I can't put it in any better terms than Dr Chandra Muzaffar (President of Just International, Malaysia) who eloquently presented the current mideastern crisis in the most convincing manner. We now understand why crown prince had to extract $100 billion by taking other wealthy princes to custody in disguise of eradicating rampant corruption.
An Unholy Alliance? Trump, Israel and Saudi Arabia – Targeting Iran
Global Research, March 02, 2018
In the wake of President Donald Trump’s visit to
West Asia, is there even a faint glimmer of hope for peace in the most
conflict-ridden region of the world? Or, has his visit to Saudi Arabia
and Israel from the 20th to the 23rd of May 2017 only strained the
region’s undercurrents of friction and tension? Some reflections on
areas of conflict in West Asia may throw a bit of light.
On the Israel-Palestine/Arab conflict — one of the world’s longest
conflicts — Trump adopted an extremely biased position while mouthing
platitudes about Israelis and Palestinians living side by side in
harmony. He was effusive in his sympathies for Israelis faced by
“threats” from Palestinians and other Arabs and the “suffering” they
have to bear but was totally silent about the usurpation of Palestinian
and Arab lands, their mass expulsion and their extermination through
acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing pursued by Israel. He appeared
oblivious to the humiliation and oppression that Palestinians have to
undergo on a daily basis at Israeli checkpoints in the West Bank or to
the incarceration of about 2 million Palestinians in the world’s largest
open-air prison called Gaza.
From Trump’s words and gestures in Israel it is obvious that he is
working towards a solution that will see Palestinians subsisting in
Bantustans with the whole of Jerusalem firmly in Israel’s control,
reinforced by settler communities in the West Bank exercising
jurisdiction over its water resources. Palestinian agents of Israel and
the US will be enticed into accepting this arrangement which in turn
will be endorsed by a number of other Arab and Muslim governments keen
on pleasing Washington for their own interests.
Needless to say, the Bantustan solution will further incense Arabs
and Muslims everywhere. It will spawn more suicide bombers and prod more
youths to turn to terrorism. Given the current pattern of terrorism,
the effects will be felt far and wide with Western cities as special
targets.
In addressing other conflicts in West Asia, Trump proved to be
equally obtuse. For him the whole region is confronted by the challenge
of terrorism which has to be resolved by Muslims themselves since it is
allegedly rooted in misinterpretations of Islamic teachings. If Trump
and his advisers had looked at the present phase of terrorism and how it
had developed, they would have realized that it is linked directly to
the Anglo-American invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003. It is
because of that act of aggression, the overthrow of Saddam Hussein
and subsequent political events including the dismantling of the Iraqi
army by the occupierthat a sizeable number of former soldiers and other
Saddam loyalists coalesced into the core of Al-Qaeda in Iraq and
launched terrorist attacks against the Shia-led, Western backed
government in Baghdad. In other words, US engineered regime change in
Baghdad had given rise for the first time to organised terrorism on
Iraqi soil. It is significant that Al-Qaeda terrorists in Iraq were
funded, equipped and trained by groups from Saudi Arabia, Qatar and
Turkey who for different reasons were opposed to the new rulers in
Baghdad.
As a faction of the Iraqi Al-Qaeda moved to Syria, encouraged by groups in Saudi Arabia to fight Bashar Assad
who has a Shia background and is secular, the US elite saw it as an
opportunity to advance its own longstanding agenda of ousting Bashar
from power especially since there was already a minor uprising against
his authoritarian rule in one small city. Bashar is not only an
adversary of Israel which occupies a large chunk of Syria’s strategic
Golan Heights, he is also a close ally of both Iran and Lebanon’s
Hezbollah, two entities which are deeply committed to resisting
US-Israeli hegemony over West Asia. This is why American and Israeli
intelligence, together with the intelligence services of Britain and
France, worked hand-in-glove with their counterparts in the region and
with religious elites in a few Muslim countries to recruit tens of
thousands of people from all over the world to engage in a sort of
‘Jihad” against the Bashar Assad government. These are the recruits who
became part of Daesh, the Jabhat Fateh al-Sham and other outfits which
until recently controlled parts of Syria. Syria is another tragic
example of an attempt to affect regime change which in turn has
generated terrorism and, in the course of it, brought death and sorrow
to tens of thousands of people.
There is a third example of the intimate nexus between regime change
and terrorism. In October 2011, the US and other NATO members provided
aerial cover while ground forces including some terrorist groups
organised the overthrow of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi
who was subsequently tortured and murdered. Libya has since plunged
into chaos. There is no effective functioning government. As a result of
the mayhem, terrorist cells have proliferated. Libya has also become a
conduit for illegal migrants from North Africa and other parts of Africa
trying desperately to escape the turmoil and find sanctuary in Europe.
There are also thousands of migrants from Iraq, Syria and other
countries who because of the mess their societies are in, cross the
Mediterranean to Europe in search of shelter and stability. This goes to
show that in at least three countries, Libya, Iraq and Syria, regime
change is also directly and indirectly responsible for the migration
crisis.
That neither migration nor terrorism can be separated from regime
change is a truism which is not part of Trump’s radar screen. None of
the Arab or Muslim leaders gathered in Riyadh to listen to Trump had the
guts to tell him that the US pursuit of regime change, that its quest
for hegemony has a lot to do with the upheavals that have overwhelmed
some of their societies. The US should cease to control and dominate
other nations through regime change and invasion and occupation if it
wants to bring terrorism to an end.
But it is not just the US that seeks hegemony through regime change.
Israel is also an aggressive advocate of regime change as demonstrated
by its enthusiastic endorsement of the ouster of Saddam Hussein. Indeed,
there are analysts who argue that more than the US president at that
time George Bush Junior it was Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
who wanted Saddam overthrown. Similarly, an Israeli Minister had called
recently for the assassination of Bashar Assad. On regime change as on a
number of other issues there is tremendous convergence of goals and
perspectives between the US and Israel. Both for instance regard Hamas,
the Palestinian resistance movement, which commands the support of a
huge percentage of Palestinians, and Hezbollah, committed to the
liberation of Arab lands from Israel and Zionism as terrorist
organisations. Trump reinforced that view during his recent visit to
West Asia.
The Trump visit also demonstrated US-Israeli convergence on Iran.
Both regard Iran as a sponsor of terrorism. Supporting a liberation
movement such as Hezbollah is not the same as colluding with Daesh or
Al-Qaeda. It is important to note that in the last so many years not a
single Iranian has been involved in any of the terrorist attacks in West
Asia and North Africa (WANA), or in Europe or in North America or in
other parts of the world. In fact, the leading terrorist groups such as
Daesh and Al-Qaeda are anti-Iran and anti-Shia. Most of them are Sunni.
In Iraq as in Syria, Iranian militias are battling Sunni terrorist
outfits. The irony is that in Iraq, Iranian militias are cooperating
with the US in the bid to defeat Daesh terrorists in Mosul. It is
obvious from all this that the attempt by Trump and Israel to smear Iran
with the terrorist brush does not stand up to scrutiny.
Neither does their attempt to concoct fear among Iran’s neighbours
about its nuclear programme. The agreement that Iran entered with the
five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany (P5+1
group) in 2015 called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)
ensures that Iran will never be able to produce a nuclear weapon. In any
case, Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, has openly proclaimed
on a number of occasions that manufacturing nuclear weapons is haram
from an Islamic perspective.
The question of Iran’s nuclear programme exposes Israel’s hypocrisy.
Why is it so perturbed by Iran’s nuclear programme whose peaceful intent
has been verified over and over again by UN Inspectors when Israel is
the only state in the region that has a nuclear weapons arsenal of
perhaps at least 200 warheads? Israel’s obsession with Iran’s nuclear
programme stems from its desire to maintain a nuclear weapons monopoly
in West Asia.
Trump alsorevealed in the course of his visit that US-Israeli
convergence was enhanced by the similarities they shared with Saudi
Arabia. On terrorism and Iran’s nuclear programme all three are on the
same page. Most of all they are all totally united in their view that
the greatest threat to peace and stability in the region is Iran.
Iran is their mortal foe. The big conference in Riyadh that brought
together heads of state or government or their representatives from 55
countries was in a sense to convince all of them that Iran is also their
greatest enemy.
Saudi antipathy towards Iran has a certain history behind it. It
became pronounced after the Islamic Revolution in Iran of 1979 which
overthrew a feudal monarch, Shah Pahlavi. Before that,
Saudi Rulers and the Shah enjoyed good relations partly because both
paid obeisance to the same overlord, namely, the US. Revolutionary Iran
under Imam Khomeini was clearly opposed to US and
Western imperialism and saw Islam as a religion of justice and human
dignity that championed the oppressed. Faced with a revolutionary
interpretation of Islam, the Saudi Rulers were concerned with preserving
their feudal power and perpetuating their ties with the US whom they
saw as the protector of their throne. Besides, they leaned towards a
brand of Islam — Wahabism —- which apart from its puritanism was also
antagonistic towards the Shia sect, the sect of the vast majority of
Iranians. This explains to some extent why the Saudis got together with
the Gulf monarchies and goaded the ambitious Saddam Hussein of Iraq to
go to war against Iran in 1980. It is estimated that a million lives
were lost in that eight-year war.
After the pain of the war receded into the background, relations
between Saudi Arabia and Iran improved somewhat. However things began to
change when the Shia majority in Iraq came to power through the
ballot-box in December 2005, following the overthrow of Saddam Hussein.
The Saudis viewed Shia ascendancy in Iraq as benefitting Iran and as an
expansion of Shia power in their neighbourhood. Then in 2006, the Shia
Hezbollah thwarted the Israeli attempt to gain control over Lebanon
which boosted Hezbollah’s standing among the entire Arab population,
much to the dismay of the Saudi elite. When the Arab uprisings began in
2010, and spread to places like Bahrain which is 70% Shia, the Saudi
elite became even more determined to maintain its grip upon the region
and moved quickly to crush the popular movement for human rights. In
Yemen, the legitimate government of the day is facing a popular
challenge, a significant segment of which comes from Houthis, who happen
to be Shia. The Saudi elite is involved in extensive military
operations to shore up the position of President Mansur Hadi
and in the course of it has committed some serious human rights
violations which have tarnished its image. Its inability to oust
President Bashar of Syria after six years has also frustrated the Saudi
elite.
The frustrations of the Saudi elite engendered by the apparent rise
of Iranian/Shia power were further compounded by the reluctance of
former President Barack Obama to curb Iran. This was how the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also felt about Obama given the latter’s enthusiastic support for the nuclear deal. This is why boththe Saudi King Salman, and Netanyahu welcomed the arrival of Trump in Riyadh and Tel Aviv with such joy.
It is in this context that one should view Trump’s arms deal with
Saudi Arabia worth 350 billion dollars over 10 years, with nearly 110
billion to take effect immediately. This “package of defence equipment
and services supports the long-term security of Saudi Arabia and the
Gulf region in the face of malign Iranian influence and Iranian related
threats.” US military assistance to Israel also runs into billions and
is a constant feature of their bilateral relations. The common aim of
both military aid programmes is crystal-clear.
If the most concrete achievement of Trump’s visit to West Asia was to
forge a US-Israel-Saudi alliance against Iran, it can only be described
as a bane upon peace. Given the friction and tension that already
exists, it could lead to open intra-regional conflict with Israel and
Saudi Arabia on one side, supported by the US, and Iran, on the other,
backed by Russia. In such a conflict, a strong sectarian dimension,
specifically a Sunni-Shia divide, could also emerge. And if the grand
sell-out of Palestinian rights occurs at the same time with all its dire
consequences, all hell will break loose.
This is why global citizenry should be focussed on what is unfolding in West Asia – and act now.
Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is the President of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST).
No comments:
Post a Comment