Should the British government stand aside from the United States if it had planned to destabilise Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran?

Dr Nafeez Ahmed writes about the geopolitics of interconnected environmental, energy and economic crises in the Guardian.In 2001 he founded and directs the Institute for Policy Research & Development, based in London, which includes on its advisory board Dr. Johan Galtung. His special report on Syria, summarised in the Guardian, opens with the subject of chemical weapons and moves on to ask:

So what is this unfolding strategy to undermine Syria, Iran and so on, all about?

First scroll down and listen to the video of the (admittedly volatile) retired NATO Secretary General Wesley Clark, speaking in 2007 about plans for the ‘former Soviet client states’ :

gen wesley clarke video

Glenn Greenwald summarises Clark’s allegation that a memo from the Office of the U.S. Secretary of Defense just a few weeks after 9/11 revealed plans to attack and destroy the governments in 7 countries in five years.  No link was given but he might well be referring to this Wikileaks file.

Clark said that a Pentagon officer familiar with the memo told him, “we’re going to start with Iraq, and then we’re going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.”

In a subsequent interview, Clark argues that this strategy is fundamentally about control of the region’s vast oil and gas resources”.

Much of the strategy currently at play in the region was candidly described in the Rand Corporation’s 2008 U.S. Army-funded report, Unfolding the Future of the Long War, which noted that:

rand logo“The economies of the industrialized states will continue to rely heavily on oil, thus making it a strategically important resource . . . The geographic area of proven oil reserves coincides with the power base of much of the Salafi-jihadist network. This creates a linkage between oil supplies and the long war that is not easily broken or simply characterized… For the foreseeable future, world oil production growth and total output will be dominated by Persian Gulf resources… The region will therefore remain a strategic priority, and this priority will interact strongly with that of prosecuting the long war.”

Read more here about the document’s thinking on:

  • ‘Divide and Rule’ policies, turning Salafi-jihadist groups against each other so as to dissipate their energy on internal conflicts.
  • U.S. capitalizing on the ‘Sustained Shia-Sunni Conflict’ by taking the side of the conservative Sunni regimes against Shiite empowerment movements in the Muslim world….
  • and so empowering al-Qaeda jihadists, focusing their activity on internal sectarian rivalry rather than targeting the U.S.
  • The U.S.’s key allies and enemies increasing vulnerability to the converging crises of rapidly rising populations, a ‘youth bulge’, internal economic inequalities, political frustrations, sectarian tensions and water shortages.

Ahmed outlines Syrian ‘offences’ – pipeline politics

Assad refused to sign a proposed agreement with Qatar that would run a pipeline from the latter’s North field . . . and pursued negotiations for an alternative $10 billion pipeline plan with Iran, across Iraq to Syria . . . read more here.

pipeline iran to syria

Israel also has a direct interest . . .

“In 2003, just a month after the commencement of the Iraq War, U.S. and Israeli government sources told The Guardian of plans to “build a pipeline to siphon oil from newly conquered Iraq to Israel” bypassing Syria . . .”

Surprise, surprise . . .

“All the parties intervening in Syria’s escalating conflict – the U.S., Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Israel on one side providing limited support to opposition forces, with Russia, China and Iran on the other shoring up Assad’s regime – are doing so for their own narrow, competing geopolitical interests”.

Ahmed’s position: “What is beyond doubt is that Assad is a war criminal whose government deserves to be overthrown. The question is by whom, and for what interests?”

Dr Ahmed has advised the British Foreign Office, the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, the UK Defence Academy, the Metropolitan Police Service on delivery of the Home Office’s Channel Project, and the UK Parliamentary Inquiry into UK counter-terrorism strategy. He has also been a consultant for projects funded by the US State Department and the UK Department for Communities & Local Government. In 2005, he testified in US Congress on Western security policy toward al-Qaeda. 

Posted on September 10, 2013, in Corporate political nexus, Government, Secret State, Vested interests and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Leave a comment.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.