Translate

Tuesday 30 September 2014

Is There An End Game To Our Wars In Muslim Lands?
(Is This An Outcome We Can Confidently Predict ? )

Are we planning, as I have said in previous blogs, to wander the Middle East like the Crusaders, supporting client sultanates, emirates caliphates ad infinitum and leaving in our wake failed states and utter chaos as those secular societies so fragile in their social constructions and relationships revert, under the weight of anarchy, back to tribalism, religious apartheid and tyrannical theocratic entities, or is there an end in sight to Christendom's military interventions in Muslim lands?; especially in the Middle East, North Africa and in the near future, the Caucasuses?
Show me a Muslim country where recent Western military intervention has brought stability, peace, security and economic prosperity to it's Arab people.
Why are we dumping all the secular dictators who were happy to do the bidding of the West or, as in the case of ex-Presidents Morsi and Mubarak, leaving them to rot in prison ?
Will someone of wisdom please explain to me the logic of our choice of bloodthirsty religious fanatics intending to take their Muslim people back to the 8th century above their predecessor secular benevolent and (in instances) tyrannical dictators in North Africa and the Levant?
Do we really believe that Salafist-Wahhabist Saudi Arabia and (current) Salafist-ruled Turkey offer a better deal for their own people (let alone Christendom) than the ones which were in place under their predecessors?
Am I completely out of touch with reality or has something really gone seriously wrong with Western Foreign Policy?
Let's see now, Christianity is illegal in Saudi Arabia and, as I am tired of repeating for the past 20 or more years (and in many blogs) Saudi Arabia has been solely responsible for all the hate generated by Salafism and Wahhabism – which created Osama Bin Laden who, in his earlier days of 'innocence' thought he could influence the Saudi Royal Household but was so horrified when they invited U.S. bases onto (the equivalent for him) 'Vatican City' – the Holy soil of Saudi Arabia, that, after this fact, he turned against his homeland and subsequently planned in earnest against the 'apostates' in Jeddah and against the United States.
So Al Qaeda and ISIL are the offspring of Saudi ideologies.
The Syrian 'Moderates'
Analysts and Fellows of renowned Institutes and Houses will go on television and talk about Syrian 'moderates' – but these 'moderates'  have no popular support because, in reality, they do not exist. You have a hotchpotch  of militias who all have one thing in common, their absolute fanatical hatred of President Assad, their determination to destroy the Ba'athist Party in Syria and create a different kind of totalitarian regime – equally based on terror – but this time directed against everyone (men, women and children) who were in any way connected to the Ba'athist Party or worked for any Government Department or worked for any organisation or agency in any way supported by the Assad regime. Now considering the fact that you could not get a job, or be a civil servant, or doctor or teacher, or nurse unless you were in the main supportive of the Ba'athist Party (or, at the very least, not actively campaigning or working against it), this means they (the 'Moderates') are planning for the same chaos as exists in Iraq today.  And I am at present talking about the 'moderates' - I have not even got started to talk about Al Qaeda and ISIL or whatever further horrors they might have in mind for the unfortunate Muslim people of the region.  (I say Muslim because any Christian from Turkey to North Africa, with the means, would be advised to evacuate before they are driven out or, as in Egypt, into semi-servitude and Islamic 'slavery' as seen under ISIL.)

Why Would The European Union Wish to Commit Economic Suicide In Favor of Militarism? 

I really do not believe that Christendom's politicians in Western Europe, conscious as they are of nearly 1000 years of bloody conflict in the Holy Land, would actively, by themselves, plan for such horrors.

I can imagine countries from behind what was known as 'The Iron Curtain' where racism, fascism and neolithic perceptions of existence hold very strong, being eager participants in such modern Crusades to show their 'colors' but those with a longer history of religious conflict over the centuries take a more measured view of unfolding events in these regions.

Germany:
The Economic Powerhouse of Europe and Financial Super Giant In The World – Would It Really Sacrifice All For Militarism?
Why should Germany, the most successful economic country in Western Europe and one of the world's giant economies, destroy it's valuable trade with Russia, The Middle East and elsewhere in favor of the production of armaments as opposed to luxury BMWs, Mercedes, washing machines and fridges, and with a technology so advanced and respected worldwide that it outclasses and outperforms and outsells nearly everyone else - except China (which successfully offers industrial products and household goods at competitive prices but not at a similar quality.)
Why would Germany wish to commit economic Hara-kiri in this regard?
Why would Britain, one of the most successful trading islands in the history of the world, similarly, wish to snuff itself out in favor of the production of armaments as the sole export as opposed to goods and financial services worldwide – in the lucrative Middle East and North Africa?   Let's be clear about something.   It is now so dangerous for Westerners doing business in all of these regions as to make their physical presence a liability rather than an asset.   Their only mission now is to 'do the deal' then 'get the Hell outta Dodge City' - not too much time spent these days wandering the Souq nor sightseeing without bodyguards.
Not only are Westerners in North Africa and The Middle East more fearful than ever of kidnap or murder, but they are also seen as an extension of the new oppression ordinary Arab people are experiencing under their new 'Islamic' 'liberators' and whose home countries are likewise blamed as sharing responsibility with the United States for the denial of their 'Arab Spring' in favor of this much more brutal oppression ( now more Mediaeval in nature) their new Prison Cell Guards (Islamic 'liberators') are imposing under strict Saudi-style Islamic law.

Is this our legacy to the majority of people in today's Arab world?
To take them back to The Dark Ages by offering them chaos as an alternative to the preceding benevolent dictatorships?


We are Parachuting Democracy Into The Levant and North Africa on the Backs of Sectarianism and Religious Bigotry – Because That Is What Saudi Arabia and It's Muslim Allies Stand For
Don't let anyone try to fool you by telling you that the West is there in the name of the Arab people and democracy.
We have never supported democracies for one man one vote in this part of the world since we created all these sultanates, emirates, states and kingdoms in the Gulf, North Africa and the Middle East, but placed as many as were possible into the hands of local tyrants and minority tribal groups to rule from afar, under Western protection. If you believe this to be inaccurate, check your history books.

Where Did ISIL Come From?
How could lSIL, in less than 6 months, seize territory bigger than that of the United Kingdom?
How come the CIA did not pick up on such a powerful group?
Who trained them in insurgency tactics?; because they are just as good as the very best graduates from top counter-insurgency schools in the the world – in Britain, Russia, Israel or The United States.
OK, let's work on the supposition that none of the above gave them training, how come they have been able to occupy strategic towns villages and vital crossroads on the borders of Syria, Turkey and almost half encircle the Iraqi capital city,Baghdad?
The obvious answer is that the disaffected Sunni minority (completely disenfranchised by Mr Paul Bremer III, when acting Pro-Consul, in his successful mission to totally dismantle the Ba'athist State of Iraq.) If indeed this is the case, we still loose in the above scenario because the Ba'athist Party, their families having been impoverished, denied the means of financial survival, having also been, metaphorically speaking, stripped naked, dragged in chains through the streets of every city, town an village in Iraq and spat upon (all with Mr Bremer's approval) by any Shia who cared, will never again trust any U.S. supported or backed or funded administration and will certainly not heed the call to arms against ISIL, their Sunni-brother 'liberators' who are restoring their dignity as Muslims, as Iraqis and as Arabs.
Is This Just An American Illness and Is It Infecting Europe?
American politicians (the ones who should know better) seem to think that everyone else in the world has no history, has no pride in their history, in their culture or in their origin.   More fatally than this they seem to have several blind spots when it comes to nations, races and tribes taking revenge for long-standing grievances. Historical grievances can run through the centuries.     History teaches us that.     Let me give you just one example of this.
Vengeance Can Be Extended Into Centuries
Alexander The Great [Alexander III of Macedon, Ἀλέξανδρος ὁ Μέγας] during the Persian Wars, put entire towns to the sword – men, women and children and babies because, several hundred years earlier, their Greek ancestors had 'defected' to support Persia, subsequently fled after the defeat of their Persian protectors, then set up communities in exile in territories still remaining under the protection of the Persian Empire and beyond the military and political empire of Hellenic forces.
This betrayal was one which was never forgiven by the Greeks and was passed down, even in folklore and word, as a historical grievance to be someday avenged.
Alexander believed that it was his historic destiny to avenge this wrong – by slaughtering not only every person but every living farm animal of these 'traitor' communities because their ancestors had transgressed by treason.   For the eager student of history, I refer you to research the Persian Wars for yourself.
As we are going back to Mediaeval times in our conduct of world affairs it seems the right and appropriate moment to resurrect such knowledge.
America is dealing with such a region where historical grievances are long-lasting and in many instances, unforgiven.
For mankind the Tigris-Euphrates are cornerstones of what we have evolved into.
What Has All The Above Got To Do With The Present Day Crisis?
Well I would say that it's a fool who will say that ISIL will be defeated without the ground presence of NATO, the United States or Western (European) troops.
It's a fool who will tell you that the Iraq Sunnis will be placated by just changing the government in Baghdad and the new Shia - dominated administration by simply 'throwing  a few 'bones' or 'crumbs' from the table (especially after their most recent experiences under U.S. occupation) to the Sunnis and Kurds.  It could have been different but the politicians who are making the decisions in Washington have no understanding of anything except money and power.   Certainly they have no understanding of ordinary people as they regard them, in many instances, as the equivalent of lepers, to be kept at a distance from themselves, the chosen and anointed ones, at least by corporate America.
This is not dissimilar from the Roman Empire before it's decline – which took place over a period of hundreds of years and not overnight.   All the signs are there.   Even the most technologically advanced superpowers for their age were ultimately unable to prevent the rise of rival potentiates to the throne.
Historical Reference – The Great Library of Alexandria
For the ancient Egyptians, there were certain sections in the Great Library of Alexandria which were off-limits to visiting foreigners.
At it's height, the Great Library of Alexandria contained almost one million hand-written books, which, for it's time, was a wonder of the ancient world.  Scholars would take several years to travel to Egypt and then spend anywhere between 5-12 years in study of it's books which contained all the stored knowledge of known mankind.   It was the equivalent of the Internet for it's day.
You could think of it's off-limits Top Secret sections to knowledge today about, say, how to 'weaponize' viruses for mass infections, techniques for the weaponization of nuclear materials, or develop EMP or nuclear or magnetic resonance devices for mass population densities usage.
The books in the Top Secret off-limit sections of The Great Library contained technical knowledge about metallurgy, chemistry, ship construction, trajectory mathematics.  Those were the most obvious.   Others, I am now guessing, were about the mathematics of optics, trigonometry, refraction, planetary and celestial movements for navigation during day and night, agriculture and water conservation for irrigation, medical techniques and the usage of plants and spices for medicinal therapeutic purposes.   All are topics which gave the Egyptian Empire that cutting military technological edge over it's potential rivals.   The crime for smuggling books out of the Library was gouging out of eyes, removal of the skin from the victim, disembowelment, dismemberment - all as slow as possible and all designed to strike fear and terror into the populace at large and visiting scholars so as to deter would-be-smugglers or theft of such top secret knowledge.   And even with such horrific punishments, they still did not deter.   Books continued to be smuggled out of the Library – finding their way to very receptive (and financially thankful) Greek island States who yearned for the knowledge and power of the Egyptian Empire.

Why The West (NATO - with Saudi-Turkish Armed Forces Key Components) Should Not Commit Ground Forces To Iraq nor Syria
The air campaign alone cannot defeat ISIL so it is inevitable that the next stage will be ground troops.
In fact an initial over-reliance on the air campaign in the absence of a diplomatic channel leaves the West with no option.
International Diplomacy Does Not Exist – Now It's The Law of The Jungle
An important fact to note here is that the conduct of international relations and protocol has become so much the law of the jungle (i.e. the United Nations an all other international bodies and NGOs have lost total credibility in the Arab world, that ISIL have not even considered the option of diplomacy.)  Looking at it, for a moment, from their perspective, one can understand why:
All laws and norms of international relations were violated to secure the invasion and destruction of Iraq, the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and the destruction of Libya.  In my view, and I said this (publicly) from 2003, Mr Bin Laden should have been categorized as a common criminal and the matter so progressed by the United States in concert with the international community.  Then there is Libya. Whether you supported or opposed it, The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was a model of development for the African continent.  This fact is not lost by African intellectuals, philosophers and visionaries – who exist no less on this underdeveloped continent as they do everywhere else in the world.  Whoever writes future history will find great difficulty to deny the availability for all Libyan citizens, under the Gadhafi dictatorship, of sanitation and clean running water, free health, free education, free higher education, free hospital care to a standard equaled in many parts of the European Union and fledgling industrial development.  There is not now a single country on the African continent which can boast such an achievement and I would challenge the ability of any African country to reach such a goal within at least the next 500 years.  I expect it will take at least double this, if ever at all.   Whether you were a fan of Gadhafi or loathed him, the above cannot be hidden in the annals of African history.   The way in which he was removed sent a very clear signal to future insurgents in the Arab world and I believe that ISIL is only the first in a long line of fanatical groups which will not be prepared to negotiate with any Christians about their future political nor economic nor demographic shape of Muslim Caliphates, Emirates and Sultanates which, as I said in an earlier blog, are becoming increasingly more likely with every blunder and foray Christendom makes into Muslim lands of the Levant and North Africa.
Turkey – Near The Cusp of Civil War ?
I do not see the Salafist government in Turkey surviving and, when it goes, the effect on the West could be very profound - as NATO has thrown all it's backing behind Salafist President Erdogan and the theocratic agenda both himself and the Saudis have for the entire region in opposition to secularism.   President Erdogan has attempted to purge the armed forces of secularists and replace them with Salafist-leaning generals but my analysis suggests that the Turkish people, as a whole, will refuse to go back to the Mediaeval Islam and civil disobedience, with the potential for a civil war, is not as remote nor far distant as one might be led to believe in the absence of an honest analysis of events in the Western media.
NATO aside, A civil war in Turkey would be an absolute disaster for it's own people and would result in ISIL (or a successor outfit) strengthening it's grips over parts of what are now Turkey and Kurdistan regional areas straddling Syria, Iraq, Iran.   It would throw NATO's plans into chaos as Turkey might decide to withdraw it's support for military action against the Assad regime favoring instead negotiation with ISIL (yes, they will negotiate with some fellow-Muslims, where it suits their temporary interests. This is very clear.  Do not forget, Fuhrer and Chancellor, Adolf Hitler, negotiated with Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain of Great Britain in 1938, resulting in The Munich Pact*.) This type of negotiation could well be paralleled with similar between ISIL and the Iraqi Government in Baghdad to deny the emergence of a powerful Kurdistan country straddling Syria, Iraq, Iran and Turkey with potential ambitions to further expand their borders.
The Gulf States and Saudi Arabia will have security crises, whatever outcome prevails and their only continued security will lie in further military cooperation with Christendom – which will fuel even more internal and regional dissent.
Historians and analysts in the future will, no doubt muse that things could have been different if Saudi Arabia had embarked, decades ago, on social and political reform. An analysis of the Saudi Royal family would suggest that reform will be offered only as a very last resort - whilst the Kingdom is collapsing in military and regional turmoil - and that such will be too little too late to prevent the disintegration of the House of Saud.
Interestingly, this is exactly my analysis for Iran, their bitter regional foe, which, I correctly said, would 'go it alone' with regard to getting rid of ISIL (see earlier blogs.)

Prime Minister Netanyahu, You Are Wrong ! (But Not For The Reasons You Gave At The United Nations Security Council ! )

Prime Minister Netanyahu recently said [I paraphrase]''don't trust Iran, don't be prepared to do a deal with Iran.'' He was, of course, not speaking for world security but for that of Israel.
As I have said earlier, the United States and it's allies have global responsibilities which outweigh provincial interests and intrigues.   Both are not always one and the same.
Should ISIL continue to advance along the lines I predict and in the absence of any real serious concerted and unified will by parties which, as I also said earlier, should all be united and militarily working in partnership to get rid of this real physical threat to world security , then Iran will have no choice, if it does not want to see the Barbarians at the Gates (see earlier blog) but to work on a program for the (military) weaponization of nuclear material.  Others suggest that this capability [weaponization] could now be quickly achieved.
The Terms
Before such an event, Iran must make very publicly and very clearly to the world what it's intentions, as a nuclear power, will be with regard to both it's regional responsibilities (e.g. Israel and Saudi Arabia) and it's global responsibilities (the rest of the world.)
The possession of nuclear weapons, of the type Iran has the capacity to produce, would be impractical if applied to a situation of being forced to use them within the country's very own borders - should ISIL forces invade Iranian territory and continue to adopt and evolve  asymmetric strategies.#
Epilog to
Why The West (NATO - with Saudi-Turkish Armed Forces As Key Components) Should Not Commit Ground Forces To Iraq nor Syria
The only way to stop this, short of military action against Iran, in my opinion, is to militarily wipe out ISIL and destroy it as an ideological force in the region, before it 'goes viral'.
As I said earlier, this involves unpalatable choices but neither Bismarck nor Metternich, should they be here today, would have issues with such alliances, given the exceptional circumstances and the limited options.
Should Iran fail to give the necessary guarantees and nonetheless go ahead with such a program, I would not be surprised if Shiasm ended as a major world spiritual influence with the military occupation and defeat of Iran at the hands of Salafist fanatics, who will then go on, unhindered and unstoppable, to create their Empire of Islam, worldwide.


Patrick Emek

footnote 1 :
I am, for brevity of the lay readership of some blogs, drawing heavily on Wikipedia as a source of quick historical reference. Wikipedia was not, of course, available to me as a student – but I considered the British Library and The Public Library Systems of the United Kingdom and Europe the best available alternatives for their day in the absence of the internet and it is from them that my own knowledge is drawn but without immediate access to the relevant reference books to complete this article with 100% historical accuracy in the time allocated.

footnote 2 :
I have been struck by the number of highly respected analysts, political commentators, former senior advisors and politicians who are all of the view that what is happening is something transient, manageable by, what ISIL and Al Qaeda would describe as the former 'puppet masters' and that, in time, we can find a new group to promote and do our bidding and everything will return to 'business as usual'.  They still do not appear to appreciate that what is taking place is a profound change in relations between the Christian and Islamic worlds, fueled by a hatred of economic disparity, mass unemployment of highly educated and semi-educated youths and adults, between the Christian and Muslim worlds and other grievances (such as Israel-Palestine) which have all reached a point of no return.  Conspiracy theorists also exist in the Muslim world and, as with Adolf Hitler, under the wrong conditions, they can be seen as saviours, especially if they invoke the word of Allah and explain the Arab predicament as Allah's judgement on it's people for 'straying' from the 'true' tenets' of the Holy Book and facilitating 'apostates' to control their destiny.
The above-mentioned analysts and advisors seem to have no conception nor perception that this could be quite a fundamental shift  which, conceivably, could  last hundreds of years - because all the parameters appear (to myself) to be in place for a very long and very protracted Holy War - which is totally out of the ball park of 'politically correct' United States and it's Allies.
You simply cannot 'buy' Allah or any other deity 'off' (with money or political or social or economic promises) when confronted with religious zealots because their 'Jerusalem' - or 'Mecca' - as the case may be - is not built on Mammon+.)


footnote 3:
Unfortunately many readers do not understand what I am saying when I say that, should Iran fall to ISIL, they (ISIL) will then go on, unhindered and unstoppable, to create their Empire of Islam, worldwide.   Either my language is too elliptical or I am just not saying it plainly enough:
If Iran falls, the version of Islam as promulgated by ISIL will 'hijack' mainstream Islam and will thus set in motion a process of strife and conflict, over perhaps hundreds of years, within both the Moslem World and  with Christianity, until either it (ISIL's interpretation) prevails as the dominant version of The Book or it (ISIL's interpretation) is militarily defeated by warring Islamic states (some with Christian backers) as each try to assert or re-assert their dominant version of Islam, worldwide.
























http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sykes%E2%80%93Picot_Agreement

http://www.presstv.com/detail/2014/02/06/349453/why-house-of-saud-fearshates-iran/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement

+http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammon

*erratum:
Munich Agreement, (September 30, 1938)

updated 1st October, 2014
updated October 3, 2014
#update 5th October, 2014

second footnote added October 3, 2014












Posted by at

Blog Archive