"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 Yemen. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Yemen. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 27, 2019
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.]
Monday, May 7, 2018
From the Yemeni Frying Pan into the US Fire
When the Weekend Australian devotes an entire page to the promotion of a Sydney Writers Festival participant (no, not Junot Diaz) as it did on Saturday you've got to wonder just what's in it for the dark side. The writer's name is Mohammed Al Samawi and the feature is titled Finding common ground.
Here's the subtitle:
"A liberating friendship overthrows the anti-Jewish bigotry of a young Yemeni."
Here's the footnote:
"Mohammed Al Samawi appears at the Sydney Writers Festival today at at Melbourne Jewish Book Week tomorrow."
And here's the Australian's introduction:
"Mohammed al Sabawi, a Zaydi Shia Muslim, was born in... the old Yemeni city of Sanaa. He describes a childhood in which Jews were demonised. His life changed as a young adult when he became active in dialogue between Muslims and Jews. Following death threats from his compatriots, he fled Yemen and eventually escaped to the US, where he lectures in inter-faith issues."
Is it just me, or do you come away from those snippets with the indelible feeling that Yemen is about to be exposed as a hotbed of frothing, foaming anti-Semitism?
The feature is described as "an edited extract from the memoir The Fox Hunt by Mohammed Al Samawi, published this week by Scribe ($35)."
The edited extract is divided into 3, headed: Age 9, Age 14, and Age 23, presumably containing the most egregious examples of "anti-Jewish bigotry" that Yemen has to offer.
And yet Age 9 doesn't even mention Jews.
Age 14 does, however. The context is his viewing of television footage of the 2000 Gaza Strip death of the Palestinian child Mohammed ad-Durrah, who, along with his father, "pressed up against a stone wall, huddling behind some curved protrusion," was trying in vain to dodge a hail of Israeli bullets.
Al Sabawi's teacher is reported as saying of this: "This is what they do. They murder the innocent. What had this boy done? Why did he have to die? Because he is Palestinian? Because he is a Muslim? Because Jews have no mercy? Yes. Yes. Yes."
Comments Al Samawi, "That boy could have been us. I'd heard for years that the Jews in Israel killed children indiscriminately if it advanced their aims."
Is this the "anti-Jewish bigotry" and "demonisation" of Jews which the Australian has led us to believe Al Samawi's book is all about?
Surely not. Are we really supposed to believe that Al Sabawi's teacher, when he uses the term 'Jews', means all Jews? As opposed to the Zionists who carved out a Jewish state in the name of a mythical Jewish people in Palestine, and who always referred to themselves, and still do, as Jews vis-a-vis Arabs?
And as for "Jews in Israel" shooting those same Arabs, including over 2,177 children since the year 2000, "indiscriminately if it advanced their aims," couldn't the maintenance of a Jewish majority in Palestine conceivably be one of those aims? (See my 28/4/18 post The Truth about the Gaza Ghetto Massacres.)
No, you'd be stretching it to find much in the way of "anti-Semitic bigotry" here.
What about Age 23 then?
"We'd been taught that the Christian Bible was a holy work, but that over time Jewish scholars had altered it... They removed the Prophet Mohammed from the Bible and they tried to erase Allah."
"Anti-Jewish bigotry" to be sure, but is that it? Is that the worst the Australian can come up with in Al Samawi's book? I feel sort of short-changed.
Yemeni religious obscurantists are pikers compared to the good old-fashioned anti-Muslim bigotry of America's millions of Israel-blessing, Trump-voting, Rapture-ready, Armageddon Now! Christian Zionist zombies. Imagine Al Samawi in interfaith dialogue with Hal Lindsey, author of the best-selling, seminal Christian Zionist rant, The Late Great Planet Earth (1970):
"Lindsey now admits to feeling shocked dismay at Sharon's voluntary withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in July 2005, at his willingness to part with what Bible-believers know to be land promised to the Jews. How to account for such a flagrant flouting of God's will? Lindsey does his best: 'Sharon came up with a plan I believe. He knew that there was one thing he could count on, that the Palestinians would keep on with their terrorism. He gave them their freedom because he knew what they would do with it. Now he knows he's got a target-rich environment there in Gaza - they're all in one place!' His cruel vision of a Palestinian turkey shoot is met by a burst of applause. 'That's right on!' someone shouts.
"The hostess of the event, Jan Markell, joins Hal on the podium and they settle themselves on high stools with microphones in their hands, as if they might croon an evangelical hymn together. But this is a question and answer session. Jan - a Jewish convert to Christianity with her own syndicated radio show and an Internet ministry devoted, like Hal's, to analysing 'current events from a biblical and prophetic perspective' - kicks it off by asking Hal whether the United States or Israel will neutralise the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran.
"After carefully opining that the current situation in Iraq would make opening another front in Iran difficult right now, Lindsey insists that he loves President George W. Bush as a fellow bible-believing Christian, but heartily wishes he understood prophecy well enough to realise that Islam is 'violent to the core' and go ahead and open that new front. When Jan prods him again for a prediction about Israel's role vis-a-vis Iran, Lindsey reveals that 'good friends in the Israeli air force' have told him that Israel is ready and willing to take on Iran. 'You can count on it - if someone else doesn't do it, Israel will,' he says.
"Jan Markell is just as troubled by the threat posed by another Muslim neighbour of Israel - Syria. Inviting the audience to open their bibles at Isaiah 17: 1, Lindsey reads aloud: '"An oracle concerning Damascus. Behold, Damascus will cease to be a city, and will become a heap of ruins..." My opinion is that Damascus will be destroyed before the Rapture...'
"'By Israel?' prompts Jan again.
"'By Israel. Syria's a troublemaker, a terrorist headquarters, and the prime reason why our troops are in such trouble in Iraq. I wish the US would obliterate Syria and not leave it to Israel...'" (Allies for Armageddon: The Rise of Christian Zionism, Victoria Clark, 2007, pp 152-53)
If the following 14/4/18 tweet of Al Samawi is any guide, he'll be a pushover for Lindsey: "The problem was in Gaddafi, they killed him but they also destroyed Libya, same thing with Saleh in Yemen and Saddam in Iraq. The US trying to rid of dictators without educating people first about democracy or creating generations that can replace dictators."
Here's the subtitle:
"A liberating friendship overthrows the anti-Jewish bigotry of a young Yemeni."
Here's the footnote:
"Mohammed Al Samawi appears at the Sydney Writers Festival today at at Melbourne Jewish Book Week tomorrow."
And here's the Australian's introduction:
"Mohammed al Sabawi, a Zaydi Shia Muslim, was born in... the old Yemeni city of Sanaa. He describes a childhood in which Jews were demonised. His life changed as a young adult when he became active in dialogue between Muslims and Jews. Following death threats from his compatriots, he fled Yemen and eventually escaped to the US, where he lectures in inter-faith issues."
Is it just me, or do you come away from those snippets with the indelible feeling that Yemen is about to be exposed as a hotbed of frothing, foaming anti-Semitism?
The feature is described as "an edited extract from the memoir The Fox Hunt by Mohammed Al Samawi, published this week by Scribe ($35)."
The edited extract is divided into 3, headed: Age 9, Age 14, and Age 23, presumably containing the most egregious examples of "anti-Jewish bigotry" that Yemen has to offer.
And yet Age 9 doesn't even mention Jews.
Age 14 does, however. The context is his viewing of television footage of the 2000 Gaza Strip death of the Palestinian child Mohammed ad-Durrah, who, along with his father, "pressed up against a stone wall, huddling behind some curved protrusion," was trying in vain to dodge a hail of Israeli bullets.
Al Sabawi's teacher is reported as saying of this: "This is what they do. They murder the innocent. What had this boy done? Why did he have to die? Because he is Palestinian? Because he is a Muslim? Because Jews have no mercy? Yes. Yes. Yes."
Comments Al Samawi, "That boy could have been us. I'd heard for years that the Jews in Israel killed children indiscriminately if it advanced their aims."
Is this the "anti-Jewish bigotry" and "demonisation" of Jews which the Australian has led us to believe Al Samawi's book is all about?
Surely not. Are we really supposed to believe that Al Sabawi's teacher, when he uses the term 'Jews', means all Jews? As opposed to the Zionists who carved out a Jewish state in the name of a mythical Jewish people in Palestine, and who always referred to themselves, and still do, as Jews vis-a-vis Arabs?
And as for "Jews in Israel" shooting those same Arabs, including over 2,177 children since the year 2000, "indiscriminately if it advanced their aims," couldn't the maintenance of a Jewish majority in Palestine conceivably be one of those aims? (See my 28/4/18 post The Truth about the Gaza Ghetto Massacres.)
No, you'd be stretching it to find much in the way of "anti-Semitic bigotry" here.
What about Age 23 then?
"We'd been taught that the Christian Bible was a holy work, but that over time Jewish scholars had altered it... They removed the Prophet Mohammed from the Bible and they tried to erase Allah."
"Anti-Jewish bigotry" to be sure, but is that it? Is that the worst the Australian can come up with in Al Samawi's book? I feel sort of short-changed.
Yemeni religious obscurantists are pikers compared to the good old-fashioned anti-Muslim bigotry of America's millions of Israel-blessing, Trump-voting, Rapture-ready, Armageddon Now! Christian Zionist zombies. Imagine Al Samawi in interfaith dialogue with Hal Lindsey, author of the best-selling, seminal Christian Zionist rant, The Late Great Planet Earth (1970):
"Lindsey now admits to feeling shocked dismay at Sharon's voluntary withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in July 2005, at his willingness to part with what Bible-believers know to be land promised to the Jews. How to account for such a flagrant flouting of God's will? Lindsey does his best: 'Sharon came up with a plan I believe. He knew that there was one thing he could count on, that the Palestinians would keep on with their terrorism. He gave them their freedom because he knew what they would do with it. Now he knows he's got a target-rich environment there in Gaza - they're all in one place!' His cruel vision of a Palestinian turkey shoot is met by a burst of applause. 'That's right on!' someone shouts.
"The hostess of the event, Jan Markell, joins Hal on the podium and they settle themselves on high stools with microphones in their hands, as if they might croon an evangelical hymn together. But this is a question and answer session. Jan - a Jewish convert to Christianity with her own syndicated radio show and an Internet ministry devoted, like Hal's, to analysing 'current events from a biblical and prophetic perspective' - kicks it off by asking Hal whether the United States or Israel will neutralise the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran.
"After carefully opining that the current situation in Iraq would make opening another front in Iran difficult right now, Lindsey insists that he loves President George W. Bush as a fellow bible-believing Christian, but heartily wishes he understood prophecy well enough to realise that Islam is 'violent to the core' and go ahead and open that new front. When Jan prods him again for a prediction about Israel's role vis-a-vis Iran, Lindsey reveals that 'good friends in the Israeli air force' have told him that Israel is ready and willing to take on Iran. 'You can count on it - if someone else doesn't do it, Israel will,' he says.
"Jan Markell is just as troubled by the threat posed by another Muslim neighbour of Israel - Syria. Inviting the audience to open their bibles at Isaiah 17: 1, Lindsey reads aloud: '"An oracle concerning Damascus. Behold, Damascus will cease to be a city, and will become a heap of ruins..." My opinion is that Damascus will be destroyed before the Rapture...'
"'By Israel?' prompts Jan again.
"'By Israel. Syria's a troublemaker, a terrorist headquarters, and the prime reason why our troops are in such trouble in Iraq. I wish the US would obliterate Syria and not leave it to Israel...'" (Allies for Armageddon: The Rise of Christian Zionism, Victoria Clark, 2007, pp 152-53)
If the following 14/4/18 tweet of Al Samawi is any guide, he'll be a pushover for Lindsey: "The problem was in Gaddafi, they killed him but they also destroyed Libya, same thing with Saleh in Yemen and Saddam in Iraq. The US trying to rid of dictators without educating people first about democracy or creating generations that can replace dictators."
Wednesday, April 25, 2018
WAPO: Syria 4, Yemen 0
Tweet from Bassem @BBassem7:
In the 24 hrs following Douma (Syria) alleged gas attack that killed supposedly 40 people, @washingtonpost tweeted 4 times about this incident. In the 24 hrs following the Saudi airstrike on wedding party in Yemen that killed 40 people, @washingtonpost tweeted 0 times about it.
In the 24 hrs following Douma (Syria) alleged gas attack that killed supposedly 40 people, @washingtonpost tweeted 4 times about this incident. In the 24 hrs following the Saudi airstrike on wedding party in Yemen that killed 40 people, @washingtonpost tweeted 0 times about it.
Thursday, April 12, 2018
Mugging Syria for Israel 1
Read this part transcript of Fox News' host Tucker Carlson, sensibly animadverting on the subject: What do we REALLY know [about the latest chlorine gas attack in Syria] this time? Then note his guest's - Republican Senator Roger Wickers - damning admission at the end. Most educational:
... All those geniuses tell us that Asad killed the children. But do we really know that? Of course, they really don't know that. They're making it up. They have no real idea what happened... How would it benefit Asad, using chlorine gas last weekend? Well, it wouldn't.
Asad's forces had been winning the war in Syria. The [US] administration just announced its plan to pull American troops out of Syria, having vanquished ISIS. That's good news for Asad and about the only thing he could do to reverse it and hurt himself would be to use poison gas against children. 'Well, he did it anyway,' they tell us. 'He's that evil.' Please.
Keep in mind this is the same story they told us last April. Do you remember that? It was almost exactly a year ago. The new administration was now no longer seeking to depose Asad from power. Regime change was no longer our policy. So the usual war hawks in Washington started yelling, went beserk, and days later Asad supposedly used sarin gas against civilians in Syria. There was a video. We bombed a Syrian airbase in response to that. At the time the obvious question would seem to have been: Are we really sure that Asad did that? It seemed weirdly-timed and counterproductive to him. 'Shut up,' they exclaimed. 'Of course we're sure. What an unpatriotic question.' But of course they were lying. Two months ago the Secretary of Defense admitted that actually we still have no proof that Asad used sarin gas last year. The story, it turns out, was propaganda, designed to manipulate Americans - just like so much of what they say. We've seen this movie before, and we know how hit ends.
But just for the sake of argument let's assume they're not lying this time. Let's assume Asad did just use chlorine gas against kids... Would that be worth starting a new war? Overthrowing Asad's regime in Syria would result in chaos. Many thousands would die. In fact we might likely see the genocide of one of the last remaining Christian communities in the Middle East, and we might just care about that... Would it make America safer? Would it make the region more stable? Let's see exactly how regime change worked in Iraq and Libya. 'It doesn't matter,' say our moral leaders at CNN... atrocities like this cannot be tolerated. OK, but let's be real. We do tolerate atrocities like this all the time. For example, there's a devastating famine killing children in Yemen right now. The Saudis are causing that famine...
In real life Syria is a highly complicated place. With Asad gone who would run it exactly. Are the moderate rebels we're always hearing about, the ones you're supporting with your tax dollars. Well, a lot of them turn out to be Islamist crazies...
Back in 2013, when the Syrian civil war was still in its earliest days, one onlooker weighed in on twitter. Here's part of what he wrote: "We should stay the hell out of Syria. The rebels are just as bad as the current regime. What do we get from our lives and billions of dollars?. Zero." That was Donald Trump.* And he was right, and that's one of the reasons he got elected president, and now the same people who brought us a dying American middle class, indefensible American borders and endless, pointless wars you can't even find on a map, are telling the president he's got to depose Asad for reasons that are both unclear and demonstrably dishonest...
Roger Wickers is the Republican representative for the state of Mississippi, and he joins us tonight... Senator, what is the national security interest that would be served by regime change in Syria?
Wickers: Well, if you care about Israel, you have to be interested at least in what's going on in Syria...
[*Trump's latest (11/4) gobsmacking tweet, smacking of a b-grade 50s western: "Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and 'smart!' You shouldn't be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!]
PS - 13/4: Tucker Carlson's rant was featured on the American progressive Jimmy Dore Show. Most of it was replayed to much head-nodding and positive asides by Dore. But not all. Seems he was so wowed over the convergence of his and Carlson's anti-war stance on Syria that he neglected to play Carlson's exchange with Wickers. Funny that...
... All those geniuses tell us that Asad killed the children. But do we really know that? Of course, they really don't know that. They're making it up. They have no real idea what happened... How would it benefit Asad, using chlorine gas last weekend? Well, it wouldn't.
Asad's forces had been winning the war in Syria. The [US] administration just announced its plan to pull American troops out of Syria, having vanquished ISIS. That's good news for Asad and about the only thing he could do to reverse it and hurt himself would be to use poison gas against children. 'Well, he did it anyway,' they tell us. 'He's that evil.' Please.
Keep in mind this is the same story they told us last April. Do you remember that? It was almost exactly a year ago. The new administration was now no longer seeking to depose Asad from power. Regime change was no longer our policy. So the usual war hawks in Washington started yelling, went beserk, and days later Asad supposedly used sarin gas against civilians in Syria. There was a video. We bombed a Syrian airbase in response to that. At the time the obvious question would seem to have been: Are we really sure that Asad did that? It seemed weirdly-timed and counterproductive to him. 'Shut up,' they exclaimed. 'Of course we're sure. What an unpatriotic question.' But of course they were lying. Two months ago the Secretary of Defense admitted that actually we still have no proof that Asad used sarin gas last year. The story, it turns out, was propaganda, designed to manipulate Americans - just like so much of what they say. We've seen this movie before, and we know how hit ends.
But just for the sake of argument let's assume they're not lying this time. Let's assume Asad did just use chlorine gas against kids... Would that be worth starting a new war? Overthrowing Asad's regime in Syria would result in chaos. Many thousands would die. In fact we might likely see the genocide of one of the last remaining Christian communities in the Middle East, and we might just care about that... Would it make America safer? Would it make the region more stable? Let's see exactly how regime change worked in Iraq and Libya. 'It doesn't matter,' say our moral leaders at CNN... atrocities like this cannot be tolerated. OK, but let's be real. We do tolerate atrocities like this all the time. For example, there's a devastating famine killing children in Yemen right now. The Saudis are causing that famine...
In real life Syria is a highly complicated place. With Asad gone who would run it exactly. Are the moderate rebels we're always hearing about, the ones you're supporting with your tax dollars. Well, a lot of them turn out to be Islamist crazies...
Back in 2013, when the Syrian civil war was still in its earliest days, one onlooker weighed in on twitter. Here's part of what he wrote: "We should stay the hell out of Syria. The rebels are just as bad as the current regime. What do we get from our lives and billions of dollars?. Zero." That was Donald Trump.* And he was right, and that's one of the reasons he got elected president, and now the same people who brought us a dying American middle class, indefensible American borders and endless, pointless wars you can't even find on a map, are telling the president he's got to depose Asad for reasons that are both unclear and demonstrably dishonest...
Roger Wickers is the Republican representative for the state of Mississippi, and he joins us tonight... Senator, what is the national security interest that would be served by regime change in Syria?
Wickers: Well, if you care about Israel, you have to be interested at least in what's going on in Syria...
[*Trump's latest (11/4) gobsmacking tweet, smacking of a b-grade 50s western: "Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and 'smart!' You shouldn't be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!]
PS - 13/4: Tucker Carlson's rant was featured on the American progressive Jimmy Dore Show. Most of it was replayed to much head-nodding and positive asides by Dore. But not all. Seems he was so wowed over the convergence of his and Carlson's anti-war stance on Syria that he neglected to play Carlson's exchange with Wickers. Funny that...
Thursday, November 30, 2017
St Theresa
Words:
"Theresa May is travelling to Saudi Arabia and is expected to raise the issue of the country's role in Yemen. In an interview with the BBC's Alex Forsyth, she said she was 'concerned' about the developing humanitarian crisis there." (PM 'concerned' about the developing humanitarian crisis there, bbc.com, 29/11/17)
Action:
Fun fact: Theresa May signed off P1.1bn worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia this year. Tweet, Patrick Galey, 29/11/17)
"Theresa May is travelling to Saudi Arabia and is expected to raise the issue of the country's role in Yemen. In an interview with the BBC's Alex Forsyth, she said she was 'concerned' about the developing humanitarian crisis there." (PM 'concerned' about the developing humanitarian crisis there, bbc.com, 29/11/17)
Action:
Fun fact: Theresa May signed off P1.1bn worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia this year. Tweet, Patrick Galey, 29/11/17)
Saturday, November 25, 2017
MBS's 'Impulsive Intervention Policy'
Must read:
The reverse Midas touch of Saudi Arabia's crown prince is turning the Middle East to dust, Mehdi Hasan, theintercept.com, 14/11/17
"Kudos to Germany's spooks. Back in December 2015, the German foreign intelligence agency, BND, distributed a... memo to various media outlets titled: 'Saudi Arabia - Sunni regional power torn between foreign policy paradigm change and domestic policy consolidation.' The document was pretty astonishing, both in its undiplomatic bluntness and remarkable prescience: 'The current cautious diplomatic stance of senior members of the Saudi royal family will be replaced by an impulsive intervention policy,' the memo warned, focusing on the role of Mohammed bin Salman, who had been appointed as deputy crown prince and defense minister at the age of 30 earlier that year.
"Both MBS, as he has come to be known, and his elderly father King Salman, the BND analysts wrote, want Saudi Arabia to be seen as 'the leader of the Arab world' with a foreign policy built on 'a strong military component.' Yet the memo also pointed out that the consolidation of so much power in a single young prince's hands 'harbours a latent risk that in seeking to establish himself in the line of succession in his father's lifetime, he may overreach,' adding: 'Relations with friendly and above all allied countries in the region could be overstretched.'
"And so it has come to pass. In fact, despite being repudiated at the time by a German government more concerned about diplomatic and commercial relations with Riyadh, the BND warning turned out to be eerily prophetic.
"Consider recent events in the Gulf. Can you get more 'impulsive' than rounding up 11 fellow princes, including one of the world's richest men and the commander of the national guard, and holding them at the Ritz Carlton on charges of corruption? Especially since MBS, who ordered the arrests only a few hours after his father set up an anti-corruption committee and put him in charge of it, isn't exactly a paragon of probity and transparency himself. Where, for example, did the crown prince find more than five hundred million dollars to spend on a luxury yacht while vacationing in the south of France last year?
"Is it anything other than 'interventionist' to force the resignation of the prime minister of Lebanon on a visit to your country and then put him under a form of house arrest (though the hapless Saad Hariri, a long-standing client of Riyadh, publicly claims otherwise and says he is heading back to Beirut this week)? Or to also detain the president of Yemen? According to an investigation by the Associated Press, 'Saudi Arabia has barred Yemen's President, along with his sons, ministers and military officials, from returning home for months.'
"That the crown prince of Saudi Arabia can, essentially, kidnap the elected leaders of not one but two Middle Eastern countries - and, incidentally, put the leading Saudi royal he replaced as crown prince under house arrest - speaks volumes about not just his 'impulsive intervention policy' but the shameless pass he gets from Western governments for such rogue behaviour. Imagine the reaction from the international community if Iran had, say, detained the Iraqi prime minister on Iranian soil after forcing him to resign on Iranian television. Yet President Donald Trump has gone out of his way to tweet his support for the crown prince and his father: 'I have great confidence in King Salman and the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, they know exactly what they are doing.'
"The more sober Europeans haven't been much better. President Emmanuel Macron of France, on a surprise visit to Riyadh last week, saluted MBS 'on the opening of his country and support for a moderate Islam.'
"Meanwhile, are we supposed to call the rift between the Gulf countries, instigated by the Saudis, with the support of the Emiratis, anything other than 'overreach,' to quote the BND, on the part of MBS? The crown prince and his cronies had assumed that tiny, defenceless Qatar would be brought to heel within a matter of weeks, if not days. Five months on, however, the Qataris continue to reject the long list of Saudi/UAE demands - including the closure of the Qatar-owned Al-Jazeera media network - and have retreated into the warm embrace of MBS's key regional rivals, Iran and Turkey. Bravo, Crown Prince!
Then there is Yemen. More than two years after the richest country in the Middle East began bombing the poorest country in the Middle East, there is no end in sight. MBS owns this disastrous conflict - he pushed for it, defended it, escalated it. But wasn't the recent Houthi rocket attack on Riyadh - which the crown prince called an act of 'direct military aggression by the Iranian military regime' - evidence of a complete failure of Saudi military strategy? Weren't those pesky Houthi rebels supposed to have been vanquished by the Royal Saudi Air Force by now? Instead, Yemen has become the world's worst humanitarian crisis - which MBS, as defence minister, shamefully intensified with his order last week to blockade all entry points into the country.
"From Lebanon to Qatar to Yemen, the much-lauded MBS has in fact proved to be the reverse Midas - everything he touches turns to dust. Maybe the authors of that scathing BND memo underestimated just how much of a disaster this favoured son of Salman would be both for the kingdom and for the wider region. The inconvenient truth about the crown prince is that he isn't only impulsive, he's incompetent: he isn't only ambitious, he's reckless. He is also a nationalist and a hawk who is bent on turning the longstanding Saudi/Iran cold war into a very hot war - and is even willing to ally with Benjamin Netanyahu's Israel in order to do so."
The reverse Midas touch of Saudi Arabia's crown prince is turning the Middle East to dust, Mehdi Hasan, theintercept.com, 14/11/17
"Kudos to Germany's spooks. Back in December 2015, the German foreign intelligence agency, BND, distributed a... memo to various media outlets titled: 'Saudi Arabia - Sunni regional power torn between foreign policy paradigm change and domestic policy consolidation.' The document was pretty astonishing, both in its undiplomatic bluntness and remarkable prescience: 'The current cautious diplomatic stance of senior members of the Saudi royal family will be replaced by an impulsive intervention policy,' the memo warned, focusing on the role of Mohammed bin Salman, who had been appointed as deputy crown prince and defense minister at the age of 30 earlier that year.
"Both MBS, as he has come to be known, and his elderly father King Salman, the BND analysts wrote, want Saudi Arabia to be seen as 'the leader of the Arab world' with a foreign policy built on 'a strong military component.' Yet the memo also pointed out that the consolidation of so much power in a single young prince's hands 'harbours a latent risk that in seeking to establish himself in the line of succession in his father's lifetime, he may overreach,' adding: 'Relations with friendly and above all allied countries in the region could be overstretched.'
"And so it has come to pass. In fact, despite being repudiated at the time by a German government more concerned about diplomatic and commercial relations with Riyadh, the BND warning turned out to be eerily prophetic.
"Consider recent events in the Gulf. Can you get more 'impulsive' than rounding up 11 fellow princes, including one of the world's richest men and the commander of the national guard, and holding them at the Ritz Carlton on charges of corruption? Especially since MBS, who ordered the arrests only a few hours after his father set up an anti-corruption committee and put him in charge of it, isn't exactly a paragon of probity and transparency himself. Where, for example, did the crown prince find more than five hundred million dollars to spend on a luxury yacht while vacationing in the south of France last year?
"Is it anything other than 'interventionist' to force the resignation of the prime minister of Lebanon on a visit to your country and then put him under a form of house arrest (though the hapless Saad Hariri, a long-standing client of Riyadh, publicly claims otherwise and says he is heading back to Beirut this week)? Or to also detain the president of Yemen? According to an investigation by the Associated Press, 'Saudi Arabia has barred Yemen's President, along with his sons, ministers and military officials, from returning home for months.'
"That the crown prince of Saudi Arabia can, essentially, kidnap the elected leaders of not one but two Middle Eastern countries - and, incidentally, put the leading Saudi royal he replaced as crown prince under house arrest - speaks volumes about not just his 'impulsive intervention policy' but the shameless pass he gets from Western governments for such rogue behaviour. Imagine the reaction from the international community if Iran had, say, detained the Iraqi prime minister on Iranian soil after forcing him to resign on Iranian television. Yet President Donald Trump has gone out of his way to tweet his support for the crown prince and his father: 'I have great confidence in King Salman and the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, they know exactly what they are doing.'
"The more sober Europeans haven't been much better. President Emmanuel Macron of France, on a surprise visit to Riyadh last week, saluted MBS 'on the opening of his country and support for a moderate Islam.'
"Meanwhile, are we supposed to call the rift between the Gulf countries, instigated by the Saudis, with the support of the Emiratis, anything other than 'overreach,' to quote the BND, on the part of MBS? The crown prince and his cronies had assumed that tiny, defenceless Qatar would be brought to heel within a matter of weeks, if not days. Five months on, however, the Qataris continue to reject the long list of Saudi/UAE demands - including the closure of the Qatar-owned Al-Jazeera media network - and have retreated into the warm embrace of MBS's key regional rivals, Iran and Turkey. Bravo, Crown Prince!
Then there is Yemen. More than two years after the richest country in the Middle East began bombing the poorest country in the Middle East, there is no end in sight. MBS owns this disastrous conflict - he pushed for it, defended it, escalated it. But wasn't the recent Houthi rocket attack on Riyadh - which the crown prince called an act of 'direct military aggression by the Iranian military regime' - evidence of a complete failure of Saudi military strategy? Weren't those pesky Houthi rebels supposed to have been vanquished by the Royal Saudi Air Force by now? Instead, Yemen has become the world's worst humanitarian crisis - which MBS, as defence minister, shamefully intensified with his order last week to blockade all entry points into the country.
"From Lebanon to Qatar to Yemen, the much-lauded MBS has in fact proved to be the reverse Midas - everything he touches turns to dust. Maybe the authors of that scathing BND memo underestimated just how much of a disaster this favoured son of Salman would be both for the kingdom and for the wider region. The inconvenient truth about the crown prince is that he isn't only impulsive, he's incompetent: he isn't only ambitious, he's reckless. He is also a nationalist and a hawk who is bent on turning the longstanding Saudi/Iran cold war into a very hot war - and is even willing to ally with Benjamin Netanyahu's Israel in order to do so."
Monday, November 20, 2017
And the Answer Is?
"How is this not the biggest story in the world? 'Now in its 11th day, the blockade on almost all of #Yemen's seaports, airports & land crossings prevents the entry of food, fuel, medicines and supplies, exposing millions of people to disease, starvation and death.' #YemenFamine" (Sophie McNeill tweet, 16/11/17)
Friday, September 29, 2017
Corbyn's Latest Foreign Policy Pronouncements
From Jeremy Corbyn's 2017 Labour conference speech in Brighton:
"[W]e also know that terrorism is thriving in a world our governments have helped to shape, with its failed states, military interventions and occupations where millions are forced to flee conflict or hunger. We have to do better and swap the knee-jerk response of another bombing campaign for long-term help to solve conflicts rather than fuel them. And we must put our values at the heart of our foreign policy. Democracy and human rights are not an optional extra to be deployed selectively.
"So we cannot be silent at the cruel Saudi war in Yemen, while continuing to supply arms to Saudi Arabia, or the crushing of democracy in Egypt or Bahrain, or the tragic loss of life in Congo. And I say to Aung San Suu Kyi - a champion of democracy and human rights - : end the violence now against the Rohingya in Myanmar and allow the UN and international aid agencies in to Rakhine state. The Rohingya have suffered for too long!
"We should stand firm for peaceful solutions to international crises. Let's tone down the rhetoric, and back dialogue and negotiations to wind down the deeply dangerous confrontation over the Korean Peninsula. And I appeal to the UN secretary general, Antonio Guterres to use the authority of his office and go to Washington and Pyongyang to kick start that essential process of dialogue.
"And let's give real support to end the oppression of the Palestinian people, the 50-year occupation and illegal settlement expansion and move to a genuine two-state solution of the Israel-Palestine conflict.
"Britain's voice needs to be heard independently in the world. We must be a candid friend to the United States, now more than ever. The values we share are not served by building walls, banning immigrants on the basis of religion, polluting the planet, or pandering to racism."
A genuine two-state solution of the Israel-Palestine conflict???
Meanwhile, back in occupied Palestine, in the illegal Gush Etzion settlement bloc, to be precise, Netanyahu and 5,000 guests have just celebrated 50 years of Israeli occupation... 'There will be no more uprooting of settlements in the land of Israel,' [Netanyahu] said to applause." (Israel holds controversial ceremony marking 50 years of settlement, Michael Blum, yahoo.com/news, 28/9/17)
"[W]e also know that terrorism is thriving in a world our governments have helped to shape, with its failed states, military interventions and occupations where millions are forced to flee conflict or hunger. We have to do better and swap the knee-jerk response of another bombing campaign for long-term help to solve conflicts rather than fuel them. And we must put our values at the heart of our foreign policy. Democracy and human rights are not an optional extra to be deployed selectively.
"So we cannot be silent at the cruel Saudi war in Yemen, while continuing to supply arms to Saudi Arabia, or the crushing of democracy in Egypt or Bahrain, or the tragic loss of life in Congo. And I say to Aung San Suu Kyi - a champion of democracy and human rights - : end the violence now against the Rohingya in Myanmar and allow the UN and international aid agencies in to Rakhine state. The Rohingya have suffered for too long!
"We should stand firm for peaceful solutions to international crises. Let's tone down the rhetoric, and back dialogue and negotiations to wind down the deeply dangerous confrontation over the Korean Peninsula. And I appeal to the UN secretary general, Antonio Guterres to use the authority of his office and go to Washington and Pyongyang to kick start that essential process of dialogue.
"And let's give real support to end the oppression of the Palestinian people, the 50-year occupation and illegal settlement expansion and move to a genuine two-state solution of the Israel-Palestine conflict.
"Britain's voice needs to be heard independently in the world. We must be a candid friend to the United States, now more than ever. The values we share are not served by building walls, banning immigrants on the basis of religion, polluting the planet, or pandering to racism."
A genuine two-state solution of the Israel-Palestine conflict???
Meanwhile, back in occupied Palestine, in the illegal Gush Etzion settlement bloc, to be precise, Netanyahu and 5,000 guests have just celebrated 50 years of Israeli occupation... 'There will be no more uprooting of settlements in the land of Israel,' [Netanyahu] said to applause." (Israel holds controversial ceremony marking 50 years of settlement, Michael Blum, yahoo.com/news, 28/9/17)
Thursday, May 4, 2017
Lest We Forget: Yemen
From a statement by Jan Egeland, Secretary General of the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) after a 5-day visit to Sana'a and Amran in Yemen:
"I am shocked to my bones by what I have seen and heard here in war- and hunger- stricken Yemen. The world is letting some 7 million men, women and children slowly but surely be engulfed by unprecedented famine. It is not a drought that is at fault. This preventable catastrophe is man-made from A to Z. Nowhere on earth are as many lives at risk. We are not even sure that the main humanitarian lifeline through the port of Hudaydah will be kept open. The Saudi-led, Western-backed, military coalition has threatened to attack the port, which would likely destroy it and cut supplies to millions of hungry civilians. The severe access restrictions to Yemen by air, sea and land has caused economic collapse in a country of 27 million people." (A man-made famine on our watch, nrc.no, 3/5/17)
"I am shocked to my bones by what I have seen and heard here in war- and hunger- stricken Yemen. The world is letting some 7 million men, women and children slowly but surely be engulfed by unprecedented famine. It is not a drought that is at fault. This preventable catastrophe is man-made from A to Z. Nowhere on earth are as many lives at risk. We are not even sure that the main humanitarian lifeline through the port of Hudaydah will be kept open. The Saudi-led, Western-backed, military coalition has threatened to attack the port, which would likely destroy it and cut supplies to millions of hungry civilians. The severe access restrictions to Yemen by air, sea and land has caused economic collapse in a country of 27 million people." (A man-made famine on our watch, nrc.no, 3/5/17)
Thursday, March 30, 2017
A Tale of Two Protests
In his latest commentary, A tale of two protests, antiwar.com's Justin Raimondo compares two tweeted photographs - one of Yemeni protesters, the other of Russian protesters - and draws a telling conclusion about the priorities and values of Western political and media elites:
"That day hundreds of thousands of Yemenis rallied against the vicious war being waged against them by Saudi Arabia and the United States - and look at the faces in that photo. These are children, their faces distorted by rage at what is happening to their country, and their lives. Their youth is no accident: most of the victims of this sickeningly immoral war are children, felled by US-supplied bombs dropped by US-manufactured warplanes, the rest killed by starvation. The Saudis are committing war crimes in Yemen - one of the poorest nations on earth - with the aid and active assistance of the Pentagon, which is now contemplating an even deeper involvement by the US.
"Yet this massive outpouring of protest received minimal coverage in the Western media compared to another protest that occurred on that same day in Russia, where the Russian bourgeoisie mobilized in the big cities, demonstrating against official corruption. This received front page attention in the Western media, while liberal commentators and their neoconservative allies demanded that President Trump make a statement of support (he did not). Naturally, the photographers from the Western media were swarming all over this manifestation of discontent with the hated Putin (hated, that is, by Western liberals), and, as per usual, they settled on one photo as the 'iconic' image meant to convey the plight of the Russian people...
"There she is, a well-dressed and apparently well-fed young woman being ever-so-gently lifted by the police. There is no expression on her face except for a vague emptiness, an absence of anger, passion, or any of the other emotions one associates with a righteous cause. Contrast this with the faces of the Yemeni children, their visages reflecting the utter desperation of their condition, their little fists raised in expressions of outraged militance - a militance that will, not so far in the future, be aimed at those who killed their brothers, their sisters, their parents, their nation. Aimed, in short, at us." (29/3/17)
"That day hundreds of thousands of Yemenis rallied against the vicious war being waged against them by Saudi Arabia and the United States - and look at the faces in that photo. These are children, their faces distorted by rage at what is happening to their country, and their lives. Their youth is no accident: most of the victims of this sickeningly immoral war are children, felled by US-supplied bombs dropped by US-manufactured warplanes, the rest killed by starvation. The Saudis are committing war crimes in Yemen - one of the poorest nations on earth - with the aid and active assistance of the Pentagon, which is now contemplating an even deeper involvement by the US.
"Yet this massive outpouring of protest received minimal coverage in the Western media compared to another protest that occurred on that same day in Russia, where the Russian bourgeoisie mobilized in the big cities, demonstrating against official corruption. This received front page attention in the Western media, while liberal commentators and their neoconservative allies demanded that President Trump make a statement of support (he did not). Naturally, the photographers from the Western media were swarming all over this manifestation of discontent with the hated Putin (hated, that is, by Western liberals), and, as per usual, they settled on one photo as the 'iconic' image meant to convey the plight of the Russian people...
"There she is, a well-dressed and apparently well-fed young woman being ever-so-gently lifted by the police. There is no expression on her face except for a vague emptiness, an absence of anger, passion, or any of the other emotions one associates with a righteous cause. Contrast this with the faces of the Yemeni children, their visages reflecting the utter desperation of their condition, their little fists raised in expressions of outraged militance - a militance that will, not so far in the future, be aimed at those who killed their brothers, their sisters, their parents, their nation. Aimed, in short, at us." (29/3/17)
Wednesday, March 29, 2017
Just Another ALP Show Phony
Compare and contrast:
1)
Pinned Tweet:
Senator Penny Wong 17/9/16 Time for leaders to speak up#leadership
"Nobody needs to defend Pauline Hanson's right to speak. Leadership is about defending those without a voice. Those Pauline Hanson is attacking." Senator Penny Wong
2)
"Penny Wong, the new Foreign Affairs spokesperson for the ALP, has said nothing at all [about the US-backed, Saudi-led, genocidal war on Yemen]. In response to media queries sent to the offices of Plibersek and Wong, I received a response from Stephen Spencer, the media adviser to Wong. He sent me what he said was 'Labor's position on Yemen'. It read:
'Labor is deeply concerned by the conflict in Yemen and the attacks on civilians, schools and hospitals. Labor condemns all violence and urges restraint from all parties. Labor calls on both sides of the Saudi Arabian-Yemeni conflict, the Houthis and the pro-government forces, to de-escalate the conflict and resume negotiations, consistent with UN Security Council resolution 2216. Labor calls on both sides of the Saudi Arabian-Yemeni conflict to restore peace, security and stability to Yemen and the region.'
"This is the only thing they have said about the war on Yemen. They did not release it publicly. The only record of it, until this article, was in the email sent to me." (Penny for her thoughts: ALP changes stance on Yemen from silence to waffly garbage, Michael Brull, newmatilda.com, 29/3/17 )
1)
Pinned Tweet:
Senator Penny Wong 17/9/16 Time for leaders to speak up#leadership
"Nobody needs to defend Pauline Hanson's right to speak. Leadership is about defending those without a voice. Those Pauline Hanson is attacking." Senator Penny Wong
2)
"Penny Wong, the new Foreign Affairs spokesperson for the ALP, has said nothing at all [about the US-backed, Saudi-led, genocidal war on Yemen]. In response to media queries sent to the offices of Plibersek and Wong, I received a response from Stephen Spencer, the media adviser to Wong. He sent me what he said was 'Labor's position on Yemen'. It read:
'Labor is deeply concerned by the conflict in Yemen and the attacks on civilians, schools and hospitals. Labor condemns all violence and urges restraint from all parties. Labor calls on both sides of the Saudi Arabian-Yemeni conflict, the Houthis and the pro-government forces, to de-escalate the conflict and resume negotiations, consistent with UN Security Council resolution 2216. Labor calls on both sides of the Saudi Arabian-Yemeni conflict to restore peace, security and stability to Yemen and the region.'
"This is the only thing they have said about the war on Yemen. They did not release it publicly. The only record of it, until this article, was in the email sent to me." (Penny for her thoughts: ALP changes stance on Yemen from silence to waffly garbage, Michael Brull, newmatilda.com, 29/3/17 )
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.
Monday, January 23, 2017
The Solitary Crusade of Congressman Ted Lieu
"It's very clear to me that there's not enough discussion about what is happening in Yemen and the United States' participation in direct military operations there, refueling jets that then drop bombs on civilians, and that is morally outrageous. If the US was doing this with our own pilots, they'd be getting court-martialed right now...
"So the US has been refueling the Saudi-led military coalition and those [Saudi/UAE] jets go drop bombs in Yemen, and, according to various reports, about one third of these bombs end up hitting civilians nowhere near military targets. They look like war crimes, and I want that to stop, and I believe the US should not be assisting a military coalition that has engaged in over 70 unlawful airstrikes.
"[My] role is to try and get the [US] administration to change course, so I've written multiple letters to the administration. I have met with administration officials. I have participated in hearings on Yemen. And, as a result of my efforts, as well as those of humanitarian organisations, the administration is now doing an internal review of what the heck we're doing in Yemen, and that's a positive step.
"The second thing I'm trying to do is just raise awareness... If you look at the way our system is set up, there is no superpath out there that is advocating for Yemen, there is no lobby raising money for Yemen, and my view is that if I don't speak out against what's happening there, then who else is? It helps national security too, because every bomb that drops with US assistance on a Yemeni child is going to be a powerful recruiting tool for terrorists." (Fueling Yemen's war: A congressman calls out the US for potential war crimes in Yemen, interview with Joshua Hersh, news.vice.com, 18/1/17)
"So the US has been refueling the Saudi-led military coalition and those [Saudi/UAE] jets go drop bombs in Yemen, and, according to various reports, about one third of these bombs end up hitting civilians nowhere near military targets. They look like war crimes, and I want that to stop, and I believe the US should not be assisting a military coalition that has engaged in over 70 unlawful airstrikes.
"[My] role is to try and get the [US] administration to change course, so I've written multiple letters to the administration. I have met with administration officials. I have participated in hearings on Yemen. And, as a result of my efforts, as well as those of humanitarian organisations, the administration is now doing an internal review of what the heck we're doing in Yemen, and that's a positive step.
"The second thing I'm trying to do is just raise awareness... If you look at the way our system is set up, there is no superpath out there that is advocating for Yemen, there is no lobby raising money for Yemen, and my view is that if I don't speak out against what's happening there, then who else is? It helps national security too, because every bomb that drops with US assistance on a Yemeni child is going to be a powerful recruiting tool for terrorists." (Fueling Yemen's war: A congressman calls out the US for potential war crimes in Yemen, interview with Joshua Hersh, news.vice.com, 18/1/17)
Sunday, October 30, 2016
Blairats in the Ranks
Note this fine editorial in the UK's Evening Standard of 27/10/16:
"Yesterday the leader of the Opposition, Jeremy Corbyn, brought a motion before the Commons to support a UN investigation into the war in Yemen and questioned the sales of British arms to Saudi Arabia, which he claims may be used to bomb civilians. He also criticised the Government's apparent support for Saudi to be admitted to the UN Human Rights Council. His motion was defeated as his MPs didn't back it. But on this, Mr Corbyn was right; his critics wrong. The war in Yemen, the poorest country in the Middle East, rivals that in Syria for its catastrophic effect on civilians. Yet Britain, while indignant about Russian actions in Aleppo, is happy to sell arms arms to the Saudi coalition besieging the city of Hodeida, where children are dying of hunger. This is an iniquitous double standard. Mr Corbyn is the conscience of Parliament on Yemen."
HIS MOTION WAS DEFEATED AS HIS MPs DIDN'T BACK IT!!??
OMFG...
Having recently won yet another election as Labour leader against the party's Blairite diehards, Corbyn, the conscience of the British Parliament on many things, now needs to deal with these backstabbing Blairats in the ranks.
As for his Australian equivalent (in name only I hasten to add), Bill Shorten wouldn't even be able to find Yemen on an unmarked map of the Middle East if his life depended on it. No problem finding his way to Israel though.
"Yesterday the leader of the Opposition, Jeremy Corbyn, brought a motion before the Commons to support a UN investigation into the war in Yemen and questioned the sales of British arms to Saudi Arabia, which he claims may be used to bomb civilians. He also criticised the Government's apparent support for Saudi to be admitted to the UN Human Rights Council. His motion was defeated as his MPs didn't back it. But on this, Mr Corbyn was right; his critics wrong. The war in Yemen, the poorest country in the Middle East, rivals that in Syria for its catastrophic effect on civilians. Yet Britain, while indignant about Russian actions in Aleppo, is happy to sell arms arms to the Saudi coalition besieging the city of Hodeida, where children are dying of hunger. This is an iniquitous double standard. Mr Corbyn is the conscience of Parliament on Yemen."
HIS MOTION WAS DEFEATED AS HIS MPs DIDN'T BACK IT!!??
OMFG...
Having recently won yet another election as Labour leader against the party's Blairite diehards, Corbyn, the conscience of the British Parliament on many things, now needs to deal with these backstabbing Blairats in the ranks.
As for his Australian equivalent (in name only I hasten to add), Bill Shorten wouldn't even be able to find Yemen on an unmarked map of the Middle East if his life depended on it. No problem finding his way to Israel though.
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.
Thursday, October 11, 2012
The Summer of Muslim Discontent 4: Yemen
Continuing an Arab Spring update from James Petras' latest (21/9/12) essay...
"The seizure of the US Embassy in Yemen followed 33 years of US arming and financial backing of the brutal Ali Abdullah Saleh dictatorship, months of drone warfare and the repression of mass peaceful protests. The ongoing pro-democracy movement in Yemen, which attained massive proportions, has been blocked by US-Saudi intervention, leaving in its wake thousands of dead, wounded and jailed Yemeni citizens. The seizure of the US Embassy, ostensibly over 'the film', had far deeper and more comprehensive causes: popular discontent with the decades-long US-Yemen alliance and a phony US-promoted 'democratic transition'. As in Egypt and Tunisia, changes in personnel are designed to save the client state apparatus (police, military, judiciary), the mainstay of US and Saudi power in the Gulf region, while sacrificing the incumbent dictator. In all such 'transitions' the US and EU rely on pliable and servile Muslim politicians in order to harness local religious beliefs to their neo-liberal and pro-imperial policies."
Next post in the series: Tunisia...
"The seizure of the US Embassy in Yemen followed 33 years of US arming and financial backing of the brutal Ali Abdullah Saleh dictatorship, months of drone warfare and the repression of mass peaceful protests. The ongoing pro-democracy movement in Yemen, which attained massive proportions, has been blocked by US-Saudi intervention, leaving in its wake thousands of dead, wounded and jailed Yemeni citizens. The seizure of the US Embassy, ostensibly over 'the film', had far deeper and more comprehensive causes: popular discontent with the decades-long US-Yemen alliance and a phony US-promoted 'democratic transition'. As in Egypt and Tunisia, changes in personnel are designed to save the client state apparatus (police, military, judiciary), the mainstay of US and Saudi power in the Gulf region, while sacrificing the incumbent dictator. In all such 'transitions' the US and EU rely on pliable and servile Muslim politicians in order to harness local religious beliefs to their neo-liberal and pro-imperial policies."
Next post in the series: Tunisia...
Monday, April 4, 2011
The Counter-Revolution Firms 3
Two of the sharpest knives in the pack dissect the ongoing counter-revolution in the Arab world:
"If not to prevent genocide, grab the oil or promote democracy (via Patriot missiles), what then is the driving force behind the Euro-US imperial intervention [in Libya]? A clue lies in the selectivity of Western military intervention: in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Jordan, Qatar and Oman ruling autocrats, allied with and backed by Euro-US imperial states go about arresting, torturing and murdering unarmed urban protesters with total impunity. In Egypt and Tunisia, the US is backing a conservative junta of self-appointed civil-military elites in order to block the profound democratic and nationalist transformation of society demanded by the protesters. The 'junta' aims to push through neo-liberal economic 'reforms' through carefully vetted pro-Western 'elected' officials. While liberal critics may accuse the West of 'hypocrisy' and 'double standards' in bombing Gaddafi but not the Gulf butchers, in reality the imperial rulers consistently apply the same standards in each region: they defend strategic autocratic client regimes, which have allowed imperial states to build strategic air force and naval bases, run regional intelligence operations and set up logistical platforms for their ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as their future planned conflict with Iran. They attack Gaddafi's Libya precisely because Gaddafi had refused to actively contribute to Western military operations in Africa and the Middle East. The key point is that while Libya allows the biggest US-European multinationals to plunder its oil wealth, it did not become a strategic geopolitical-military asset of the empire. As we have written in many previous essays the driving force of US empire-building is military - and not economic. This is why billions of dollars of Western economic interests and contracts have been sacrificed in the setting up of sanctions against Iraq and Iran - with the costly result that the invasion and occupation of Iraq shut down most oil exploitation for over a decade. The Washington-led assault on Libya... is part of a more general counter-attack in response to the most recent Arab popular pro-democracy movements. The West is backing the suppression of these pro-democracy movements throughout the Gulf; it finances the pro-imperial, pro-Israel junta in Egypt and it is intervening in Tunisia to ensure that any new regime is 'correctly aligned'. It supports a despotic regime in Algeria as well as Israel's daily assaults on Gaza. In line with this policy, the West backs the uprising of ex-Gaddafites and right-wing monarchists, confident that the 'liberated' Libya will once again provide military bases for the US-European military empire-builders." (The Euro-US war on Libya: official lies & misconceptions of critics, James Petras & Robin E, Abaya, petras.lehaine.org, 25/3/11)
"You invade Bahrain. We take out Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. This, in short, is the essence of a deal struck between the Barack Obama administration and the House of Saud. Two diplomatic sources at the United Nations independently confirmed that Washington, via Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, gave the go-ahead for Saudi Arabia to invade Bahrain and crush the pro-democracy movement in their neighbor in exchange for a 'yes' vote by the Arab League for a no-fly zone over Libya - the main rationale that led to United Nations Security Council resolution 1973. The revelation came from two different diplomats, a European and a member of the BRIC group, and was made separately to a US scholar and Asia Times Online. According to diplomatic protocol, their names cannot be disclosed. One of the diplomats said, 'This is the reason why we could not support resolution 1973. We were arguing that Libya, Bahrain and Yemen were similar cases, and calling for a fact-finding mission. We maintain our official position that the resolution is not clear, and may be interpreted in a belligerent manner'. As Asia Times Online has reported, a full Arab League endorsement of a no-fly zone is a myth. Of the 22 full members, only 11 were present at the voting. Six of them were Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) members, the US-supported club of Gulf kingdoms/sheikhdoms, of which Saudi Arabia is the top dog. Syria and Algeria were against it. Saudi Arabia only had to 'seduce' 3 other members to get the vote. Translation: only 9 out of 22 members of the Arab League voted for the no-fly zone. The vote was essentially a House of Saud-led operation, with Arab League secretary general Amr Moussa keen to polish his CV with Washington with an eye to become the next Egyptian President. Thus, in the beginning, there was the great 2011 Arab revolt. Then, inexorably, came the US-Saudi counter-revolution.
"Humanitarian imperialists will spin en masse this is a 'conspiracy', as they have been spinning the bombing of Libya prevented a hypothetical massacre in Benghazi. They will be defending the House of Saud - saying it acted to squash Iranian subversion in the Gulf; obviously R2P - 'responsibility to protect' does not apply to people in Bahrain. They will be heavily promoting post-Gaddafi Libya as a new - oily - human rights Mecca, complete with US intelligence assets, black-ops, special forces and dodgy contractors. Whatever they say won't alter the facts on the ground - the graphic results of the US-Saudi dirty dancing. Asia Times Online has already reported on who profits from the foreign intervention in Libya (see There's no business like war busines, March 30). Players include the Pentagon (via Africom), NATO, Saudi Arabia, the Arab League's Amr Moussa, and Qatar. Add to the list the al-Khalifa dynasty in Bahrain, assorted weapons contractors, and the usual neo-liberal suspects eager to privatize everything in sight in the new Libya - even the water. And we're not even talking about the Western vultures hovering over the Libyan oil and gas industry. Exposed, above all, is the astonishing hypocrisy of the Obama administration, selling a crass geopolitical coup involving northern Africa and the Persian Gulf as a humanitarian operation. As for the fact of another US war on a Muslim nation, that's just a 'kinetic military action'. There's been widespread speculation in both the US and across the Middle East that considering the military stalemate - and short of the 'coalition of the willing' bombing the Gaddafi family to oblivion - Washington, London and Paris might settle for the control of eastern Libya; a northern African version of an oil-rich Gulf Emirate. Gaddafi would be left with a starving North Korea-style Tripolitania. But considering the latest high-value defections from the regime, plus the desired endgame ('Gaddafi must go', in President Obama's own words), Washington, London, Paris and Riyadh won't settle for nothing but the whole kebab. Including a strategic base for both Africom and NATO." (Exposed: The US-Saudi Libya deal, Pepe Escobar, atimes.com,)
"If not to prevent genocide, grab the oil or promote democracy (via Patriot missiles), what then is the driving force behind the Euro-US imperial intervention [in Libya]? A clue lies in the selectivity of Western military intervention: in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Jordan, Qatar and Oman ruling autocrats, allied with and backed by Euro-US imperial states go about arresting, torturing and murdering unarmed urban protesters with total impunity. In Egypt and Tunisia, the US is backing a conservative junta of self-appointed civil-military elites in order to block the profound democratic and nationalist transformation of society demanded by the protesters. The 'junta' aims to push through neo-liberal economic 'reforms' through carefully vetted pro-Western 'elected' officials. While liberal critics may accuse the West of 'hypocrisy' and 'double standards' in bombing Gaddafi but not the Gulf butchers, in reality the imperial rulers consistently apply the same standards in each region: they defend strategic autocratic client regimes, which have allowed imperial states to build strategic air force and naval bases, run regional intelligence operations and set up logistical platforms for their ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as their future planned conflict with Iran. They attack Gaddafi's Libya precisely because Gaddafi had refused to actively contribute to Western military operations in Africa and the Middle East. The key point is that while Libya allows the biggest US-European multinationals to plunder its oil wealth, it did not become a strategic geopolitical-military asset of the empire. As we have written in many previous essays the driving force of US empire-building is military - and not economic. This is why billions of dollars of Western economic interests and contracts have been sacrificed in the setting up of sanctions against Iraq and Iran - with the costly result that the invasion and occupation of Iraq shut down most oil exploitation for over a decade. The Washington-led assault on Libya... is part of a more general counter-attack in response to the most recent Arab popular pro-democracy movements. The West is backing the suppression of these pro-democracy movements throughout the Gulf; it finances the pro-imperial, pro-Israel junta in Egypt and it is intervening in Tunisia to ensure that any new regime is 'correctly aligned'. It supports a despotic regime in Algeria as well as Israel's daily assaults on Gaza. In line with this policy, the West backs the uprising of ex-Gaddafites and right-wing monarchists, confident that the 'liberated' Libya will once again provide military bases for the US-European military empire-builders." (The Euro-US war on Libya: official lies & misconceptions of critics, James Petras & Robin E, Abaya, petras.lehaine.org, 25/3/11)
"You invade Bahrain. We take out Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. This, in short, is the essence of a deal struck between the Barack Obama administration and the House of Saud. Two diplomatic sources at the United Nations independently confirmed that Washington, via Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, gave the go-ahead for Saudi Arabia to invade Bahrain and crush the pro-democracy movement in their neighbor in exchange for a 'yes' vote by the Arab League for a no-fly zone over Libya - the main rationale that led to United Nations Security Council resolution 1973. The revelation came from two different diplomats, a European and a member of the BRIC group, and was made separately to a US scholar and Asia Times Online. According to diplomatic protocol, their names cannot be disclosed. One of the diplomats said, 'This is the reason why we could not support resolution 1973. We were arguing that Libya, Bahrain and Yemen were similar cases, and calling for a fact-finding mission. We maintain our official position that the resolution is not clear, and may be interpreted in a belligerent manner'. As Asia Times Online has reported, a full Arab League endorsement of a no-fly zone is a myth. Of the 22 full members, only 11 were present at the voting. Six of them were Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) members, the US-supported club of Gulf kingdoms/sheikhdoms, of which Saudi Arabia is the top dog. Syria and Algeria were against it. Saudi Arabia only had to 'seduce' 3 other members to get the vote. Translation: only 9 out of 22 members of the Arab League voted for the no-fly zone. The vote was essentially a House of Saud-led operation, with Arab League secretary general Amr Moussa keen to polish his CV with Washington with an eye to become the next Egyptian President. Thus, in the beginning, there was the great 2011 Arab revolt. Then, inexorably, came the US-Saudi counter-revolution.
"Humanitarian imperialists will spin en masse this is a 'conspiracy', as they have been spinning the bombing of Libya prevented a hypothetical massacre in Benghazi. They will be defending the House of Saud - saying it acted to squash Iranian subversion in the Gulf; obviously R2P - 'responsibility to protect' does not apply to people in Bahrain. They will be heavily promoting post-Gaddafi Libya as a new - oily - human rights Mecca, complete with US intelligence assets, black-ops, special forces and dodgy contractors. Whatever they say won't alter the facts on the ground - the graphic results of the US-Saudi dirty dancing. Asia Times Online has already reported on who profits from the foreign intervention in Libya (see There's no business like war busines, March 30). Players include the Pentagon (via Africom), NATO, Saudi Arabia, the Arab League's Amr Moussa, and Qatar. Add to the list the al-Khalifa dynasty in Bahrain, assorted weapons contractors, and the usual neo-liberal suspects eager to privatize everything in sight in the new Libya - even the water. And we're not even talking about the Western vultures hovering over the Libyan oil and gas industry. Exposed, above all, is the astonishing hypocrisy of the Obama administration, selling a crass geopolitical coup involving northern Africa and the Persian Gulf as a humanitarian operation. As for the fact of another US war on a Muslim nation, that's just a 'kinetic military action'. There's been widespread speculation in both the US and across the Middle East that considering the military stalemate - and short of the 'coalition of the willing' bombing the Gaddafi family to oblivion - Washington, London and Paris might settle for the control of eastern Libya; a northern African version of an oil-rich Gulf Emirate. Gaddafi would be left with a starving North Korea-style Tripolitania. But considering the latest high-value defections from the regime, plus the desired endgame ('Gaddafi must go', in President Obama's own words), Washington, London, Paris and Riyadh won't settle for nothing but the whole kebab. Including a strategic base for both Africom and NATO." (Exposed: The US-Saudi Libya deal, Pepe Escobar, atimes.com,)
Sunday, March 20, 2011
False Messiah
"... A light will shine through that window, a beam of light will come down upon you, you will experience an epiphany... & you will suddenly realize that you must go to the polls and vote for Obama." Barack Obama, Lebanon, New Hampshire, 7/1/08
For Obama so loved the Libyan people that He...
"... approved US missile strikes on Libya, warning a defiant Muammar Gaddafi that 'actions have consequences' but stressing that no US ground troops would deploy to the North African nation... Pentagon officials said US and British warships and submarines fired 110 Tomahawk cruise missiles at Libya's air defence systems in 'Operation Dawn', the first phase of military action against Libya to impose a UN-mandated no-fly zone. 'We must be clear: actions have consequences, and the writ of the international community must be enforced', Obama told reporters... 'I want the American people to know that the use of force is not our first choice, and it's not a choice that I make lightly', Obama said. 'But we cannot stand idly by when a tyrant tells the people there will be no mercy, and when his forces step up their assault on cities like Benghazi and Misrata where innocent men and women face brutality and death at the hands of their own government'." (Obama OKs missile strikes on Libya, AAP, 20/3/11)
Yet, for the innocent men and women of Bahrain, all He could manage was a lecture on restraint:
"At least 6 people were killed and hundreds wounded in Bahrain Wednesday when security forces crushed protesters camped in Manama, witnesses said. Explosions were heard and smoke seen billowing over the capital, al-Jazeera reported. A curfew was imposed on downtown areas including the Pearl Roundabout and the Bahrain Financial Harbour. Witnesses said the forces - armed with tanks, helicopters and jeeps mounted with machine guns - fired tear gas, rubber bullets and possibly live ammunition into crowds of protesters, as well as trashing vehicles, The New York Times reported... King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa Tuesday imposed martial law. On Monday, 2,000 troops from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were deployed to the island monarchy... A White House spokesman called for calm and restraint, and expressed concerns about violence from all sides." (6 deaths reported in Bahrain crackdown, upi.com, 16/3/11)
And for the innocents of Yemen, a mere tap on the wrist:
"Beleagured Yemen President Ali Abdullah Saleh ordered a state of after regime loyalists on Friday killed at least 46 protesters, according to medics, in the bloodiest clash in weeks of unrest. Witnesses said pro-Saleh 'thugs' had rained bullets from rooftops around a square at Sanaa University, the centre of demonstrations against Saleh, adding that more than 400 were wounded... The violence drew international condemnation, with US President Barack Obama calling on his key anti-terror ally to live up to a pledge to allow peaceful protests and engage with the opposition." (46 dead in Yemen protest bloodbath: medics, al-Jaberi & Mounassar, news.smh.com.au, 19/3/11)
As for the innocents of Gaza 2008-2009, how could we possibly forget His deafening silence?
For Obama so loved the Libyan people that He...
"... approved US missile strikes on Libya, warning a defiant Muammar Gaddafi that 'actions have consequences' but stressing that no US ground troops would deploy to the North African nation... Pentagon officials said US and British warships and submarines fired 110 Tomahawk cruise missiles at Libya's air defence systems in 'Operation Dawn', the first phase of military action against Libya to impose a UN-mandated no-fly zone. 'We must be clear: actions have consequences, and the writ of the international community must be enforced', Obama told reporters... 'I want the American people to know that the use of force is not our first choice, and it's not a choice that I make lightly', Obama said. 'But we cannot stand idly by when a tyrant tells the people there will be no mercy, and when his forces step up their assault on cities like Benghazi and Misrata where innocent men and women face brutality and death at the hands of their own government'." (Obama OKs missile strikes on Libya, AAP, 20/3/11)
Yet, for the innocent men and women of Bahrain, all He could manage was a lecture on restraint:
"At least 6 people were killed and hundreds wounded in Bahrain Wednesday when security forces crushed protesters camped in Manama, witnesses said. Explosions were heard and smoke seen billowing over the capital, al-Jazeera reported. A curfew was imposed on downtown areas including the Pearl Roundabout and the Bahrain Financial Harbour. Witnesses said the forces - armed with tanks, helicopters and jeeps mounted with machine guns - fired tear gas, rubber bullets and possibly live ammunition into crowds of protesters, as well as trashing vehicles, The New York Times reported... King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa Tuesday imposed martial law. On Monday, 2,000 troops from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were deployed to the island monarchy... A White House spokesman called for calm and restraint, and expressed concerns about violence from all sides." (6 deaths reported in Bahrain crackdown, upi.com, 16/3/11)
And for the innocents of Yemen, a mere tap on the wrist:
"Beleagured Yemen President Ali Abdullah Saleh ordered a state of after regime loyalists on Friday killed at least 46 protesters, according to medics, in the bloodiest clash in weeks of unrest. Witnesses said pro-Saleh 'thugs' had rained bullets from rooftops around a square at Sanaa University, the centre of demonstrations against Saleh, adding that more than 400 were wounded... The violence drew international condemnation, with US President Barack Obama calling on his key anti-terror ally to live up to a pledge to allow peaceful protests and engage with the opposition." (46 dead in Yemen protest bloodbath: medics, al-Jaberi & Mounassar, news.smh.com.au, 19/3/11)
As for the innocents of Gaza 2008-2009, how could we possibly forget His deafening silence?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)