wars.
There never been efforts by USA to effect democratic
regime changes in Mideast but only interested in puppet corrupt regimes that
would arrange to ship energy resources to USA and Europe. .
Democracy slogan is perhaps a hoax, but the USA now
brought entire Mideast region under its control and both allows Israel to
manipulate things to suit its illegal needs and uses it to get easy deals with
Arab nations.
Top fascist nations United States, Britain, and Israel
plan strategies to conquer entire world and jointly author the so-called New
Middle East of Arab nations to be effected through regime changes to put in
place puppet regimes to advance global hegemony goals. Zionist crimes in
Mideast have had been fully endorsed by
Washington and London and real security of the region has been compromised and
validated the existence of the geo-strategic objectives of the trio United
States, Britain, and Israel. They wanted and still expect to create their new
world orders in Mideast through destructions and genocides.
The trio United States, Britain, and Israel were long ago
ready with a blueprint of a roadmap in the Middle East and Central Asia – the
global energy zones.
They opted to operationalize the new plan by
engineering the Sept-11 hoax with the help of some west
educated Arab Muslims very close to the rulers. .
Upon the brutal assassination of Iraqi president Saddam
Hussein for his open opposition to US hegemony in Mideast as well as
controlling the Kuwait oil fields, the Anglo-American forces decided to divide
Iraq into parts. They occupied particularly Iraqi Kurdistan, seems to be the
preparatory ground for the balkanization of the Middle East.
Already the legislative framework, under the Iraqi
Parliament and the name of Iraqi federalization, for the partition of Iraq into
three portions was drawn out.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, a prominent Jew and former US
National Security Advisor, was on record with is famous statement that hegemony
is as old as Mankind…-It has long been established that the mass slaughter in
Iraq by NATO rouge states , the incineration of swathes of towns, cities and
the use of US-UK weapons of mass destruction was not about Iraq’s weapons of
mass destruction, but about oil and gas. November
2006 is of particular relevance to an understanding of the ongoing process of
destabilization and political fragmentation of Iraq.
Today, Israel dictates terms not only to the besieged and
heavily terrorized people of Palestine but to all Arabs, more indirectly. The way the international media make
strenuous efforts to project the Muslims, the so-called terrorists as the root
cause of crises in Mideast is ridiculous and mischievous and US arrogance to
showcase its hegemony only exposes the oil mindset of US terror strategists to
prolong terror wars in Arab world.. .
Many Russian and Central Asian scholars, military
planners, strategists, security advisors, economists, and politicians consider
Central Asia to be the vulnerable and “soft under-belly” of the Russian
Federation. The Kremlin, therefore, is eager to directly control the region
without allowing USA to dictate terms to the rulers there. However, USA smartly
tries to control the region by other means, like the Eurasian Balkans and to
some extent both Iran and Turkey..
II
Many of the problems affecting the contemporary Middle
East are the result of the deliberate aggravation of pre-existing regional
tensions. Sectarian division, ethnic tension and internal violence in Africa,
Latin America, the Balkans, and the Middle East have been traditionally
exploited by the United States and Britain. Iraq is just one of many examples
of the Anglo-American strategy of “divide and conquer.” Other examples are
Rwanda, Yugoslavia, the Caucasus, and Afghanistan. Lack of so-called democracy
constitutes a pretext for confrontation and USA always used it. USA has targeted
only those Middle Eastern states which do not conform to Washington’s demands.
Washington has no problems with Egypt and Burma where
military dictatorships reign, because they are firmly aligned within the
Anglo-American orbit or sphere.
The term “New Middle East” was introduced to the world in
June 2006 in Tel Aviv by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in
replacement of the older and more imposing term, the “Greater Middle East.”
Condoleezza Rice was credited by the Western media for
coining the term GME. The term and conceptualization of the “New Middle East,”
was subsequently heralded by the U.S. Secretary of State and the Israeli Prime
Minister at the height of the
Anglo-American sponsored Israeli siege of Lebanon. Hawkish Israeli PM Olmert
and Secretary Rice had informed the international media that a project for a
“New Middle East” was being launched from Lebanon. Records reveal that this
shift in foreign policy phraseology coincided with the inauguration of the
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) Oil Terminal in the Eastern Mediterranean.
This announcement was a confirmation of an
Anglo-American-Israeli “military roadmap” in the Middle East. This project,
which has been in the planning stages for several years, consists in creating
an arc of instability, chaos, and violence extending from Lebanon, Palestine,
and Syria to Iraq, the Persian Gulf, Iran, and the borders of NATO-garrisoned
Afghanistan.
The ferocious Neocons said that there is “cultural
stagnation” in the Middle Eas and thus Condoleezza Rice’s belief that the
devastation of Lebanon by the Israeli military was a necessary pain or “birth
pang”
in order to create the “New Middle East” that Washington,
London, and Tel Aviv envision.
It is a fact that almost all major conflicts afflicting
the Middle East are the consequence of overlapping Anglo-American-Israeli
agendas. The overhaul, dismantlement, and reassembly of the nation-states of
the Middle East as per the Anglo-American-Israeli agendas have been packaged as
a solution to the hostilities in the Middle East, but this is categorically
misleading, false, and fictitious. The advocates of a “New Middle East” and
redrawn boundaries in the region avoid and fail to candidly depict the roots of
the problems and conflicts in the contemporary Middle East.
The “New Middle East” project was introduced publicly by
Washington and Tel Aviv with the expectation that Lebanon would be the pressure
point for realigning the whole Middle East and thereby unleashing the forces of
“constructive chaos.” This generates conditions of violence and warfare
throughout the region– would in turn be used so that the United States,
Britain, and Israel could redraw the map of the Middle East in accordance with
their geo-strategic needs and objectives.
Upon creating an illegal entity called Israel, that
terrorize the region and world at large, the USA-UK terror twins have been
using Israel for engineering
destabilization, terror attacks and
other forms of crimes.
The concept of New Middle East is supposed to make an
enormous difference between freedom and oppression, tolerance and atrocity, the
rule of law and terrorism, or even peace and war. The most arbitrary and
distorted borders in the world are in Africa and the Middle East.
Drawn by self-interested Europeans, Africa’s borders
continue to provoke the deaths of millions of local inhabitants. But the unjust
borders in the Middle East generate more trouble than can be consumed locally
(Churchill).
While the Middle East has far more problems than
dysfunctional borders alone — from cultural stagnation through scandalous
inequality to deadly religious extremism — the greatest taboo in striving to
understand the region’s comprehensive failure isn’t Islam, but the
awful-but-sacrosanct international boundaries worshipped by our own diplomats.
The regimes of republican hawkish father-son Bushes began
applying the new Mideast theory developed by neoconservatives to establish full
and complete hegemony of Washington over world affairs which would benefit
Israel greatly, controlling the Arab nations and help USA in energy deals.
US Secretary Condoleezza Rice had described the
destruction process of Lebanon and the
Israeli attacks on Lebanon as the ‘birth pangs’—of a ‘New Middle East’ and USA should be pushing forward to the New
Middle East. Rice was immediately
criticized for her statements both within Lebanon and internationally for
expressing indifference to the suffering of an entire nation, which was being
bombed indiscriminately by the Israeli Air Force.
Of course, the Anglo-American military forces do not
inform their secret plans to Israel but their roadmap appears to be vying an
entry into Central Asia via the Middle East. The Middle East, Afghanistan, and
Pakistan are stepping stones for extending U.S. influence into the former
Soviet Union and the ex-Soviet Republics of Central Asia. The Middle East is to
some extent the southern tier of Central Asia.
Central Asia in turn is also termed as the Russian “Near
Abroad” or “Russia’s Southern Tier”.
Drawn by self-interested Europeans the most arbitrary and
distorted borders in the world are in Africa and the Middle East. The New
Middle East plan and strategy for implementation have utterly failed. the degree of injustice they inflict upon civilians,
those whom frontiers force together or separate makes an enormous difference —
often the difference between freedom and oppression, tolerance and atrocity,
the rule of law and terrorism, or even peace and war.
The concept of a redrawn Middle East had been presented
as a “humanitarian” and “righteous” arrangement that would benefit the peoples
of the Middle East and its peripheral regions.
When Turkey, a prominent member of NATO, got offended by the US made map of New
Middle East, displayed in NATO’s Military College in Rome, Italy, the Pentagon
had gone out of its way to assure Turkey that the map does not reflect official
U.S. policy and objectives in the region, but this seems to be conflicting with
Anglo-American actions in the Middle East and NATO-garrisoned Afghanistan.
III
Many Middle Eastern governments, such as that of Saudi
Arabia, are assisting Washington in fomenting divisions between Middle Eastern
populations. The ultimate objective is to weaken the resistance movement
against foreign occupation through a “divide and conquer strategy” which serves
Anglo-American and Israeli interests in the broader region.”Although the divide
and conquer strategy is not new, it still works thanks to the media smoke
screens and mirrors.
Engineering a civil war (as it happened in
Palestine) is the best way to divide a
country into several territories. It worked in the Balkans and it is well documented
that ethnic tensions were used and abused in order to destroy Yugoslavia and
divide it into seven separate entities.
Western media and government officials define them not by
who they are, but by who they fight against. In Syria they constitute a “legitimate
opposition, “freedom fighters” fighting for democracy against a brutal
dictatorship”, whereas in Iraq, they are “terrorists fighting a democratically
elected U.S.-supported government”:
US media never reveal that the death squads trained by
U.S advisors in Iraq in the wake of the invasion and which are at the heart of
the current turmoil.
As usual, the mainstream media does not want world to
understand what’s going on. Its goal is to shape perceptions and opinions by
crafting a view of the world which serves powerful interests. For that matter,
they will tell you it’s a civil war. What is unfolding is a process of
“constructive chaos”, engineered by the West. The destabilization of Iraq and
its fragmentation has been planned long ago and is part of the
”Anglo-American-Israeli ‘military road map’ in the Middle East”, as explained
in 2006 in the following article:
A wider war in the Middle East could result in redrawn
borders that are strategically advantageous to Anglo-American interests and
Israel… This project, which has been in the planning stages for several years,
consists in creating an arc of instability, chaos, and violence extending from
Lebanon, Palestine, and Syria to Iraq, the Persian Gulf, Iran, and the borders
of NATO-garrisoned Afghanistan.
The ‘New Middle East’ project was introduced publicly by
Washington and Tel Aviv with the expectation that Lebanon would be the pressure
point for realigning the whole Middle East and thereby unleashing the forces of
“constructive chaos.” This “constructive chaos” –which generates conditions of
violence and warfare throughout the region– would in turn be used so that the
United States, Britain, and Israel could redraw the map of the Middle East in
accordance with their geo-strategic needs and objectives. ...
The redrawing and partition of the Middle East from the
Eastern Mediterranean shores of Lebanon and Syria to Anatolia (Asia Minor),
Arabia, the Persian Gulf, and the Iranian Plateau responds to broad economic,
strategic and military objectives, which are part of a longstanding
Anglo-American and Israeli agenda in the region… Attempts at intentionally
creating animosity between the different ethno-cultural and religious groups of
the Middle East have been systematic. In fact, they are part of a carefully
designed covert intelligence agenda.
While the Middle East has far more problems than
dysfunctional borders alone — from cultural stagnation through scandalous
inequality to deadly religious extremism — the greatest taboo in striving to
understand the region’s comprehensive failure isn’t Islam, but the
awful-but-sacrosanct international boundaries worshipped by our own diplomats.
For all the injustices the borders re-imagined here leave unaddressed, without
such major boundary revisions, would shall never see a more peaceful Middle
East. World is dealing with colossal, man-made deformities that will not stop
generating hatred and violence until they are corrected.
The Eurasian Balkans include nine countries that one way
or another fit the foregoing description, with two others as potential
candidates. The nine are Kazakstan [alternative and official spelling of
Kazakhstan] , Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan,
Armenia, and Georgia—all of them formerly part of the defunct Soviet Union—as
well as Afghanistan. The potential additions to the list are Turkey and Iran,
both of them much more politically and economically viable, both active
contestants for regional influence within the Eurasian Balkans, and thus both
significant geo-strategic players in the region. At the same time, both are
potentially vulnerable to internal ethnic conflicts. If either or both of them
were to be destabilized, the internal problems of the region would become
unmanageable, while efforts to restrain regional domination by Russia could
even become futile.
This region experienced a period of upheaval, violence
and conflict, before and after World War I, which was the direct result of
foreign economic interests and interference.
The reasons behind the First World War are more sinister
than the standard school-book explanation, the assassination of the heir to the
throne of the Austro-Hungarian (Habsburg) Empire, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, in
Sarajevo. Economic factors were the real motivation for the large-scale war in
1914. Those powerful individuals who from behind the scenes controlled the
finances, policies, and government of the United States had in fact also
planned U.S. involvement in a war, which would contribute to entrenching their
grip on power.
The Western media has fed, on a daily basis, incorrect
and biased notions that the populations of Iran and Iraq cannot co-exist and
that the conflict is not a war of occupation but a “civil war”
characterized by domestic strife between Shiites, Sunnis
and Kurds.
Attempts at intentionally creating animosity between the
different ethno-cultural and religious groups of the Middle East have been
systematic. In fact, they are part of a carefully designed covert intelligence
agenda.
Even more ominous, many Middle Eastern governments, such
as that of Saudi Arabia, are assisting Washington in fomenting divisions
between Middle Eastern populations. The ultimate objective is to weaken the
resistance movement against foreign occupation through a “divide and conquer
strategy” which serves Anglo-American and Israeli interests in the broader
region.
The preferred narrative in the U.S. and most Western
mainstream media is that the current situation is due to the U.S “withdrawal”
which ended in December 2011 Western mainstream media is a mixture of half
truths, falsehoods, disinformation and propaganda. The mainstream media will
not tell you that the US is supporting both sides in the Iraqi conflict.
IV
The US objective in Iraq is to engineer a civil war, in
which both sides are controlled indirectly by US-NATO. The scenario is to arm
and equip them, on both sides, finance them with advanced weapons systems and
then ‘let them fight and kill themselves’…The US proxy government in Baghdad
which purchases advanced weapons systems from the US including F16 fighter jets
from Lockheed Martin and the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham –which is
fighting Iraqi government forces– is supported covertly by Western
intelligence. Under the banner of a civil war, an undercover war of aggression
is being fought which essentially contributes to further destroying an entire
country, its institutions, its economy. The undercover operation is part of an
intelligence agenda, an engineered process which consists in transforming Iraq
into an open territory.
The Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham’s Sunni caliphate
project coincides with a longstanding US agenda to carve up both Iraq and Syria
into three separate territories: A Sunni Islamist Caliphate, an Arab Shia
Republic, and a Republic of Kurdistan.
In the Middle East, Saudi Arabia has been serving US
interests as well as its own. Being a staunch U.S. ally Saudi Arabia is the
exception to the rule proclaimed by George W. Bush after the 9/11 terrorist
attacks: ”We will make no distinction between those who
committed these acts and those who harbor them.” The facts are clear: the US is
supporting terrorism through allies like Saudi Arabia and Qatar. If those who
shape the discourse in the mainstream media fail to connect the dots, it is
only because they don’t want to.
The US alliance with Saudi Arabia shows the contempt the
US actually has for democracy. This alliance alone clearly indicates that the
goal of the US invasion of Iraq was not to bring democracy and freedom to
Iraqis.
Ever since the overthrow of Saddam’s regime in 2003, the
Saudi regime has been emphatically hostile towards Iraq. The Saudi regime also
accuses Maliki, of giving Iran a freehand to dramatically intensify its
influence in Iraq. The Saudi regime has made no secret that its overriding
priority is to severely undermine what it perceives as highly perilous and yet
growing Iranian influence.
Even though the Saudi regime vehemently opposed U.S. pull
out from Iraq, nevertheless in Dec. 2011, Syria rather than Iraq became Saudi
Arabia’s principal target for regime change. The Saudi regime has consistently
considered the Syrian regime of Bashar Al Assad, an irreplaceable strategic
ally to its primary foe Iran.
V
The world’s energy consumption is bound to vastly
increase over the next two or three decades. The momentum of Asia’s economic
development is already generating massive pressures for the exploration and
exploitation of new sources of energy, and the Central Asian region and the
Caspian Sea basin are known to contain reserves of natural gas and oil that
dwarf those of Kuwait, the Gulf of Mexico, or the North Sea.
Access to that resource and sharing in its potential
wealth represent objectives that stir national ambitions, motivate corporate
interests, rekindle historical claims, revive imperial aspirations, and fuel
international rivalries. The situation is made all the more volatile by the
fact that the region is not only a power vacuum but is also internally
unstable.
Neocons constructed a theory known as the “creative
destruction and chaos” in the Middle East as beneficial assets to reshaping the
Middle East, creating the “New Middle East,” and furthering the Anglo-American
roadmap in the Middle East and Central Asia: But now the entire large region has become zone of instability
and uncertainty. Although most of the states located in the Persian Gulf and
the Middle East are also unstable, American power is that the Middle East’s
ultimate arbiter. The unstable region in the outer zone is thus an area of
single power hegemony and is tempered by that hegemony.. Though ruled by
elected corrupt leaders there is indeed a power vacuum in Mideast and Central
Asia..
The world’s energy consumption is bound to vastly
increase over the next two or three decades. The momentum of Asia’s economic
development is already generating massive pressures for the exploration and
exploitation of new sources of energy, and the Central Asian region and the
Caspian Sea basin are known to contain reserves of natural gas and oil that
dwarf those of Kuwait, the Gulf of Mexico, or the North Sea.
Access to that resource and sharing in its potential
wealth represent objectives that stir national ambitions, motivate corporate
interests, rekindle historical claims, revive imperial aspirations, and fuel
international rivalries. The situation is made all the more volatile by the
fact that the region is not only a power vacuum but is also internally
unstable.
VI
New Middle East has been envisaged to make terrorist
Israel with illegally obtained nukes the boss in the region which in turn would
promote US interests in the New Middle East of puppet regimes and world at
large. .
US foreign policy in the Middle East is not a failure as
a few analysts did not put it, nor the policymakers are stupid. But they want
others to think that way because they think rs are stupid.
What is happening now even in Iraq was planned long ago.
The US knew exactly what it was doing when it armed and funded the “opposition”
in Libya and Syria. What they did was not stupid. They knew what was going to
happen and that is what they wanted.
The truth is that US foreign policy in the Middle East is
diabolical, brutally repressive, criminal and undemocratic. And the only way
out of this bloody mess is a return to the law: But the USA continues to exploit
the Sept-11 hoax to its advantage and refuses to return to rule of law and
wants others to follow it.
The war launched by US government leaders in 2003 against
the people of Iraq was not just a mistake: it was a crime. And those leaders
should be held to account, under law, for their decisions.
For all the injustices the borders re-imagined here leave
unaddressed, without such major boundary revisions, world shall never see a
more peaceful Middle East, the most important energy zone.
________
|