just commentary july 2014

Vol 14, No.07 July 2014

Turn to next page

ARTICLES

STATEMENT

ISRAEL BOMBS GAZA; MASSES ARMY ON BORDERBy Patrick Martin

. PEACE MOVEMENT’S COMMON VISIION-THE

ABOLITION OF MILITARISM

BY MAIREAD MAGUIRE........................................P 4

.THE CUBAN FIVE TERRORISM AS A WEAPON OF HEGEMONY BY CHANDRA MUZAFFAR......................P2

. THE ISLAMIC STATE, THE “CALIPHATE”AND THE

“GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM”

BY MICHELCHOSSUDOVSKY..................................P 6

. EGYPT’S SO CALLED JUSTICE SYSTEM IS THE GUILTY

PARTY AND THE WORLD SHOULD ACT

BY ALAN HART............................................P 11

.2014 COUP : OLD WINE IN A NEW BOTTLE?

BY SULAK SIVARAKSA........................................P 11

. TONY BLAIR, PHANTOM OF THE OPERA

BY PEPE ESCOBAR...............................................P 13

.THE MALAYSIAN LINK TO TERROR IN SYRIA

BY CHANDRA MUZAFFAR.....................................P8

Israeli warplanes struck the Gaza Strip

, hitting at least 15 targets in the

blockaded Palestinian territory, causing

extensive damage and wounding at least

10 people, including a pregnant woman

and a 65-year-old man.

The Israel Defense Forces moved tanks

and artillery units towards Gaza,

positioning them in advance of any

order from the cabinet to invade the

densely populated enclave, with nearly

two million people crammed into an area

of less than 200 square miles. The IDF

also called up an undisclosed number

of reservists for duty.

The military mobilization was the largest

on the border of Gaza since Israel’s last

major attack on the Palestinian territory,

eight days of bloody bomb and missile

strikes in November 2012.

An Israeli military spokesman claimed

the sites targeted by bombs and missiles

were linked to Hamas, the Islamic party

that has ruled Gaza since it won

elections in 2006. The Israeli

government has declared Hamas

responsible for the kidnapping and

murder of three Israeli teenagers in the

West Bank, although that territory is

controlled by the secular Palestinian

party Fatah, with Israeli support.

The killing of the three teenagers,

whose bodies were found on June 30

outside Hebron, is being used as a

pretext by Prime Minister Benjamin

Netanyahu to escalate tensions with

Hamas and threaten an invasion or re-

occupation of the Gaza Strip. Israeli

military forces and settlers were

withdrawn from Gaza in 2005.

Thursday’s bombing was the latest in

a series of tit-for-tat exchanges, with

Israeli jets dropping bombs or firing

missiles at targets in Gaza, while

Palestinian militants launch primitive

unguided rockets from Gaza at nearby

Israeli towns, particularly the border

town of Sderot.

The Israeli attacks, using high-tech

weaponry, much of it supplied by the

United States, are far more destructive

and lethal. On Tuesday, Israeli air

strikes hit 34 targets in Gaza, after

attacks over the weekend.

Bombs and missiles in Gaza have been

combined with brutal military-police

operations on the West Bank, where

500 Palestinians were arrested, dozens

injured, and six killed in the four weeks

since the kidnappings on the West

Bank.

Tensions on the West Bank exploded

Wednesday after the killing of a

Palestinian youth, 16-year-old

Muhammad Hussein Abu Khudair, who

was abducted from the street outside

his home in East Jerusalem, apparently

I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D

2

continued from page 1

L E A D A R T I C L E

by ultra-right Jewish settlers vowing

“revenge” for the killing of the three

Israeli youth. Khudair’s body was

found miles away, badly burned and

bearing marks of violence.

Thousands of Palestinians took to the

streets Wednesday in East Jerusalem

in response to the news of Khudair’s

murder, throwing rocks, bottles and

firecrackers at police and setting up

barricades. The neighborhoods of

Shuafat and Beit Hanina, where the

violence was concentrated, were

relatively quiet on Thursday, as the

residents prepared for the funeral

service, and Israeli troops sealed off

access to that part of the city.

Late Thursday, the Khudair family said the

funeral was postponed until Friday because

of the delay in conducting an autopsy in

Tel Aviv, where a Palestinian doctor was to

observe the procedure.

Elsewhere in Jerusalem, protesters threw

rocks and built barricades of burning tires.

Israeli police fired stun grenades but

otherwise did not directly engage the

protesters.

Israeli police officials claimed that despite

an intensive investigation, “the motive for

the murder cannot be determined at

present.” Eyewitnesses described the

attackers as Jewish, however, and

Palestinian officials have charged that the

attackers were Israeli extremists.

While witnesses supplied police with

the license plate number of the vehicle

used by the kidnappers, the police have

not publicly identified the killers.

The murdered youth’s family criticized

police inaction. Hussein Abu Khudair,

Muhammad’s father, declared: “If

things were different, and an Arab

kidnapped an Israeli, it would have

been uncovered in moments.”

04 July, 2014

Patrick Martin served as The Globe’s

Foreign Editor and as a Comment

Editor

Source : WSWS.org

THE CUBAN FIVE TERRORISM AS A WEAPON OF HEGEMONY

By Chandra Muzaffar

Once again, the International

Movement for a Just World

(JUST) joins hands with the

people of Cuba and justice-loving

people in every nook and cranny

of the planet, in demanding the

immediate release of the three

remaining prisoners from the

Cuban Five who are s t i l l

languishing in US jails, after 13

years.

Two were re leased af te r

completing their prison terms —

Rene Gonzales on the 7 th of

October 2011, and Fernando

Gonzales on the 27th of February

2014. I t i s impor tant to

emphasize that they walked to

freedom with their dignity intact.

The three who are still in jail —

Gerardo Hernandez, Antonio

Guerrero and Ramon Labanino

— deserve our fullest support and

solidarity. We should continue to

campaign for them with all our

heart and soul.

To reiterate, the imprisonment of

all five is a travesty of justice. The

Cuban Five were monitoring

Cuban exile groups in the US in

the nineties who had a proven

record of committing terrorist

acts against the Cuban people.

They were gathering information

about the terrorist missions that

these groups were planning and

had informed the US authorities

about what they (the Cuban Five)

were doing. And yet they were

arrested and jailed after an unfair

and unjust trial.

If the Cuban Five working under

the direct ion of the Cuban

government was determined to

expose terrorist activities being

carr ied out aga ins t the i r

motherland from US soil, it was

mainly because Cuba and its

leadership had been victims of

US sponsored te r ror and

violence for decades. In 1976, a

Cuban commercial plane with 73

passengers on board, a number

of them school children, was

bombed, killing everyone. The

alleged mastermind of this

te r ror i s t ac t , Luis Posada

Carriles, is still alive, protected

by the US government. There

was also an unsuccessful invasion

of Cuba by groups in the US in

1961, the infamous ‘Bay of Pigs’

fiasco. A series of terrorist

attacks targeting hotels and

tourists in the nineties sought to

cripple the Cuban economy. And

there have been innumerable

at tempts to assassinate thecontinued next page

STATEMENT


3

S T A T E M E N T

continued next page

Leader of the Cuban Revolution,

Fidel Castro, right through the 47

years that he was in power. Add

to all this the crippling economic

sanctions imposed upon Cuba by

every US Administration since

1961 and we will get a complete

picture of how a small nation of

11 million people has had to

endure the terror unleashed

against it by its superpower

neighbor.

Why has Cuba been the target

of te r ror i sm in a l l i t s

manifestations for so long? The

reason is simple. The US elite will

not accept in its neighborhood, a

nation which is determined to

choose its own path to the future

without being dictated to, or

dominated by, the US. It will not

to lera te a people who are

committed to defending their

independence and sovereignty.

To put it in another way, the US

drive for hegemony does not

permi t another na t ion—

especially a nation with a different

worldview — to preserve and

enhance its dignity.

This hegemonic attitude is borne

out by the US’s treatment of other

countries in Latin America.

Whenever a nation steps out of

line, the US line, it is clobbered.

Sometimes through terror and

violence. Look at Nicaragua, El

Salvador, Panama, Uruguay,

Ecuador, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, at

different times and in different

circumstances. Even in West

Asia, terror has been employed

to both undermine governments

which want to maintain a degree

of independence from the US and

the West and to create instability

continued from page 2 and chaos in society. This is the

story of Somalia and Sudan, of

Libya and Lebanon, of Iraq and

Syria. In Southeast Asia too, the

Vietnamese, the Cambodians

and Laot ians have a l l

experienced US terror, just as

the people of the Philippines had

in the past. Weren’t the citizens

of Hiroshima and Nagasaki also

exposed to a US “rain of terror”

in 1945?

Let ’s be c lear about th is .

Terrorism is a tool for dominance

and control. Terrorism is a

weapon of hegemony. The US —

like some other states too—uses

this weapon in both ways. It

employs terror when it suits its

interests. It also fights against

terrorism when it serves its

agenda. This is why for the US

there are “good terrorists” and

“bad terrorists.” It is quite happy

to collude with the former and

crush the latter.

This was obvious in I raq

following the Anglo-American

occupation of the land in 2003.

In the initial phase the occupier

encouraged the Shia militias to

fight the Sunni remnants of the

Saddam Hussein regime. Once

the Shias got into power through

the democratic process and

moved closer to Iran, the US

became worried and backed

Sunni militias fighting the Shia

dominated government. Now of

course, Sunni-Shia clashes,

compounded by various other

forces, have assumed a life of

their own.

In Syria, it is an open secret that

the US and other Western and

regional ac tors have been

actively involved in supporting

the armed rebels against the

Bashar al-Assad government in

Damascus. Some of the rebels

are favored more than others by

the US just as other rebels are

linked to some of the other

external players. The good

ter ror is t s f rom the US

perspective receive a lot of

assistance including weapons and

funds through channels

connected to US allies in the

region. Are there bad terrorists

in the Syrian conflict? While the

US may not approve of the

tactics used by some of the

rebels, it has refrained from

strong denunciation of them since

i t shares the i r overr id ing

objective of eliminating Assad.

So it is Assad who is the bad

terrorist in the eyes of the US.

Assad is bad because he has

been consistent in his opposition

to US-Israeli hegemony over

West Asia.

There is a parallel of sorts to the

Cuban s i tuat ion. Al l those

individuals and groups opposed

to the Cuban government ,

however violent they may be, are

good terrorists and have been

bestowed with all kinds of aid by

US agencies through various


4

S T A T E M E N T

conduits. Fidel Castro, and his

successor, Raul Castro, are the

bad ones. Fidel in particular was

demonized in the mainstream

Western media as few other leaders

had been. Needless to say, it was

because of his principled position

against US helmed hegemony,

articulated with such depth and

clarity, that a grossly negative image

of the man was disseminated

through the media.

But Fidel Castro and the Cuban Five

have demonstrated that in the

ultimate analysis truth will triumph.

Today, Fidel commands a lot of

respect and affection among

ordinary men and women

everywhere for what he has

accomplished for his people and

indeed for the people of Latin

America and the Global South.

Similarly, the cause of the Cuban Five

has become one of the major rallying-

points in the worldwide struggle for

human freedom and human dignity

because it symbolizes the struggle of

the powerless against the powerful.

Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is the

President of the International

Movement for a Just World

(JUST).

16 June 2014


PEACE MOVEMENT’S COMMON VISION - THE ABOLITION OF MILITARISM

By Mairead Maguire

We are all aware that this is the 100th

anniversary of the assassination of

Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo

which led to the start of the First

World War in l9l4. What started here

in Sarajevo was a century of two

global wars, a Cold War, a century

of immense, rapid explosion of death

and destruction technology, all

extremely costly, and extremely risky.

A huge step in the history of war, but

also a decisive turning point in the

history of peace. The peace

movement had never been as strong

politically as in the last three decades

before the break-out of WWl. It was

a factor in political life, literature,

organization, and planning, the Hague

Peace Conferences, the Hague

Peace Palace and the International

Court of Arbitration, the bestseller of

Bertha von Suttner’s ‘Lay Down

your Arms’. The optimism was high

as to what this ‘new science’ of

peace could mean to humankind.

Parliaments, Kings, and Emperors,

great cultural and business

personalities involved themselves.

The great strength of the Movement

was that it did not limit itself to

civilizing and slowing down

militarism, it demanded its total

abolition.

People were presented with an

alternative, and they saw common

interest in this alternative road

forward for humankind. What

happened in Sarajevo a hundred

years ago was a devastating blow to

these ideas, and we have never really

recovered. Now, 100 years later,

must be the time for a thorough

reappraisal of what we had with this

vision of disarmament, and what we

have done without it, and the need

for a recommitment, and a new

ambitious start offering new hope to

a humanity suffering under the

scourge of militarism and wars.

People are tired of armaments and

war. They have seen that they

release uncontrollable forces of

tribalism and nationalism. These are

dangerous and murderous forms of

identity and which we need to take

steps to transcend, lest we unleash

further dreadful violence upon the

world. To do this, we need to

acknowledge that our common

humanity and human dignity are more

important than our different traditions.

We need to recognize our life and the

lives of others are sacred and we can

solve our problems without killing

each other. We need to accept and

celebrate diversity and otherness. We

need to work to heal the ‘old’

divisions and misunderstandings, give

and accept forgiveness, and choose

non-killing and non-violence as ways

to solve our problems. So too as we

disarm our hearts and minds, we can

also disarm our countries and our

world.

We are also challenged to build

structures through which we can co-

operate and which reflect our

interconnected and interdependent

relationships. The vision of the

European Union founders to link

countries together, economically, in

order to lessen the likelihood of war

amongst the nations, is a worthy

endeavour. Unfortunately instead of

putting more energy into providing

help for EU citizens, we are witnessing

the growing militarization of Europe,

its role as a driving force for

armaments, and its dangerous path,

under the leadership of the USA/

NATO, towards a new ‘cold’ war andcontinued next page

ARTICLES


5


military aggression. The European

Union and many of its countries, who

used to take initiatives in the UN for

peaceful settlements of conflicts,

particularly allegedly peaceful

countries, like Norway and Sweden,

are now one of US/NATO’s most

important war assets. The EU is a threat

to the survival of neutrality. Many

nations have been drawn into being

complicit in breaking international law

through US/UK/NATO wars in

Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, etc.,

I believe NATO should be abolished.

The United Nations should be reformed

and strengthened and we should get rid

of the veto in the Security Council so

that it is a fair vote and we don’t have

one power ruling over us. The UN

should actively take up its mandate to

save the world from the scourge of war.

But there is hope. People are mobilizing

and resisting non-violently. They are

saying no to militarism and war and

insisting on disarmament. Those of us

in the Peace Movement can take

inspiration from many who have gone

before and worked to prevent war

insisting on disarmament and peace.

Such a person was Bertha Von Suttner,

who was the first woman to win the

Nobel Peace Prize in l905, for her

activism in the women’s rights and

peace movement. She died in June,

l9l4, 100 years ago, just before WWl

started. It was Bertha Von Suttner

who moved Alfred Nobel to set up the

Nobel Peace Prize Award and it was

the ideas of the peace movement of the

period that Alfred Nobel decided to

support in his testament for the

Champions of Peace, those who

struggled for disarmament and for

replacing power with law and

international relations. That this was

the purpose is clearly confirmed by

three expressions in the will, creating

the fraternity of nations, work for

abolition of armies, holding Peace

Congresses. It is important the Nobel

Committee be faithful to his wishes and

that prizes go to the true Champions

of Peace that Nobel had in mind.

This 100 year old Programme for

Disarmament challenges those of us in

the Peace Movement to confront

militarism in a fundamental way. We

must not be satisfied with

improvements and reforms, but rather

offer an alternative to militarism,

which is an aberration and a system of

dysfunction, going completely against

the true spirit of men and women, which

is to love and be loved and solve our

problems through co-operation,

dialogue, non-violence, and conflict

resolution.

Thanks to the organizers for bringing

us together. In the coming days we

shall feel the warmth and strength of

being among thousands of friends and

enriched by the variety of peace

people, and ideas. We shall be inspired

and energized to pursue our different

projects, be it arms trade, nuclear, non-

violence, culture of peace, drone

warfare, etc., Together we can lift the

world! But soon we shall be back

home, on our own, and we know all

too well how we all too often are being

met with either indifference or a remote

stare. Our problem is not that people

do not like what we say, what they

understand correctly is that they believe

little can be done, as the world is so

highly militarized. There is an answer

to this problem: we want a different

world and want people to believe that

peace and disarmament are possible.

Can we agree, that diverse as our work

is, a common vision of a world without

arms, militarism and war, is

indispensable for success? Does not

our experience confirm that we will

never achieve real change if we do not

confront and reject militarism entirely,

as the aberration/dysfunction it is in

human history? Can we agree to work

so that all countries come together in

an Agreement to abolish all weapons

and war and to commit to always sort

out our differences through International

Law and Institutions?

We cannot here in Sarajevo make a

common peace program, but we can

commit to a common goal. If our

common dream is a world without

weapons and militarism, why don’t we

say so? Why be silent about it? It

would make a world of difference if we

refused to be ambivalent about the

violence of militarism. We should no

longer be scattered attempts to modify

the military, each one of us should do

our thing as part of a global effort,

across all divisions of national borders,

religions, races. We must be an

alternative, insisting on an end to

militarism and violence. This would give

us an entirely different chance to be

listened to and taken seriously.

Let the Sarajevo where peace ended,

be the starting point for the bold

beginning of a universal call for peace

through the wholesale abolition of

militarism.

The above is a keynote address

delivered at the Sarajevo Peace

Event on the 6th of June 2014.

Mairead Maguire is a Nobel Peace

Laureate. She is also a member of

JUST’s International Advisory Panel

(IAP).

A R T I C L E


6

continued next page

A R T I C L E S

THE ISLAMIC STATE, THE “CALIPHATE” PROJECT AND THE GLOBAL

WAR ON TERRORISM

By Michel Chossudovsky

The Al Qaeda legend and the threat of

the “Outside Enemy” is sustained

through extensive media and

government propaganda.

In the post 9/11 era, the terrorist threat

from Al Qaeda constitutes the building

block of US-NATO military doctrine.

It justifies –under a humanitarian

mandate– the conduct of “counter-

terrorism operations” worldwide.

Known and documented, Al Qaeda

affiliated entities have been used by US-

NATO in numerous conflicts as

“intelligence assets” since the heyday

of the Soviet-Afghan war. In Syria, the

Al Nusrah and ISIS rebels are the foot-

soldiers of the Western military alliance,

which in turn oversees and controls

the recruitment and training of

paramilitary forces.

While the US State Department is

accusing several countries of

“harboring terrorists”, America is the

Number One “State Sponsor of

Terrorism”: The Islamic State of Iraq

and al-Sham (ISIS) –which operates

in both Syria and Iraq– is covertly

supported and financed by the US and

its allies including Turkey, Saudi Arabia

and Qatar. Moreover, 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 separate territories: A Sunni

Islamist Caliphate, an Arab Shia

Republic, a Republic of Kurdistan,

among others.

The US-led Global War on Terrorism

(GWOT) constitutes the cornerstone

of US military doctrine. “Going after

Islamic terrorists” is part and parcel

of non-conventional warfare. The

underlying objective is to justify the

conduct of counter-terrorism

operations worldwide, which enables

the US and its allies to intervene in the

affairs of sovereign countries.

Many progressive writers, including

alternative media, while focusing on

recent developments in Iraq, fail to

understand the logic behind the “Global

War on Terrorism.” The Islamic State

of Iraq and al sham (ISIS) is often

considered as an “independent entity”

rather than an instrument of the

Western military alliance. Moreover,

many committed anti-war activists –

who oppose the tenets of the US-

NATO military agenda– will nonetheless

endorse Washington’s counter-

terrorism agenda directed against Al

Qaeda:. The Worldwide terrorist threat

is considered to be “real”: “We are

against the war, but we support the

Global War on Terrorism”.

The Caliphate Project and The US

National Intelligence Council Report

A new gush of propaganda has been

set in motion. The leader of the now

defunct Islamic State of Iraq and al

sham (ISIS) Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi

announced on June 29, 2014 the

creation of an Islamic State:

Fighters loyal to the group’s

proclaimed “Caliph Ibrahim ibn

Awwad”, or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as

he was known until Sunday’s July 1st

announcement, are inspired by the

Rashidun caliphate, which succeeded

the Prophet Muhammad in the seventh

century, and is revered by most

Muslims.” (Daily Telegraph, June 30,

2014)

In a bitter irony, the caliphate project

as an instrument of propaganda has

been on the drawing board of US

intelligence for more than ten years.

In December 2004, under the Bush

Administration, the National

Intelligence Council (NIC) predicted

that in the year 2020 a New Caliphate

extending from the Western

Mediterranean to Central Asia and

South East Asia would emerge,

threatening Western democracy and

Western values.

The “findings” of the National

Intelligence Council were published in

a 123 page unclassified report entitled

“Mapping the Global Future”.

“A New Caliphate provides an example

of how a global movement fueled by

radical religious identity politics could

constitute a challenge to Western

norms and values as the foundation of

the global system” (emphasis added)

The NIC 2004 report borders on

ridicule; it is devoid of intelligence, let

alone historical and geopolitical

analysis. Its fake narrative pertaining

to the caliphate, nonetheless, bears a

canny resemblance to the June 29,

2014 highly publicized PR

announcement of the creation of the

I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D A R T I C L E S

7


Caliphate by ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-

Baghdadi.

The NIC report presents a so-called

“fictional scenario of a letter from a

fictional grandson of Bin Ladin to a

family relative in 2020.” It is on this

basis that it makes predictions for the

year 2020. Based on an invented bin

Laden grandson letter narrative rather

than on intelligence and empirical

analysis, the US intelligence community

concludes that the caliphate constitutes

a real danger for the Western World

and Western civilization.

From a propaganda standpoint, the

objective underlying the Caliphate

project –as described by the NIC– is

to demonize Muslims with a view to

justifying a military crusade:

“The fictional scenario portrayed below

provides an example of how a global

movement fueled by radical religious

identity could emerge.

Under this scenario, a new Caliphate

is proclaimed and manages to advance

a powerful counter ideology that has

widespread appeal.

It is depicted in the form of a

hypothetical letter from a fictional

grandson of Bin Ladin to a family

relative in 2020.

He recounts the struggles of the Caliph

in trying to wrest control from

traditional regimes and the conflict and

confusion which ensue both within the

Muslim world and outside between

Muslims and the United States, Europe,

Russia and China. While the Caliph’s

success in mobilizing support varies,

places far outside the Muslim core in

the Middle East—in Africa and Asia—

are convulsed as a result of his appeals.

The scenario ends before the Caliph is

able to establish both spiritual and

temporal authority over a territory—

which historically has been the case

for previous Caliphates. At the end of

the scenario, we identify lessons to be

drawn.”(“Mapping the Global Future”.

p. 83)

This “authoritative” NIC “Mapping the

Global Future” report was not only

presented to the White House, the

Congress and the Pentagon, it was also

dispatched to America’s allies. The

“threat emanating from the Muslim

World” referred to in the NIC report

(including the section on the caliphate

project) is firmly entrenched in US-

NATO military doctrine.

The NIC document was intended to

be read by top officials. Broadly

speaking it was part of the “Top

official” (TOPOFF) propaganda

campaign which targets senior foreign

policy and military decision-makers,

not to mention scholars, researchers

and NGO “activists”. The objective is

to ensure that “top officials” continue

to believe that Islamic terrorists are

threatening the security of the Western

World.

The underpinnings of the caliphate

scenario is the “Clash of Civilizations”,

which provides a justification in the

eyes of public opinion for America to

intervene worldwide as part of a global

counter- terrorism agenda.

From a geopolitical and geographic

standpoint, the caliphate constitutes a

broad area in which the US is seeking

to extend its economic and strategic

influence. In the words of Dick Cheney

pertaining to the 2004 NIC’s report:

“They talk about wanting to re-

establish what you could refer to as

the Seventh Century Caliphate. This

was the world as it was organized

1,200, 1,300 years, in effect, when

Islam or Islamic people controlled

everything from Portugal and Spain in

the West; all through the Mediterranean

to North Africa; all of North Africa;

the Middle East; up into the Balkans;

the Central Asian republics; the

southern tip of Russia; a good swath

of India; and on around to modern day

Indonesia. In one sense from Bali and

Jakarta on one end, to Madrid on the

other.” Dick Cheney (emphasis added)

What Cheney is describing in today’s

context is a broad region extending

from the Mediterranean to Central Asia

and South East Asia in which the US

and its allies are directly involved in a

variety of military and intelligence

operations.

The stated aim of the NIC report was

“to prepare the next Bush

administration for challenges that lie

ahead by projecting current trends that

may pose a threat to US interests”.

The NIC intelligence document was

based, lest we forget, on “a

hypothetical letter from a fictional

grandson of Bin Ladin to a [fictional]

family relative in [the year] 2023 . “The

Lessons Learnt” as outlined in this

“authoritative’ NIC intelligence

document are as follows:

the caliphate project “constitutes a

serious challenge to the international

order”.

“The IT revolution is likely to amplify

the clash between Western and Muslim

A R T I C L E SI N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D

8


worlds…”

The document refers to the appeal of

the caliphate to Muslims and concludes

that:

“the proclamation of the Caliphate

would not lessen the likelihood of

terrorism and in fomenting more

conflict”. [sic]

The NIC’s analysis suggests that the

proclamation of a caliphate will

generate a new wave of terrorism

emanating from Muslim countries

thereby justifying an escalation in

America’s Global War on Terrorism

(GWOT):

The proclamation of the caliphate …

could fuel a new generation of terrorists

intent on attacking those opposed to the

caliphate, whether inside or outside the

Muslim World.” (emphasis added)

What the NIC report fails to mention is

that US intelligence in liaison with

Britain’s MI6 and Israel’s Mossad are

covertly involved in supporting both the

terrorists and the caliphate project.

In turn, the media has embarked on a

new wave of lies and fabrications,

focusing on “a new terrorist threat”

emanating not only from the Muslim

World, but from “home grown

Islamist terrorists” in Europe and

North America.

2 July 2014

Michel Chossudovsky is an award-

winning author, Professor of

Economics (emeritus) at the

University of Ottawa, Founder and

Director of the Centre for Research

on Globalization (CRG), Montreal and

Editor of the globalresearch.ca

website.

THE MALAYSIAN LINK TO TERROR IN SYRIA

By Chandra Muzaffar

Since April 2014, the Malaysian media

has carried numerous stories of

Malaysians who are directly or

indirectly linked to terrorist groups

operating in Syria, and to a lesser extent,

Iraq. We are told that they see

themselves as “jihadis” who are fighting

for an Islamic cause. There are

unconfirmed reports that some of them

have been killed in the on-going conflict

in Syria.

Police intelligence appears to have

mined a lot of information about the

activities of these individuals and groups.

Their local training hideouts have been

revealed and their regional and

international links exposed. This has

enabled the police to make several

arrests.

Eliminating Muslim terrorist networks

of this sort will not be a walk in the park.

The police, and indeed, the majority of

the Malaysian populace share the same

faith as the individuals associated with

these terrorist operations. A lot of

Malaysian Muslims may also harbor

some of the misconceptions and

prejudices which impelled some of these

jihadis to take the road to Damascus.

What would have motivated them to

tread this perilous path? What would

have persuaded thousands of Muslims

from some 80 countries — according

to a certain estimate — to join the

armed rebels against the Bashar Al-

Assad government in Syria? Why are

they so determined to topple Bashar?

It must be remembered that this is not

the first time in recent decades that

Muslims from various parts of the world

have come together to do battle on

behalf of a common cause. The global

Muslim campaign against the

occupation of Afghanistan by the Soviet

Union in the nineteen eighties was in a

sense even more extensive and

sustained. Muslims from Malaysia were

also involved in that campaign which

they saw rightly as the foreign

occupation of a Muslim land. Repelling

occupation is a Quranic imperative.

But Syria today is not occupied the way

Afghanistan was in the eighties. If there

is any occupation in Syria, it is Israeli

occupation of the strategic Golan

Heights since 1967 which should

concern Muslims and others who

cherish justice and sovereignty. And

yet the jihadis from Malaysia and the

rebels who are their comrades-in-

arms do not seem to be bothered

about the liberation of the Golan

Heights. On the contrary, it is an open

secret that Israel has colluded with

some of the rebels — by providing

training and supplying intelligence —

—in the fight against Bashar since the

middle of 2011. Israel itself has

conducted a series of military strikes

within Syria in the course of the last

two years with the aim of sapping the

strength of the Syrian army.

Mission

If the rebels are not fighting alien

occupation, what is their mission? It is

obvious that the Malaysian jihadis, like

their counterparts from other countries,

see themselves as defending the Sunniscontinued next page


9


of Syria against alleged oppression by

the Shia ruling elite. There is a parallel

perception of Shia suppression of

Sunnis in Iraq. Both these perceptions

are part of a wider view fostered by

various influential groups in West Asia

(including Israel) and in some parts of

the West that an arc of Shia power is

rising from Iran through Bahrain to Iraq

and Lebanon and this is a threat to the

Sunni majority in the region. Adding to

this phobia of the Shias — Shiaphobia

— especially in the case of Syria is the

rebels’ opposition to secularism and the

secular state. It is a state which in their

reckoning has to be replaced by a

Caliphate — a Global Sunni Caliphate

— which has now become the rallying-

cry of some of the rebels, specifically

the terrorist group known as the Islamic

State of Iraq and Sham (ISIS).

This narrative of Sunnis being

suppressed; of Shia power; of the

illegitimacy of the secular state; of a

Sunni Caliphate, has reached a

crescendo in the last few years in the

midst of the Syrian conflict. Leading

religious personalities in West Asia

especially from the Gulf monarchies

have been vitriolic in their denunciation

of the Shias. In mosques and through

the media, they have succeeded in

fuelling hatred of this minority sect within

and beyond the region while creating a

sense of siege among the majority Sunni

population. Consequently, the Sunni-

Shia divide has become more

pronounced than ever before.

Because some of these Islamic

personalities are highly revered in

Malaysia, their utterances command a

substantial constituency. They have

legitimized the already prevailing

antipathy towards the Shias among the

local ulama (religious scholars).As a

result, the anti-Shia campaign led by

the ulama has gained much prominence

among the populace. Some of the

ulama are part of the religious

establishment; others are free-lance

operators. Academics and media

practitioners have also reinforced the

vile bigotry emanating from some of the

ulama. So have politicians from both

the government and the opposition.

NGO activists have been equally vocal

in conjuring an ominous Shia threat in

a Sunni-Muslim majority nation where

the sect is an insignificant minority.

Given how pervasive and intensive the

targeting of this sect has been in recent

months, propelled by the massive

propaganda flowing from parts of the

Arab world, it is not surprising that

some impressionable youth in the

country have been lured by the slogan

of Sunnis facing the danger of

extermination in Syria and now Iraq.

There are perhaps two additional

factors that explain this fatal attraction.

For centuries, Sunni Muslims in

Malaysia, as in some other parts of the

Muslim world, have been somewhat

uneasy about Shias— which is why any

negative imaging of the sect is so readily

absorbed. The videos on You Tube

showing the alleged atrocities

committed by the Syrian government

in the course of the last three years have

also had a huge impact upon Muslims

here, as elsewhere. Indeed, cyber

media as a whole has been a major

tool in mobilizing Sunnis globally to

defend themselves.

Critical Analysis

While there is no denying that the Syrian

Army and its affiliates have committed

gross atrocities in trying to quell the

armed rebellion, Muslims in Malaysia

and other countries have unfortunately

failed to subject the media blitz

launched by the rebels, their supporters

in West Asia and in Western capitals

to critical analysis. Independent

investigations into a number of

horrendous massacres for which the

mainstream media had immediately

blamed the Syrian authorities have now

revealed that the rebels were actually

culpable. The Khalidiya and Karm

Allouz massacres in March 2012 and

the Houla massacre in May 2012

would be outstanding examples. The

most startling expose of all was the

Ghouta sarin gas attack of August

2013, pinpointed upon the Bashar

government, which the celebrated

American investigative journalist,

Seymour Hersh, showed through

meticulous analysis was in fact the work

of a rebel group carried out with the

connivance of Turkey. Young

Malaysian Muslims should realize that

half-truths, outright lies and wholesale

fabrication in order to demonize an

adversary and to camouflage the truth

are part and parcel of the arsenal of

the powerful as they seek to perpetuate

their interests.

Indeed, even allegations about the

suppression of Sunnis who are the

majority in Syria should be examined

with greater objectivity. Sunnis

constitute the bulk of the Syrian

armed forces and are at the core of

the top brass. The current defense

minister is Sunni. His predecessor

was a Christian assassinated by the

rebels. Some of the most influential

positions in the dominant public

sector are held by Sunnis while major

businesses in the private sector are

Sunni owned. The highest religious

authority in Syria, the Grand Mufti,

is a Sunni from the Shafie doctrinal

school, the same mazhab as the

Muslims of Malaysia.

continued next page

A R T I C L E S


10


It is because many Muslims trapped in

the web of propaganda spun by certain

elements in West Asia and the West

refuse to come to grips with realities

that they do not want to acknowledge

that Syria is one of the few countries in

the region that has succeeded in

integrating the majority community with

the minorities and has developed an

inclusive Syrian citizenship that

transcends religious boundaries. This is

also the reason why the Syrian

leadership has always been opposed

to any notion of an exclusive Muslim

religious identity in politics peddled by

groups such as the Muslim

Brotherhood.

Just as the question of an inclusive

versus exclusive idea of citizenship is

fundamental to Malaysia’s own quest

for national identity, so is the other issue

that appears to have attracted some

Muslims to the Syrian rebellion, the

issue of Syria’s fidelity to Islam. For

most of the armed rebels and the

Malaysian Muslims who have joined

them, one of the reasons why they

regard the Bashar government as not

‘Islamic’ is because it has not

implemented the Islamic penal code,

erroneously interpreted as hudud. They

may not be aware that in the Syrian

Constitution Islamic jurisprudence is a

main source of legislation and the

President of the Syrian Republic has

to be a Muslim, the faith of the vast

majority of the citizenry. More than that,

there are many aspects of governance

— free education, universal healthcare,

specific worker representation in public

decision-making and so on— which

would make Syria Islamic. By the same

token, there are other aspects of the

Bashar administration which violate

Islamic norms such as the ubiquitous

role of its secret police, the curtailment

of dissent, and the persistence of

corruption.

However, Bashar’s Syrian opponents

and their Malaysian friends do not

adopt a balanced, rational approach

when it comes to determining the

credentials of a government. They are

more inclined towards labelling a

government as ‘Islamic’ or ‘secular’

driven by their own shallow, superficial

approach to religion and politics. In this

regard, they would view an absolute

monarchy that denies basic rights to the

people but implements hudud as

‘Islamic’ while condemning a state that

applies the rule of law to all its citizens

and provides space to women and men

to participate in politics but does not

include hudud in its legal system, as

‘secular.’

This then is the nub of the issue. It

is a shallow, superficial

understanding of what is happening

in Syria that has pushed some

Malaysian Muslims into the arms of

the Syrian conflict. Their ignorance

has been exacerbated by distorted

information and skewed analysis.

There is hardly any appreciation

among these jihadis of the

underlying causes of the conflict

and how they are linked to regional

and global politics with long-term

significance. That the Syrian

conflict epitomizes the perennial

US-Israeli goal of crushing

resistance to their hegemony over

West Asia is something that escapes

our jihadis.

This is why there is an urgent need

to develop a deeper, broader

understanding of the conflict among

religious elites, politicians, activists,

youths, students, academics and the

media. This is as important as

intelligence gathering and effective

action against the culprits based upon

law. A more profound appreciation

of conflicts such as Syria should be

accompanied by a serious endeavor

to impart an understanding of Islam

that is inclusive, universal,

progressive and enlightened through

our educational institutions, religious

bodies and the media.

The national leadership has a

particularly important role to play in

this. It should be clear in its total

rejection of the sort of religious

extremism that breeds terror and

violence. In both its domestic and

foreign policies it should demonstrate

through deeds — not words — that

it subscribes to a “justly balanced”

outlook, as prescribed in the Quran.

There can be no room for ambiguity

or ambivalence in its approach to

issues that hint of religious bigotry

and dogmatism.

As a nation, we should not be

under any illusion. Malaysians with

a terrorist orientation, willing to

exploit religion in pursuit of their

agenda, are now operating in other

countries. There is no reason to

believe that they and their kind will

not turn their guns upon local targets

one day. We should not let that

happen — which is why we must

act now.

30 June 2014

A R T I C L E S


11

EGYPT’S SO-CALLED JUSTICE SYSTEM IS THE GUILTY PARTY AND THE WORLD

SHOULD ACT

By Alan Hart

Could it be that the three Al-Jazeera

journalists have been found guilty and each

sentenced to seven years in jail to enable

Egyptian President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi to

pardon and free them in order to give the

impression that he is a kind, forgiving man

and not on his way to becoming the Arab

world’s most ruthless and repressive tyrant?

Only the coming days or weeks will give

us the answer but while we wait I think the

governments of the world should act. What

could they do? For starters they could isolate

Sisi’s Egypt diplomatically by expelling its

ambassadors and withdrawing their own.

The conviction of Peter Greste, Mohammed

Fahmy and Bahar Mohamed for allegedly

supporting a terrorist organization has

nothing whatsoever to do with justice. It’s

all about sending a Zionist-like message to

the world – “The truth is whatever the

masters of Egypt say it is and anybody who

tells and spreads an alternative version of

events will be punished.”

On the social networks there was instant

and universal condemnation of the Egyptian

court’s politically motivated decision but

there is no reason to suppose that

governments will act.

The U.S. has, in fact, rewarded Sisi for his

intimidation and suppression of all opposition

to date. The day before the Egyptian court

delivered its decision, U.S. Secretary of State

John Kerry was in Cairo and with him came

the announcement that the U.S. has released

$575 million in military aid to Egypt that

had been frozen since the removal of

President Mohammed Morsi in a coup last

year.

In what were described as “candid” talks

with Sisi, Kerry emphasised “our strong

support for upholding the universal rights

and freedoms of all Egyptians including the

freedom of expression, peaceful assembly

and association.”

If Kerry and his boss truly believe that Sisi

has any intention of upholding those rights

and freedoms they are, to say the least, naive

in the extreme.

Kerry also pledged that Washington would

“stand with the Egyptian people in the fight

for the future they want.”

I find myself wondering what America’s

position will be when in that fight Egyptians

turn against Sisi.

24 June 2014

Alan Hart is a former ITN and BBC

Panorama foreign correspondent. He is

author of Zionism: The Real Enemy of the

Jews

Source : Alanhart.net

2014 COUP: OLD WINE IN A NEW BOTTLE?

By Sulak Sivaraksa

continued next page

At first sight, the most recent coup d’état

on 22 May 2014 seemed to have learned

admirably well from the failures of the

previous coup in 2006. But what have

and what haven’t the military leaders

learned from the 2006 coup? Here are

some observations.

1) The martial law was declared two

days in advance of the actual seizure of

state power. The Senate was allowed to

linger on for a brief while and was

subsequently dissolved. Power was

seized and monopolized by one leader.

Royal endorsement only came on 26

May at a ceremony in which the king

was not present. The president of the

Privy Council didn’t seem to play any

role in this process too. And the junta

leaders didn’t have an audience with the

king. These measures were taken to

show that there wasn’t any connection

between the monarchy and the coup; the

military alone was responsible for it.

Whether or not this is plausible is entirely

a different matter.

2) This time the coup group, officially

known as the National Council for Peace

and Order (NCPO),* didn’t appoint a

prime minister to govern on their behalf.

The junta has moved swiftly to

undermine or destroy Thaksin

Shinawatra’s power-base by transferring

to inactive posts the Ministry of Defense

permanent secretary and the National

Police Chief—along with a number of

senior police officers and provincial

governors who are said to be connected

to Thaksin. We will have to see whether

or not the military junta will be successful

in eradicating Thaksin and Co’s political

power this time; the 2006 coup failed

dismally in this feat.

3) The junta’s appointment of Mr.

Pridiyathorn Devakula and Somkid

Jatusipitak as advisors to handle

economic and foreign affairs matters

respectively is interesting. Both men

belong to the opposite poles. They are


12


however honest and highly competent.

It will be interesting to see if they can

work together and whether or not

NCPO listens to their advice.

Professor Yongyut Yuttawong is also

capable and upholds a strong sense of

ethics. Ultimately, how many more

qualified technocrats will be enlisted to

work for NCPO—aside from the legal

experts who have served under every

recent military dictatorship?

4) We have to wait and see whether or

not the new set of administrators will

courageously work to dismantle

structural injustice and to what extent

they understand the sources of

poverty, oppression and exploitation

faced by the majority of people in the

country. Moreover, will they continue

to denigrate local knowledge forms as

well as autonomy? Will they attempt

to move beyond the populist and

corrupt policies of Thaksin and

Yingluck?

NCPO’s plans to construct roads and

dams around Bangkok may prove as

disastrous as Yingluck’s approval of a

massive budget for dam construction

in the name of flood relief. Is it far-

fetched to demand that NCPO call for

a referendum before launching any

massive construction projects?

5) The creation of the Military Court

is a double-edged dagger. If the

objective is to improve the justice

process in the country, then it must be

accompanied by the nourishment of

mindfulness, emancipatory

knowledge, and tolerance—and not to

say of a major overhaul of the education

and Sangha systems. I’m afraid these

issues are not on the priority list of

NCPO.

6) Summoning individuals to report to

the junta or detaining them seems to

have spiraled out of control. It may lead

to a culture of misinforming and

denouncing innocent persons, a kind

of McCarthyism. The sooner this path

is avoided, the better. (The suspension

of US military aid to Thailand is simply

a weak PR ploy. The US has always

had deep ties with every postwar

military dictatorship in the country.)

7) As shocking as this may sound but

the present military leaders should look

to Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat as a

role model. Despite his terrifying flaws

Sarit was also pretty clever. Sarit’s

closest confidant as well as advisor

was very talented. The Field Marshal

was able to make highly competent

individuals work for the wellbeing of

the country such as Puey Ungphakorn

in the domain of finance and economics

and Tawee Boonyaket in the field of

constitutional drafting.

8) NCPO won some praise as it

disbursed payment to rice farmers

under the rice pledging scheme of the

previous government. But in the wake

of the 2006 coup in an effort to reduce

public dissent, the price of certain

essential commodities was also cut.

The 2006 coup-makers justified their

action under the pretext of fighting

corruption. Arguably, they ended up

being even more corrupt than the

deposed government.

9) Hopefully, the drafting of a new

constitution and formation of a civilian

government will not take an inordinate

amount of time as during the Sarit

years. Likewise, let’s hope that

oppositional intellectuals and politicians

will not be liquidated as during the Sarit

dictatorship.

10) The Sangha Act of 1962 issued by

Sarit is a root cause of the Sangha’s

downfall in the country. If this Act is

not amended or revoked, the future of

Buddhism looks bleak in the kingdom.

PS

Perhaps, the leader of NCPO should

take the time to study the life of

Pompey, a great military-general-

turned-political-leader. In his

biography of Pompey Plutarch

writes:

“Life out of uniform can have the

dangerous effect of weakening the

reputation of famous generals….

They are poorly adapted to the

equality of democratic politics. Such

men claim the same precedence in

civilian life that they enjoy on the

battlefield…. So when people find a

man with a brilliant military record

playing an active part in public life

they undermine and humiliate him. But

if he renounces and withdraws from

politics, they maintain his reputation

and ability and no longer envy him.”

Anthony Everitt adds that “The

trouble was that Pompey was a poor

political tactician and also an

uninspiring public speaker.”

I am aware that the leader of NCPO

doesn’t have the time to read this

article. But if his trustworthy and

clever subordinates alert him to the

message in this postscript it may be

beneficial to the present situation.

*The English name of £Êª is

National Council for Peace and Order.

Its Latin equivalent would be “otium

cum dignitate.” That is, peace/leisure

(otium) is inextricable from dignity

(dignitate). If human rights are

trammeled on and freedom of

expression is denied, then an order

is peaceful only in name. It will be a

false peace.

25 June 2014

Sulak Sivaraksa is one of

Thailand’s (Siam as Sulak refers to

his country) leading public

intellectuals. He is also a member of

JUST’s International Advisory Panel

(IAP).


13

TONY BLAIR, PHANTOM OF THE OPERA

By Pepe Escobar

The Phantom of the (tragic) Middle

East Opera is back. A killer without a

clue, he can’t be blamed for not being

consistent.

His most recent opus speaks for

itself; like a Kabuki mask high on Earl

Grey tea, the Phantom is eviscerated

by his own mighty pen, actually

sword.

The fact that the Phantom keeps

getting away with his vast desert of

convoluted lies – instead of

languishing in some rotten,

extraordinary rendition hotel - spells

out all we need to know about so-

called Western “elites”, of which he’s

been a faithful, and handsomely

rewarded, servant.

So Western “inaction” in Syria has

led to the latest Iraq tragedy? Sorry,

Tony; it was yours and “Dubya’s”

2003 Shock and Awe “action” that

set the whole Shakespearean tragedy

in motion.

The Phantom always wanted the

Obama administration to bomb Syria,

as much as he labored for “Dubya”

to destroy Iraq. Phantom logic never

considered that would have installed

in Damascus the same Islamic State

of Iraqi and the Levant (ISIL) that is

now making a push towards

Baghdad.

Then there’s the gift that keeps on

giving – the endlessly recycled,

repackaged Global War on Terror

(GWOT), of which the Phantom was

the prime sidekick. So Phantom had

to be on board the latest US craze –

which brands ISIL as the avatar of a

new 9/11.

In Syria, Phantom has been one of

the prime instigators of the “rebel

with a cause” ISIL and Jabhat al-

Nusra-infested gang. If the

Phantom’s bombing logic had won

in Syria – he was preaching

Damascus as a replay of 2003

Baghdad - Aleppo would be, for a

while now, an avatar of Mosul.

The deeper we get into it , the

Phantom looks and sounds like the

heir of – also clueless - British

commanders in 19th century

Afghanistan. Look, for instance, at

this unintended consequence of the

2001 American bombing of

Afghanistan; now we have Hazaras

– Afghan Shi’ites – fighting side by

side with Iranians, alongside Bashar

al-Assad’s Syrian army, against the

Phantom-supported Syrian “rebels”.

Oh Tony; not even your old cohort

Peter “Lord of Darkness” Mandelson

could have explained that.

By the way, the Phantom has always

been a firm believer in the “evil” of

Iran, constantly “warning” that

Tehran was on the verge of

assembling a nuclear weapon (old

habits – as in the Phantom’s Saddam

syndrome – die hard.) So imagine his

Dick Cheney-worthy stupor when

Washington and Tehran are on the

verge of discussing in Vienna the set-

up of some sort of joint action to fight

ISIL in Iraq, and even “uber-hawks”

such as Republican Senator Lindsey

Graham utter the unimaginable

words, “We are probably going to

need [Iran’s] help to hold Baghdad.”

The Phantom would be incapable of

connecting the geopolitical dots from

Afghanistan and Iraq to Libya and

Syria; the bottom line he would be

unable to identify is that there is

absolutely no strategic, long-term

Anglo-American foreign policy

project in what the Pentagon still calls

the “arc of instability”. If there ever

was a motto, i t was “Dubya’s”

“you’re either with us or with the

terrorists”. A motto turned on its

head, because until this very moment

Anglo-American power was “with

the terrorists”, from Libya to Syria;

a predictable perversion of time-

tested Divide and Rule.

The Obama administration is going

no holds barred to get a SOFA in

Afghanistan – code for Enduring

Freedom forever (with “discreet”

Special Forces as the invisible stars.)

Washington has already admitted it

is sending lethal “assistance” to

“moderate” rebels in Syria (as, in

theory, the Islamic Front goons, not

Jabhat al-Nusra or ISIL). As if

Hollywoodish CIA assets wouldn’t

know that these weapons will

certainly be bought and/or stolen by

hardcore jihadis.

ISIL in the borderless desert between

Syria and Iraq is already a proto-

Caliphate. Blowback from this

weaponizing of so-called

“moderates” – there are no

continued next page


14

“moderates”, as there are no Taliban

“moderates” – will be no less than

staggering. Victims includes Kurds in

Syria, Iraq, Turkey and Iran;

Turkmen in Iraq (as it’s already

happening this week); and of course

Christians all over (as it already

happened in Syria).

Bomb them into democracy, again

The Phantom now is preaching for

American “intervention” in Iraq;

first you starve them; then you

bomb them into a wasteland and

cal l i t “democracy”; then you

occupy them; then you infest them

with jihadis; then they kick you out;

then the jihadis raise hell (now

flush with $425 million stolen from

a government vault in Mosul, apart

from loads of cash from Wahhabis

in the Gulf to buy all those white

Toyotas and RPGs); then you re-

occupy them softly. It IS the gift

that keeps on giving.

As for the notion – equally peddled

by the Phantom and US neo-cons

– that ISIL is a threat to Western

security (“trying to do harm to

Europe , to Amer ica and o ther

people”, in Kerry’s words), that’s

nonsense; a joke as monumental as

that maze of American satellites

incapable of tracking a long line of

white Toyotas advancing in the

Western Iraqi desert – leading to

the swift disintegration of four

Iraqi army divisions.

They saw it, they tracked it, and

they kept mum. That’s s traight

f rom the Empire of Chaos’s

p laybook . Why not advance

murderous “Div ide and Rule”

between Sunnis and Shiites? Let

them eat corpses – and kill each

other to kingdom come, as in the

eight-year Iran-Iraq war.

ISIL’s push is a remix of the Sunni-

Shi’ite civil war of 2006-2007,

whose e f fec t s , p re -Amer ican

surge , I documented in my

reportage book Red Zone Blues. At

the time, i t was all centered in

Baghdad; when al-Qaeda in Iraq

took over the Dora neighborhood

in Baghdad, that lasted only a short

while. Sunnis themselves rebelled

aga ins t the medieva l j ihad i

“worldview”.

The Phantom, anyway, got h is

wish ; I raq i s fo r a l l p rac t ica l

purposes broken , i r re t r ievably

fragmented, and cannot be “fixed”

(Colin Powell’s terminology). The

Kurds have already solved one of

the most intractable problems of

pos t -Shock and Awe; they’ve

already rearranged Sykes-Picot by

taking over oil-rich Kirkuk (not to

mention the Nineveh plateau).

And as fur ther proof ISIL has

nothing to do wi th a threa t to

Western security, the tanks and

heavy artillery they captured in Iraq

were redirected to Syria, in their

push to fight Damascus.

This i s a l l too much for the

Phantom to diges t . Perhaps he

should start by reading this - as in

Iraqi works rejecting everything

that happened even before 2003,

and even before the Phantom’s

limelight moment.

As for the Phantom’s key argument

that what’s happening now in Iraq

is the result of less – and not more –

Western warmongering, call i t

phantom hubris. The “Middle East”

– in fact Southwest Asia – is a

Western fiction imposed by colonial

powers on the local populations.

What the Pentagon described since

the early 2000s as the “arc of

instability” is a self-fulfil l ing

projection of anarchy, with some

patches of “peace” represented by

those repellent GCC petro-

monarchies (after we need “our”

oil).

And then there’s the slowly but

surely inevitable process of

progressive integration of Eurasia –

along the myriad, Chinese-driven

new silk roads. That’s anathema for

the empire of chaos and its “special

relationship” minion. So Southwest Asia

in perpetual chaos is more than

welcomed. Expect hubristic Phantom to

call for increased fuel to be added to

this Western-concocted opera already on

fire.

17 June 2014

Pepe Escobar is the roving

correspondent for Asia Times/Hong

Kong, an analyst for RT and

TomDispatch, and a frequent

contributor to websites and radio shows

ranging from the US to East Asia.

Source: Rt.com


INTERNATIONAL MOVEMENTFOR A JUST WORLD (JUST)P.O BOX 288Jalan Sultan46730 Petaling JayaSelangor Darul EhsanMALAYSIAwww.just-international.org

Bayaran Pos JelasPostage Paid

Pejabat Pos BesarKuala Lumpur

MalaysiaNo. WP 1385

Please donate to JUST by Postal Order or Cheque

addressed to:

International Movement for a Just World

P.O. Box 288, Jalan Sultan, 46730, Petaling Jaya,

Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia

or direct to our bank account:Malayan Banking Berhad, Petaling Jaya Main

Branch, 50 Jalan Sultan, 46200, Petaling Jaya,

Selangor Darul Ehsan,MALAYSIA

Account No. 5141 6917 0716

Donations from outside Malaysia should be made

by Telegraphic Transfer or Bank Draft in USD$

The International Movement for a Just World isa nonprofit international citizens’ organisationwhich seeks to create public awareness aboutinjustices within the existing global system.It a lso attempts to develop a deeperunderstanding of the struggle for social justiceand human dignity at the global level, guided byuniversal spiritual and moral values.

In furtherance of these objectives, JUST hasundertaken a number of activities includingconducting research, publishing books andmonographs, organising conferences andseminars, networking with groups and individuals and participating in public campaigns.

JUST has friends and supporters in more than130 countries and cooperates actively withother organisations which are committed to

similar objectives in different parts of the world.

About the International Movement for aJust World (JUST)

It would be much appreciated if you

could share this copy of the JUST Com-

mentary with a friend or relative. Bet-

ter still invite him/her to write to JUST

so that we can put his/her name on our

Commentary mailing list.

TERBITAN BERKALA

just commentary july 2014

Documents

gaza strip

border of gaza

israeli teenagers

israeli attacks

israeli support

israeli airstrikes

west bank explodedwednesday

military mobilization