Is Western Media credible anymore?

Is Western Media credible anymore?

December 11, 2019

by Prof. Engr. Zamir Ahmed Awan for The Saker Blog

Western media is spreading fake news and fabricating stories with evil intentions. Western Media is biased and creating unrest and chaos in various parts of the world. Media is being used by the Western world to coerce, influence and achieve their ill-political motives. Unfortunately, Western Media is already dominating and controlling public opinion throughout the world.

Let me give you a particular example of the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation). BBC reported that the Saddam Hussain regime in Iraq possesses Weapons of Mass Destructions (WMD). America along with its allies attacked Iraq, destructed Iraq, killed millions of people, damaged Infrastructure, Power Houses, Telecommunication, Hospitals, Schools, Churches, Mosques, Roads, Industry, Oil Wells, Refineries, etc. Finally noticed that there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). Later on, the British Prime Minister of that time, acknowledged that the BBC news was not accurate, and information about WMD was not correct. But after damaging a country totally and harming millions of people, pushing Iraq into stone ages, one’s mere apology may not be accepted and may not be forgiven by humanity, irreversible damage to Iraq may never be forgotten by the history.

It is worth mentioning, Iraq was a very stable, oil-rich, and total welfare state under President Saddam Hussain. Education, health care was free of cost to its citizens, plenty of food, variety of food was available abundantly. Electricity was available in all parts of the country in abundance sufficiently. Fuel and items of daily use were available everywhere conveniently. The society was very much stable, satisfied and living a comfortable life. All factions of the society were enjoying harmony and was a tolerant society. It might be possible a few exceptionally politicians opposing the ruling party “Bath” or President Saddam Hussain, were victimized. They might be few in numbers or two digits only. But the vast majority of the nation was comfortable with the rulers.

But after the US war on Iraq, today, people of Iraq are facing a shortage of food, fuel, electricity, medicines, and items of daily life. No free education and health care are provided by the government. The society is extremely polarized, intolerance and factionist are very much common. Terrorism, lawlessness, and chaos are witnesses everywhere.

Is publically apology is sufficient to cool down the suffering of millions of Iraqis? Can anyone ignore the dirty role of the BBC? Is it possible, people of Iraq forget the BBC? Can the victim forgive the BBC?

It is only one example only. The same trick was played in the case of Syria. BBC reported that the Syrian Government possesses Chemical Weapons and is using against rebellions. Western Alliance NATO, under the US leadership, attacked Syria, killed millions of innocent people, displace millions of common citizens, damaged the whole country, and pushed the Syrian into stone ages. Forced the Syrian people to take asylum in the Western World where they are humiliated, especial the women and children are being abused. A huge portion is forced to live in temporary camps within the country, where life is very hard and lacks the basic amenities of daily life. Western World has made the life on common Syrian misery and curse only. While Syrians was a very stable country, may not be very rich, but with all basic amenities available conveniently. Nature has blessed the Syrians with best fruits and vegetables, and traditional Syrian food is one of the important attractions in the region. The people of Syria are very pretty and a superior creature. They can compete any beauty villain in the world easily. The law and order situation was very much comfortable and society was stable and living in harmony.

The same is the case of Libya, where ill-motivated fake News led to the destruction of a sovereign country. A very stable, oil-rich nation turned into chaos and lawlessness. A nation with all comforts and facilities has been deprived of even basic needs of life. A sate with total welfare for its citizens has been changed into a lack of everything like food, medicines, fuel, electricity, etc.

The situation in Yemen, Egypt, Tunisia, and Afghanistan is not much different than this. The US admits its role in spreading fake information about Afghanistan and admits its failure in Afghanistan. Pakistan, Turkey, and Iran are on the list and Western World is engaged in a hybrid war, where media is the basic weapon and in some cases over-engaged in spreading fake news and fabrication of stories to create chaos and promote instability.

In Pakistan only, we noticed many illegal radio stations operating by Western-funded NGOs, spreading hate, misinformation, and troubles only. Many media houses and individual journalists are hired by Western World and used as front-man or under-cover operation of hybrid war in Pakistan.

Only in the Middle East, around two million people have been killed, several million have been displaced from their homes, either to live in Camps or to move to other countries seeking asylums.

In fact, the world is full of such examples and unfortunately, the developing world is the victim and under direct target.

The recent reports regarding Mike Pompeo regarding lies, cheating, stealing, etc are further confirmation that information is deliberately changed to achieve designed results. The US role in

1970s ‘Operation Condor,’ in which South American dictators systematically tortured and killed dissidents in the region. An estimated 60,000 people were killed by the Latin American states in the clandestine operation, 30,000 in Argentina alone. Another 30,000 were disappeared and 400,000 imprisoned during the Operation. It is now known that the CIA was a guiding hand throughout the whole process, by training and helping military and civilian personnel. “Diplomacy and military strength go hand in hand. They are indeed intimately related. Each relies on the other,” Pompeo also admitted during the conference called “Why Diplomacy Matters.”

Covert operations, ousting democratically elected governments, inciting revolts and supporting transnational companies are run of the mill actions for the CIA, all justified as part of the fight against those who question U.S. interests. Actions that continue until this day. In 2018, one of its offshoots, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) channeled over US$23 million to meddle in the internal affairs of key Latin American countries, under the flagship of “human rights” or “democracy,” which represent a real menace for national sovereignty and the continuity of progressive governments in the region and the world.

These are the only few known facts, there must be much more in various parts of the world similar incidents and fake news or spread of misinformation.

I believe the Western World is misusing Media and the spread of distorted information as an unarmed wing or tool of defense and diplomatic strategies, to achieve their evil goals. It seems Western media is notorious for spreading fake news and the fabrication of stories. They have lost their credibility at all. The intellectuals and people with common sense no more believe Western Media anymore. The credibility of Western Media is challenged and lost recognition among the people having conscious.

I have been traveling internationally frequently and come across many foreigners. Most of them have a very negative impression about Pakistan. But those who have travelled to Pakistan, are very different and praise Pakistan. In fact, media is projecting negative image of Pakistan, however, the ground realities are very different. I do not claim that Pakistan is perfect and everything is ideal, but reject the extremely negative impression posed in the Western Media. There might be many problems in Pakistan but just like other countries, not much different from the rest of world. In some respect, Pakistan is better than many other nations awhile facing few challenges too like other nations. Misinformation and distorted stories regarding Pakistan are part of Western Media war launched against Pakistan.

I understand some of you may disagree with my opinion and maybe offended but at least it may initiate an open debate. Let’s explore the avenues of a common ground where we can seek the truth. The common man is interested only in seeking the real facts and figures. Let’s judge the reports and news on an impartial basis and reach conclusion at our own. With the improvement of technology, and especially with the help of the internet and ICT (Information and Communication Technologies), it is possible for the dissemination of facts instantly. We should conceive the facts with open-minded and be receptive to facts only.

I wish for a peaceful world where justice, freedom, and truth will prevail. Let’s join hands toward this goal and all those willing to achieve this goal, be struggling till the victory. In fact, journalist is a holy profession and must not be politicized. Let the media work for the welfare of humanity. There are many media houses working very well and are serving humanity properly. We must salute them and extend our full cooperation. We must differential among good and bad News agencies or media houses. It is our own duty to judge the good and evil media and should appreciate the positive role of media where ever necessary.

I must offer my heartiest apology if offended a few of you. But willing to find common ground and extend my full cooperation, if it is desired by some of you. Let’s build a better world, where tomorrow should be better than yesterday. Our next-generation must not face the same challenges which we have faced. Love humanity, love peace, seek the truth.

Author: Prof. Engr. Zamir Ahmed Awan, Sinologist, ex-Diplomat, Academician, Researcher, member editorial board (World Scientific), Peace-activist, Geo-analyst, Non-Resident Fellow of CCG (Center for China and Globalization), Islamabad, Pakistan. E-mail: awanzamir@yahoo.com)

Pro Tip: Mentally Replace All Uses of “Conspiracy Theorist” with “Iraq Rememberer”

By Caitlin Johnstone

Source

Powel Iraq 3c62d

I watched the film Official Secrets the other day, which I highly recommend doing if you want to rekindle your rage about the unforgivable evil that was the Iraq invasion.

Which is a good thing to do, in my opinion. Absolutely nothing was ever done to address the fact that a million people were murdered with the assistance of government lies just a few short years ago; no new laws were passed mandating more government transparency or accountability with its military operations, no war crimes tribunals took place, no new policies were put into place. No one even got fired. In fact we’ve seen the exact opposite: the people responsible for unleashing that horror upon our species have been given prestigious jobs in government and media and the US government is currently collaborating with the UK to set the legal precedent for charging under the Espionage Act any journalist in the world who exposes US war crimes.

The corrupt mechanisms which gave rise to the Iraq invasion still exist currently, stronger than ever, and its consequences continue to ravage the region to this very day. The Iraq war isn’t some event that happened in the past; everything about it is still here with us, right now. So we should still be enraged. You don’t forgive and forget something that hasn’t even stopped, let alone been rectified.

Apart from the howling rage surging through my veins during the film, the other thing I experienced was the recurring thought, “This was a conspiracy. This is the thing that a conspiracy is.”

And, I mean, of course it is. How weird is it that we don’t use that word to describe what the architects of that war did? Conspiracy is defined as “a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.” From the secret plan between the NSA and GCHQ to spy on and blackmail UN members into supporting the illegal invasion which is the subject of Official Secrets, to the mountain of other schemes and manipulations used by other government bodies to deceive the world about Iraq, it’s absolutely insane that that word is never used to describe the conspiracy within the Bush and Blair governments to manufacture the case for war.

The engineering of the Iraq war was a conspiracy, per any conceivable definition. So why isn’t that word reflexively used by everyone who talks about it?

Easy. Because we haven’t been trained to.

The use of the word “conspiracy” is studiously avoided by the narrative managers of the political/media class who are tasked with the assignment of teaching us how to think about our world, except when it is to be employed for its intended and authorised use: smearing skeptics of establishment narratives. The pejorative “conspiracy theory” has been such a useful weapon in inoculating the herd from dissident wrongthink that the propagandists do everything they can to avoid tainting their brand, even if it means refraining from using words for the things that they refer to.

This is why the word “collusion” was continuously and uniformly used throughout the entire Russiagate saga, for example. It was a narrative about a secret conspiracy between the highest levels of the US government and the Russian government to subvert the interests of the American people, yet the word “conspiracy” was meticulously replaced with “collusion” by everyone peddling that story.

Max Blumenthal

@MaxBlumenthal

A self-described “former Rolling Stone fact-checker” called me (what else?) a “conspiracy theorist.” But when challenged, this was the best she could do. 🤣 https://twitter.com/MeredithLClark/status/1200447148858445827 

Syria narrative managers on Twitter have been in meltdown for a week ever since the Rolling Stone podcast Useful Idiots featured oppositional journalist Max Blumenthal talking about the US-centralized empire’s involvement in the Syrian war and its pervasive propaganda campaign against that nation. The entire site has been swarming with high-visibility blue-checkmarked thought police demanding the heads of the show’s hosts Matt Taibbi and Katie Halper for giving this evil “conspiracy theorist” a platform to say we’re being deceived about yet another US-led regime change intervention in yet another Middle Eastern nation.

Narrative managers use the “conspiracy theorist” pejorative to shove skepticism of establishment narratives into the margins of political discourse, far away where it can’t contaminate the mainstream herd. Whenever you see a dissenting interpretation of events getting too close to mainstream circles, as with Blumenthal appearing on a Rolling Stone podcast, Tulsi Gabbard saying on national television that the US government has armed terrorists, or Tucker Carlson interviewing Jonathan Steele about the OPCW leaks, you see an intense campaign of shrieking outrage and public shaming geared at shoving those dissident narratives as far into the fringe as possible by branding them “conspiracy theories”.

My suggestion then is this: whenever you see the label “conspiracy theorist” being applied to anyone who questions an establishment narrative about Syria, Russia, Iran or wherever, just mentally swap it out for the term “Iraq rememberer”. When you see anyone shouting about “conspiracy theories”, mentally replace it with “Iraq remembering”. It makes it much easier to see what’s really going on: “Oh those damn Iraq rememberers! Why can’t they just trust their media and government about what’s happening in Syria instead of indulging in Iraq remembering?”

Rania Khalek

@RaniaKhalek

The regime changers have been melting down for days bc @kthalps and @mtaibbi interviewed @MaxBlumenthal on their @RollingStone podcast. They can’t stand seeing an antiwar voice anywhere near the mainstream. Check out the episode that’s driving them mad https://youtu.be/5Pb7Q5aSmi0 

Powerful people and institutions secretly coordinating with each other to do evil things is the absolute worst-case scenario for the rest of the population; it is precisely the thing we fear when we allow people and institutions to have power over us. We need to be able to talk about that worst-case scenario occurring, especially since we know for a fact that it does indeed happen. Powerful people do conspire to inflict evil things upon the rest of us, and we do need to use thoughts and ideas to discuss how that might be happening. We are not meant to think about this, which is why we’re meant to forget about Iraq.

The Iraq invasion was like if a family were sitting around the dinner table one night, then the father stood up, decapitated his daughter with a steak knife, then sat back down and continued eating and everyone just went back to their meals and never talked about what happened. That’s how absolutely creepy and weird it is that the news churn just moved on after a conspiracy within the most powerful government in the world led to the murder of a million human beings, and now we’re all somehow only supposed to care about Trump’s rude tweets.

Never forget the Iraq war conspiracy, no matter how hard they try to make you. They did it before, they’ve done it again in Libya and Syria, and they’ll continue to attempt it in the future. When you sound the alarm about this they will call you a conspiracy theorist. All they’re really saying is that you’re one of those annoying pests who just won’t shut up and forget about Iraq.

متفقون أم منحرفون؟

ديسمبر 7, 2019

د. وفيق إبراهيم

يروّج آلاف من المحللين السياسيين ومنتحلي صفة مثقفين على شاشات التلفزة الإقليمية لمقولة تزعم ان التدخل الأميركي في الشرق الأوسط، يوفر للعرب حماية من التدخلات الخارجية وينقذهم من خطر الاحتلال.

ويقذفون بثلاثة انواع من المخاطر التي يجابها الأميركيون في العالم العربي كما يقولون وهي المطامع الإيرانية، والإرهاب، وروسيا.

لجهة الخطر الإيراني، يمكن الجزم بالاستدلال العلمي التاريخي ان إيران لم تعتدِ على بلد عربي منذ الفتوحات الاسلامية قبل الف عام تقريباً، وفي حين ان اتهام تحالفاتها في العالم العربي بأنها من الحرس الثوري الإيراني، فأمرٌ مثير للسخرية، لأن انصار الله في اليمن هم جزء من “الزيود” الذين يحكمون اليمن منذ تسعة قرون على الأقل.

لقد مر عشرات المستعمرين على اليمن في مراحل تاريخية مختلفة، وتلقوا جميعاً هزائم شديدة، أسألوا الأتراك والانجليز والسعوديين، وحتى المصريين في مرحلة عبد الناصر، أما قبل الإسلام فألحقوا هزائم بالرومان والفرس والصليبيين والإغريق فقط.

لجهة الحشد الشعبي العراقي فهو عراقي تاريخي ينتمي لكتلة بشرية تنتمي الى ارض السواد منذ آلاف السنين أي قبل دخول الإسلام اليه، وتحالفه مع إيران أدى الى دحر إرهاب كبير مدعوم من الأتراك والأميركيين والخليج.

هذا يؤكد أن تحالف إيران مع الحشد الشعبي كان عاملاً أساسياً في تحرير العراق من الإرهاب ومنع تقسيمه حسب مشروع أميركي – خليجي علني وليس إيرانياً.

كذلك فإن الدور الإيراني في سورية انما جاء بعد تدخل إرهابي كوني من حدود تركيا وبرعاية من مخابراتها وتمويل سعودي – إماراتي قطري تلبية لمطالب أميركية.

هذا الدور دعم الجيش السوري ببضع مئات من المستشارين وأسلحة كثيرة ومساعدات أخرى مادية، حتى تمكن من تحرير 65 في المئة من سورية بإسناد روسي وآخر من حزب الله.

حتى الآن لا أحد يعرف كيف أسهم التدخل الأميركي في إنقاذ المنطقة، بل على العكس لانه كشف التواطؤ الأميركي بدعم الإرهاب لتفتيت المنطقة.

ماذا عن لبنان؟ هناك حزب الله المتهم بإيرانيته على مستوى السياسة، باعتبار انه لبناني أصلي من جبل عامل.

تكفي هنا الاشارة الى ان الدعم الإيراني لحزب الله أدى الى تحرير جنوب لبنان من “إسرائيل” في العام 2000 ونجاحه في منع اجتياحها له في العام 2006، ومشاركته في القضاء على الإرهاب الدولي في سورية وجرود بلدة عرسال اللبنانية.

لذلك فالسؤال هنا، هو ما هي التدخلات الأجنبية التي أنقذ الأميركيون العرب منها، ففلسطين المحتلة هي بإيدي أصدقائهم اليهود المدعومين منهم، ومدينة القدس المقدسة باعها الأميركيون للإسرائيليين مصدرين قراراً بإلغاء وكالة الاونروا ومانحين شرعية للمستوطنات الاسرائيلية في الضفة الغربية ومقدمين لـ”إسرائيل” الجولان السوري المحتل ومزارع شبعا اللبنانية المحتلة.

لذلك يسأل البعض عن هوية الذي يسطو على النفط في شرقي الفرات؟ ألم يعترف الرئيس الأميركي ترامب انه وضع يده عليه عازماً على استثماره لمصلحة الولايات المتحدة الأميركية.

أما فمن يحتل العراق مقيماً فيه عشرات القواعد العسكرية فهي أميركية ايضاً.

فكيف يمكن اذاً اعتبار إيران خطراً يهدّد العالم العربي، وهي التي لا تحتل متراً واحداً من أراضيه، فيما يسيطر الأميركيون بالاحتلال على أراض سورية وعراقية وليبية ولديهم قواعد في البحرين والإمارات وعمان والكويت والسعودية والإمارات مع حق التزوّد بالوقود والسلع في المغرب ومصر والاردن.

وهل ننسى تركيا التي تحتل بدورها عشرات آلاف الكيلومترات في شرقي الفرات والشمال الغربي السوري حتى ادلب واراضي في العراق ولديها قواعد عسكرية في قطر وليبيا.

بالمقابل لا تحتل إيران متراً واحداً من المناطق العربية المجاورة.

يكشف هذا العرض عن مدى الانحطاط في ثقافة الدفاع عند قسم من المحللين العرب ومنتحلي صفة مثقفين.

على مستوى الإرهاب فالدور التركي – الخليجي الأميركي في دعمه عند انطلاقته غير مخفي تماماً كمستوى الوضوح في ان الذين هزموه في ميادين سورية والعراق هم الجيشان السوري والعراقي وحزب الله والحشد الشعبي، وروسيا التي شنت عليه مئة وعشرين الف غارة وإيران التي شاركت في القضاء عليه.

الا تبين هذه المعطيات ان الأميركيين يشكلون وبالاً على العالم العربي وقوة احتلال لأراضيه؟ وتظهر في آن معاً ان إيران ليست قوة احتلال، بل أمنت دعماً لقوى عربية متحالفة معها يجمعها بها العداء لنفوذ أميركي يلتهم ثروات المنطقة منذ 1945 ويحتل أراضيها ويسيطر على سلطاتها السياسية.

لذلك يمكن الاعتراف بأن الأميركيين يدعمون الأنظمة العربية لتقويتها في قمع شعوبها وتسهيل مسألة السطو الغربي على ثرواتها.

ماذا عن روسيا؟ هل تشكل خطراً على العرب ويعمل الأميركيون على مجابهته؟

المعروف أن روسيا لم يسبق لها ان احتلت ارضاً عربية في التاريخ ولم تكن قوة استعمارية كحالة الغرب.

اما وجودها العسكري في سورية، فهو يحوز على الشرعية القانونية من الأمم المتحدة التي تعترف بحق اي دولة الاستعانة بقوات من دولة أخرى، وهذا ما فعلته سورية بطلبها التدخل الروسي في مكافحة الإرهاب على أراضيها.

إن هؤلاء المثقفين والإعلاميين المستعربين يتوجون إيران عدواً للعرب، فيما يحتل الأتراك والأميركيون والاسرائيليون أراضي عربية بحجم دول كبيرة ويزعمون محاربة الإرهاب وهو المتحدّر من “القاعدة” الوهابية السعودية او الإخوانية التركية، ويرحلون نحو اتهام الروس في وقت تتمتع دول الخليج ومصر ومعظم الدول العربية بعلاقات جيدة مع موسكو.بذلك ينكشف تواطؤ مثقفين وإعلاميين عرب مع الأميركيين والأتراك لإبقاء العالم العربي في خدمة المستعمرين بشعارات كاذبة وزائفة.

Iraq’s parliament approves prime minister’s resignation

Sunday, 01 December 2019 3:02 PM

Source

Outgoing Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi (photo by AFP)

Iraq’s parliament has approved the resignation of Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi, which came after top Shia cleric Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani urged the parliament to “reconsider” its support for the incumbent government.

Iraqi legislators approved Abdul-Mahdi’s resignation during a parliament session held in the capital, Baghdad, on Sunday afternoon.

Abdul-Mahdi’s administration is expected to take on a caretaker role until the largest bloc in the parliament agrees on a new candidate to replace him.

Speaker Mohammad al-Halbusi said President Bahram Salih would now ask the largest political bloc in parliament to nominate the next prime minister.

Abdul-Mahdi announced in a statement on Friday that he would submit his resignation to parliament, amid anti-government demonstrations.

Earlier that day, Grand Ayatollah Sistani had through a representative urged lawmakers to “reconsider” their support for the government amid the demonstrations.

Abdul-Mahdi said he had made his decision in response to the revered cleric’s call and in order to “facilitate and hasten its fulfillment as soon as possible.”

Nearly two months of protests have rocked primarily Baghdad and the southern areas of Iraq. The protesters have been expressing frustration with a failing economy and have demanded reforms.

The rallies have, however, turned into violent confrontations on numerous occasions.

Since October 1, more than 300 people have been killed in the country, according to the Iraqi parliament’s human rights commission.

Elections in May 2018 ended without a single bloc winning a majority of seats to elect a new prime minister. To avoid a political crisis, the parliament’s two main political blocs — Sairoon, led by Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, and the Fatah bloc led by Hadi al-Amiri and linked to the Popular Mobilization Units (PMF) — eventually forged an alliance, nominating Abdul-Mahdi as prime minister.

Commenting on the ongoing unrest across Iraq, Lawrence Davidson, a professor in West Chester University, said in an interview with Press TV on Sunday that some foreign elements were desperately attempting to make Iran a “scapegoat” for Iraq’s social and economic problems.

The remarks come after masked assailants last week set fire on the Iranian consulate in the southern Iraqi city of Najaf and burned tires around the building.

Davidson said the “US was considering the protests an opportunity to create a trouble and direct them against Iran.”

Related Videos

Related News

حاكم قطر يُموّلُ دولة للأتراك في الشمال السوري!

 

نوفمبر 28, 2019

د. وفيق إبراهيم

زيارتان خاطفتان قام بهما الرئيس التركي رجب اردوغان للرئيس الاميركي ترامب في بيته الابيض الرئاسي واستتبعها بأخرى للأمير القطري تميم في الدوحة القطرية، نتيجتها كانت تلميحاً اردوغانياً بأن تميم أعجبته فكرة تمويل مشروع إعماري في «المنطقة الآمنة» التي يحتلها الجيش التركي في سورية لإسكان مليون ونصف مليون نازح سوري موجودين حالياً في تركيا.

هذه أولى المفاجآت، أما الثانية فإعلان أميركي عاجل بضرورة إنهاء الخلاف الخليجي الخليجي بين قطر من جهة والسعودية والإمارات المدعومتين من مصر من جهة ثانية.

هناك مباغتة ثالثة وهي إعلان اردوغان عن البدء ببناء قاعدة تركية ثانية لجيشه في قطر، داعياً دول الخليج إلى عدم الذعر من الفكرة واعداً انه سيطلق عليها اسم القائد خالد بن الوليد.

بالاستنتاج يتضح أن هناك اتفاقاً أميركياً تركياً لتفتيت الشمال والشرق السوريين، ببناء آلاف الوحدات السكنية في منطقة «الاحتلال العثماني الآمنة» كما يزعمون، مقابل إنشاء كانتون كردي فيه عشائر عربية يتمتع بحماية من 600 جندي أميركي موجودين في المنطقة.

وميزته الإضافية أنه بعيد عن «منطقة الأتراك» والنفوذ الروسي ومواقع انتشار الدولة السورية ويبتعد ايضاً بمسافات كبيرة عن قرى وبلدات الأكراد السوريين.

يتبين اذاً أن دولة عربية هي قطر تساعد الاتراك على سرقة أرض سورية لإيواء الاخوان المسلمين والنصرة عليها بتغطية أميركية وموافقة من «قوات سورية الديموقراطية». تصعد حيناً وتنخفض أحياناً حسب فرص الابتزاز في الصراع الاميركي من ناحية والروسي السوري من ناحية أخرى.

بالمقابل، تفرض واشنطن على السعودية والإمارات العودة الى العلاقات الطبيعية مع قطر والذريعة حاضرة دائماً، وهي رص الصف الخليجي في مواجهة إيران.

ولتبرير القاعدة التركية الثانية في الدوحة يمكن لأردوغان التذرّع بحمايتها من الإرهاب او من إيران ايضاً.

ماذا تعني هذه الاتفاقات باللغة العملية؟

أولاً إعادة رص المتحالفين مع النفوذ الأميركي في سلة إقليمية واحدة وهم تركيا، السعودية، الإمارات ومصر والأردن والبحرين.

ثانياً توجيه حركة هذا الحلف نحو تفتيت سورية واستعداء إيران والمضي في بناء حلف مع «إسرائيل».

ثالثاً يجري تقسيم النفط والغاز في مناطق شمال شرق سورية بين الأميركيين والأتراك على أن يجري إرضاء «قسد» من الحصة الأميركية.

رابعاً دعم السياسة التركية في العراق، خصوصاً لجهة دعمها للاخوان المسلمين فيه وبعض الاتجاهات العراقية الأخرى.

لكن ما دخل حيّز التنفيذ من هذه الخطة هو بناء القاعدة العسكرية للجيش التركي في قطر، وإقرار التمويل القطري لمشروع إسكان نازحين من الاخوان المسلمين في شمال سورية، وموافقة السعودية والإمارات على المشاركة في مباريات كأس العالم في قطر، وهذا وحده إنجاز كبير عند العربان.

إن ما تفعله قطر لحماية إمارة تميم يدخل من باب الانحطاط السياسي الكبير، فكيف تجيز دولة عربية لنفسها تمويل دولة تركية على أراضي دولة عربية أخرى؟ وكيف تقبل بقواعد تركية على أراضيها وهي التي تحتوي على قاعدة العديد الأميركية التي تعتبر اكبر قاعدة برية لأميركا خارج أراضيها؟

يبدو أن تميم يتحسّب لغضب أميركي مباغت قد يطيح به فاستجلب الأتراك لحمايته متناسياً أنهم احتلوا المنطقة العربية بقسميها الأفريقي والآسيوي نحو خمسة قرون فقط.

فمن يصدق أن إيران التي فتحت أجواءها ومياهها لتموين قطر بكل ما تحتاجه من موارد للصمود في وجه الحصار السعودي الإماراتي، قطر هذه تهرول الآن للحاق بحلف أميركي سعودي يستهدف إيران، أليس هذا من مؤشرات الانحطاط؟

وكيف تقبل ببناء آلاف المساكن لإرهابيين على اراضي سورية لها أصحابها النازحون ايضاً، وهي العالمة بأنها تخالف بذلك مبادئ الامم المتحدة حول سيادة الدول على أراضيها. وقرارات جامعة الدول العربية والعلاقات العربية العربية؟

توجد ايضاً اعتبارات اخرى وهي ان ما يحدث في ايران والعراق ولبنان هو آخر الإمكانات الاميركية في الاستثمار في التظاهرات المطلبية المحقة للشعوب، علماً أن هذه الانتفاضات الشعبية المحقة هي وليدة الحصار الأميركي الاقتصادي المفروض على هذه البلدان، ما أدى الى ازدياد مصاعبها. بالاضافة الى ان الاحتلال الأميركي للعراق، أتاح للفساد العراقي فرصاً فريدة للتجذر.

إن استمرار قطر في تأييد وتمويل اعمار منطقة الاحتلال التركي في سورية، يدخلها في صراعات إقليمية ودولية أكبر من مقاسها حتى لو كانت مدعومة من الأتراك والاخوان المسلمين، فهناك الدولة السورية التي يقف جيشها الآن قبالة منطقة الاحتلال التركي بالإضافة الى روسيا التي تشرف بأمنها وسياساتها على كامل منطقة شمالي سورية، بالإضافة الى أن الأكراد المتريثين حتى الآن في حركة قراءة دقيقة للصراع الأميركي الروسي، لن يتأخروا في الدخول صفاً واحداً إلى جانب الجيش السوري في وجه الطغاة العثمانيين.

المعتقد أن اردوغان لن يذهب بعيداً في استعداء الروس، على الرغم من مراوغاته المتشابكة مع محاولات للاستثمار في طرفي الصراع الروسي الاميركي. لأن مواصلته اللعب على الحبلين لن تنجح امام حلف اصبح على مشارف التشكل ويضم الجيش السوري والأكراد والروس مع حلفائهم بما يؤدي تلقائياً الى فتح حربين كلاسيكية تقليدية وأخرى شعبية لن تبقي على احد من المستعمرين في أراضي سورية قلب المشرق ومركز صموده التاريخي، أليس هذا بكافٍ ليرعوي تميم ومعه صبيان الخليج؟

 

Is the Middle East Beginning a Correction?

By Alastair Crooke

Source

 

“Two years, three years, five years’ maximum from now, you will not recognize the same Middle East”, says the former Egyptian FM, Arab League Secretary General and Presidential Candidate, Amr Moussa, in an interview with Al-Monitor.

Mousa made some unexpected points, beyond warning of major change ahead (“the thing now is that the simple Arab man follows everything” – all the events). And in reference to the protests in Iraq, Moussa says that Iraq is in “a preparatory stage for them to choose their way as Iraqis — emphasizing that “the discord between Sunni and Shia is about to fade away.”

The present regional turbulence, he suggests, is [essentially] a reaction to the US playing the sectarian card – manipulating “the issues of sect and religion, et cetera, was not only a dangerous, but a sinister kind of policy”. He added however, “I don’t say that it will happen tomorrow, but [the discord between Sunnis and the Shi’a fading away], will certainly happen in the foreseeable future, which will reflect on Lebanon too.”

What we are witnessing in Iraq and Lebanon, he adds,

“are these things correcting themselves. It will take time, but they will correct themselves. Iraq is a big country in the region, no less than Iran, no less than Turkey. Iraq is a country to reckon with. I don’t know whether this was the reason why it had to be destroyed. Could be. But there are forces in Iraq that are being rebuilt … Iraq will come back. And this phase – what we see today, perhaps this is the — what can I say? A preparatory stage?”

Of course, these comments – coming from a leading Establishment Sunni figure – will appear stunningly counter-intuitive to those living outside the region, where the MSM narrative – from Colombia to Gulf States – is that the current protests are sectarian, and directed predominantly at Hizbullah and Iran. Certainly there is a thread of iconoclasm to this global ‘Age of Anger’, targeting all leaderships, everywhere. In these tempestuous times, of course, the world reads into events what it hopes and expects to see. Moussa calls such sectarian ‘framing’ both dangerous and “sinister”.

But look rather, at the core issue on which practically all Lebanese demonstrators concur: It is that the cast-iron sectarian ‘cage’ (decreed initially by France, and subsequently ‘corrected’ by Saudi Arabia at Taif, to shift economic power into the hands of the Sunnis), is the root cause to the institutionalised, semi-hereditary corruption and mal-governance that has infected Lebanon.

Is this not precisely articulated in the demand for a ‘technocratic government’ – that is to say in the demand for the ousting of all these hereditary sectarian Zaim in a non-sectarian articulation of national interests. Of course, being Lebanon, one tribe will always be keener for one, rather than another, sectarian leader to be cast as villain to the piece. The reality is, however, that technocratic government exactly is a break from Taif – even if the next PM is nominally Sunni (but yet not partisan Sunni)?

And just for clarity’s sake: An end to the compartmentalised sectarian constitution is in Hizbullah’s interest. The Shi’i – the largest minority in Lebanon – were always given the smallest slice of the national cake, under the sectarian divide.

What is driving this sudden focus on ‘the flawed system’ in Lebanon – more plausibly – is simply, hard reality. Most Lebanese understand that they no longer possess a functional economy. Its erstwhile ‘business model’ is bust.

Lebanon used to have real exports – agricultural produce exported to Syria and Iraq, but that avenue was closed by the war in Syria. Lebanon’s (legal) exports today effectively are ‘zilch’, but it imports hugely (thanks to having an artificially high Lebanese pound). All this – i.e. the resulting trade, and government budget deficit – used to be balanced out by the large inward flow of dollars.

Inward remittances from the 8 – 9 million Lebanese living overseas was one key part – and dollar deposits arriving in Lebanon’s once ‘safe-haven’ banking system was the other. But that ‘business model’ effectively is bust. The remittances have been fading for years, and the Banking system has the US Treasury crawling all over it (looking for sanctionable Hizbullah accounts).

Which brings us back to that other key point made by Moussa, namely, that the Iraqi disturbances are, in his view, “a preparatory stage for them to choose their way as Iraqis … and that will reflect on Lebanon too”.

If the ‘model’ – either economically or politically – is systemically bust, then tinkering will not do. A new direction is required.

Look at it this way: Sayyed Nasrallah has noted in recent days that other alternatives for Lebanon to a US alignment are possible, but have not yet consolidated into a definitive alternative. That option, in essence, is to ‘look East’: to Russia and China.

It makes sense: At one level, an arrangement with Moscow might untie a number of ‘knots’: It could lead to a re-opening of trade, through Syria, into Iraq for Lebanon’s agricultural produce; it could lead to a return of Syrian refugees out from Lebanon, back to their homes; China could shoulder the Economic Development plan, at a fraction of its projected $20 billion cost – and, above all it could avoid the ‘poison pill’ of a wholesale privatisation of Lebanese state assets on which the French are insisting. In the longer term, Lebanon could participate in the trade and ‘energy corridor’ plans that Russia and China have in mind for the norther tier of the Middle East and Turkey. At least, this alternative seems to offer a real ‘vision’ for the future. Of course, America is threatening Lebanon with horrible consequences – for even thinking of ‘looking East’.

On the other hand, at a donors’ conference at Paris in April, donors pledged to give Lebanon $11bn in loans and grants – but only if it implements certain ‘reforms’. The conditions include a commitment to direct $7 bn towards privatising government assets and state property – as well as austerity measures such as raising taxes, cutting public sector wages and reducing social services.

Great! But how will this correct Lebanon’s broken ‘business model’? Answer: It would not. Devaluation of the Lebanese pound (almost inevitable, and implying big price rises) and further austerity will not either make Lebanon again a financial safe-haven, nor boost income from remittances. It is the classic misery recipe, and one which leaves Lebanon in the hands of external creditors.

Paris has taken on the role of advancing this austerity agenda by emphasising that only a cabinet acceptable to the creditors will do, to release crucial funds. It seems that France believes that it is sufficient to introduce reforms, impose the rule of law and build the institutions – in order to Gulliverise Hizbullah. This premise of US or Israeli acquiescence to this Gulliverisation plan – seems questionable.

The issue for Aoun must be the potential costs that the US might impose – extending even to the possible exclusion of Lebanese banks from the dollar clearing system (i.e. the infamous US Treasury neutron bomb). Washington is intent more on pushing Lebanon to the financial brink, as hostage to its (i.e. Israel’s) demand that Hizbullah be disarmed, and its missiles destroyed. It might misjudge, however, and send Lebanon over the brink into the abyss.

But President Aoun, or any new government, cannot disarm Hizbullah. But Israel’s newly ambiguous strategic situation (post – Abqaiq), will likely hike the pressures on Lebanon to act against Hizbullah, through one means or another. Were Aoun or his government to try to mitigate the US pressures through acquiescence to the ‘reform’ package, would that be the end to it? Where would it all end, for Lebanon?

And it is a similar conundrum in Iraq: The economic situation though, is quite different. Iraq has one-fifth of the population of neighbouring Iran, but five times the daily oil sales. Yet the infrastructure of its cities, following the two wars, is still a picture of ruination and poverty. The wealth of Iraq is stolen, and sits in bank accounts abroad. In Iraq, it is primarily the political model that is bust, and needs to be re-cast.

Is this Moussa’s point – that Iraq presently is in the preparatory stage of choosing a new path ahead? He describes it as a self-correcting process leading out from the fissures of sectarianism. Conventional Washington thinking however, is that Iran seeks only a Shi’i hegemony for Iraq. But that is a misreading: Iran’s policy is much more nuanced. It is not some sectarian hegemony that is its objective, but the more limited aim to have the strategic edge across the region – in an amorphous, ambiguous, and not easily defined way – so that a fully sovereign Iraq becomes able to push-back against Israel and the US – deniably, and well short of all-out war.

This is the point: the end to sectarianism is an Iranian interest, and not sectarian hegemony.

Rethinking National Security: CIA and FBI Are Corrupt, but What About Congress?

Image result for Rethinking National Security: CIA and FBI Are Corrupt, but What About Congress?
Philip Giraldi
November 21, 2019

The developing story about how the US intelligence and national security agencies may have conspired to influence and possibly even reverse the results of the 2016 presidential election is compelling, even if one is disinclined to believe that such a plot would be possible to execute. Not surprisingly perhaps there have been considerable introspection among former and current officials who have worked in those and related government positions, many of whom would agree that there is urgent need for a considerable restructuring and reining in of the 17 government agencies that have some intelligence or law enforcement function. Most would also agree that much of the real damage that has been done has been the result of the unending global war on terror launched by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, which has showered the agencies with resources and money while also politicizing their leadership and freeing them from restraints on their behavior.

If the tens of billions of dollars lavished on the intelligence community together with a “gloves off” approach towards oversight that allowed them to run wild had produced good results, it might be possible to argue that it was all worth it. But the fact is that intelligence gathering has always been a bad investment even if it is demonstrably worse at the present. One might argue that the CIA’s notorious Soviet Estimate prolonged the Cold War and that the failure to connect dots and pay attention to what junior officers were observing allowed 9/11 to happen. And then there was the empowerment of al-Qaeda during the Soviet-Afghan war followed by failure to penetrate the group once it began to carry out operations.

More recently there have been Guantanamo, torture in black prisons, renditions of terror suspects to be tortured elsewhere, killing of US citizens by drone, turning Libya into a failed state and terrorist haven, arming militants in Syria, and, of course, the Iraqi alleged WMDs, the biggest foreign policy disaster in American history. And the bad stuff happened in bipartisan fashion, under Democrats and Republicans, with both neocons and liberal interventionists all playing leading roles. The only one punished for the war crimes was former CIA officer and whistleblower John Kiriakou, who exposed some of what was going on.

Colonel Pat Lang, a colleague and friend who directed the Defense Intelligence Agency HUMINT (human intelligence) program after years spent on the ground in special ops and foreign liaison, thinks that strong medicine is needed and has initiated a discussion based on the premise that the FBI and CIA are dysfunctional relics that should be dismantled, as he puts it “burned to the ground,” so that the federal government can start over again and come up with something better.

Lang cites numerous examples of “incompetence and malfeasance in the leadership of the 17 agencies of the Intelligence Community and the Federal Bureau of Investigation,” to include the examples cited above plus the failure to predict the collapse of the Soviet Union. On the domestic front, he cites his personal observation of efforts by the Department of Justice and the FBI to corruptly “frame” people tried in federal courts on national security issues as well as the intelligence/law enforcement community conspiracy to “get Trump.”

Colonel Lang asks “Tell me, pilgrims, why should we put up with such nonsense? Why should we pay the leaders of these agencies for the privilege of having them abuse us? We are free men and women. Let us send these swine to their just deserts in a world where they have to work hard for whatever money they earn.” He then recommends stripping CIA of its responsibility for being the lead agency in spying as well as in covert action, which is a legacy of the Cold War and the area in which it has demonstrated a particular incompetence. As for the FBI, it was created by J. Edgar Hoover to maintain dossiers on politicians and it is time that it be replaced by a body that operates in a fashion “more reflective of our collective nation[al] values.”

Others in the intelligence community understandably have different views. Many believe that the FBI and CIA have grown too large and have been asked to do too many things unrelated to national security, so there should be a major reduction-in-force (RIF) followed by the compulsory retirement of senior officers who have become too cozy with and obligated to politicians. The new-CIA should collect information, period, what it was founded to do in 1947, and not meddle in foreign elections or engage in regime change. The FBI should provide only police services that are national in nature and that are not covered by the state and local jurisdictions. And it should operate in as transparent a fashion as possible, not as a national secret police force.

But the fundamental problem may not be with the police and intelligence services themselves. There are a lot of idiots running around loose in Washington. Witness for example the impeachment hearings ludicrous fact free opening statement by House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff (with my emphasis) “In 2014, Russia invaded a United States ally, Ukraine, to reverse that nation’s embrace of the West, and to fulfill Vladimir Putin’s desire to rebuild a Russian empire.”

And the press is no better, note the following excerpt from The New York Times lead editorial on the hearings, including remarks of the two State Department officers who testified, on the following day: “They came across not as angry Democrats or Deep State conspirators, but as men who have devoted their lives to serving their country, and for whom defending Ukraine against Russian aggression is more important to the national interest than any partisan jockeying…

“At another point, Mr. Taylor said he had been critical of the Obama administration’s reluctance to supply Ukraine with anti-tank missiles and other lethal defensive weapons in its fight with Russia, and that he was pleased when the Trump administration agreed to do so

“What clearly concerned both witnesses wasn’t simply the abuse of power by the president, but the harm it inflicted on Ukraine, a critical ally under constant assault by Russian forces. ‘Even as we sit here today, the Russians are attacking Ukrainian soldiers in their own country and have been for the last four years…’ Mr. Taylor said.”

Schiff and the Times should get their facts straight. And so should the two American foreign service officers who were clearly seeing the situation only from the Ukrainian perspective, a malady prevalent among US diplomats often described as “going native.” They were pushing a particular agenda, i.e. possible war with Russia on behalf of Ukraine, in furtherance of a US national interest that they fail to define. One of them, George Kent, eulogized the Ukrainian militiamen fighting the Russians as the modern day equivalent of the Massachusetts Minutemen in 1776, not exactly a neutral assessment, and also euphemized Washington-provided lethal offensive weapons as “security assistance.”

Another former intelligence community friend Ray McGovern has constructed a time line of developments in Ukraine which demolishes the establishment view on display in Congress relating to the alleged Russian threat. First of all, Ukraine was no American ally in 2014 and is no “critical ally” today. Also, the Russian reaction to western supported rioting in Kiev, a vital interest, only came about after the United States spent $5 billion destabilizing and then replacing the pro-Kremlin government. Since that time Moscow has resumed control of the Crimea, which is historically part of Russia, and is active in the Donbas region which has a largely Russian population.

It should really be quite simple. The national security state should actually be engaged in national security. Its size and budget should be commensurate with what it actually does, nothing more. It should not be roaming the world looking for trouble and should instead only respond to actual threats. And it should operate with oversight. If Congress is afraid to do it, set up a separate body that is non-partisan and actually has the teeth to do the job. If the United States of America comes out of the process as something like a normal nation the entire world will be a much happier place.

%d bloggers like this: