"Mention any trouble spot in the Third World over the past ten years, and, inevitably, you will find smiling Israeli officers and shiny Israeli weapons on the news pages. The images have become familiar: the Uzi submachine gun or the Galil assault rifle, with Israeli officers named Uzi and Galil, or Golan, for good measure. We have seen them in South Africa, Iran, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Namibia, Taiwan, Indonesia, the Philippines, Chile, Bolivia, and many other places. From Manila to San Salvador, from Seoul to Tegucigalpa, from Walvis Bay to Guatemala City, from Taipei to Port-au-Prince, Israeli civilians and military men have been helping, in their own words, in 'the defense of the West'." (The Israeli Connection: Who Israel Arms & Why, Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi, p xii)
Beit-Hallahmi's groundbreaking expose of Israeli military involvement in conflict zones around the world, was published in 1987. Needless to say, nothing has changed:
"'If Iran tries to block the Bab al-Mandab strait, I'm sure it will find itself facing an international coalition determined to prevent it. This coalition will include all Israel's army branches as well,; declared Benjamin Netanyahu in August, following Iran's threat against American sanctions. Such a coalition had already been set up in 2015 by Saudi Arabia, who partnered with the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Egypt and Pakistan. Israel is also an unofficial partner. Israeli cyber companies, gun traders, terror-warfare instructors and even paid hitmen operated by an Israeli-owned company are partners to the war in Yemen.
"In September, London-based Al-Khaleej Online published a long article about Israel's involvement in training Colombian and Nepalese combatants, who were recruited by the UAE for the war in Yemen... The report also says that Israel set up special training bases in the Negev, where the mercenaries were trained by Israeli combatants... The mercenaries later took part in the war on the port town of Hodeidah and other fighting zones in Yemen. The site's sources said Israel also sold bombs and missiles to Saudi Arabia, some of which are banned. Recently it was reported and later denied that Israel also sold Saudi Arabia combat drones and intends to sell it Iron Dome systems as well.
"Many reports have been written about Israeli companies like the NSO group, which is suspected of selling Saudi Arabia Pegasus spyware accused of helping trace and survey Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, or the AGT company owned by the Israeli businessman Mati Kochavi, which in 2007 won the $6 billion bid to set up surveillance and monitoring systems in Abu Dhabi. But what remains a mystery is to what extent Israeli technology served the fighting forces in Yemen.
"Another company, Spearhead Operations group, which was set up by Israeli Avraham Golan and is registered in the United States, was responsible for assassinating Yemenite clergyman Anssaf Ali Mayo in December 2015. Mayo was one of the leaders of the Yemeni reform party, which is affiliated to the Muslim Brotherhood. The latter is classified in the UAE as a terror organization... " From Yemen's war is a mercenary heaven. Are Israelis reaping the profits? Zvi Bar'el, outline.com, 15/2/19
Showing posts with label UAE. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UAE. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 27, 2019
Saturday, January 12, 2019
Magic Mike Does Cairo
US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, has just (10/1) given a speech at the American University in Cairo. It is essentially, to borrow the words of The Bard, a tale told by a Christian Zionist idiot, full of imperial sound and fury, signifying God-only-knows-what in the years ahead. Since Pompeo is a little shaky on historical context, not to mention the most basic understanding of modern Western history - "In World War II, American GIs helped free North America from Nazi occupation" - I couldn't help but comment and quip as the spirit moved me. These gems, btw, are but excerpts, albeit in chronological order:
"This trip is especially meaningful to me as an evangelical Christian... In my office, I keep a Bible open on my desk to remind me of God and His Word, and the Truth."
OMG! Note the capitals.
"America's penchant for wishful thinking led us to look the other way as Hizballah, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Iranian regime, accumulated a massive arsenal of approximately 130,000 rockets and missiles... aimed squarely at our ally Israel."
Of course, Hezbollah was only formed to resist the Israeli invasion and occupation of Lebanon in 1982. And Hezbollah only exists today to prevent the Israeli re-occupation of south Lebanon. And of course Israel couldn't possibly be described as a wholly owned subsidiary of the US, now could it? Or is it the other way around?
"The good news is this. The age of self-inflicted American shame is over... Now comes the real new beginning... The Trump administration did not stand idly by when Bashar Assad used chemical weapons against his people."
US imperialism has never known shame. Nor has it ever stood idly by.
"For those who fret about the US of American power, remember this: America has always been, and always will be, a liberating force, not an occupying power. We've never dreamed of domination in the Middle East. Can you say the same about Iran? In World War II, American GIs helped free North America from Nazi occupation. (!) Fifty years later, we assembled a coalition to liberate Kuwait from Saddam Hussein. Would the Russians and Chinese come to your rescue in the same way... that we have?"
So, in Iraq, the US was a "liberating force, not an occupying power," while the tread of Iranian jackboots can be heard over vast swathes of the Middle East. Really, inhabiting a parallel universe doesn't begin to describe the world of Pompeo and his fellow Christian Zionist brethren.
And yes, he did say that American troops "helped free North America from Nazi occupation." But then again, he comes from a country where only 1% of university graduates study history.
"Let's turn to Iran. President Trump has reversed our willful blindness to the regime and withdrew from the failed nuclear deal, with its false promises. The US re-imposed sanctions that should never have been lifted. We embarked on a new pressure campaign to cut off the revenues the regime uses to spread terror and destruction throughout the world. We joined the Iranian people in calling for freedom and accountability. And importantly, we fostered a common understanding with our allies of the need to counteract the Iran regime's revolutionary agenda. Countries increasingly understand that we must confront the ayatollahs, not coddle them."
"Pressure campaign" = war of regime change.
"Spreading terror and destruction around the world": an precise description of the globe-girding depredations of the American capitalism and imperialism.
"We're building out (?) a healthy dialogue with the Government of Iraq, a thriving and young democracy. We're also building relationships for our shared prosperity. It is time for old rivalries to end for the sake of the greater good of the region."
To quote Tacitus' rendition of the words of the Caledonian chieftain who fought the Romans in first century Scotland: "To ravage, to slaughter, to usurp under false titles, they call empire, and where they make a desert, they call it peace."
"We're also seeing remarkable change. New bonds are taking root that were unimaginable until very recently. Who could have believed a few years ago that an Israeli prime minister would visit Muscat?... In October of last year, the Israeli national anthem played as an Israeli judo champion was crowned the winner of a tournament in the United Arab Emirates. It was the first time - the first time - that an Israeli delegation was allowed to participate under its own national flag. It was also the first time an Israeli culture and sports minister attended a sports event in the Gulf. She said, and I quote, 'It is a dream come true. For two years we had talks in order to reach this moment.' It was hard for her to stop the tears."
I know the feeling.
"We strongly support Israel's efforts to stop Tehran from turning Syria into the next Lebanon."
And I can fully understand the Lebanese people strongly supporting Hezbollah's efforts to stop Tel Aviv from turning south Lebanon into the next Golan Heights.
"It is important to know also that we will not cease our campaign to stop Iran's malevolent influence and actions against this region and the world, the nations of the Middle East will never enjoy security, achieve economic stability, or advance the dreams of their people if Iran's revolutionary regime persists on its current course. February 11th will mark 40 years since the oppressive regime came to power in Tehran. America's economic sanctions against the regime are the strongest in history, and will keep getting tougher until Iran starts behaving like a normal country."
No mention, of course, of the CIA's overthrow of Iran's democratically elected prime minister, Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953, or the oppressive US-backed regime of the Shah (1941-1979), which led to the birth of "the oppressive regime (which) came to power in Tehran" in 1979.
And what's with this rhetoric about "security" and "economic stability" in the Arab world that Iran is supposedly standing in the way of? What Pompeo really means here is that the Arab world must lie back, spread its legs wide, and allow US corporations (and Israel) to have their way.
"Iran may think it owns Lebanon. Iran is wrong."
The mind boggles.
"In Iraq, the United States will help our partners build a nation free of Iranian influence."
With friends like the US, who needs enemies?
"And I think this is clear, but it is worth reiterating: The United States fully supports Israel's right to defend itself against the Iranian regime's aggressive adventurism. We will continue to ensure that Israel has the military capacity to do so decisively."
He means here that the US will underwrite Israel's top-dog status in the Middle East as per the doctrine of maintaining its QME (qualitative military edge) over the Arabs.
"The Trump administration will also continue to press for a real and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians. Again, we've adhered to our word. President Trump campaigned on the promise to recognize Jerusalem - the seat of Israel's government - as the nation's capital. In May, we moved our embassy there. These decisions honor a bipartisan congressional resolution from more than two decades ago. President Trump acted on this commitment."
Oh, the Palestinians! Yes, moving the US embassy to Jerusalem will ineluctably lead to "a real and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians." How come only Trump, Bolsanaro, Morales and Morrison could manage to come up with this magic solution to the Israeli lion lying down with the Arab lamb in Palestine/Israel? Nobel peace prizes all round. Now!
"This trip is especially meaningful to me as an evangelical Christian... In my office, I keep a Bible open on my desk to remind me of God and His Word, and the Truth."
OMG! Note the capitals.
"America's penchant for wishful thinking led us to look the other way as Hizballah, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Iranian regime, accumulated a massive arsenal of approximately 130,000 rockets and missiles... aimed squarely at our ally Israel."
Of course, Hezbollah was only formed to resist the Israeli invasion and occupation of Lebanon in 1982. And Hezbollah only exists today to prevent the Israeli re-occupation of south Lebanon. And of course Israel couldn't possibly be described as a wholly owned subsidiary of the US, now could it? Or is it the other way around?
"The good news is this. The age of self-inflicted American shame is over... Now comes the real new beginning... The Trump administration did not stand idly by when Bashar Assad used chemical weapons against his people."
US imperialism has never known shame. Nor has it ever stood idly by.
"For those who fret about the US of American power, remember this: America has always been, and always will be, a liberating force, not an occupying power. We've never dreamed of domination in the Middle East. Can you say the same about Iran? In World War II, American GIs helped free North America from Nazi occupation. (!) Fifty years later, we assembled a coalition to liberate Kuwait from Saddam Hussein. Would the Russians and Chinese come to your rescue in the same way... that we have?"
So, in Iraq, the US was a "liberating force, not an occupying power," while the tread of Iranian jackboots can be heard over vast swathes of the Middle East. Really, inhabiting a parallel universe doesn't begin to describe the world of Pompeo and his fellow Christian Zionist brethren.
And yes, he did say that American troops "helped free North America from Nazi occupation." But then again, he comes from a country where only 1% of university graduates study history.
"Let's turn to Iran. President Trump has reversed our willful blindness to the regime and withdrew from the failed nuclear deal, with its false promises. The US re-imposed sanctions that should never have been lifted. We embarked on a new pressure campaign to cut off the revenues the regime uses to spread terror and destruction throughout the world. We joined the Iranian people in calling for freedom and accountability. And importantly, we fostered a common understanding with our allies of the need to counteract the Iran regime's revolutionary agenda. Countries increasingly understand that we must confront the ayatollahs, not coddle them."
"Pressure campaign" = war of regime change.
"Spreading terror and destruction around the world": an precise description of the globe-girding depredations of the American capitalism and imperialism.
"We're building out (?) a healthy dialogue with the Government of Iraq, a thriving and young democracy. We're also building relationships for our shared prosperity. It is time for old rivalries to end for the sake of the greater good of the region."
To quote Tacitus' rendition of the words of the Caledonian chieftain who fought the Romans in first century Scotland: "To ravage, to slaughter, to usurp under false titles, they call empire, and where they make a desert, they call it peace."
"We're also seeing remarkable change. New bonds are taking root that were unimaginable until very recently. Who could have believed a few years ago that an Israeli prime minister would visit Muscat?... In October of last year, the Israeli national anthem played as an Israeli judo champion was crowned the winner of a tournament in the United Arab Emirates. It was the first time - the first time - that an Israeli delegation was allowed to participate under its own national flag. It was also the first time an Israeli culture and sports minister attended a sports event in the Gulf. She said, and I quote, 'It is a dream come true. For two years we had talks in order to reach this moment.' It was hard for her to stop the tears."
I know the feeling.
"We strongly support Israel's efforts to stop Tehran from turning Syria into the next Lebanon."
And I can fully understand the Lebanese people strongly supporting Hezbollah's efforts to stop Tel Aviv from turning south Lebanon into the next Golan Heights.
"It is important to know also that we will not cease our campaign to stop Iran's malevolent influence and actions against this region and the world, the nations of the Middle East will never enjoy security, achieve economic stability, or advance the dreams of their people if Iran's revolutionary regime persists on its current course. February 11th will mark 40 years since the oppressive regime came to power in Tehran. America's economic sanctions against the regime are the strongest in history, and will keep getting tougher until Iran starts behaving like a normal country."
No mention, of course, of the CIA's overthrow of Iran's democratically elected prime minister, Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953, or the oppressive US-backed regime of the Shah (1941-1979), which led to the birth of "the oppressive regime (which) came to power in Tehran" in 1979.
And what's with this rhetoric about "security" and "economic stability" in the Arab world that Iran is supposedly standing in the way of? What Pompeo really means here is that the Arab world must lie back, spread its legs wide, and allow US corporations (and Israel) to have their way.
"Iran may think it owns Lebanon. Iran is wrong."
The mind boggles.
"In Iraq, the United States will help our partners build a nation free of Iranian influence."
With friends like the US, who needs enemies?
"And I think this is clear, but it is worth reiterating: The United States fully supports Israel's right to defend itself against the Iranian regime's aggressive adventurism. We will continue to ensure that Israel has the military capacity to do so decisively."
He means here that the US will underwrite Israel's top-dog status in the Middle East as per the doctrine of maintaining its QME (qualitative military edge) over the Arabs.
"The Trump administration will also continue to press for a real and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians. Again, we've adhered to our word. President Trump campaigned on the promise to recognize Jerusalem - the seat of Israel's government - as the nation's capital. In May, we moved our embassy there. These decisions honor a bipartisan congressional resolution from more than two decades ago. President Trump acted on this commitment."
Oh, the Palestinians! Yes, moving the US embassy to Jerusalem will ineluctably lead to "a real and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians." How come only Trump, Bolsanaro, Morales and Morrison could manage to come up with this magic solution to the Israeli lion lying down with the Arab lamb in Palestine/Israel? Nobel peace prizes all round. Now!
Tuesday, June 19, 2018
The War in Yemen: No Proxy Conflict with Iran
"Alongside their throttlehold over which reporters can visit what parts of Yemen, and thus what story they can tell, Saudi and Emirati investments in public relations, lobbying, think-tanks, and political consultants are shaping the narrative about their war there. Headline writers, pundits, Wikipedia, news correspondents, and even some so-called experts frame the asymmetric conflict as a 'proxy war.' Sunni nations led by Saudi Arabia are battling Shi'a Iran and its regional proxies, the story goes; the world's worst man-made humanitarian disaster thus appears as un-named collateral damage.
"The word 'proxy,' incongruously accompanied by the label of a 'civil war' between an 'internationally recognized government' and 'Iranian-backed militia,' rationalizes the unwarranted, unprovoked Saudi-UAE intervention in Yemen. Some headlines and stories reflect sloppy journalism and the tendency to mindlessly reiterate hackneyed tag-lines. However, make no mistake: big petrodollar spending around DuPont Circle systematically produces a story-line that exonerates the murder and starvation of Yemenis who are not even 'Shi'a' in the name of countering overblown Iranian influence.
"A proxy war is a clash between contending powers that do not engage directly in combat. Rather, rivals arm, train, and goad third parties in smaller countries to fight one another. The classic Cold War cases were civil or cross-border wars in Central America and southern Africa where communist or socialist forces battled US clients. In the big antagonism between patrons - the Soviet Union and the United States - the battlefield was in the so-called Third World. Some sources (like Wikipedia) characterize the Korean and Vietnam wars as 'proxy' conflicts, because the American objective was to defeat communist 'proxies;' but these conflicts, named for the places US forces engaged, are more commonly, and accurately, recalled as direct American interventions, or instances of American imperialism. Like scores of US interventions during the era of bipolar competition, they reflected a hegemonic urge to insulate friendly allies from popular revolutions, and to perpetuate dependent regimes.
"The US- and UK-supported Saudi and UAE dynasties and their hired analysts insist that their Yemeni adversary is a proxy of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. The inference is that Arab Gulf monarchies righteously resist Iranian - or Shi'a - influence in the Peninsula. Therefore, forty months of relentless bombing and blockade are justified as self-defense.
"Poppycock. Sure, the Houthi militia have ex post facto Iranian support - not in their several pre-2011 rebellions against the Salih government, but more recently. When they swept into Sana'a in 2014, with the turncoat support of Salih and his regiments, they instigated regular flights to and from Tehran. This infuriated the Saudi and Emirati governments, who ordered the bombing of Sana'a's runways and the indefinite shutdown of the airport. Improbably and irrationally, given the domestic roots of their grievances, the Houthis adopted Iranian slogans "death to America, death to Israel." PressTV and other Iranian propaganda outlets champion the Houthi cause.
"Civilian transport and propaganda do not, however, proxies make. The evidence of Houthis receiving Iranian arms despite the strangling Saudi-led, US-backed air and naval blockade is thin; the missiles they fire are low-tech and antiquated, mostly leftovers from the Soviet era. Iranians have not been filmed inside of Yemen. If anything, cries of 'Iranian-backed' grossly inflate Tehran's influence, and even that is more self-fulfilling after-the-fact prophesy than casus belli. No reasonable claim can be advanced that the Houthis take their marching orders or even their inspiration from the Islamic Republic. Two rather aside points in this regard: first, until recently the Persian Twelvers did not even consider the Zaydi Fivers as Shi'a; and secondly, the 'cold war' between Tehran and Riyadh is as much about republican vs. royal visions of an Islamic state as it is a denominational confrontation between the two great branches of Islam.
"Moreover, the 'internationally recognized government' has been in comfortable exile in Riyadh since March or April of 2015. 'Internationally recognized' is another way of saying that the so-called government of Abdarrubuh Mansur Hadi - often portrayed as a puppet - has no domestic mandate or following, only Gulf sponsors. These patrons, particularly Saudi Arabia, have a history of meddling in Yemen against popular movements and democratic impulses. Among other instances, the House of Saud backed the Zaydi Imamate against republican officers in North Yemen during the 1962-1970 civil war: then, and perhaps now, the fear of republicanism overrode any antipathy towards Zaydi Shi'ism. The Gulf patriarchies worried about uprisings in North Africa; the mass protests in Yemen in 2011 - led, incidentally, by women - caused genuine panic in the palaces.
"The most dangerous aspect of the 'proxy war against Iranian-backed militia' narrative is that is deflects attention away from indisputable war crimes. The Saudi-led coalition is now making a push on the strategic Red Sea port of al-Hudaydah, which has already been out of commission for three years and remains 'occupied' by Houthi rebels. Al-Hudaydah port and the governorate of al-Hudaydah lie along the Red Sea coastal plain known as the Tihama. The people of the Tihama, residents of fishing, herding, pottery-and-basket-making, and sharecropping communities who have already suffered disproportionately from Saudi-led bombing and the naval blockade, are dark-skinned Yemenis of mixed Arab and African ancestry. Spiritually, they identify with the Shafi'i denomination of Sunni Islam. Socially, they are the poorest of the poor. Politically, they have no sympathy for the Houthis, much less Iran.
"The victims of the coming - or current - onslaught are not 'proxies of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.' They are starving children under attack by filthy-rich monarchies wielding the most advanced weapons Britain and the United States have to sell." (War of aggression: the Saudi & UAE slaughter in Yemen isn't a proxy conflict with Iran, Sheila Carapico, juancole.com, 6/6/18)
"The word 'proxy,' incongruously accompanied by the label of a 'civil war' between an 'internationally recognized government' and 'Iranian-backed militia,' rationalizes the unwarranted, unprovoked Saudi-UAE intervention in Yemen. Some headlines and stories reflect sloppy journalism and the tendency to mindlessly reiterate hackneyed tag-lines. However, make no mistake: big petrodollar spending around DuPont Circle systematically produces a story-line that exonerates the murder and starvation of Yemenis who are not even 'Shi'a' in the name of countering overblown Iranian influence.
"A proxy war is a clash between contending powers that do not engage directly in combat. Rather, rivals arm, train, and goad third parties in smaller countries to fight one another. The classic Cold War cases were civil or cross-border wars in Central America and southern Africa where communist or socialist forces battled US clients. In the big antagonism between patrons - the Soviet Union and the United States - the battlefield was in the so-called Third World. Some sources (like Wikipedia) characterize the Korean and Vietnam wars as 'proxy' conflicts, because the American objective was to defeat communist 'proxies;' but these conflicts, named for the places US forces engaged, are more commonly, and accurately, recalled as direct American interventions, or instances of American imperialism. Like scores of US interventions during the era of bipolar competition, they reflected a hegemonic urge to insulate friendly allies from popular revolutions, and to perpetuate dependent regimes.
"The US- and UK-supported Saudi and UAE dynasties and their hired analysts insist that their Yemeni adversary is a proxy of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. The inference is that Arab Gulf monarchies righteously resist Iranian - or Shi'a - influence in the Peninsula. Therefore, forty months of relentless bombing and blockade are justified as self-defense.
"Poppycock. Sure, the Houthi militia have ex post facto Iranian support - not in their several pre-2011 rebellions against the Salih government, but more recently. When they swept into Sana'a in 2014, with the turncoat support of Salih and his regiments, they instigated regular flights to and from Tehran. This infuriated the Saudi and Emirati governments, who ordered the bombing of Sana'a's runways and the indefinite shutdown of the airport. Improbably and irrationally, given the domestic roots of their grievances, the Houthis adopted Iranian slogans "death to America, death to Israel." PressTV and other Iranian propaganda outlets champion the Houthi cause.
"Civilian transport and propaganda do not, however, proxies make. The evidence of Houthis receiving Iranian arms despite the strangling Saudi-led, US-backed air and naval blockade is thin; the missiles they fire are low-tech and antiquated, mostly leftovers from the Soviet era. Iranians have not been filmed inside of Yemen. If anything, cries of 'Iranian-backed' grossly inflate Tehran's influence, and even that is more self-fulfilling after-the-fact prophesy than casus belli. No reasonable claim can be advanced that the Houthis take their marching orders or even their inspiration from the Islamic Republic. Two rather aside points in this regard: first, until recently the Persian Twelvers did not even consider the Zaydi Fivers as Shi'a; and secondly, the 'cold war' between Tehran and Riyadh is as much about republican vs. royal visions of an Islamic state as it is a denominational confrontation between the two great branches of Islam.
"Moreover, the 'internationally recognized government' has been in comfortable exile in Riyadh since March or April of 2015. 'Internationally recognized' is another way of saying that the so-called government of Abdarrubuh Mansur Hadi - often portrayed as a puppet - has no domestic mandate or following, only Gulf sponsors. These patrons, particularly Saudi Arabia, have a history of meddling in Yemen against popular movements and democratic impulses. Among other instances, the House of Saud backed the Zaydi Imamate against republican officers in North Yemen during the 1962-1970 civil war: then, and perhaps now, the fear of republicanism overrode any antipathy towards Zaydi Shi'ism. The Gulf patriarchies worried about uprisings in North Africa; the mass protests in Yemen in 2011 - led, incidentally, by women - caused genuine panic in the palaces.
"The most dangerous aspect of the 'proxy war against Iranian-backed militia' narrative is that is deflects attention away from indisputable war crimes. The Saudi-led coalition is now making a push on the strategic Red Sea port of al-Hudaydah, which has already been out of commission for three years and remains 'occupied' by Houthi rebels. Al-Hudaydah port and the governorate of al-Hudaydah lie along the Red Sea coastal plain known as the Tihama. The people of the Tihama, residents of fishing, herding, pottery-and-basket-making, and sharecropping communities who have already suffered disproportionately from Saudi-led bombing and the naval blockade, are dark-skinned Yemenis of mixed Arab and African ancestry. Spiritually, they identify with the Shafi'i denomination of Sunni Islam. Socially, they are the poorest of the poor. Politically, they have no sympathy for the Houthis, much less Iran.
"The victims of the coming - or current - onslaught are not 'proxies of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.' They are starving children under attack by filthy-rich monarchies wielding the most advanced weapons Britain and the United States have to sell." (War of aggression: the Saudi & UAE slaughter in Yemen isn't a proxy conflict with Iran, Sheila Carapico, juancole.com, 6/6/18)
Monday, June 18, 2018
The Suez Aggression Rides Again
It's back to 1956*, chaps, with Britain and France now key players in the Saudi/Emirati intervention in Yemen.
In addition to arming the Saudis, Britain (along with the US) has just vetoed a UNSC resolution designed to prevent a Saudi/Emirati attack on the Yemeni port city of Hodeidah. (See UN rejects plan for ceasefire in Yemen port, Jason Ditz, antiwar.com, 15/6/18)
As for the French, they've apparently deployed special forces to Yemen to bolster Emirati troops there. (See French special forces on the ground in Yemen, Jason Ditz, antiwar.com. 16/6/18)
These two imperial recidivists, you'll remember, accompanied Trump on his bombing run in Syria in April. Now they're at it again, this time in Yemen. When will they ever learn?
As Syrian MP Fares Shehabi tweeted on June 16: "In short, the UK, US & France are behind all of our nightmares and tragedies in the region! We don't have any positive collective memory of anything good they did for us! For a century all they did was conquer, destroy, divide, loot, abuse and terrorize our people!"
[*When Britain and France colluded with the Israelis to seize the Suez Canal and topple Egypt's president Nasser. See my 14/4/18 post Anthony Nutting Turns in His Grave.]
In addition to arming the Saudis, Britain (along with the US) has just vetoed a UNSC resolution designed to prevent a Saudi/Emirati attack on the Yemeni port city of Hodeidah. (See UN rejects plan for ceasefire in Yemen port, Jason Ditz, antiwar.com, 15/6/18)
As for the French, they've apparently deployed special forces to Yemen to bolster Emirati troops there. (See French special forces on the ground in Yemen, Jason Ditz, antiwar.com. 16/6/18)
These two imperial recidivists, you'll remember, accompanied Trump on his bombing run in Syria in April. Now they're at it again, this time in Yemen. When will they ever learn?
As Syrian MP Fares Shehabi tweeted on June 16: "In short, the UK, US & France are behind all of our nightmares and tragedies in the region! We don't have any positive collective memory of anything good they did for us! For a century all they did was conquer, destroy, divide, loot, abuse and terrorize our people!"
[*When Britain and France colluded with the Israelis to seize the Suez Canal and topple Egypt's president Nasser. See my 14/4/18 post Anthony Nutting Turns in His Grave.]
Sunday, March 26, 2017
Australia Sells Arms to Saudi Arabia
The Turnbull Government is now directly stoking the US-backed Saudi/UAE war on the Yemeni people:
"Australian firms have secured contracts to supply military equipment to Saudi Arabia, an autocracy accused of ongoing war crimes in a conflict that has killed more than 10,000 civilians. Defence has approved four military exports to the kingdom in the past year and the Australian government has led the push for more. But the government has refused to release details of the approved military sales, citing commercial-in-confidence rules... Mr Pyne [Minister for Defence Industry]... would not comment on the value of materiel exports to Saudi Arabia... He declined to name which businesses accompanied him to Riyadh." (Defence approves military deals with Saudi Arabia, Patrick Begley, Sydney Morning Herald, 25/3/17)
See also my 2/2/16 post Australia's Dogs of War in Yemen.
"Australian firms have secured contracts to supply military equipment to Saudi Arabia, an autocracy accused of ongoing war crimes in a conflict that has killed more than 10,000 civilians. Defence has approved four military exports to the kingdom in the past year and the Australian government has led the push for more. But the government has refused to release details of the approved military sales, citing commercial-in-confidence rules... Mr Pyne [Minister for Defence Industry]... would not comment on the value of materiel exports to Saudi Arabia... He declined to name which businesses accompanied him to Riyadh." (Defence approves military deals with Saudi Arabia, Patrick Begley, Sydney Morning Herald, 25/3/17)
See also my 2/2/16 post Australia's Dogs of War in Yemen.
Tuesday, February 2, 2016
Australia's Dogs of War in Yemen
The Australian mainstream media, asleep at the wheel as usual, has NOT reported this:
"An Australian citizen is the commander of an elite UAE military force deployed in Yemen as part of the Saudi-led coalition which human rights groups accused of war crimes. Mike Hindmarsh, 59, is a former Australian army officer who is publicly listed as commander of the UAE's Presidential Guard... a unit of marines, reconnaissance, special forces and mechanised brigades according to the US State Department website... The Presidential Guard has been lauded for playing a key role in the Saudi-led coalition seeking to reinstall the exiled Yemeni government of President Abd Rabbuh Mansour Hadi... While the Arab coalition fighting in Yemen is widely described as being led by Saudi Arabia, one Gulf official told Middle East Eye on condition of anonymity that the external ground forces were in reality being steered by the UAE... [I]n October 2009 it was announced that the Australian government had approved Hindmarsh's retirement from the army to take up a new role commanding the UAE Presidential Guard... [A] quick search through LinkedIn throws up numerous results of experienced soldiers - mainly from Australia - who occupy senior roles in the elite force..."
That's the gist of Revealed: the mercenaries commanding UAE forces in Yemen, Rori Donaghy, middleeasteye.net, 23/12/15.
"An Australian citizen is the commander of an elite UAE military force deployed in Yemen as part of the Saudi-led coalition which human rights groups accused of war crimes. Mike Hindmarsh, 59, is a former Australian army officer who is publicly listed as commander of the UAE's Presidential Guard... a unit of marines, reconnaissance, special forces and mechanised brigades according to the US State Department website... The Presidential Guard has been lauded for playing a key role in the Saudi-led coalition seeking to reinstall the exiled Yemeni government of President Abd Rabbuh Mansour Hadi... While the Arab coalition fighting in Yemen is widely described as being led by Saudi Arabia, one Gulf official told Middle East Eye on condition of anonymity that the external ground forces were in reality being steered by the UAE... [I]n October 2009 it was announced that the Australian government had approved Hindmarsh's retirement from the army to take up a new role commanding the UAE Presidential Guard... [A] quick search through LinkedIn throws up numerous results of experienced soldiers - mainly from Australia - who occupy senior roles in the elite force..."
That's the gist of Revealed: the mercenaries commanding UAE forces in Yemen, Rori Donaghy, middleeasteye.net, 23/12/15.
Saturday, June 27, 2015
The Saudi-Israeli Alliance
We live in strange times:
1)
"There are many hands behind the Israeli army's onslaught on Gaza. America is not unhappy that Hamas is getting such a beating... Nor is Egypt overcome with grief...
"Neither matter to Netanyahu as much as the third undeclared partner in this unholy alliance, for neither on their own could give him the cover he needs for a military operation of this ferocity... Such permission can only come from a brother Arab.
"The attack on Gaza comes by Saudi Royal Appointment. This royal warrant is nothing less than an open secret in Israel, and both former and serving defense officials are relaxed when they talk about it. Former Israeli defence minister Shaul Mofaz surprised the presenter on Channel 10 by saying Israel had to specify a role for Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in the demilitarisation of Hamas. Asked what he meant by that, he added that Saudi and Emirati funds should be used to rebuild Gaza after Hamas had been defanged.
"Amos Gilad, the Israeli defence establishment's point man with Mubarak's Egypt and now director of the Israeli defence ministry's policy and political-military relations department told the academic James Dorsey recently: 'Everything is underground, nothing is public. But our security cooperation with Egypt and the Gulf states is unique. This is the best period of security and diplomatic relations with the Arabs.' The celebration is mutual. King Abdullah let it be known that he had phoned President Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi to approve of an Egyptian ceasefire initiative which had not been put to Hamas, and had the Jerusalem Post quoting analysts about whether a ceasefire was ever seriously intended.
"Mossad and Saudi intelligence officials meet regularly: The two sides conferred when the former Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi was about to be deposed... and they are hand in glove on Iran, both in preparing for an Israeli strike over Saudi airspace and in sabotaging the existing nuclear programme. There has even been a well sourced claim that the Saudis are financing most of Israel's very expensive campaign against Iran..." (From Saudi Israeli alliance forged in blood, David Hearst, middleeasteye.net, 20/7/14)
2)
"For more than half a century, Saudi Arabia has tried to use its vast oil wealth to build a lobby in the United States that could rival the imposing Israel lobby... but [they] could never build the kind of grassroots political organization that has given Israel... such extraordinary clout... But Saudi Arabia may have found another way to buy influence inside the United States - by giving money to Israel and currying favor with Israeli Prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Over the past several years, as both Saudi Arabia and Israel have identified Iran and the so-called 'Shiite crescent' as their principal enemies, this once-unthinkable alliance has become possible - and the Saudis, as they are wont to do, have thrown lots of money into the deal.
"According to a source briefed by US intelligence analysts, the Saudis have given Israel at least $16 billion over the past two and a half years, funneling the money through a third-country Arab state and into an Israeli 'development' account in Europe to help finance infrastructure inside Israel. The source first called the account 'a Netanyahu slush fund,' but later refined that characterization, saying the money was used for public projects such as building settlements in the West Bank..." (From Did money seal Israeli-Saudi alliance? Robert Parry, consortiumnews.com, 15/4/15)
1)
"There are many hands behind the Israeli army's onslaught on Gaza. America is not unhappy that Hamas is getting such a beating... Nor is Egypt overcome with grief...
"Neither matter to Netanyahu as much as the third undeclared partner in this unholy alliance, for neither on their own could give him the cover he needs for a military operation of this ferocity... Such permission can only come from a brother Arab.
"The attack on Gaza comes by Saudi Royal Appointment. This royal warrant is nothing less than an open secret in Israel, and both former and serving defense officials are relaxed when they talk about it. Former Israeli defence minister Shaul Mofaz surprised the presenter on Channel 10 by saying Israel had to specify a role for Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in the demilitarisation of Hamas. Asked what he meant by that, he added that Saudi and Emirati funds should be used to rebuild Gaza after Hamas had been defanged.
"Amos Gilad, the Israeli defence establishment's point man with Mubarak's Egypt and now director of the Israeli defence ministry's policy and political-military relations department told the academic James Dorsey recently: 'Everything is underground, nothing is public. But our security cooperation with Egypt and the Gulf states is unique. This is the best period of security and diplomatic relations with the Arabs.' The celebration is mutual. King Abdullah let it be known that he had phoned President Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi to approve of an Egyptian ceasefire initiative which had not been put to Hamas, and had the Jerusalem Post quoting analysts about whether a ceasefire was ever seriously intended.
"Mossad and Saudi intelligence officials meet regularly: The two sides conferred when the former Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi was about to be deposed... and they are hand in glove on Iran, both in preparing for an Israeli strike over Saudi airspace and in sabotaging the existing nuclear programme. There has even been a well sourced claim that the Saudis are financing most of Israel's very expensive campaign against Iran..." (From Saudi Israeli alliance forged in blood, David Hearst, middleeasteye.net, 20/7/14)
2)
"For more than half a century, Saudi Arabia has tried to use its vast oil wealth to build a lobby in the United States that could rival the imposing Israel lobby... but [they] could never build the kind of grassroots political organization that has given Israel... such extraordinary clout... But Saudi Arabia may have found another way to buy influence inside the United States - by giving money to Israel and currying favor with Israeli Prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Over the past several years, as both Saudi Arabia and Israel have identified Iran and the so-called 'Shiite crescent' as their principal enemies, this once-unthinkable alliance has become possible - and the Saudis, as they are wont to do, have thrown lots of money into the deal.
"According to a source briefed by US intelligence analysts, the Saudis have given Israel at least $16 billion over the past two and a half years, funneling the money through a third-country Arab state and into an Israeli 'development' account in Europe to help finance infrastructure inside Israel. The source first called the account 'a Netanyahu slush fund,' but later refined that characterization, saying the money was used for public projects such as building settlements in the West Bank..." (From Did money seal Israeli-Saudi alliance? Robert Parry, consortiumnews.com, 15/4/15)
Saturday, August 20, 2011
Fort Lowy
There are those among us who cannot bear the idea of Australia missing out on a slice of the imperial action de jour in the Middle East. Apparently, Iraq was just an appetizer. But while there might be more than enough murder and mayhem in Afghanistan to satisfy them for the present, what are we going to do when - perish the thought! - it's time to cut and run? Just sit around and twiddle our thumbs down here in the south Pacific?
Not to worry, over at the Lowy Institute, they're working on it:
"As part of this approach [formulating a government strategy paper on Australia's relationship with the Middle East to articulate our strategic interests in the region and to allow for the development of a policy framework] the government should send a signal to the region regarding our long-term interest. This could be done by transforming Australia's present military commitment in the UAE in support of our troops in Afghanistan to a much smaller military presence following the withdrawal of combat troops from Afghanistan in 2014. Such a commitment could be tailored to meet Gulf and Australian training or perhaps maritime surveillance needs. Its practical and symbolic benefits in advancing the national interest would outweigh the small resource commitment. It would reinforce the impression among Gulf rulers that Australia is a committed middle power, with potential flow-on benefits in other areas of our bilateral relationship. For Australia, it would provide a small regional base with access to civilian aviation and maritime hubs that could be used in a range of future military contingencies, from Pakistan to North Africa."* (Troops should be kept in the Middle East: A small regional base makes a lot of sense, Rodger Shanahan, The Australian, 18/8/11)
Bet you can't wait to put it up the Pakistanis or mix it with the Moroccans, eh?
But, despite the Lowy Institute's breezy assurance that it'd only cost peanuts for the pleasure, mowing down brown people these days always seems to have a nasty habit of running into the trillions. So wouldn't you think Frank and the lads would at least put their money where their mouth is (over at the Lowy Institute). But no, judging by Shanahan's piece, the understanding seems to be that the cost of Australia's future imperial adventures in the Middle East will be borne almost exclusively by those who manage to pay their taxes without the tax office looking over their shoulder and who probably don't automatically think of Israel when the word charity crops up. Speaking of which, here's the latest:
"The US tax office's long-running investigation into the Lowy family's financial affairs has extended to Bermuda in a bid to unmask who owned and controlled a Liechtenstein-based foundation that US authorities believe was used for tax evasion. The US Internal Revenue Service in April 2009 asked the Bermuda government for help in determining the ownership and control of two companies, Adelphi Ltd and Clareville Ltd, which the IRS suspects are controlled by the Lowy family. The IRS is investigating Westfield Group's Los Angeles-based managing director, Peter Lowy, and his wife Janine, over their tax returns for the year to December 2005. It is also scrutinising the 2004-05 tax return of Beverly Park Corporation, a Delaware-registered company ultimately owned by the Frank Lowy Family Trust, and certain aspects of Beverly Park's returns for the 10 years from 1997 to 2007...
"It is noted that the Liechtenstein-based Luperla Foundation was set up in 1997 'for the benefit of all the members of the Frank Lowy family...' and that it received a loan repayment from Adelphi. In its request, the IRS contended that Adelphi's ownership and control in the 10 years to 2007 was relevant to the ownership and control of Luperla, and that understanding Luperla's ownership would help resolve whether the Lowys should have filed information about the Liechtenstein foundation with US tax authorities... Details of the Bermuda inquiries have emerged in a California court where Peter Lowy is suing the IRS, under the Freedom of Information Act. Mr Lowy wants the US District Court to force the IRS to hand over thousands of pages of documents related to his US tax investigation. The IRS has repeatedly baulked at releasing at least 5402 pages, saying they had to remain confidential because they were the product of exchanges between US tax authorities and the Australian Taxation Office. But Mr Lowy's lawyers now claim that while some material from Bermuda about the Lowys was handed to US authorities, the IRS has 'not identified the existence of such records or identified any grounds for withholding such records'. According to memos stolen from LGT Bank, published by a US Senate committee in 2008, Luperla received $US53 million as founding monies from Adelphi in 1997 by way of a 'credit repayment'. In 2001, LGT Bank was instructed to disperse Luperla's proceeds of $US68 million. The Lowys have said publicly that they never benefited from the Luperla structure, that all its proceeds went to Israeli charities and they met all tax obligations in Australia and the US." (US tax authorities followed Lowy's trail to Bermuda, Leonie Wood, The Age, 18/8/11)
[*Presumably, if Shanahan's proposal - Fort Lowy? - were implemented by an Australian government, our existing base in Dubai (See my 12/11/09 post Billabong Flats) would become permanent.]
Not to worry, over at the Lowy Institute, they're working on it:
"As part of this approach [formulating a government strategy paper on Australia's relationship with the Middle East to articulate our strategic interests in the region and to allow for the development of a policy framework] the government should send a signal to the region regarding our long-term interest. This could be done by transforming Australia's present military commitment in the UAE in support of our troops in Afghanistan to a much smaller military presence following the withdrawal of combat troops from Afghanistan in 2014. Such a commitment could be tailored to meet Gulf and Australian training or perhaps maritime surveillance needs. Its practical and symbolic benefits in advancing the national interest would outweigh the small resource commitment. It would reinforce the impression among Gulf rulers that Australia is a committed middle power, with potential flow-on benefits in other areas of our bilateral relationship. For Australia, it would provide a small regional base with access to civilian aviation and maritime hubs that could be used in a range of future military contingencies, from Pakistan to North Africa."* (Troops should be kept in the Middle East: A small regional base makes a lot of sense, Rodger Shanahan, The Australian, 18/8/11)
Bet you can't wait to put it up the Pakistanis or mix it with the Moroccans, eh?
But, despite the Lowy Institute's breezy assurance that it'd only cost peanuts for the pleasure, mowing down brown people these days always seems to have a nasty habit of running into the trillions. So wouldn't you think Frank and the lads would at least put their money where their mouth is (over at the Lowy Institute). But no, judging by Shanahan's piece, the understanding seems to be that the cost of Australia's future imperial adventures in the Middle East will be borne almost exclusively by those who manage to pay their taxes without the tax office looking over their shoulder and who probably don't automatically think of Israel when the word charity crops up. Speaking of which, here's the latest:
"The US tax office's long-running investigation into the Lowy family's financial affairs has extended to Bermuda in a bid to unmask who owned and controlled a Liechtenstein-based foundation that US authorities believe was used for tax evasion. The US Internal Revenue Service in April 2009 asked the Bermuda government for help in determining the ownership and control of two companies, Adelphi Ltd and Clareville Ltd, which the IRS suspects are controlled by the Lowy family. The IRS is investigating Westfield Group's Los Angeles-based managing director, Peter Lowy, and his wife Janine, over their tax returns for the year to December 2005. It is also scrutinising the 2004-05 tax return of Beverly Park Corporation, a Delaware-registered company ultimately owned by the Frank Lowy Family Trust, and certain aspects of Beverly Park's returns for the 10 years from 1997 to 2007...
"It is noted that the Liechtenstein-based Luperla Foundation was set up in 1997 'for the benefit of all the members of the Frank Lowy family...' and that it received a loan repayment from Adelphi. In its request, the IRS contended that Adelphi's ownership and control in the 10 years to 2007 was relevant to the ownership and control of Luperla, and that understanding Luperla's ownership would help resolve whether the Lowys should have filed information about the Liechtenstein foundation with US tax authorities... Details of the Bermuda inquiries have emerged in a California court where Peter Lowy is suing the IRS, under the Freedom of Information Act. Mr Lowy wants the US District Court to force the IRS to hand over thousands of pages of documents related to his US tax investigation. The IRS has repeatedly baulked at releasing at least 5402 pages, saying they had to remain confidential because they were the product of exchanges between US tax authorities and the Australian Taxation Office. But Mr Lowy's lawyers now claim that while some material from Bermuda about the Lowys was handed to US authorities, the IRS has 'not identified the existence of such records or identified any grounds for withholding such records'. According to memos stolen from LGT Bank, published by a US Senate committee in 2008, Luperla received $US53 million as founding monies from Adelphi in 1997 by way of a 'credit repayment'. In 2001, LGT Bank was instructed to disperse Luperla's proceeds of $US68 million. The Lowys have said publicly that they never benefited from the Luperla structure, that all its proceeds went to Israeli charities and they met all tax obligations in Australia and the US." (US tax authorities followed Lowy's trail to Bermuda, Leonie Wood, The Age, 18/8/11)
[*Presumably, if Shanahan's proposal - Fort Lowy? - were implemented by an Australian government, our existing base in Dubai (See my 12/11/09 post Billabong Flats) would become permanent.]
Sunday, July 3, 2011
A Penny for the Potentate
Of considerable interest:
"Officially, the US does not pay other governments for rights to military bases. The logic is straightforward: funneling money into the treasuries of foreign dictators cannot form the foundation of genuine strategic alliances. Yet, to fight wars in Iraq and Afghnistan... over the last decade the Pentagon has come to rely in an unprecedented way on a web of bases across the Middle East. And a NEWSWEEK investigation of Pentagon contracting practices in Abu Dhabi, Kuwait, and Bahrain has uncovered more than $14 billion paid mostly in sole-source contracts to companies controlled by ruling families across the Persian Gulf. The revelation raises a fundamental question: are US taxpayer dollars enriching the ruling potentates of friendly regimes just as the youthful protesters and the Arab Spring have brought a new push for democracy across the region?
"Take a look at Abu Dhabi. The wealthiest of the United Arab Emirates, it hosts a US Air Force at Al Dhafra, which is a vital refueling hub in the region. As is the case in most Gulf states, Abu Dhabi is ruled by a single family that dominates both government and business. Here it is the Nahyan family, and the emir... is worth $15 billion, and controls the country's national oil company, ADNOC. As it turns out, every drop of fuel that America buys for its planes at Al Dhafra... costing $5.2 billion since 2005 - is purchased from the Al Nahyan-controlled ADNOC. Yet, according to contract documents, that money has bypassed the competitive bidding process that is supposed to accompany any purchase - of firearms, flak jackets, or fuel - by the Pentagon." (Welfare for dictators, Aram Roston, newsweek.com, 26/6/11)
Virtually ignored by the ms media in this country, Australia, thanks to former prime minister Kevin Rudd, now has a military base in another of the Emirates, Dubai (See my posts Say It Isn't So (2/4/09) & Billabong Flats (12/11/09)).
The UAE, of course, hasn't a democratic bone in its body, even contributing troops to the Saudi intervention in Bahrain to prop up the brutally repressive Khalifa dynasty there.
The question arises, are we too making direct deposits in the deep pockets of the ruler of Dubai, and Prime Minister of the UAE, Sheikh Mohammad bin Rashid al-Maktoum? And how much?
"Officially, the US does not pay other governments for rights to military bases. The logic is straightforward: funneling money into the treasuries of foreign dictators cannot form the foundation of genuine strategic alliances. Yet, to fight wars in Iraq and Afghnistan... over the last decade the Pentagon has come to rely in an unprecedented way on a web of bases across the Middle East. And a NEWSWEEK investigation of Pentagon contracting practices in Abu Dhabi, Kuwait, and Bahrain has uncovered more than $14 billion paid mostly in sole-source contracts to companies controlled by ruling families across the Persian Gulf. The revelation raises a fundamental question: are US taxpayer dollars enriching the ruling potentates of friendly regimes just as the youthful protesters and the Arab Spring have brought a new push for democracy across the region?
"Take a look at Abu Dhabi. The wealthiest of the United Arab Emirates, it hosts a US Air Force at Al Dhafra, which is a vital refueling hub in the region. As is the case in most Gulf states, Abu Dhabi is ruled by a single family that dominates both government and business. Here it is the Nahyan family, and the emir... is worth $15 billion, and controls the country's national oil company, ADNOC. As it turns out, every drop of fuel that America buys for its planes at Al Dhafra... costing $5.2 billion since 2005 - is purchased from the Al Nahyan-controlled ADNOC. Yet, according to contract documents, that money has bypassed the competitive bidding process that is supposed to accompany any purchase - of firearms, flak jackets, or fuel - by the Pentagon." (Welfare for dictators, Aram Roston, newsweek.com, 26/6/11)
Virtually ignored by the ms media in this country, Australia, thanks to former prime minister Kevin Rudd, now has a military base in another of the Emirates, Dubai (See my posts Say It Isn't So (2/4/09) & Billabong Flats (12/11/09)).
The UAE, of course, hasn't a democratic bone in its body, even contributing troops to the Saudi intervention in Bahrain to prop up the brutally repressive Khalifa dynasty there.
The question arises, are we too making direct deposits in the deep pockets of the ruler of Dubai, and Prime Minister of the UAE, Sheikh Mohammad bin Rashid al-Maktoum? And how much?
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
The Arabs' Pacific Push
Most readers of this blog will be aware of the tendency of a handful of Pacific island states to cluster protectively around Israel whenever it gets sin-binned in the United Nations General Assembly. To draw on a recent example: when 114 nations endorsed the Goldstone Report in the UNGA in November last year, 18 nations, including a bloc of Pacific minnows - the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru and Palau - voted against. (See my posts, Israel's Pacific Solution (9/11/09) & Israel's Pacific Solution 2 (12/11/09))
This may be about to change:
Following a visit to the Pacific region by UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan the Arab League held an Arab-Pacific summit in Abu Dhabi in June, attended by all 14 members of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF). There the PIF "agreed to 'note the concern of Arab states regarding the conflict in the Middle East, in particular in Palestine', and 'agreed on the need to settle all outstanding disputes and issues based on relevant Security Council resolutions and the principles of the Road Map recognising that the views of the Arab states were crucial to a just, comprehensive and permanent peace'." Furthermore, "[t]he Arab League has decided to send an official delegation to the Pacific and establish an office for the Pacific islands in the region; the UAE has launched a $54 million development fund for the islands and a new Arab-Pacific Forum is being set up in the UAE." (Arab League seeks influence with Pacific push, Rowan Callick, The Australian, 11/8/10)
Watch this space.
This may be about to change:
Following a visit to the Pacific region by UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan the Arab League held an Arab-Pacific summit in Abu Dhabi in June, attended by all 14 members of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF). There the PIF "agreed to 'note the concern of Arab states regarding the conflict in the Middle East, in particular in Palestine', and 'agreed on the need to settle all outstanding disputes and issues based on relevant Security Council resolutions and the principles of the Road Map recognising that the views of the Arab states were crucial to a just, comprehensive and permanent peace'." Furthermore, "[t]he Arab League has decided to send an official delegation to the Pacific and establish an office for the Pacific islands in the region; the UAE has launched a $54 million development fund for the islands and a new Arab-Pacific Forum is being set up in the UAE." (Arab League seeks influence with Pacific push, Rowan Callick, The Australian, 11/8/10)
Watch this space.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Billabong Flats
Australia's descent into military madness as a support act for US imperialism is gaining pace under the Rudd Government. Read this (& weep):
"Don't tell anyone but the Federal Government is spending $87.5 million on a new Middle East military base. Not that it's using the word 'base'. Instead, budget papers state the money is being spent on 'command and control enhancements' in the Middle East. Under a diplomatic agreement with the host country, the location cannot be revealed. The Government cannot give the location of the old bases the new one is replacing. A Defence Force spokesman said he could not say where the bases are because of security considerations and 'host national sensitivities'. But given that the locations are widely known, the coyness has less to do with security and more to do with 'sensitivities'. Instead, it's imposed by the Arab hosts, who do not want to advertise they are accommodating foreign troops and their hardware. The secrecy leads to a curious absurdity: the details and images of most of the bases are on the internet, in the Middle East press and on Defence Force websites. Australian ambassadors have openly said where they are and they have been mentioned in Hansard. The Sun-Herald is a party to the subterfuge. On an ADF-escorted trip to the Middle East and Afghanistan, it signed an undertaking not to reveal 'operationally sensitive information' - including 'the country in which ADF support bases are located outside of Iraq and Afghanistan'. Without breaching that undertaking, we can reveal - drawing on what spies call open sources, and readers call Google - where these bases are. One of them has a big sign out the front, adorned with red kangaroos and the words 'Billabong Flats'. We can reveal bases have been or are being closed in Kuwait and Qatar. The new one is at Al Minhad Airbase in Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates. Australian troops going to Afghanistan acclimatise in Kuwait, at a compound attached to a US base called Camp Victory. The base is alongside Kuwait's Ali Al Salem Air Base. You can find more about the base at globalsecurity.org. Liberal senator David Bushby visited the base and told the Senate all about it on June 18." ($87.5m for not so secret army base, Tom Hyland, 8/11/09)
Sorry Tom, the Sydney Morning Herald's Peter Hartcher let the cat out of the bag in March of this year. You can read all about it - and more - at my 2/4/09 post Say It Isn't So.
"Don't tell anyone but the Federal Government is spending $87.5 million on a new Middle East military base. Not that it's using the word 'base'. Instead, budget papers state the money is being spent on 'command and control enhancements' in the Middle East. Under a diplomatic agreement with the host country, the location cannot be revealed. The Government cannot give the location of the old bases the new one is replacing. A Defence Force spokesman said he could not say where the bases are because of security considerations and 'host national sensitivities'. But given that the locations are widely known, the coyness has less to do with security and more to do with 'sensitivities'. Instead, it's imposed by the Arab hosts, who do not want to advertise they are accommodating foreign troops and their hardware. The secrecy leads to a curious absurdity: the details and images of most of the bases are on the internet, in the Middle East press and on Defence Force websites. Australian ambassadors have openly said where they are and they have been mentioned in Hansard. The Sun-Herald is a party to the subterfuge. On an ADF-escorted trip to the Middle East and Afghanistan, it signed an undertaking not to reveal 'operationally sensitive information' - including 'the country in which ADF support bases are located outside of Iraq and Afghanistan'. Without breaching that undertaking, we can reveal - drawing on what spies call open sources, and readers call Google - where these bases are. One of them has a big sign out the front, adorned with red kangaroos and the words 'Billabong Flats'. We can reveal bases have been or are being closed in Kuwait and Qatar. The new one is at Al Minhad Airbase in Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates. Australian troops going to Afghanistan acclimatise in Kuwait, at a compound attached to a US base called Camp Victory. The base is alongside Kuwait's Ali Al Salem Air Base. You can find more about the base at globalsecurity.org. Liberal senator David Bushby visited the base and told the Senate all about it on June 18." ($87.5m for not so secret army base, Tom Hyland, 8/11/09)
Sorry Tom, the Sydney Morning Herald's Peter Hartcher let the cat out of the bag in March of this year. You can read all about it - and more - at my 2/4/09 post Say It Isn't So.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Say It Isn't So
Say it isn't so: "The Federal Government has moved to permanently base Australia's various Middle Eastern regional military assets in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). In return, Australia has about 30 personnel in the UAE training its fast-growing special forces troopers. Behind the details of the arrangement are the 2 countries' larger needs. Australia has decided to stop pretending. Instead of pretending that we are occasional visitors to the Middle East, only rushing in when the US decides to go to war there and rushing out when it finishes, Australia is now acknowledging that it has permanent interests in the area... Both countries are now girding for the coming crisis with Iran, which lies just across the Gulf from the UAE." (Gulf friends look to us as Iran flexes its muscles, Peter Hartcher*, Sydney Morning Herald, 31/3/09)
The pro-US UAE, according to Hartcher, is worried about Iranian retaliation in the event of a strike by USrael against its nuclear facilities. That's the UAE's "larger need," but what's ours? We're still in Iraq, we've never been more involved in Afghanistan, and prime minister Rudd has even offered counter-insurgency trainers to Pakistan (see my 31/7/08 post Pure Genius) and spoken of his interest in keeping the Straits of Hormuz open "in coalition with the US." (See my 22/9/08 post The Left Hand... & the Right) But, wherein lies Australia's "larger need" to keep open the Straits of Hormuz and beef up the UAE's special forces?
As Scott Ritter reminds us in his 2006 book Target Iran: "The conflict currently underway between the US and Iran is, first and foremost, born in Israel. It is based upon an Israeli contention that Iran poses a threat to Israel, and defined by Israeli assertions that Iran possesses a nuclear weapons program. None of this has been shown to be true, and indeed many of the allegations made by Israel against Iran have been clearly demonstrated as being false. And yet the US continues to trumpet the Israeli claims..." (p 208) If so, it looks as though the only possible reason for the Rudd government's newfound interest in the Straits of Hormuz and a "permanent" presence in the Emirates is to aid and abet the coming USraeli mugging of Iran, itself the product of Israel's desire for regional hegemony.
After all, Rudd has said that support for Israel is "in his DNA," and, alone among world misleaders, has threatened to drag the Iranian president before the International Court of Justice for incitement to genocide against Israel. (See my 23/5/08 post Kevin Bonhoeffer vs Adolf Ahmadinejad) And what would you expect of a man whose speeches at Zionist functions could just as easily have been given by any of Israel's current crop of misleaders: "Israel has always confronted these challenges to its existential existence. That is why Israel continues to survive to this day - resolute in its mission and intelligent in its stategy." (Rudd: I am Israel's proud 'lifelong' friend, The Australian Jewish News, 23/2/07)
Into what uncharted foreign policy waters is Rudd taking this country?
[* Hartcher affixed the following disclosure to his piece: "Peter Hartcher, the Herald's international editor, travelled to the UAE as a guest of the Lowy Institute for International Policy." Can we expect a similar disclosure from the next Israel junketeer? Don't hold your breath.]
The pro-US UAE, according to Hartcher, is worried about Iranian retaliation in the event of a strike by USrael against its nuclear facilities. That's the UAE's "larger need," but what's ours? We're still in Iraq, we've never been more involved in Afghanistan, and prime minister Rudd has even offered counter-insurgency trainers to Pakistan (see my 31/7/08 post Pure Genius) and spoken of his interest in keeping the Straits of Hormuz open "in coalition with the US." (See my 22/9/08 post The Left Hand... & the Right) But, wherein lies Australia's "larger need" to keep open the Straits of Hormuz and beef up the UAE's special forces?
As Scott Ritter reminds us in his 2006 book Target Iran: "The conflict currently underway between the US and Iran is, first and foremost, born in Israel. It is based upon an Israeli contention that Iran poses a threat to Israel, and defined by Israeli assertions that Iran possesses a nuclear weapons program. None of this has been shown to be true, and indeed many of the allegations made by Israel against Iran have been clearly demonstrated as being false. And yet the US continues to trumpet the Israeli claims..." (p 208) If so, it looks as though the only possible reason for the Rudd government's newfound interest in the Straits of Hormuz and a "permanent" presence in the Emirates is to aid and abet the coming USraeli mugging of Iran, itself the product of Israel's desire for regional hegemony.
After all, Rudd has said that support for Israel is "in his DNA," and, alone among world misleaders, has threatened to drag the Iranian president before the International Court of Justice for incitement to genocide against Israel. (See my 23/5/08 post Kevin Bonhoeffer vs Adolf Ahmadinejad) And what would you expect of a man whose speeches at Zionist functions could just as easily have been given by any of Israel's current crop of misleaders: "Israel has always confronted these challenges to its existential existence. That is why Israel continues to survive to this day - resolute in its mission and intelligent in its stategy." (Rudd: I am Israel's proud 'lifelong' friend, The Australian Jewish News, 23/2/07)
Into what uncharted foreign policy waters is Rudd taking this country?
[* Hartcher affixed the following disclosure to his piece: "Peter Hartcher, the Herald's international editor, travelled to the UAE as a guest of the Lowy Institute for International Policy." Can we expect a similar disclosure from the next Israel junketeer? Don't hold your breath.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)