-->The USA V.S. ArabicNews.com
Regional-USA, Analysis, 3/17/2003
When the UN inspectors presented their reports recently to the UN Security Council, the reports were very positive about Iraq's cooperation with the inspectors, and the inspectors presented no proof of any Iraqi violations.
The US objective, all along and as many suspected, has been to have war against Iraq. So the US had sought from the UN inspection efforts an open ended process that would never end, in order to keep the sanctions on Iraq. This is not the first time this has happened. The US used the same process the last time before it attacked Iraq.
Having very well suspected the US motives, France and Germany moved to ask the UN inspectors to define specifically the needed steps that Iraq needs to meet to be considered in compliance with the UN. This is precisely what the US did not want to happen, and what the US had been against -- ever since the sanctions had been placed on Iraq (read our old articles to know what dejavue is all about). As soon as the UN inspectors agreed to specify these inspection steps, which are to be presented shortly to the council, the US realized that with this event, the US will loose the pretext it needed to keep the sanctions on Iraq, and would be unable to further claim that Iraq is in defiance of the UN Security Council, a claim, the US wanted to use to continuously pressure Iraq, keep the sanctions on it, or as many had in the US administration wanted, to go to war.
The upcoming report of the UN inspectors to be presented to the UN Security Council defining specific steps in the inspection process that at the end of which, Iraq would be declared compliant or not, was the trigger point for the quick action of the United States to hurry up the pace for war. After, the coming March 27, the time of the UN inspection report, the US would have lost all its pretext to go into the war it has wanted to engage in.
This will be demonstrated time and again by the US until it actually goes to war with Iraq, as the US will provide a"no way out" ultimatums to Iraq -- options that have little to do with finding a solution to this crisis, and much to put Iraq in a position of having to say"no." The US will ask Iraq all kinds of conditions, regardless of their merit to the problem at hand --conditions the US knows will be unacceptable to the Iraqi leadership, precisely because the US does not want to hear a"Yes" for an answer. The reason is simple, Iraq is a small puzzle of the strategic game the US playing, and the big prize, is the whole middle east, its assets, and control of its politics, with a side benefit of having complete and total dominance of world affairs. That should suit many autocracies in the region well, because the US will be there to secure and support their rule against anyone speaking out.
Radicalizing the Arab states, you having seen anything yet. Oppressing those who will be radicalized. You haven't seen anything yet. Viscous downward cycle. You bet. The rulers in the region will be happy, they don't care as long as they are in control. The US will be happy? don't give a damn, as long as it is in control.
Bombing al-Jazeera office in Afghanistan was a small hint of the frustration the US could no longer contain. Free speech. Is this a threat to the US. You bet. A very big one. High level US officials calling Saudi Arabia about shutting some guy who publishes a poem and speaks about corruption? you bet. The US likes the status quo, and they are telling the rulers"we are with you, and we will even give you cover to repress;" because we want you to!
This new media has been the biggest headache that the USA could not control. All of sudden, ideas of liberty and democracy are the biggest threats the US faced. It just did not want the Arab states to have it. If they did, they would throw away or fundamentally change many of the rulers. The US would have no further levers to control the Arab leaders. The US would no longer be able to use its most fundamental lever in the Arab states -- the rift between the ruler and ruled. Democracy and free speech was and is the biggest threat. Those who though that the US secret creation of the Office of Strategic Influence was an anomaly, it was not. The major US strategic studies identified the problem the US was facing in this new era; it was media communication means and control. The US had lost it, and new experiments the US was using to influence the Arab states public were not and would not deliver the job.
The US, has for a while, realized that the greatest asymmetric weapon of the modern world, is media, and not any kind of conceivable physical weapon. But the US constitution would not allow the US direct interference in US media. So, freedom of expression outfits became the real target and concern. But how do you control them when one, such as ArabicNews.com is a US company? You can't. You may try tricks to influence their coverage, but if they are like us, you can't, they are independent! So, there remained one and only one option. By controlling Iraq, the US will have direct control of the politics of the area, as everything will be within its control.
If people don't know why the UK supports the US, then we don't have time to explain the obvious. But people may be puzzled as to why Spain is such a supporter of the US policy against Iraq. Exactly where does Spain come into the equation? What has Iraq done to Spain, in the past or present to bring such a hostile position about? If you understood from the first part of our analysis why the US is fundamentally opposed to genuine democracy in the Arab states, then Spain's' role should be easy to understand.
Morocco is the up and coming country in the Arab states that is championing democratic values, with a king that is truly historic in the steps he is taking. That is a big threat that the other Arab states, and the US does no want to see or hear of such talk, despite public comments to the contrary. Someone who is always talking about democracy and freedom and justice, is a threat to many of the Arab rulers. Spain has an enmity with Morocco and serious territorial and strategic disputes. The US will give Spain what it wants, and the US will in the process control have the leverages to have Morocco to shut it up. It's a win-win situation for the US and Spain.
With the heart of the Arab states, Iraq, occupied, the nearby Bahraini democratic experience, another major threat to the Gulf states, will be under control as well, and with Morocco on the other end of the Arab states under control, there is little that is left. And Qatar's TV will in the process be under control as well and used properly!
No amount of talk will prove otherwise. The US is not fighting for democratic values, and it will not support democracy in the region if it gets there, as fundamentally, democracy in the region is a threat to US interests there. The US will talk of democracy, and may take inconsequentual steps in this regard to pretend that it cares about democracy. But this should be clearly understood, and no amount of public relations talk should muddy your understanding of this fundamental fact: the US is fundemantaly opposed to democracy in the Arab States and Iran, for that matter.
So here we are. The foundation of liberty and democracy are genuine free speech, and free speech is the US biggest strategic enemy, as it threatens the world's center of energy resources.
So the US is set for war. And at its aim, are the pages of ArabicNews.com. A publication that if you were to scroll the last 365 days consecutively, as an example, as you can do from our front page, you will notice something a little bit odd for a news publication. That unlike other publications, the good and positive news were almost without exception the top stories. It was the stories about democracy, about freedom, about justice, and social welfare. These were our stories that threatened many rulers in the Arab states, and their friends in the US.
So the US may be able to win this war. So go ahead and bomb away. And, while you are it, you might as well aim for a direct hit at ArabicNews.com. You know well our location. Why do it indirectly? Why bother? Save Iraq and go to source of the problem?
If there are eyes watching from on above. Let them see what is happening in the place they built and the ideals they championed.
Editor's note: ArabicNews.com is sad to have to publicly declare that it will not fulfill a contract sent two weeks ago by the United States National Security Agency through its representative company to place advertisements for jobs at the National Security Agency.
--------------------
Nach allem was ich weiß, liegt arabic news da hundertprozentig richtig. Wolfowitz, Pearl und die anderen Chefplaner benutzten in ihren Strategiepapieren meines Wissens auch des öfteren Begriffe wie"democracy-trap" in Verbindung mit dem Mittleren Osten. Die Marokko-Erklärung war jedoch neu für mich. [img][/img]
winkääää
stocksorcerer
|
Thread-Ansicht
Mix-Ansicht
Reihenfolge
Thread gesperrt
