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.
