Search
 
Write
 
Forums
 
Login
"Let there arise out of you a band of people inviting to all that is good enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong; they are the ones to attain felicity".
(surah Al-Imran,ayat-104)
Image Not found for user
User Name: abdulruff
Full Name: Dr.Abdul Ruff Colachal
User since: 15/Mar/2008
No Of voices: 1852
 
 Views: 601   
 Replies: 0   
 Share with Friend  
 Post Comment  

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.

 

________

 No replies/comments found for this voice 
Please send your suggestion/submission to webmaster@makePakistanBetter.com
Long Live Islam and Pakistan
Site is best viewed at 1280*800 resolution