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!
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.
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)
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."
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.'"
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.
November 26, 2011 Bulletin • Return to Index • Write to:
editor@cpcml.ca
|