War Preparations Against Syria and Iran

Denounce the Harper War Criminals!
Establish an Anti-War Government!

Canadians must uphold the principle that preparing for war is a war crime as serious as any other war crime. Without preparing the objective and subjective conditions for predatory war, the ultimate war crime does not happen.

In practical terms, upholding this principle means that the Canadian government must be held to account for its war preparations against Syria and Iran, and so must all those who conciliate with these war preparations under this or that excuse.

The preparations for war against Syria and Iran compound the war crimes already committed by the federal dictatorship and its conciliators, which in addition to Afghanistan now include the predatory war against Libya. The war fervour sweeping the Harper dictatorship was evident in the disgusting Nazi-style triumphalism on display in Ottawa November 24, glorifying the war against Libya as a great victory.

As an annexed member of the U.S.-led imperialist system of states, which includes the aggressive war alliances NATO and NORAD, the federal dictatorship under Harper is preparing the country and its armed forces for war against Syria and Iran. This is a monstrous war crime by those directly involved and by those conciliating with Harper.

November 20, the Harper dictatorship announced the posting of a warship to the Mediterranean until the end of 2012 to be used "for evacuations or naval blockades if the violence in Syria descends into civil war." The government said HMCS Vancouver, which was recently involved in NATO's predatory war against Libya, will be reassigned in the Mediterranean to NATO's Operation Active Endeavour until early 2012, at which time the HMCS Charlottetown will relieve it and remain until the end of the year. Operation Active Endeavour ostensibly opposes terrorism in the Mediterranean, and has been in place since October 2001.

War minister Peter MacKay told CTV that Canada is prepared to engage in a predatory war against Syria. The Canadian military is "prepared for all inevitabilities," MacKay said. To attack Syria "a cascading number of [international] sanctions would have to happen before there would be any type of intervention.... I think it's fair to say that a lot of dictators are on notice, that this type of behaviour is not going to be tolerated. Now how we go about it and what comes next, is done on what some would call an escalating scale before making any final decisions around intervention," MacKay added.

The "escalating scale" refers to the active U.S./European interference within Syria to foment a reactionary civil war and the war preparations outside Syria assembling sufficient NATO military forces to invade. Preparations also include the dissemination of disinformation for purposes of getting support if possible or, failing that, making sure there is no organized opposition to the military adventure to overthrow the Syrian regime and install one directly annexed into the U.S.-led imperialist system of states.

The wrecking of public opinion against predatory war follows the colonial tactic of divide and rule. In the contemporary world of a sole U.S. superpower, it means financing and arming opposition groups within a target country that can wage struggle against the regime. The opposition can be based on tribal, religious or national differences or even just opponents thirsting to be in power with the backing of U.S. imperialism. The regime under attack defends itself with force and an escalation begins towards a reactionary civil war and increasing calls for international intervention.

Within Canada, an important ally in the federal dictatorship's preparations for war comes from those who support the call to wage predatory war to stop the bloodshed of a reactionary civil war under the banner of "responsibility to protect" such as in Libya and Syria. Conciliators with predatory war also include those who demand the overthrow of the regime in  Iran. U.S. imperialism covets Iran and vies to take it over against other European contenders. For self-serving reasons they portray it in the most negative light. Everything is done to raise issues outside of the context of a society which experienced the overthrow of its government in a foreign engineered coup d'etat which then suffered terribly under the cruel Pahlavi dynasty of the Shah of Iran. Since the overthrow of the Shah, a very dynamic situation exists in Iran where the class struggle rages along with internal contradictions and differences generated with the transformation from an ancient society with its aristocratic privileges and petty production to a modern socialized economy that sees the growth of an indigenous capitalist class that wants to benefit from the country's natural resources and internal mass production, others who are connected with the global monopolies, and a working class movement that continues to gain in size and experience.

The conciliators with the Harper dictatorship's war agenda suspend all conscious thinking and analysis of imperialist war. They refuse to recognize the truth that Canadians' responsibility to protect the peoples of the world begins with organizing and building an anti-war government at home here in our own country. It begins with forming a government that takes up the responsibility to protect public right and the rights of all and guarantees those rights in opposition to monopoly right, and prepares conditions for a human-centred alternative. Any other interpretation of Canada's international responsibilities is a fraud and cover for annexation into the predatory imperialist war machine of the U.S. Empire.

Conciliators with Harper's war agenda forget that a genuine responsibility to protect arises from the people themselves organizing to defend their rights. The people are their own liberators. The conciliators with war forget that the U.S.-led imperialist system of states sends spies and agents everywhere to provoke mayhem and chaos just as a Canadian police "joint task force" sent spies and agents into those groups preparing to oppose the 2010 G20 meetings in Ontario.

Conciliators with war forget that the principles of independence and the sovereignty of nations, the right not to be attacked by the big imperialist powers, and the necessity of an international equilibrium based on mutual benefit and not "might makes right" are a precious heritage of the victory of the anti-fascist Second World War. Those principles must not be abandoned under pressure from a resurgence of fascism and the aim of the U.S.-led imperialist system of states to return to the lawless anarchy, dictate and constantly escalating wars where "might makes right."

Conciliators with Harper's war agenda forget that Canada was the target of plans to foment a reactionary civil war in the 1960s and '70s, when the RCMP and U.S. military agents tried to subvert the just struggle of the Quebec people for their national rights and turn it into one of aimless terrorism, anarchy and chaos. The federal dictatorship of the day imposed the War Measures Act under the hoax of combating terrorism and sent the military into the streets of Quebec to arrest activists and intimidate those involved in defending the rights of all. The 1979 McDonald Commission of Inquiry into RCMP Wrongdoings exposed the use of state-organized terrorism and interference in the people's organizations to block the working class and its allies from building the new. Progressive people at the time stood firmly with the national liberation struggle of Quebec in opposition to U.S. imperialism and Anglo-Canadian colonialism. This meant in practice consciously opposing the RCMP and U.S. military spies who were fomenting a reactionary civil war with terrorist bombs and other dirty tricks that were meant to crush the Quebec national liberation movement, the working class movement and the struggles of all for their rights, including women and First Nations. At the time, a very real danger existed of a reactionary civil war and U.S. military involvement on one side or the other to annex both Canada and Quebec under the hoax of defending U.S. national security and the responsibility to protect civilians.

The responsibility of Canadians is to protect themselves from subversion and interference by the federal dictatorship and U.S. imperialism so that the working class and its allies can fight successfully to defend the rights of all and solve the many economic, political and social problems confronting the country. This means being conscious of the attempts of the political police to infiltrate and subvert the people's organizations and their fights in defence of the rights of all and for a human-centred alternative. This means being conscious of the U.S.-led "international community" sending spies and agents and bribing people and groups to stop progressive development of the society, and if needed, to foment reactionary civil wars to bring about regime change on behalf of the U.S. Empire.

To conciliate with the federal dictatorship's war agenda is to ignore that the world is in the grip of the U.S.-led imperialist system of states;

Conciliation with the war agenda means to forget that smaller and weaker countries are extremely vulnerable to imperialist subversion and the fomenting of divisions that can lead to reactionary civil war;

Conciliation with the war agenda means to abandon the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign nations and peoples;

Conciliation with the war agenda means to reject the truth that the people are their own liberators and that they are capable of overthrowing their oppressors, and with this convenient forgetting conciliate with U.S.-led predatory wars under the hoax of protecting people from their own regimes;

Conciliation with the war agenda means to divert the people away from their own struggles to defend their rights and instead engage in some phony solidarity movement with people who are engaged in their own struggles for their rights and do not want the interference of imperialism and its inevitable destruction of their struggles;

Conciliation with the war agenda means in practice to refuse to engage in struggles here at home to mobilize the working class and its allies to defend the rights of all, confront monopoly right and engage in a conscious consistent organized struggle for a human-centred alternative in Canada.

No to Predatory War Against Syria and Iran!
Denounce the Harper War Criminals!
Denounce Those Who Conciliate with the Harper War Criminals!
Together Let Us Organize and Fight for an Anti-War Government!

Top of Page


For Your Information

Harper Government Spends Half Billion Dollars to Join U.S. Military Satellite Program

The Harper government claims it must cut more than $200 million in funding for programs of public importance in the name of balanced budgets, such as research and monitoring of the environment, including Environment Canada's Ozone Network. At the same time, it continues to militarize the economy and pay the rich hundreds of millions of dollars for war preparations, further integrating Canada's armed forces with the U.S. war machine.

For example, the government recently announced that it will provide $477 million to join a U.S. Defense Department satellite communication system as its costs spiral out of control. According to the U.S. Department of Defense, the Wideband Global Satellite (WGS) System is a communications system for "U.S. warfighters, allies and coalition partners during all levels of conflict, short of nuclear war." The aim of the WGS System is to have up to nine military satellites over different parts of the world to provide high-frequency bandwidth for U.S. and allied forces wherever they may be operating.

The U.S. planned to have the system in place for its own use by 2004. However, according to a 2011 U.S. government report, manufacturing and quality control issues plagued the first three satellites. As a result, the first satellite wasn't launched until October 2007 and didn't become operational over the Pacific Ocean until April 2008. The second satellite, positioned over the Middle East and Afghanistan, was declared operational in June 2009 and the third, over the Atlantic Ocean, in March 2010. The next three satellites are expected to be launched in 2012 or 2013 -- the fourth isn't expected to be operational until 2013. A further two-year delay is expected between the sixth and seventh satellites. The program was expected to cost US$1.3 billion, but is now expected to cost more than US$3.5 billion. The U.S. military has asked Congress for US$469 million for the WGS for the coming fiscal year alone.

It is not unlikely that the Canadian hand-out to the U.S. Defense Department is linked to having Canadian based monopolies in the military sector become part of the project, if they are not already. Speaking in Parliament, Canada's Associate Minister of National Defence Julian Fantino tried to justify handing over hundreds of millions of dollars of Canada's social product to the U.S. war machine on the basis that it will help the Harper government better wage wars of aggression. "Our efforts in Afghanistan and Libya have proven that the ability to exchange information between headquarters and deployed elements is critical to the success of modern military operations. This government intends to meet this requirement while ensuring the best value for taxpayer money. As such, we have sought an agreement with our allies that provides the Canadian Forces with access to an international constellation of satellites."

Australia, according to reports, agreed to join the project in 2007 and contributed more than US$800 million to pay for the sixth satellite in return for a portion of the system's overall bandwidth. In addition to Canada and Australia, New Zealand, Luxembourg, Denmark and the Netherlands have also expressed interest in joining the U.S. on the project.

In related news, on November 2 Fantino announced a $31.1 million contract to MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates Ltd. (MDA) to build two Unclassified Remote-sensing Situational Awareness (URSA) systems. According to a government backgrounder, "The URSA system is a mobile, deployable system that will allow the download of satellite imagery directly from commercial satellites, including Canada's Radarsat-2, as they pass over areas of interest, providing up-to-date mapping and surveillance of operational theatres. This capability is meant to support deployed commanders in mission planning and in making tactical decisions where time is crucial. The Canadian Forces will be acquiring two URSA systems, one meant for international deployments and the other for domestic operations and training. MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates, Ltd. will be the provider of these systems."

The Harper government is attempting to hide the drive towards the militarization of space and its expanding war preparations in the name of job creation. It is also presenting the militarization of the economy as a positive development for the people of Canada. According to the backgrounder: "the Industrial and Regional Benefits (IRB) Policy will apply to this contract, which means that MDA will be required to re-invest into Canada 100 per cent of the contract value, further expanding the economic benefits from this procurement in regions across the country. This contract is part of over 60 major procurements subject to the IRB policy which represents over $21 billion in IRB commitments from major defence contractors." Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative Member of Parliament for Delta-Richmond East added: "This is welcome news for Richmond because it supports approximately 23 skilled local jobs and reinforces the value of our technological expertise [...] Improving the Canadian Forces' equipment and focusing on the economic recovery are major commitments made by our government, and this announcement is further evidence that we are fulfilling our promises."

The announcement is part of the Harper government's Canadian Forces' Joint Space Support Project (JSSP). According to the government "the goal of the JSSP is to enhance the Canadian Forces' access to dependable, timely and accurate surveillance information within their deployed areas of interest." The first phase of the project is the acquisition of the URSA system.

(Postmedia News, Department of National Defence)

Top of Page


Arab League Introduces Unprecedented
Measures to Isolate Syria


Thousands of Syrian women rally in the district of Bab Touma in Damascus on November 24, 2011.
The small coffin bears the writing: "The Syrian people mourn the death of the Arab League."

News agencies report that the Arab League has imposed economic sanctions on Syria, which include freezing financial assets in Arab countries and a ban on travel by senior officials. The Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) described the Arab League's plan to impose economic sanctions on Syria at its Economic and Social Council on November 26 an unprecedented procedure in the history of the Arab League. The measures will also halt dealings with the Syrian central bank and ban trade with the Syrian government, excluding basic commodities, and financial transaction with the government. These are all actions detrimental to the interests of the Syrian people, SANA emphasizes.

The measures are to pressure Syria to conform to the demands of the imperialists. It is a way of threatening reprisals if the Syrian government does not sign a protocol accepting the visit of 500 observers.

The Syrian people describe such actions as a flagrant interference in their domestic affairs, Prensa Latina writes.

Syrian media highlighted Russia's rejection of foreign intervention in Syria and the policy of imposing sanctions, a stance expressed by Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich.

According to Lukashevich, Russia believes that Syria's problem can only be solved through a national dialogue, not through political and economic reprisals.

In Beirut, Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati affirmed his government's rejection of any Arab League decision to isolate Syria or any state of the region. Lebanon will not participate in these actions against Syria, the Prime Minister said.

Mass Rallies Reject Foreign Interference and Uphold
National Sovereignty and Independence

News agencies report demonstrations in several Syrian cities supporting President Bashar al-Assad, his reform process and condemning foreign actions against the country.

"At this moment, thousands of people are demonstrating in Saba Bahrat Square in Qamishli expressing their support for national decisions and to defend their sovereignty and their country," Prensa Latina reported on Friday.


Damascus


Lattakia (northwest Syria, on the Mediterranean)


Banias (northwest Syria, on the Mediterranean)


Tartous (northwest Syria, on the Mediterranean)


Sweida (southern Syria)


Qamischli (northeast Syria, on the border with Turkey)

(Photos: Xinhua, SANA)

Top of Page


NATO Conceals Preparations for
Military Action Against Syria

The United States has decided to disengage itself from certain obligations under the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty (CFE), in particular, no longer informing Russia about plans connected with the redeployment of its forces, an article in Pravda by Vadim Trukhachev states. Those restrictions do not affect any other country. Excepts from that article follow.

***

Today [November 24] the United States announced in Vienna, Austria, that it would cease carrying out certain obligations under the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty with regard to Russia. This announcement in the CFE Treaty's implementation group comes after the United States and NATO Allies have tried over the past 4 years to find a diplomatic solution following Russia's decision in 2007 to cease implementation with respect to all other 29 CFE States. Since then, Russia has refused to accept inspections and ceased to provide information to other CFE Treaty parties on its military forces as required by the Treaty," State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said on Tuesday.

[...]

The remarks from the US diplomat look like another attempt to turn everything upside down again. It is worth mentioning here that the first version of the CFE Treaty was signed in 1990, during the existence of both NATO and the Warsaw Pact. The document stipulated a reduction of the number of tanks, armored vehicles, artillery (larger than 100 mm in caliber), combat planes and helicopters, as well as information exchange.

A renewed variant of the treaty was signed in 1999. The new edition reflected such changes in Europe as the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and the expansion of NATO. However, only Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Kazakhstan ratified the new treaty. Russia moved a big part of its arms behind the Ural mountains, but the Western countries did not even want to execute it. The expansion of the North Atlantic Alliance continued, and NATO neared Russian borders.

At the end of 2007, Vladimir Putin decided to suspend Russia's participation in the CFE until the USA and its European allies ratified the renewed variant of the treaty. The Americans did not want to make any moves in that direction. Now they have decided not to inform Russia about the redeployment of its forces. This is obviously another violation of the treaty which the United States committed.

What consequences may Russia face as a result of the US decision? Pravda.Ru asked an expert opinion from the director of the Center for Military Forecasts, Anatoly Tsyganok.

"The USA will stop informing Russia about military redeployments. The Americans can technically send their troops to Latvia, Lithuania or Estonia, which did not sign the treaty. Will the Baltic states turn into an uncontrollable military center near Russia's borders?"

"When Russia suspended its participation in the CFE Treaty, she had the right to say that some of NATO's newcomers, such as the Baltic states and Slovenia, had never signed the treaty. Now NATO eyes Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Lithuania and all other former members of the Warsaw Pact.

"When they were deciding on the unification of Germany in 1990, Germany and France said in the appendix to the agreement that NATO would not move beyond the Oder River (the river separates Germany and Poland -- Pravda ed.). However, the West does not take this appendix into consideration. They only follow the agreement itself, which does not say a word about the non-expansion of the North Atlantic Alliance. It just so happens that the USA and its allies played a trick on Russia."

"Why did it take the United States four years to decide not to inform Russia about military redeployments?"

"Apparently, it is connected with the situation in the Mediterranean Sea. One may assume that NATO will create a military group near Russia's southern borders to strike Syria. They will most likely raise this issue at a NATO meeting in December. They will try to analyze Syria's actions in case NATO conducts a military operation against the country, like it already happened in Libya."

"Is Russia a big obstacle for conducting NATO's operation against Syria? Does the USA have anything to conceal from us at this point?"

"Russia is an obstacle, yes. We have a naval base in Syria's Tartus. The base is protected with air defense complexes, so the chances for aggression from NATO or Israel from the sea are slim. If they decide to attack, it will most likely happen from the side of Saudi Arabia. So the USA has something to conceal.

"There is another aspect to this. There are approximately 120,000 Russian citizens living in Syria. Presumably, a lot are Russian women who married local men. Russia can use this detail to interfere into the events in Syria. In addition, 20 percent of the Russian defense complex will simply tip off the perch in case Russia loses the Syrian market. It is not ruled out that they are regrouping NATO forces to get ready for a war against Syria, and they don't want to notify Russia of that."

(Pravda, November 24, 2011)

Top of Page


Predictions for a Greater Middle East

Writing for Asia Times Online, Pepe Escobar delineates power relations in North Africa and West Asia as follows:

"Syria is Iran's undisputed key ally in the Arab world -- while Russia, alongside China, are the key geopolitical allies. China, for the moment, is making it clear that any solution for Syria must be negotiated.

"Russia's one and only naval base in the Mediterranean is at the Syrian port of Tartus. Not by accident, Russia has installed its S-300 air defense system -- one of the best all-altitude surface- to-air missile systems in the world, comparable to the American Patriot -- in Tartus. The update to the even more sophisticated S-400 system is imminent.

"From Moscow's -- as well as Tehran's -- perspective, regime change in Damascus is a no-no. It will mean virtual expulsion of the Russian and Iranian navies from the Mediterranean."

NATO Military Base in Libya

"Yet key lateral moves by the West are already on. Diplomats in Brussels confirmed to Asia Times Online that the former Libyan 'rebels' -- now trying to come up with a credible government -- have already given the go-ahead for NATO to build a sprawling military base in Cyrenaica.

"NATO has no final say in such matters. This is decided by the boss -- the Pentagon -- interested in emboldening Africom in coordination with NATO. As many as 20,000 boots are expected to be deployed on the ground in Libya -- at least 12,000 of them Europeans. They will be responsible for Libya's 'internal security,' but also be on alert for possible, further military campaigns targeted at -- who else -- Syria and Iran."

Iranian Perspective

According to Escobar, as Tehran sees it, what's really going on regarding Syria is a "humanitarian" cover for a complex anti-Shi'ite and anti-Iran operation. He writes:

"As much as the latest 'coalition of the willing' -- which by the way repeats the Libya model -- is against the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria, it also represents a Christian/Sunni war against Shi'ites, be they the Alawite minority in Syria or the Shi'ite majorities in Iran, Iraq and Lebanon.

"This is part and parcel of the 'strategic opportunity' identified by the powerful Israel lobby in Washington; if we strike against the Damascus-Tehran link, we deal a mortal blow to Hezbollah in Lebanon. That, ideologues believe, can now be sold to world public opinion under the cover of the former Arab Spring -- now 'Arab Winter' after a metamorphosis, before 'Arab Summer,' into the Arab counter-revolution."

Role of the House of Saud and the Gulf Cooperation Council

The House of Saud, Jordan and rising Qatar are more than comfortable doing the U.S.'s and Israel's bidding, Escobar writes. "The House of Saud -- the [Gulf Cooperation Council's (GCC)] top dog -- invaded Bahrain with 1,500 troops to smash pro-democracy protests very much like the ones in Egypt and Syria. The House of Saud helped the ruling Sunni al-Khalifa dynasty in 70% Shi'ite Bahrain to conduct widespread torture; Bahrainis confirm that everyone tortured was forced to confess direct links with 'evil' Tehran.

"In Egypt, the House of Saud supported Mubarak even after he was deposed. Now it supports -- with over U.S.$4 billion so far -- a military junta that basically wants to keep power, unchecked, over a 'democratic' facade.

"The House of Saud couldn't possibly coexist with a successful, democratic Egypt. Anyone believing the House of Saud's claim to defend human rights and democracy in the Middle East should check into an asylum.

"The Arab League -- also a House of Saud extension -- gave a green card to NATO to bomb a member state. It suspended Syria on November 12 -- as it had done with Libya on February 22 -- because, unlike in Libya, U.S. and European designs in the United Nations Security Council were duly vetoed by Russia and China.

"Welcome to a 'new' Arab League where if you don't prostrate in front of the GCC altar, you're condemned to regime change.

"Worshipping the GCC can't compare to worshipping the Pentagon and NATO. Jordan and Morocco are members of NATO's Mediterranean dialogue, and Qatar and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) are members of NATO's Istanbul Cooperation Initiative. In addition, Jordan and the UAE are the only Arabic Troop Contributing Nations for NATO in Afghanistan.

"Ivo Daalder, the Obama administration's ambassador to NATO, has already ordered Libya to enter the Mediterranean Dialogue, alongside Morocco, Jordan, Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Mauritania and Israel. And early this month he told the Atlantic Council what's needed for an attack on Syria; an 'urgent necessity' (such as giving the impression Assad is going to raze Homs to the ground); 'regional support' (that will come in a flash from the GCC/Arab League); and a UN mandate (it won't happen, as Russia and China had made it clear).

"So one may expect exactly that from the 'coalition of the willing'; some black ops blamed on the Assad regime; immediate support from GCC/Arab League; and probably unilateral action, because via the UN is a no-no."

Predictions for a Greater Middle East

According to Escobar, "Russia knows that if the current Libyan model is reproduced in Syria -- and with Lebanon already under a de facto NATO blockade -- the Mediterranean will indeed become that dream, a NATO lake, which is code for total U.S. control.

"Moscow also sees that in the U.S.-conceived Greater Middle East -- and talk about 'great', spanning from Mauritania to Kazakhstan -- the only countries that are not linked with NATO through myriad 'partnerships' are, apart from Syria: Lebanon, Eritrea, Sudan and Iran.

"As for the Pentagon, the name of the game is 'repositioning,' As in if you leave Iraq you go somewhere else in the 'arc of instability', preferably the Gulf. There are 40,000 U.S. troops already in the Gulf -- 23,000 of them in Kuwait. A secret army for the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency is being trained by former Blackwater, 'repositioned' as Xe, in the UAE. A NATO of the Gulf is being born. NATOGCC, anyone?

"When the U.S. neo-conservatives ruled the universe -- that was only a few years ago -- the motto was 'Real men go to Tehran,' An update is in order. Call it 'Real men go to Tehran via Damascus only if they have the balls to stare down Moscow.'"

Top of Page


Commentary on Significance of
Developments in Egypt


Rallies near Tahrir Square, Cairo, November 23 and 24, 2011

News reports inform that at least 36 people have died in clashes with Egyptian police in Tahrir Square in Cairo in the last week and more than 1,250 are reported wounded.

The week began with the resignation of the government followed by the military regime's announcement on Tuesday of further concessions. The attempt to impose this imperialist system of democracy onto Egypt is so bogus, that none of it succeeds in stemming the political crisis in that country.

But what is the significance of the developments in Egypt? To contribute to the discussion, TML Weekly looks at what politial analyst Victor Kotsev has to say. Writing for Asia Times Online, November 24, Kotsev points out "there is much at stake in the outcome of the confrontations, both for Egypt and for the Middle East as a whole."

"To anybody who has been following the decline of the Egyptian economy and the repeated failure of key sectors of internal security since the ouster of former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak in February, none of this is surprising. Neither is the disappointment of the crowds surprising to any one familiar with the course of the countless democratic and 'color' revolutions in Eastern Europe over the past 20 years; some of the latter -- specifically the one in Serbia against former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic -- inspired the organizers of the anti-Mubarak movement," Kotsev adds. He continues:

"Still, the timing of the unrest is important, as it started just days before the parliamentary elections in the country that are scheduled for next Monday (November 28). Moreover, it began at the same time as another crisis in the region (and another episode of the Arab Spring), that in Syria, seemingly nears its climax. These apparent coincidences are deeply suspicious, and suggest that either external or internal forces (or both) may be involved.

"The protests on Friday were organized by the Muslim Brotherhood, which rose up against an attempt by the ruling military to pass a document that would guarantee its authority over the future elected government. They were quickly joined by pro-democratic activists and others.

"Egypt's rulers, just as Mubarak's regime 10 months ago, attempted to clear Tahrir Square by force, and failed; by Tuesday, the scenes in Cairo were fully reminiscent of those in early February, with tens of thousands of angry Egyptians braving tear gas and police assaults and chanting more or less the same chants as back then, and calling on Egypt's de facto ruler, Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, to resign.

"Tantawi, in a speech, responded by offering broad concessions, including a power transfer by July next year and an investigation into the events of the past days.[1] According to reports, the Muslim Brotherhood agreed to the offer, but the crowd was not appeased. The New York Times writes:

"'The crowd roared its disapproval when the deal was announced at 8 pm, fighting spiked on the avenue leading to the Interior Ministry, and the number of protesters continued to swell. Unlikely to satisfy the public demands for the military to leave power, the deal may have driven a new wedge into the opposition, reopening a divide between the seething public and the political elite, between liberals and Islamists and, as events unfolded, among the Islamists themselves.'[2]

"The danger of chaos is clear in this report, and others; we can only imagine what a power vacuum in the most populous Arab country would look like, and this specter has been drawing nearer by the week since February, as Egyptian currency reserves have dwindled and the Egyptian economy has continued to stagnate. Some analysts, such as Asia Times Online's Spengler, have warned about this danger since the very start.[3]

"However, the exact timing of the protests suggests that something more than economics and the inevitable popular discontent may be at play. It is hard to tell what exactly stirs under the surface of Egypt, and this is as true now as it was in early February, or over the summer, when Sinai gradually slid out of control and angry mobs stormed the Israeli Embassy in Cairo.

"In January and February, most international media offered a romantic portrayal of what they described as a leaderless resistance facing a vast security apparatus; it took a number of weeks until the first accounts appeared that contradicted this framing, and even then the latter did not receive sufficient attention.

"Pulitzer-prize winning journalist Tina Rosenberg, for example, provides a fascinating description of the links between the April 6 movement in Egypt and the Otpor movement against Milosevic in Serbia.[4]

"A riddle that remains unanswered to this day is how come the formidable security apparatus that Mubarak had at his disposal failed to locate and take out the April 6 leaders in the early days of the protests against him.

"In several reports over the past year, the think-tank Stratfor voiced suspicion that the Egyptian military might be more deeply involved in the unrest in the country than is openly acknowledged.

"In this case, the protests were started by the Muslim Brotherhood, but it seems that the Islamists quickly lost control. Whether the army was willing -- or able -- to take a gamble and stoke the fire, after failing to put it out initially, with hopes that the threat of chaos would justify putting off the transfer of power further, is hard to tell.

"The regional context in which the crisis occurred is similarly complex. The crisis between Iran and its regional enemies (and their Western patrons) is at an all-time peak. The Syrian regime, a key Iranian ally, seems to be on its last legs, having defied days ago the most recent ultimatum issued by the Arab League, and now facing an increasingly well-organized and well-armed uprising as well as an ever-more hostile international community.

"In a recent analysis, Stratfor argues that the ouster of Syria's President Bashar al-Assad has become a key part of the strategy of the United States and its allies against Iran. 'If al-Assad survives,' writes Stratfor, 'Iran will be the big winner.'[5]

"Certainly, after the death of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya last month, Assad had become the key villain of the Arab Spring; a distraction in the form of chaos in Egypt could not come at a more welcome time for either Assad or his Iranian patrons.

"In this line of thought, it is worth noting that high-ranking Israeli intelligence officers have been warning for months now of an ongoing Iranian infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood. While some of these claims are clearly tendentious, it does not take a very high level of penetration to instigate a riot in a situation that is fraught with tensions.[6]

"A certain amount of less sophisticated penetration of Egypt by pro-Iranian elements is clearly visible in the Sinai Peninsula, which has become a terror hub of sorts in the past months, and has reportedly turned into a major smuggling route of Libyan weapons into the Gaza Strip.

"Some of these arms go to the Hamas movement, which rules Gaza, and is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood; others go to more radical Islamists who are even more closely dependent on Iran, such as the Islamic Jihad.

"The relationship between the different Palestinian factions is a very complicated topic in its own right. This status quo, too, is at stake in the Egyptian crisis.

"Suffice to mention that Egypt is the main patron of the ongoing Palestinian reconciliation process, and a major force in Palestinian internal politics. And while not much else is clear at this point, it can be said that if the Egyptian elections are put off as a result of further violence, Palestinian elections, also under discussion, will most likely be put off as well."

Notes

1. Egypt military offers to speed up power transfer in meet with political parties, Ha'aretz, November 22, 2011.
2. Egypt Military Pledges Faster Handover to Civilian Rule, New York Times, November 22, 2011.

3. Food and failed Arab states, Asia Times Online, February 1, 2011.
4. Revolution U, Foreign Policy, February 16, 2011.
5. Syria, Iran and the Balance of Power in the Middle East, Stratfor, November 22, 2011.
6. MI chief sees hope for Assad yet, Ynet, July 5, 2011.

Top of Page


November 26, 2011 Bulletin • Return to Index • Write to: editor@cpcml.ca