Archive | April 13th, 2011

Libya: All About Oil

or All About Banking?


By Ellen Brown


Several writers have noted the odd fact that the Libyan rebels took time out from their rebellion in March to create their own central bank – this before they even had a government.  Robert Wenzelwrote in the Economic Policy Journal:

I have never before heard of a central bank being created in just a matter of weeks out of a popular uprising.  This suggests we have a bit more than a rag tag bunch of rebels running around and that there are some pretty sophisticated influences.

Alex Newman wrote in the New American:

In astatement released last week, the rebels reported on the results of a meeting held on March 19. Among other things, the supposed rag-tag revolutionaries announced the “[d]esignation of the Central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya and appointment of a Governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi.”

Newman quoted CNBC senior editor John Carney, who asked, “Is this the first time a revolutionary group has created a central bank while it is still in the midst of fighting the entrenched political power?  It certainly seems to indicate how extraordinarily powerful central bankers have become in our era.”

Another anomaly involves the official justification for taking up arms against Libya.  Supposedly it’s about human rights violations, but the evidence is contradictory.  According to an article on the Fox News website on February 28:

As the United Nations works feverishly to condemn Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi for cracking down on protesters, the body’s Human Rights Council is poised to adopt a report chock-full of praise for Libya’s human rights record.

The review commends Libya for improving educational opportunities, for making human rights a “priority” and for bettering its “constitutional” framework. Several countries, including Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, and Saudi Arabia but also Canada, give Libya positive marks for the legal protections afforded to its citizens — who are now revolting against the regime and facing bloody reprisal.

Whatever might be said of Gaddafi’s personal crimes, the Libyan people seem to be thriving.  A delegation of medical professionals from Russia, Ukraine and Belarus wrote in an appeal to Russian President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin that after becoming acquainted with Libyan life, it was their view that in few nations did people live in such comfort:

[Libyans] are entitled to free treatment, and their hospitals provide the best in the world of medical equipment. Education in Libya is free, capable young people have the opportunity to study abroad at government expense. When marrying, young couples receive 60,000 Libyan dinars (about 50,000 U.S. dollars) of financial assistance.  Non-interest state loans, and as practice shows, undated. Due to government subsidies the price of cars is much lower than in Europe, and they are affordable for every family. Gasoline and bread cost a penny, no taxes for those who are engaged in agriculture. The Libyan people are quiet and peaceful, are not inclined to drink, and are very religious.

They maintained that the international community had been misinformed about the struggle against the regime. “Tell us,” they said, “who would not like such a regime?”

Even if that is just propaganda, there is no denying at least one very popular achievement of the Libyan government: it brought water to the desert by building the largest and most expensive irrigation project in history, the $33 billion GMMR (Great Man-Made River) project.  Even more than oil, water is crucial to life in Libya.  The GMMR provides 70 percent of the population with water for drinking and irrigation, pumping it from Libya’s vast underground Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System in the south to populated coastal areas 4,000 kilometers to the north.  The Libyan government has done at least some things right.

Another explanation for the assault on Libya is that it is “all about oil,” but that theory too is problematic.  As noted in the National Journal, the countryproduces only about 2 percent of the world’s oil.  Saudi Arabia alone has enough spare capacity to make up for any lost production if Libyan oil were to disappear from the market.  And if it’s all about oil, why the rush to set up a new central bank?

Another provocative bit of data circulating on the Net is a 2007 “Democracy Now” interview of U.S. General Wesley Clark (Ret.).  In it he says that about 10 days after September 11, 2001, he was told by a general that the decision had been made to go to war with Iraq.  Clark was surprised and asked why.  “I don’t know!” was the response.  “I guess they don’t know what else to do!”  Later, the same general said they planned to take out seven countries in five years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.

What do these seven countries have in common?  In the context of banking, one that sticks out is that none of them is listed among the 56 member banks of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).  That evidently puts them outside the long regulatory arm of the central bankers’ central bank in Switzerland.

The most renegade of the lot could be Libya and Iraq, the two that have actually been attacked.  Kenneth Schortgen Jr., writing on, noted that “[s]ix months before the US moved into Iraq to take down Saddam Hussein, the oil nation had made the move to accept Euros instead of dollars for oil, and this became a threat to the global dominance of the dollar as the reserve currency, and its dominion as the petrodollar.”

According to a Russian article titled “Bombing of Lybia – Punishment for Ghaddafi for His Attempt to Refuse US Dollar,” Gadaffi made a similarly bold move: he initiated a movement to refuse the dollar and the euro, and called on Arab and African nations to use a new currency instead, the gold dinar.  Gadaffi suggested establishing a united African continent, with its 200 million people using this single currency.  During the past year, the idea was approved by many Arab countries and most African countries.  The only opponents were the Republic of South Africa and the head of the League of Arab States.  The initiative was viewed negatively by the USA and the European Union, with French president Nicolas Sarkozy calling Libya a threat to the financial security of mankind; but Gaddafi was not swayed and continued his push for the creation of a united Africa.

And that brings us back to the puzzle of the Libyan central bank.  In an article posted on the Market Oracle, Eric Encina observed:

One seldom mentioned fact by western politicians and media pundits: the Central Bank of Libya is 100% State Owned. . . . Currently, the Libyan government creates its own money, the Libyan Dinar, through the facilities of its own central bank. Few can argue that Libya is a sovereign nation with its own great resources, able to sustain its own economic destiny. One major problem for globalist banking cartels is that in order to do business with Libya, they must go through the Libyan Central Bank and its national currency, a place where they have absolutely zero dominion or power-broking ability.  Hence, taking down the Central Bank of Libya (CBL) may not appear in the speeches of Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy but this is certainly at the top of the globalist agenda for absorbing Libya into its hive of compliant nations.

Libya not only has oil.  According to the IMF, its central bank has nearly 144 tons of gold in its vaults.  With that sort of asset base, who needs the BIS, the IMF and their rules?

All of which prompts a closer look at the BIS rules and their effect on local economies.  An article on the BIS website states that central banks in the Central Bank Governance Network are supposed to have as their single or primary objective “to preserve price stability.”  They are to be kept independent from government to make sure that political considerations don’t interfere with this mandate.  “Price stability” means maintaining a stable money supply, even if that means burdening the people with heavy foreign debts.  Central banks are discouraged from increasing the money supply by printing money and using it for the benefit of the state, either directly or as loans.

In a 2002 article in Asia Times titled “The BIS vs National Banks,” Henry Liu maintained:

BIS regulations serve only the single purpose of strengthening the international private banking system, even at the peril of national economies. The BIS does to national banking systems what the IMF has done to national monetary regimes. National economies under financial globalization no longer serve national interests.

. . . FDI [foreign direct investment] denominated in foreign currencies, mostly dollars, has condemned many national economies into unbalanced development toward export, merely to make dollar-denominated interest payments to FDI, with little net benefit to the domestic economies.

He added, “Applying the State Theory of Money, any government can fund with its own currency all its domestic developmental needs to maintain full employment without inflation.”  The “state theory of money” refers to money created by governments rather than private banks.

The presumption of the rule against borrowing from the government’s own central bank is that this will be inflationary, while borrowing existing money from foreign banks or the IMF will not.  But all banks actually create the money they lend on their books, whether publicly-owned or privately-owned.  Most new money today comes from bank loans.  Borrowing it from the government’s own central bank has the advantage that the loan is effectively interest-free.  Eliminating interest has been shown to reduce the cost of public projects by an average of 50%.

And that appears to be how the Libyan system works.  According to Wikipedia, the functions of the Central Bank of Libya include “issuing and regulating banknotes and coins in Libya” and “managing and issuing all state loans.”  Libya’s wholly state-owned bank can and does issue the national currency and lend it for state purposes.

That would explain where Libya gets the money to provide free education and medical care, and to issue each young couple $50,000 in interest-free state loans.  It would also explain where the country found the $33 billion to build the Great Man-Made River project.  Libyans are worried that NATO-led air strikes are coming perilously close to this pipeline, threatening another humanitarian disaster.

So is this new war all about oil or all about banking?  Maybe both – and water as well.  With energy, water, and ample credit to develop the infrastructure to access them, a nation can be free of the grip of foreign creditors.  And that may be the real threat of Libya: it could show the world what is possible.  Most countries don’t have oil, but new technologies are being developed that could make non-oil-producing nations energy-independent, particularly if infrastructure costs are halved by borrowing from the nation’s own publicly-owned bank.  Energy independence would free governments from the web of the international bankers, and of the need to shift production from domestic to foreign markets to service the loans.

If the Gaddafi government goes down, it will be interesting to watch whether the new central bank joins the BIS, whether the nationalized oil industry gets sold off to investors, and whether education and health care continue to be free.

Posted in LibyaComments Off on Libya: All About Oil

Libya: Jihadees are Coming!!

By General Mirza Aslam Beg


The ‘Unholy Alliance’ of the West, launched the ‘Crusade’ against Gaddafi in support of the rebels, but is having cold feet now, realising that, the Jehadees from the neighbouring countries are entering Libya, in support of Gaddafi. Not only the West, but Gaddafi himself is nervous, which explains the dilemma that, the Jehadees will soon gain power and influence in Libya.

The West has geo-strategic interests in the Mediterranean Rim Countries and Africa. Libya occupies an important position. With the establishment of the ‘AFRICOM, West’s objective is to establish hegemony over the region. Out of twenty countries of the Mediterranean Rim land, only Libya, Lebanon and Syria are not allied to NATO, and so are Somalia, Eritrea, Zimbabwe and Ivory Coast, from fifty African countries. Zimbabwe is the exception, while Somalia, Eritrea and Ivory Coast, are facing revolt. The so called “repressive regimes”, Sudan, Syria and Libya, the weakest has been invaded. The 5th American fleet is located in Bahrain, where the revolt is being suppressed by the Saudis and GCC armed forces. Thus morality has been sacrificed by crushing the rebels in Bahrain, while the Libyan rebels are being whole heartedly patronised.

As soon as the ‘No Fly Zone’ was established over Libya, the SAS men, Marines and CIA operatives from USA, UK and France numbering over 1500, landed to supply arms and ammunition and provide command & communication support to the rebels. An amount of US$ 1.1 billion, out of the seized assets of Gaddafi, was promptly released to support the war. Libya is important because of large oil and gas deposits and huge fresh water deposits, called Nubian Sandstone Water, estimated at 200xyears of flow of the Nile River. The French cartel, which controls 40% of global water market has deep interest in this water.

The Jihadees. At the very beginning of the war on Libya, what I wrote in my article, titled “Obama’s Call for Jehad Into Libya” is coming true: “The worst that will happen is that, very soon the Jehadees from Iraq, Afghanistan and the neighbouring countries, particularly the Takfeeris from Iraq will enter Libya to liberate the Muslim land, as it happened in Afghanistan in 2001. The rebels and the jehadees are joining Gaddafi’s forces against the West. The powerful Salafi leader, Abu Masaab al-Wadood, has joined the Jehad against the ‘Crusaders’ and is getting arms and ammunition from Gaddafi. In fact, Libya is another Afghanistan in the making,” because this conflict doesn’t seem to be coming to an end soon. The West has rejected the African Union agreed proposal for seize fire and reforms. West wants Gaddafi out, which is not likely.

The situation is frightening both, for the West as well as Gaddafi, who will not be able to stand-up to the jehadees, once they gain power and influence. In fact, West is supporting Al-Qaeda Magrab (AQM) in the same manner, they supported Mujahideen in Afghanistan 1980-88. The Jehadees are coming as they did, when Iraq was occupied by USA in 2003. An incident, narrated to me by my journalist friend in Karachi in 2003, explain the phenomenon: “It was about two months after the occupation of Iraq, that while traveling in a taxi, the driver told me that he was working in Saudi Arabia, I asked him, how was life in Saudi Arabia? He said, he was having a roaring time there, because every evening he would pick-up the jehadees in his taxis and show them the way into Iraq. I asked him who are they and who is supporting them? He said “name any country, they are coming on their own, and no one supports them.” I said, “God help the United States.” And now in Libya, “God help the West, and Gaddafi”, who will be facing the jehadees, after the air war dust settles down.

Gaddafi is threatened by the Jehadees upsurge in Libya. Himself a ‘moderate Muslim’, he follows the philosophy of his ‘Green-book’. If he wins, he would stand to loose, both, his regime and his philosophy of moderate Islam. Having smelled the threat, he sent his foreign minister, abroad “for medical treatment, under the pretext of abdication.”, with the message to the West, that before it was too late, they better readjust their priorities. He is also ready to cooperate as he wrote to Obama saying “You are our son, who has enough courage to annul a wrong.”

It always pays, to be honest and straight forward, and that is where the West has gone wrong. When nations like Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine and Kashmir fight for their freedom, their struggle is dubbed as terrorism. Al-Qaeda is the name of the terror, considered responsible for the 9/11 disaster threatening the homeland security of USA. They see Al-Qaeda behind every bush and with every movement for freedom. That is the dichotomy which has blurred their vision. They have been chasing shadows in Iraq & Afghanistan and have lost the asymmetric war there. And now in Libya, they are fighting a war, which was lost, before it was joined.

Democracy is promoted as the utopia for the empowerment of the people but the same is not acceptable for Iran, Iraq, Lebanon or Ghaza, even if they get elected through fair means of the ballot, because they are Islamists. On the other hand, the model democracies in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Bahrain, Yemen and Qatar are being patronized. This kind of duality is the painful realization of the Muslim World.

Swept by strong passion for change, the Arab World and the Muslim countries, see the decline of the most powerful nations of the world during the last thirty years – a symptomatic phenomenon, similar to post World War II decline of the colonial and imperial powers, which caused the surge for freedom of many countries. Neo-imperialism has failed in the first attempt to dominate the Asian Muslim region 1990-2010. It will fail again in dominating the Afro-Mediterranean region now. The world has changed, because the oppressed of the world desire change, which has been correctly understood only by the Chinese, who provide the living example of a true initiative for ‘Peace, Cooperation and Engagement.’ We as Pakistanis enjoy the best of relations with China, despite having different ideologies, different political culture and traditions. Chinese never pull strings, never interfere in our internal matters. They only help us to be self-reliant, self-respecting and strong. That is the recipe for change, which Obama promised.

Posted in LibyaComments Off on Libya: Jihadees are Coming!!

Arabs Striving!

Strive for Political Change and New Leadership

By Mahboob A. Khawaja, Ph.D.

Arab people are ancient, civilized and appear highly motivated to challenge the neo-colonial established tyranny of

oppressive rule across the Middle East. The paranoid and vengeful rulers see this challenge as anti- tradition where tribal clans and affiliations are bought with “wasta” (favors) and money.  Not, so, the traditional Arab landscape is up in revolt against the so called norms of petro-dollars sponsored modernity. It is more likely that human nature has returned to its originality of thinking and behavior and the ordinary folks do not see the light in palaces dominated politics of the few. Rulers live in palaces, not with people. Both parties are unable to cross-over the varied time zones of conflicting interests and political ambitions in an age of reason and higher public expectations.

The Arab rulers could claim to have pursued change and achieved modernity at the cost of perpetuated authoritarianism, ruthlessness, institutionalized secret police system, co-existence with the business communities and military establishments but the phenomenon of success spells out public moral and intellectual deprivation, incapacity to think of the self and the future leading to degeneration and viciousness of the exploitative system of governance. The Arabian political landscape depicts a clear sense of public deprivation and helplessness. Would the current peaceful movements of the common people produce desired results for political change, recognition of human rights and dignity and opportunities for participation in making of the democratic governance?

The Authoritarian Arab Rulers Bitten by Greed and Ignorance

Islam enriched the Arabs with knowledge, divine guidance and global leadership but the oil exporting prosperity shelved them back to the age of ignorance and greed. For over 60 years, the Arab rulers have been beaten on all the major fronts of political and strategic endeavors involving their primary national interests. Foremost, the sudden economic boom derived from the petro-dollars had adverse social, moral and political impacts across wide range of the Arabian lives and traditions. The illusion of economic prosperity undermined the Arab thoughts, culture and Islamic belief and values. In the process of sudden transformation, they lost the essence of Islamic THINKING and moral and political identities. Once the Arab civilization was the most powerful force contributing to the European Renaissance and Industrial

Revolution. John Draper (History of the Intellectual Development of Europe, 1876), describes how the Arab civilization advanced the European and American human progress. The Arab achievements were the direct results of Islam as system of life for 800 years in Al-Andalusia- Spain. Now, the Arab rulers desperately search for new identities, titles and images to keep afloat for the challenges of the 21st century survival kit. Ending the colonialism, many had conveniently adapted to make history as the point of reference for the Arab contributions to the human civilization. History is living but its primary coverage is past acts, not the present and the future. H.S. Aziz (“Islam and Muslims”) describes the Arabian complexity:

“Most Muslim countries are governed by power groups which consist of people who do not know or understand Islam and have abandoned it. They are people who have established themselves in advantageous positions often by repressing and exploiting their own peoples with the help of the dominating foreign powers. They are usually educated in the West or in the Western style and their business, cultural and political interests are intimately connected with the West. They cannot possibly be said to represent the people”

The contemporary Arab rulers, the outcome of the neo-colonial THINKING and culture, encounter serious crises in defining their own cultural-based identities and relevance to the people they claim to govern. Across the Arab world, Africa, Asia and beyond, the European planned and administered coerced European thoughts, laws and traditions to eradicate the centuries old established Islamic cultural values, principles of legal justice, education, social and moral system of governance, dedicated to the recognition of God as the supreme authority and law-giving power in the Muslim societies. The British, French, Italian and Dutch imperialists imposed their own distinct cultures, languages, laws and educational system to dismantle the Islamic institutions of education and human development, finances, moral and political governance.

The imperialistic transformation was achieved by military crusades, massive killings and displacements, coerced occupation through historical intrigues, treacheries and forced laws and divides and rule strategies. The planned scheme of European terrorism that destroyed the Islamic culture and civilization in the Arabian peninsula, southern Europe, Asia and Africa but nobody is willing to speak in the emerging political corridors of the US led political hegemony in global affairs. Consequently, millions opposing the European conquests were massacred and their habitats destroyed and overtaken by force and flourishing human societies destroyed by the colonial powers now claim to be civilized nations at the beginning of the 21st century. What rational criterion is being used to claim this concept of civilization?

Perhaps, the former colonial masters would have difficulty in explaining to the mankind that a little while ago they lived in the dark ages of barbarism, they held Roman coliseum entertaining people with wild beasts killing the human beings and tried to subjugate the morally and culturally rich Islamic world under their deception by force, not by the persuasion of democratic principles and exercise of the free and rational choice. The ruling Arabian elite, now enriched with oil exporting earnings, do not view these historical record as its irony will render judgment which might go against their own interests and political survivability. The phenomenon of CHANGE is the most important factor that the Arab ruling elite seem to ignore and hate to discuss in any public forums. The Arab people are not part of the authoritarian rules in their oil riched lands operated by the Western establishments. The rulers live in palaces and people live in distant dust covered clans and tribal locations.

There are varied cultures and time zones involved in-between the Arabian ruling elite and the people they claim to govern. The laws and public institutions date back to the European imperial time and order. The Arab rulers occupying the political powerhouses for over half a century would have difficulty to face the mirror. All the mirrors appear dusty covered with the illusion of the oil-based economic prosperity whose strings are within the control of the Sheiks-the Arab rulers for the time being. Paul Craig Roberts (“Muslims are their own Worst Enemies” March 02, 2010, ICH), offers the following candid observation:

“Muslims are numerous but powerless. Divisions among Muslims, especially between Sunni and Shiites, have consigned the Muslim Middle East to almost a century of Western control….Muslim disunity has made it possible for Israel to dispossess the Palestinians, for the U.S. to invade Iraq, and for the U.S. to rule much of the region through puppets. ….Egypt receives $1.5 billion a year from Washington, which enabled President Mubarak to buy off opposition. The opposition had rather have the money than support the Palestinians. Therefore, Egypt cooperates with Israel and the U.S. in the blockade of Gaza….. Another factor is the willingness of some Muslims to betray their own kind for U.S. dollars. ….The U.S. and its NATO puppets have been killing Afghan women, children, and village elders since October 7, 2001, when the U.S. military invasion “Operation Enduring Freedom,” a proper Orwellian title for a self-serving war of aggression, was launched. The U.S. installed puppet president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, is bought and paid for with U.S. dollars.”

Arab People Look for Political Change to articulate a New World

The neo-colonial rulers think that modernity will change the people to adjust themselves to the requisites of economic prosperity. The masses believe a return to originality of the Arab-Islamic culture will free them from the bondage of modern slavery of the coerced materialism.  Would it be an intellectual evolution or a political revolution in the making to bring about the much desired change across the oil exporting Arabian landscape? The irony of human tragedies is manifolds. Some of the largest military goods and weapons are purchased by the Arab rulers but there are no Arab armies to make good out of it. In the post colonial period, the Arab leaders have not won any wars with favorable outcomes. There are no Arab Generals to fight for Islam and to free the occupied Palestine or to defend the Arab national interests. It makes no sense why would the ruling elite make major investments in buying the American or British obsolete military hardware?

Observing the massive public uprising against the beleaguered Arab leaders, it is becoming clear that the Arab armies were meant to protect the authoritarian rulers and their palaces, and not the interests of the captive Arab masses. The Arab rulers have vast financial resources but approximately 75% of their national incomes are invested in the American or European financial institutions, not being used for the good of the people who deserve it. Rather the resources are manipulated by the few and used for high-rise building, even the Western industrialized societies cannot compete, artificial snow to enjoy desert skiing, horse races, highways for imported American vehicles and of course, unmatchable airports, not found in most of the Western nations. Are these the true human values and standards for human development and sustainable future-building?

The critical issues call for critical analysis and change and new ideas to phase-out the old and obsolete thinking and obsessed values flourishing across the Arabian Peninsula. But the ruling elite have not built new institutions to plan change and to view the imperatives of new trends for policy on peace and conflict resolution and human progress in a global community of nations. It is overwhelmingly one sided Western materialism not the human development that explains the material progress. The proponents of the material civilization see the human life just in one track system – just the body without spirituality, and all the time glued to greed and needs of the physical body, and a deliberate instinct not to understand the rationality of a just balanced approach of both the body and soul to human development, happiness and success.

How could the Arab leadership failure be turned into change and reformation of the neo-colonialism and to revive the cultural presence and visionary leadership role in the global political arena? The 21st century is more enlightened and an age of information and knowledge-driven global culture of creativity, effective leadership and human progress. It is not reasonable for the ignorant to inherit kingship or a leadership role to be successful. The emerging and complex political imperatives call for the new generation of proactive educated and intelligent people to be in the leading role of planning of change and reformation of the old and obsolete inherited infrastructures of political governance unto new sustainable system of institutional development and nation-building and to be people-oriented and represent the Islamic interests in a rational manner.

The hard facts of life speak for themselves. There is not a single Arab-Muslim country to present a credible intelligent leader to the international community. The Arab elite are operative from a position of moral and intellectual weakness and deprivation, not of political strength. To change the naïve political governance, Muslims in general and the Arabs in particular, must develop public institutions of the citizenry participation as Islam emphasizes the concept of “Shura”- consultation an important principle for societal decision making, of law, justice and leadership accountability. Muslims as one Ummah could well have a common currency, economic productivity, an international organization – “Ummah Council” responsible to develop policies and deal with issues of security, peace and conflict resolution, and to represent the unity of the Muslim Ummah as an agent of influence to strengthen the Islamic perspectives and workable policy stance in a constantly changing and challenging global political culture.

In Search of Political Imagination, State of Israel and Palestine in Waiting

The Arab ruling class faces multiple issues: (1) lack of proactive leadership to provide a sustainable vision and hope for the future, (2) lack of institutions to THINK and PLAN for peace and conflict management, and (3) to offer any concerted plan of action for manageable political CHANGE in the Arab world. The single most vital failure of the Arab rulers is self evident in failure to deal with the state of Israel and to resolve the Palestine problem in a way suitable to the human rights and dignity of the indigenous Palestinian people displaced by the creation of the state of Israel. For over 60 years, the Arab and Israelis have been talking about peace and fighting to achieve it. None of them seem to have the upper hand in dealing with a peaceful resolution of the problem. There is a conscious indifference and neglect on the part of the Arab rulers in dealing with Palestine problem.

They failed to take any creative or innovative initiatives to deal with the Jewish people or to listen to their own voices of public reason in finding a workable outcome. The Arab elite take shelter in the petro-dollars dominated temporary economic uplift, whereas, Israelis have relied in aggressive policy stance to ignore the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people. The concerned global community must find a rational ground to come to terms with a just and workable solution by establishing an independent State of Palestine. Peace seems to have lost its true meaning and purpose in the Middle East politics. They are always talking about peace without having it on the table or in human reach for all practical purposes.  The Arab rulers need to reflect at themselves if they have any institutionalized capacity with intellectual outreach to resolve the Palestine problem.

Whether fair or foul, Arab rulers are always ready to enter into negotiations for peace, the Western entrapment and outcomes favor Israel, not the authoritarian Arab rulers as they do not know how to deal with Israeli politicians and the changing patterns of global politics. The Israelis have institutionalized presence across Western Europe and America and their lobbyists control the mass media communication, a new weapon being used in global political manipulation. The Arabs do not know the enemy, yet Israelis are knowledgeable about all aspects of the Arabian life, their culture and indoctrination. Arab rulers neither have institutions nor interest to learn about Israelis or their social values and political culture. At human level, be it in peace or war, one must know the enemy. In an information-age, ignorance cannot be a reason to erect barriers for being ignorant.

America is at the epic centre of the approach to a peaceful resolution. Throughout the Arab world, American history or politics is not part of the educational curriculum. Most Arab states are the client states of the US without much knowledge of the Master. The Arab ruling elite needs new educated, proactive and intelligent leaders and effective communicators to evolve creative challenges and acquire position of strength in global conflict management and peace building. You must come up with innovative challenges and be counted in global political affairs. The current Arab rulers live with immense weaknesses, they urgently need to redefine their role and work on leadership capacity-building to negotiate peace and to co-exist with the changing political landscape of international affairs. If the Arab rulers would understand the importance and NEED to develop new leaders from the new educated and intelligence generation of their own people, they would be relevant to explore new strategies for communication and conflict resolution.

The time and opportunities call for new ideas and approaches to deal with the political problems. Israeli illegal settlements are increasing daily to occupy the Palestinian homes and land. Almost 42% of the occupied West Bank is said to have been taken up by the new immigrants coming from the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe to Israel. Every day news comes out about Israeli bulldozing the Arab ancestral homes in East Jerusalem to make room for the new illegal settlements. Have you ever heard of the Arab bulldozing the illegal Israeli settlements? Why are the contemporary Arab rulers so indifferent, ignorant and politically incompetent to provide intellectual security to the besieged masses?

The oil-based economy is not for ever and peak oil stage is already in place. Therefore, the illusion of prosperity is seen as short lived concept of the few living in palaces not viable with the people. History tells us that all the Arab glory and progress was intermittently linked with the message of Islam and following the Divine system as a way of life. That led the Arabs to achieve success in Southern Europe for more than 800 years of the Islamic civilization in Al-Andulus- Spain. The Arabs were the most advanced civilization in Europe while the European were enriched in witchcraft, slavery, dynastic warfare and gladiatorial games and torture- these were the competing identities of those who subsequently occupied the Islamic world by force, not by democratic persuasion. The Arab rulers are greedy and ignorant and not equipped with knowledge and wisdom to have public communication and establish people to people contacts and relationships.

They are immune to change and relevance to the future. They belong to an age and time span that no longer exists except on papers and on the scheme of Western strategic planners in Washington and London. The real dilemma is that the new and intellectually entrepreneurial generations are stalled from progress as the hereditary rulers would not encourage their participation in political thinking, decision making and people-oriented governance. The challenge is how to bridge the gap in thinking and actions that the old and dormant neo-colonial Arab rulers could be phased-out or sidelined in just a ceremonial role and the new and more educated and competent young generations of the citizens could be phased-in to assume the much needed political leadership and to ensure that future will happen and it will be safe, secure and sustainable for peace and change in the Middle East.

One of my recent articles  “Global Peace and Conflict Resolution:

How the Arab, Israeli and the Western Leaders Duped the Humanity?” 06/2010 makes the following observation:

“The prosperity fantasy bubble is fast approaching to an end with the peak oil forecasts as a visual reality in- waiting.  Power, prosperity and poverty are all trials in human affairs and transitory phenomenon. Was the discovery of oil a conspiracy (“fitna”) for the Arabs to change the originality of their thinking, beliefs, values and passion for Islam as successful system of human life?”

The Arab masses long for political change and a promising future based on peaceful co-existence with others. But the rulers continue to live in dream world that is no longer relevant or sustainable to the changing perceptions, hopes and aspirations of the Arab people. The new educated, proactive and informed generation of Arab leadership with an inward eye not merely on the petro-dollars transitory economy but craving for realism and workable solutions for the purpose of building a different and promising future for the people-oriented Islamic governance, transforming the cruelty of authoritarianism into a functional democracy for the best interest of the people – is the real challenge with an opportunity. Change will lead to durable and peaceful future when political governance will ensure respect and recognition of the rights of the people and their active participation in making the political governance a reality.  The bewildered rulers rely heavily on borrowed weapons, tanks, guns and bullets to silence the people’s voices of reason for change and peace. If there are any Arab rulers eager to LISTENING and LEARNING as part of the changing leadership role, the criterion for peaceful CHANGE is logically defined by the Al-Qura’an: Surah Al-Noor (verse 55, translation by Abdullah Yousef Ali)):

“Allah has promised to those

Among you who believe and work

Righteous deeds, that He will of a surety

Grant them in the land, inheritance

(of power), as He granted it to those before them,

That He will establish in authority

Their religion- the one

Which He has chosen for them;

And that He will change (their state),

After the fear

In which they (lived) to one of security and peace.”

Posted in Middle EastComments Off on Arabs Striving!

Myopic US démarche

“In the face of failure, ego centric become myopic that further enhances the egoistic tendencies in them” Raja Mujtaba

By S. M. Hali


The latest biannual White House report to the US Congress about the performance of the Government of Pakistan and the counter-insurgency efforts of its army, states that Pakistan has made little progress in the past year in battling Islamist extremists and that there is “no clear path toward defeating the insurgency” in the country. Coming at the heels of the Raymond Davis affair and the lethal drone attack on a tribal jirga in North Waziristan killing 41 civilians and the subsequent Pakistan’s pulling out of the March 26 trilateral ministerial meeting with USA and Afghanistan, it smacks of doublespeak.

Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokesperson Tehmina Janjua has rightly rejected US criticism of Pakistan’s war efforts. The latest démarche by the US depicts a myopic view of Pakistani nation as well as its Army. Pakistan’s economic and political problems notwithstanding, it has a professional Army, which has become battled hardened and well honed in the war against terror. Pakistan Army has not only assimilated the lessons in counter insurgency operations, but managed to score unprecedented success. Its complete routing of the miscreants in Swat and South Waziristan have been acknowledged as an achievement by all the major powers involved in combating terrorism. It is sad that whenever, the US faces tough opposition in Afghanistan, it finds an easy scapegoat in Pakistan and blames it for its woes.

Here two recent publications merit attention; both focus on the same topic but are divergent in their views. The first is Professor Anatol Lieven’s “Pakistan: A Hard Country”, an assessment of Pakistan as a viable and coherent state. Equipped by nuclear weapons, threatened by the al-Qaeda, victim of several raging insurgencies and strife torn because of a chronically unstable political structure—most Western experts continue to view Pakistan as the most dangerous country in the world. Thus this book by Anatol Lieven could hardly be timelier. Lucid and well informed, he deals carefully with all Pakistan’s well-known problems. Lieven rings hope, avoiding the hysteria and partial judgment that disfigure much contemporary writing on the subject.

Above all, he emanates a deep affection bordering on love for unfortunate, beleaguered, magical Pakistan. Lieven’s research takes him to an army cantonment in Quetta, boar-hunting in the Punjab and to a stay in Taliban-dominated Mohmand Agency on the North West Frontier. Lieven, a former foreign correspondent who is now professor of terrorism studies at King’s College, London, talks to relevant stakeholders: farmers, intelligence officers, judges, clerics, politicians, doctors, soldiers, jihadis. In the course of this journey he demolishes the neo-conservative narrative that Pakistan is dominated by a mortal struggle between virtuous modernity and rage-filled Islamist conservatism. He insists that Pakistan is not—as Western intelligence agencies, journalists and think tanks believe—a country on the brink; nor should anyone worry about its nuclear weapons falling into the wrong hands. Pakistan is not about to be taken over by Islamists.

The second publication is by Pakistan-baiter and staunch critic, Bruce Riedel. The former CIA operative, in his book ‘Deadly Embrace: Pakistan, America, and the Future of Global Jihad’, depicts his usual love for India, and spews venom against Pakistan. Once again raising the spectre of the insecurity of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, Mr. Riedel uses the unfortunate assassination of Governor Salman Taseer to build his argument.  He snidely remarks that Pakistanis have been insisting that an intense vetting system makes sure that “fundos” do not make away with Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.

He argues that a similar system, was supposed to assure that armed bodyguards are loyal to the government, and to the officials they are supposed to protect, alluding to Mr. Qadri, the security guard who killed Governor Taseer. He plays to the Indian gallery that for thoughtful Indians, the crisis in Pakistan is a nightmare on their border. They know Pakistan has the fastest growing nuclear arsenal in the world. Thus far, India has held back from accelerating its own nuclear buildup, but that may change. A jihadist Pakistan is the globe’s worst nightmare of the 21st century.  For Americans it’s a nightmare on the other side of the planet.  For Indians it’s a nightmare next door.

Pakistan has paid high price in the war on terrorism (WoT). Unfortunately Pakistan’s efforts and sacrifices have not been fully recognized by Western media, think tanks and other stake holders like USA/EU, instead anti Pakistan propaganda has been aired to tarnish the image of Pakistan, its armed forces and intelligence agencies. In Mao’s words, “wind blows against Pakistan from all sides” and now even the White House has jumped in the fray.

Posted in USAComments Off on Myopic US démarche

Libya: America Considering the use of Nuclear Weapons! Part 2




By Prof. Michel Chossudovsky


Shortly after the commencement of the Libya bombing campaign on March 19, the Pentagon ordered the testing of the B61-11 nuclear bomb. These tests announced in an April 4 press release, pertained to the installed equipment and weapon’s components. The objective was to verify the functionality of  the nuclear bomb…..

The B-2 Spirit Stealth bomber is the “chosen carrier” of the B61 -11 nuclear bombs. The B-2 Spirit Stealth bomber out of Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri was not only sent on a mission to bomb Libya at the very outset of the air campaign, it was subsequently used in the testing of the B61 Mod 11 nuclear bomb.

The B61-11 has a yield of two thirds of a Hiroshima bomb. Why were these tests of the equipment and functionality of a tactical nuclear weapon scheduled shortly after the onset of the Libya bombing campaign?

Why now?

Is the timing of these tests coincidental or are they in any way related to the chronology of the Libya bombing campaign?

U.S. Air Force Global Strike Command, which is responsible for the coordination of US bombing operations directed against Libya was also involved in the testing of the B61-11 nuclear bombs.

Both the bombing of Libya by the B-2 Spirit Stealth bomber (see image above) on March 19-20, as well as the testing of the functionality of the B61-11 nuclar bomb (announced April 4) were implemented out of the same US Air Force base in Missouri.

An earlier article entitled America’s Planned Nuclear Attack on Libya, (PART I)  provided details of the Pentagon’s plan under the Clinton administration to wage a nuclear attack on Libya.

The Pentagon had envisaged  the use of the B61 Mod 11 nuclear bomb against Libya. Categorized as a mini-nuke, the B61-11 is a 10 kiloton bomb with a yield equivalent to two thirds of a Hiroshima bomb. (See Michel Chossudovsky, America’s Planed Nuclear Attack on Libya,Global Research, March 25, 2011)

The Pentagon’s 1996 plan to nuke Libya had been announced in no uncertain terms at a press briefing by Assistant Secretary of Defense Harold P. Smith:

“[The] Air Force would use the B61-11 [nuclear weapon] against Libya’s alleged underground chemical weapons plant at Tarhunah if the President decided that the plant had to be destroyed. ‘We could not take [Tarhunah] out of commission using strictly conventional weapons,’ Smith told the Associated Press. The B61-11 ‘would be the nuclear weapon of choice,’ he told Jane Defence Weekly. (The Nuclear Information Project: the B61-11)

Clinton’s Defense Secretary William Perry –who was present at the press briefing– had earlier told a Senate Foreign Relations Committee that “the U.S. retained the option of using nuclear weapons against countries [e.g. Libya] armed with chemical and biological weapons.”(Ibid, See also Greg Mello, The Birth Of a New Bomb; Shades of Dr. Strangelove! Will We Learn to Love the B61-11? The Washington Post, June 01, 1997)

The Department of Defense’s objective was to fast track the “testing” of the B61-11 nuclear bomb on an actual country and that country was Libya:

“Even before the B61 came on line, Libya was identified as a potential target”. (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists – September/ October 1997, p. 27). (For further details see Michel Chossudovsky, America’s Planned Nuclear Attack on Libya, March 2011)

While the 1996 plan to bomb Libya using tactical nuclear weapons was subsequently shelved, Libya was not removed from the “black list”: “The Qadhafi regime” remains to this date a target country for a pre-emptive (“defensive”) nuclear attack.

As revealed by William Arkin in early 2002, “The Bush administration, in a secret policy review… [had] ordered the Pentagon to draft contingency plans for the use of nuclear weapons against at least seven countries, naming not only Russia and the “axis of evil” Iraq, Iran, and North Korea but also China, Libya and Syria. (See William Arkin, “Thinking the Unthinkable”, Los Angeles Times, 9 March 2002).

According to the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review, adopted by the Senate in 2002, Libya is on the “Pentagon’s list”. Moreover, it is also important to emphasize that Libya was the first country to be tagged and formally identified (at a Department of Defense press briefing) as a possible target for a US sponsored nuclear attack using the B61 Mod 11 nuclear bomb. This announcement was made in 1996, five years prior to the formulation of  the pre-emptive nuclear war doctrine under the Bush administration (i.e the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review).

The Testing of the B61-11 Nuclear Bomb (Announced on April 4, 2011)

What is the relevance of the history of the B61-11 nuclear bomb and earlier threats directed by the Clinton administration against Libya?

Has the project to nuke Libya been shelved or is Libya still being contemplated as a potential target for a nuclear attack?

Shortly after the commencement of the Libya bombing campaign on March 19, the US Department of Defense ordered the testing of the B61-11 nuclear bomb. These tests pertained to the installed equipment and weapon ‘s components of the nuclear bomb.

The announcement of these tests was made public on April 4; the precise date of  the test was not revealed, but one can reasonably assume that it was in the days prior to the April 4 press release by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA. Press Release, NNSA Conducts Successful B61-11 JTA Flight Test, Apr 4, 2011,)

The B-2 Spirit Stealth bomber is the US Air Force’s chosen “carrier” for the delivery of the B61 Mod 11 nuclear bomb. In late March or early April  (prior to April 4), the B-2 Spirit Stealth bomber from the 509th Bomber Wing operating out of Whiteman Air Force Base, was used in the so-called “Joint Test Assembly” (JTA) of the B61 Mod 11 nuclear bomb.

In other words, the B61-11 was tested using the same B-2 Spirit Stealth bombers out of Whiteman Air Force Base, which were used to bomb Libya at the very outset of the air campaign.

The Joint Test Assembly (JTA) of the B61-11

This JTA testing was undertaken by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

together with the U.S. Air Force Global Strike Command, which coincidentally is responsible for the coordination of US bombing operations directed against Libya as well as ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“The JTA was produced by the NNSA in support of the Joint Surveillance Flight Test Program between the Department of Defense and the NNSA” (Press release, op cit)

The Joint Test Assembly (JTA) in the case of  the B61 Mod 11 nuclear bomb, requires testing the equipment of the B61-11 using a proxy conventional non-nuclear warhead. Essentially what is involved is to test all the installed equipment on the nuclear bomb and ensure its functionality without actually having a nuclear explosion. The JTA test “was

built to simulate the actual B61-11 weapon configuration utilizing as much war reserve hardware as feasible.  It was assembled at the Pantex plant in Amarillo, Texas and was not capable of nuclear yield, as it contained no special nuclear materials.”  (Press Release, NNSA Conducts Successful B61-11 JTA Flight Test, Apr 4, 2011)

“JTA tests [are to ensure] that all weapon systems [e.g. B61-11 nuclear bomb] perform as planned and that systems are designed to be safe, secure and effective,”…. A JTA contains instrumentation and sensors that monitor the performance of numerous weapon components [e.g of the B61-11] during the flight test to determine if the weapon functions as designed. This JTA also included a flight recorder that stored the bomb performance data for the entire test. The data is used in a reliability model, developed by Sandia National Laboratories, to evaluate the reliability of the bomb. (Ibid)

The B-2 Spirit Stealth Bomber operating out of the Whiteman Air Force Base was reported to have “delivered and released” the B61-11 JTA at the Tonopah Test Range in Nevada, which is routinely used to test nuclear ordnance. (See Press Release, op cit.).

The Tonopah Test Range while owned by the US Department of Energy, is managed and operated by Sandia National Laboratories, a division of America’s largest weapons producer Lockheed-Martin (under permit with the NASA). (See

Aerial View of Tonopah Test Range where the B61 11 JTA was tested using a B-2 Spirit Stealth bomber. Source NASA.

The Deployment of B 2 Stealth bombers to Libya

Why were these JTA tests of the equipment and functionality of a tactical nuclear weapon scheduled shortly after the onset of the Libya bombing campaign?

Why now?

Is the timing of these tests coincidental or are they in any way related to the chronology of the Libya bombing campaign?

It is worth noting that the U.S. Air Force Global Strike Command was in charge of both the JTA tests of the B61-11 as well as the deployment of three B-2 Spirit Stealth bombers to Libya on March 19.

“Three B-2 Spirit bombers, piloted by two men each, made it back after the 11,418-mile round trip from the Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri – where they are kept in special hangars – to Libya, where they hit targets on forces loyal to Colonel Gaddafi and back again.”(Libya-crisis-B2-stealth-bombers-25-hour-flight-Missouri-Tripoli, Daily Mail, March 21, 2011)

In other words, both the deployment of the B-2s to the Libya war theater as well as the JTA  test (using the B-2 bomber for delivery) were coordinated out of Whiteman Air Force base.

“Humanitarian war” is carried out through a “Shock and Awe” Blitzkrieg. Three B-2 Spirit Stealth bombers were sent on a bombing mission at the very outset of the Libya bombing campaign. According to the reports, they returned to Whiteman Air Force base on March 21st. The reports suggest that the three B-2s were carrying bunker buster bombs with conventional warheads.

The report suggests that the B-2 Stealth bombers dropped 45 one ton satellite guided missiles on Libya, which represents an enormous amount of ordnance: “At $2.1bn, they are the most expensive warplanes in the world and rarely leave their climate-controlled hangars. But when it does, the B-2 bomber makesa spectacularly effective start to a war – including during this weekend’s aerial attack on Libya’s air defences. (Daily Mail, March 21, 2011, op cit)

While we are not in a position to verify the accuracy of these reports, the 45 one-ton bombs correspond roughly to the B-2 specifications, namely each of these planes can carry sixteen 2,000 pound (900 kg) bombs.

Concluding Remarks: The Decision to Use Nuclear Weapons

Through a propaganda campaign which has enlisted the support of “authoritative” nuclear

scientists, the B61-11 “mini-nuke” is presented as an instrument of peace rather than war.

In an utterly twisted logic, low yield tactical nuclear weapons are presented as a means to building peace and preventing “collateral damage”.

In this regard, US nuclear doctrine ties in with the notion that the US-NATO war under Operation Odyssey Dawn is a humanitarian undertaking.

The important question addressed in this article is whether the recent test of a B61-11 is “routine” or was it envisaged by the DoD directly or indirectly in support of Operation Odyssey Dawn, implying the possible deployment of mini nukes at some future stage of the Libya bombing campaign. There is no clear-cut answer to this question.

It should be emphasized, however, that under the doctrine of “pre-emptive nuclear war” mini nukes are always deployed and  in “a state of readiness” (even in times of peace). Libya was the first “rogue state” to be tagged for a nuclear attack in 1996 prior to the approval of the mini nukes for battlefield use by the US Congress.

The Pentagon claims that “mini-nukes” are harmless to civilians because  “the explosion takes place under ground”.  Not only is the claim of an underground explosion erroneous, each of these ‘mini-nukes’,  constitutes – in terms of explosion and potential radioactive fallout – a significant fraction of the atom bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945….

We are at a dangerous crossroads: The rules and guidelines governing the use nuclear weapons have been “liberalized” (i.e. “deregulated” in relation to those prevailing during the Cold War era). The decision to use low yield nuclear nuclear weapons (e.g. against Libya) no longer depends on the Commander in Chief, namely president Barack Obama. It is strictly a military decision. The new doctrine states that Command, Control, and Coordination (CCC) regarding the use of nuclear weapons should be “flexible”, allowing geographic combat commanders to decide if and when to use of nuclear weapons:

Known in official Washington, as “Joint Publication 3-12”, the new nuclear doctrine (Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations , (DJNO) (March 2005)) calls for “integrating conventional and nuclear attacks” under a unified and “integrated” Command and Control (C2).

It largely describes war planning as a management decision-making process, where military and strategic objectives are to be achieved, through a mix of instruments, with little concern for the resulting loss of human life.

Military planning focuses on “the most efficient use of force”, i.e. an optimal arrangement of different weapons systems to achieve stated military goals. In this context, nuclear and conventional weapons are considered to be “part of the tool box”, from which military commanders can pick and choose the instruments that they require in accordance with “evolving circumstances” in the “war theatre”. (None of these weapons in the Pentagon’s “tool box”, including conventional bunker buster bombs, cluster bombs, mini-nukes, chemical and biological weapons are described as “weapons of mass destruction” when used by the United States of America and its “coalition” partners). Michel Chossudovsky, Is the Bush Administration Planning a Nuclear Holocaust? Global Research, February 22, 2006

Authors note:

In researching these issues I have attempted to present the documented facts without drawing simple conclusions as to the potential use of nuclear weapons in the Libya war theater.

Having examined the various facets of US nuclear doctrine for many years, I have become increasingly aware that the use of nuclear weapons does not belong to the field of abstraction.  Neither does the testing of the equipment of the B61-11 nuclear bomb including its various installed functions.

The matter needs further examination, the release of more information, discussion at all levels, questions in the US Congress and above all a detailed, honest and unbiased media coverage.

It is my sincere hope that this article will contribute to an understanding of US nuclear doctrine as well as a greater awareness of the impending dangers of nuclear war.

Posted in LibyaComments Off on Libya: America Considering the use of Nuclear Weapons! Part 2

The Siege of Pakistan Continues


By Sajjad Shaukat


In the past, conventional forces used to besiege an enemy country in order to defeat it or to fulfill their strategic aims. But in the modern era of globalization and technology, a rival country can be besieged through some different tactics which include various subversive acts conducted in that country by a single country or a number of countries which want to obtain their joint selfish goals.

In these terms, although our country has been facing multiple crises of grave nature, yet the same have been intensified by the foreign enemies recently as part of the siege of Pakistan. At present, Pakistan and its security forces are facing suicide attacks, bomb blasts, sectarian violence, drone attacks and targeted-killings coupled with intermittent battles with the militants.

In this respect, on April 3 this year, a double bomb suicide attack outside a shrine in Dera Ghazi Khan killed more than 40 people. On March 30, a suicide bomber struck a convoy carrying Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) chief in Charsadda, killing 12 people. In two days, it was the second attack against Maulana Fazlur Rehman who survived fortunately.

While in one of the major attacks, more than 40 civilians and policemen were killed when on March 18, 2011; an unmanned US aircraft fired four missiles into a building in Datta Khel area of North Waziristan.

Although drone attacks have continued intermittently on Pakistan’s tribal areas in the last few years, which have killed many people, yet this strike was so lethal that on the same day, Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani strongly condemned it as “unjustified and intolerable” and said it was a violation of human rights. He elaborated, “A jirga of peaceful citizens including elders of the area has been targeted carelessly with a complete disregard to human life. He further indicated, “Such an act of violence takes us away from our objective of elimination of terrorism…it was imperative to understand that this critical objective could not be sacrificed for temporary tactical gains”, adding that “security of the people of Pakistan, in any case, stood above all.”

Meanwhile, apart from other cities, such incidents as linguistic clashes, sectarian violence, firings and particularly targeted killings have become a routine matter in Karachi.

Taking cognizance of all the subversive events, Pakistan’s civil and military leadership has been revealing from time to time that Indian secret agency RAW, Israeli Mossad and some other foreign agencies are involved in supporting insurgency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and separatism in Balochistan including acts of terrorism in other cities of Pakistan.

It is of particular attention that some opportunist elements like the US, India, Afghanistan and Israel are in collusion as part of a plot to ‘destabilize’ Pakistan for their common strategic interests. For this purpose, American CIA, Indian secret agency RAW and Israeli Mossad including Blackwater have rapidly established their collective network in Pakistan. They have recruited Pakistani nationals who are vulnerable and can work on payroll, giving them high financial incentives to work for them. Notably, some reports suggest that this notorious firm Blackwater has been recruiting smugglers, employees of the security companies, experts of the psychological warfare, scholars and journalists in order to fulfill anti-Pakistan designs of America, India and Israel.

It is mentionable that in the last three years, Pakistan’s security forces and intelligence agencies have caught a number of foreign spies along with sophisticated weapons, working against the integration of the country. In this respect, a number of times, arms and guns were also captured from Americans traveling in vehicles in various cities of Pakistan, camouflaged with dark mirrors.

On the one hand, Pakistan’s security forces have successfully coped with the Taliban militants in the Malakand Division and South Waziristan, while on the other, situation has deteriorated in the country where subversive events like suicide attacks, targeted killings, attacks on buildings, oil pipelines, sectarian violence etc. have accelerated due to the presence of external spies.

It is notable that on April 23, 2009 in the in-camera sitting of the Senate, Federal Minister to the Interior, Rehman Malik had displayed documentary evidence of Indian use of Afghanistan to create unrest in Balochistan. It is believed that the main aim of in-camera session was also to show the engagement of American CIA and other external agencies as part of a conspiracy against Pakistan because at that stage, Islamabad did not want to publicly point out America.

Besides, Pakistan’s Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit without naming CIA had revealed, “The evidence of foreign powers’ involvement in the destabilisation of Pakistan will be shared with relevant countries.”

While in the recent past, Governor of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Awais Ghani had disclosed that some world powers were trying to divide Pakistan, adding that if he were not a governor, he would have exposed them.

During the Malakand and Waziristan military operations, ISPR spokesman, Maj-Gen. Athar Abbas has repeatedly indicated foreign hands in helping the insurgents in order to destabilize Pakistan.

It is mentionable that Pakistan is the only nuclear country in the Islamic World; hence the US, India, Israel and some western powers are determined to weaken it. Notably, despite American cooperation with Islamabad, its main aim along with India and Israel remains to de-nuclearise our country whose geo-strategic location with the Gwadar port entailing close ties with China irks the eyes of these countries, therefore, they are in collusion to weaken Pakistan. For this sinister aim, a well-established network of Indian army, RAW, Mossad and CIA which was set up in Afghanistan against Pakistan so as to support insurgency in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and separatism in Balochistan have been extended. Now, it has been expanded in whole of Pakistan as recent suicide attacks, bomb blasts and targeted killings in Karachi and other cities of the country have proved. In this context, some other incidents like kidnappings and killings of Iranians and Chinese engineers in the last three years might also be cited as example.

In fact, the problem was not restricted to Balochistan alone, it also related to the Karakorum Highway, which was extended to Khyber Pukhtunkhwa and the tribal areas of Pakistan. The fight in the name of Islam started in Bajor, Malakand and Swat, when in 2004; China signed an agreement with the government of Pakistan for an extension of the historical highway from Gilgat to Swat, passing through Dir and Chitral. That highway was named the Karakorum Highway phase II. As soon as some parts of that plan were brought to world’s attention, a siren went off in the capitals of some countries—especially Washington, New Delhi and Tel Aviv. The USA took it as a threat to its global plans, and India felt that it threatened its integrity. American close ally, Israel also took it as a greater threat from an Islamic country.

It is established fact that CIA, RAW and Mossad are collectively working inside Pakistan. In this context, these secret agencies have been spending huge money to train and equip the militants who have been entering Pakistan on daily basis and have been conducting subversive acts of various types—assaults on our security forces and inciting sectarian violence. These foreign agencies have also purchased the services of some Indian Muslims so as to fulfill their nefarious designs. They intend to create perennial unrest in Pakistan, while main purpose remains to disintegrate the country.

In this regard, Indo-Israeli lobbies are working in the US and other western countries in order to implicate Islamabad. With the help of especially American media, these lobbies are propagating that the next terror-plan to attack the US homeland will be prepared in Pakistan. In this respect, recent release of the new secret documents which have targeted Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Syria including some other Islamic countries in general and Pakistan in particular are the plot of their collective enemies through WikiLeaks. Particularly, the main aim of these diplomatic cables is to distort the image of Pakistan by maligning our political leadership, army and superior spy agency, ISI which is the first defense line of the country in thwarting the conspiracy of the foreign enemies.

Without any doubt, US has been playing a double game against our country, while its allies—India and Israel continues the siege of Pakistan with its support.

Posted in Pakistan & KashmirComments Off on The Siege of Pakistan Continues

The new Egypt: Mustafa Al-Faqi


This opportunist Egyptian politician has been all over the news media lately.  And he has been attacking IsraHell as much as I do.  Only I dont trust him because he was part of Zionist  Mubarak regime until he broke with it, a few weeks before the ouster of Zionist Mubarak.  He has been officially nominated by Egypt to serve as secretary-general of the League of Arab Tyrants.  In this interview with Ash-Sharq Al-Awsat (the mouthpiece of Prince Salman and his sons) he brags that he never ever visited IsraHell.  Well, Saudi King and Zayid’s sons in UAE never visited IsraHell but they still are lousy and obedient servants of IsraHell.  In the Egyptian press, Faqi asserted that IsraHell is behind most of the Middle East problems and said that Egypt is more a victim of IsraHell than the Palestinians.  That is running for office in the new Egypt.  O, Zionists can now freak out.  Go ahead.


Posted in EgyptComments Off on The new Egypt: Mustafa Al-Faqi

The new Egypt: Grand Shaykh of Al-Azhar remembers that he too opposes IsraHell


“The Grand Sheikh of Al Azhar, Dr Ahmed Al Tayeb, has stated that he opposes the normalisation of relations with the Zionist Occupation and that this has always been his stance on the issue. ”  But the charlatan never said that during Zionist Mubarak’s days.  And the charlatan was an active member of Zionist Mubarak’s ruling party

Al Azhar’s chief imam: I oppose normalization of relations with IsraHell

Grand Sheikh of Al Azhar University, Dr Ahmed Al Tayeb 

Dr. Al Tayeb called on the Palestinian factions to reach national reconciliation and to unite the Palestinian people’s position.

The Grand Sheikh of Al Azhar, Dr Ahmed Al Tayeb, has stated that he opposes the normalisation of relations with the Zionist Occupation and that this has always been his stance on the issue.

During a meeting with Mahmoud Al Zahhar who is a member of Hamas’ political bureau, Dr Al Tayeb called on the Palestinian factions to reach national reconciliation and to unite the Palestinian people’s position. “A divided people cannot stand in the face of IsraHell,” the Grand Imam said.

“With your division, you have given them [the Occupation] a pretext to halt negotiations, and without the reconciliation you will remain distant from each other and IsraHell; this has been a plot against you – to weaken and divide you, and one which you must unify to confront.”

Dr Al Tayeb expressed his readiness to participate in the reconciliation efforts between the Palestinian factions “while safeguarding the rights of Hamas, Fatah, and the Palestinian people, because the Palestinian people deserve more than this in order to lead a better life. Al Azhar stands with you and behind you.”

On his part, Dr Al Zahhar stressed that Hamas supports the reconciliation and “trusts the ability of Egypt and its people to push forward Palestinian reconciliation.”

“We are completely ready to sit with Fatah and reach reconciliation with it,” Al Zahhar said.

Posted in EgyptComments Off on The new Egypt: Grand Shaykh of Al-Azhar remembers that he too opposes IsraHell

This is hilarious: read the last line. Obama wants to balance democracy with…Saudi Arabia–Saudi Arabia, for potato’s sake


“A top White House aide delivered a personal letter from President Obama to Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah on Tuesday, as the administration moved to calm tensions between the two countries over how to respond to upheaval in the Arab world and deal with their mutual adversary in Iran.  The hastily arranged visit to the kingdom by national security adviser Thomas E. Donilon came less than a week after Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates made the same trip. While administration officials confirmed the delivery of Obama’s missive, they declined to specify its contents.  Neither government denies that there has been a divergence of views between the entrenched, conservative monarchy and the administration, which is struggling to balance its substantial interests and alliances in the region with its desire to see democratic reforms.”  I mean, that last sentence is classic.  This is like saying that some one wants to balance celibacy with sex, or to balance resistance with Muhammad Dahlan, or to balance Abu Mazen with transparency or to balance Sa`d Hariri with intelligence or tobalance Husni Mubarak with the rule of law.

Top White House aide delivers Obama letter to Saudi king

By Karen DeYoung,

April 12,2011

A top White House aide delivered a personal letter from President Obama to Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah on Tuesday, as the administration moved to calm tensions between the two countries over how to respond to upheaval in the Arab world and deal with their mutual adversary in Iran.

The hastily arranged visit to the kingdom by national security adviser Thomas E. Donilon came less than a week after Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates made the same trip. While administration officials confirmed the delivery of Obama’s missive, they declined to specify its contents.

Neither government denies that there has been a divergence of views between the entrenched, conservative monarchy and the administration, which is struggling to balance its substantial interests and alliances in the region with its desire to see democratic reforms.

The stakes are high for both sides, perhaps higher for Obama.

Saudi Arabia, in addition to being the world’s largest oil exporter and the site of the Muslim world’s holiest sites, is the leading U.S. regional partner on counterterrorism matters. An extensive bilateral intelligence and law enforcement infrastructure has been established over the past decade. A pending $60 billion arms deal with the Saudis is the largest in U.S. history.

A senior Saudi official said the back-to-back U.S. trips were less “fence-mending” than consultations on “how do we move forward . . . given all the things that are happening, in ways that best protect our interests.”

While the administration sees democratic potential in the Arab spring, the Saudis are feeling an ominous chill from all points of the compass — Bahrain to the east, Yemen to the south, Egypt to the west andIraq to the north. They have also seen signs of internal unrest, with minor Shiite demonstrations in the eastern part of the kingdom in recent weeks.

Saudi leaders were furious last month when the administration criticized their deployment of troops to Bahrain, the small island nation in the Persian Gulf whose Shiite majority has taken to the streets to demand more political representation from Sunni rulers. U.S. calls for political dialogue were interpreted as a naive response to what the Saudis see as a clear case of interference by Iran’s Shiite theocracy.

Bahrain is the “reddest of red lines” for the Saudis, said a member of the Majlis al-Shura, the consultative council that advises Abdullah on a range of foreign and domestic issues.

Beyond Bahrain, the Saudis were stunned at Obama’s rapid abandonment of Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, a decades-long ally. They have been dismayed by what they see as Obama’s failure to seize the initiative in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. They also consider Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki little more than a stooge for Iranian interests, and were disappointed in the administration’s support for his second term in office against Saudi advice.

“I don’t want to pretend we haven’t had some differences,” said a senior U.S. official who was not authorized to discuss the situation on the record. “There are some things we need to work on.”

While the administration shares the Saudi concern about Iranian expansionism, it also believes that the Saudis have developed a dangerous fixation on Iran’s role.

“It can become a self-fulfilling prophecy,” the administration official said. “If you see every Shiite as an Iranian agent, that could very well turn out eventually to be the case.”

Underlying the current tensions is Saudi Arabia’s long-standing concern that it “has been taken for granted by the United States,” said another member of the Shura, part of a group that visited Washington last week.

The Saudis consider themselves “the voice for moderation and stabilization in the Middle East,” he said, and resent the U.S. implication that the administration is more attuned to threats such as Iran, or that the Saudi monarchy needs to move toward its own reforms at a faster pace than it believes is wise or necessary.

Some foreign policy experts in this country agree that Obama needs to pay more attention to the relationship. The Saudi king needs to know “that the president will provide a secure safety net of support, rather than undermine him” in the event of trouble in the kingdom, Martin Indyk, the director of the Brookings Institution’s foreign policy program, wrote in The Washington Post early this week.

Saudi uncertainty was reflected in a visit to Pakistan last month by Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the head of the Saudi National Security Council.

Until the mid-1990s, Pakistan maintained a division of troops in Saudi Arabia, and it has long been a recruiting ground for Persian Gulf security forces. Although Bandar made no official request, he was assured of help if needed, a senior Pakistani official said. “We hold the Saudis so close,” the official said, “we have to really help them if there is a need.”

But others are more dismissive of Saudi concerns. “Our friends are mad at us because we said Mubarak had to go,” Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) said Tuesday at the U.S.-Islamic Forum, a conference in Washington jointly sponsored by Brookings and the government of Qatar. “We didn’t say that . . . the Egyptian people did,” Kerry said. “We acknowledged a reality.”

“For leaders worried about their regimes, royal families and governments,” Kerry said, “this is an opportunity to adjust to how they stay in power.”

Posted in USAComments Off on This is hilarious: read the last line. Obama wants to balance democracy with…Saudi Arabia–Saudi Arabia, for potato’s sake

White Man is pleased with the performance of the collaborationist police (non)state in Ramallah



Posted by: Sammi Ibrahem
Chair of West Midland PSC

“In the six areas in which the United Nations is most engaged — governance, rule of law and human rights; livelihoods; education and culture; health; social protection; and infrastructure and water — it said that the authority’s functions were “now sufficient for a functioning government of stste.””  I mean, in the area of rule of law and human rights, the PA has indeed served the occupier and it does deserve praise.

U.N. Praises Palestinians’ Progress Toward a State

Published: April 12, 2011
JERUSALEM — The United Nations praised Palestinian Authorityefforts at strengthening its institutions in a report on Tuesday, describing aspects of its administration as sufficient for an independent state.

Marco Longari/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Youths played at a cemetery east of Gaza City on Monday. Hamas, a rival of the Palestinian Authority, controls Gaza.

The endorsement came at a crucial time for the Palestinian Authority, which has set a September deadline for the completion of its state-building program and is working toward international recognition ofPalestinian statehood in the West BankGaza and East Jerusalem that month.

September is also the target date set by Israel and the Palestinians to reach a negotiated agreement for a Palestinian state, but the latest round of peace talks has been stalled for six months.

A meeting of the so-called quartet of Middle East peacemakers — the United States, theEuropean Union, the United Nations and Russia — that was scheduled for Friday in Berlin has been canceled amid disagreements over how to proceed.

The United Nations report, published on the eve of a Palestinian donor meeting in Brussels on Wednesday, echoed similar assessments by the International Monetary Fund and theWorld Bank in reports issued last week.

In the six areas in which the United Nations is most engaged — governance, rule of law and human rights; livelihoods; education and culture; health; social protection; and infrastructure and water — it said that the authority’s functions were “now sufficient for a functioning government of state.”

It warned, however, that the authority’s achievements were limited by the political and physical restrictions that the Israeli occupation has placed on further development. Some 60 percent of the West Bank’s territory remains under full Israeli control.

The report said that the Palestinian economy was helped by Israeli measures to facilitate movement and access, but that further steps were needed.

“I believe Israel needs to roll back measures of occupation to match the P.A.’s achievements,” Robert H. Serry, the United Nations special coordinator for the Middle East peace process, said in a statement. “I also stress the urgent need for Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations on a two-state solution to resume, if the state-building and political tracks are to come together by September.”

The report noted an easing of restrictions on goods entering Gaza from Israel, but said an increase in construction materials was important to helping socioeconomic conditions in the coastal enclave, which is controlled by the authority’s rival, Hamas.

Israel strictly limits the importing of construction materials into Gaza to approved, internationally supervised projects, saying it fears that Hamas could use cement, iron and other materials for weaponry and fortifications.

Underlining the stark difference between the West Bank and Gaza — and the challenge that internal Palestinian divisions present to the goal of Palestinian statehood — the only commercial crossing between Israel and Gaza remained closed for a fourth working day on Tuesday, with Israel citing specific security threats against the terminal.

The Israeli Defense Ministry ordered the crossing at Kerem Shalom closed last Wednesday afternoon, a day before an antitank missile launched from Gaza hit an Israeli school bus, critically wounding a 16-year-old boy and setting off days of intense exchanges of fire that killed 18 Palestinians, about half civilians.

The Gaza-based Palestinian Center for Human Rights reported that 29 cooking-gas distribution stations had closed and that stores were running out of medicine.

Israeli security officials said that there were no indications of shortages and that more than 3,600 trucks carrying mainly food and medical supplies entered Gaza through the Kerem Shalom crossing in March. They added that an additional 1,100 trucks carrying paving and construction materials went through another crossing that was opened temporarily for that purpose despite the firing of rockets and mortar shells by Gaza militants at southern Israel last month.

Posted in Palestine AffairsComments Off on White Man is pleased with the performance of the collaborationist police (non)state in Ramallah

Shoah’s pages