Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2013 23:02:37 +0200
The Crises in Syria, Lebanon and Egypt: The Plan to 'Divide and Conquer' the
Middle East and Why All Roads Lead to Tehran
By <http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/timothy-alexander-guzman> Timothy
Alexander Guzman
Global Research, August 25, 2013
middleeast
Western media has accused the Syrian government of launching a chemical
attack in an area east of Damascus that killed hundreds of civilians. It is
the same accusations they had on Saddam Hussein who allegedly ordered a
chemical attack in the town of Halabja in Southern Kurdistan, a Kurdish
territory killing more than 3000 people and more than 7000 injured. U.S
President George H.W. Bush used the incident to justify an invasion when he
said "The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has
already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands of his own citizens
dead, blind or disfigured." Many doubts surfaced including a former Central
Intelligence Agency senior political analyst and professor at the Army War
College, Stephen C. Pelletiere who wrote an opinion piece in the New York
Times in 2003 called 'A War Crime or an Act of War?, he said:
This much about the gassing at Halabja we undoubtedly know: it came about in
the course of a battle between Iraqis and Iranians. Iraq used chemical
weapons to try to kill Iranians who had seized the town, which is in
northern Iraq not far from the Iranian border. The Kurdish civilians who
died had the misfortune to be caught up in that exchange. But they were not
Iraq's main target.
US media is receiving reports from the Western backed rebels that accuse
Assad for the atrocities committed by his government. They are using the
information to justify an invasion of Syria. However, RT news reported that
there was evidence the attack was pre-planned according to Russian Foreign
Ministry spokesman, Aleksandr Lukashevich who said "We're getting more new
evidence that this criminal act was of a provocative nature," he stressed.
"In particular, there are reports circulating on the Internet, in particular
that the materials of the incident and accusations against government troops
had been posted for several hours before the so-called attack. Thus, it was
a pre-planned action." Ironically, the Kurds (who Saddam Hussein was accused
of murdering) are targeted by the same rebels in the north of Syria by
Al-Nusra Front, an Al Qaeda front group and the Free Syrian Army. RT news
and other international news outlets reported that more than 450 Kurdish
people including women and children were killed in the village of Tal Abyad
near the Turkish border.
Western governments and their media outlets accuse the Assad government of a
chemical attack that allegedly killed hundreds of people, but the claim was
made by the Western-backed rebels. Russia says the evidence suggests that
the weapons were fired from Rebel-held territory. Last March, The US and
Israel claimed that Syrian forces launched a chemical attack in the Khan
al-Assal village, located north from the city of Aleppo. A Russian-led
investigation declared militants were behind the attack. The U.S., Israel
and now France want to invade Syria and remove President Assad and divide
Syria into several small territories. They are interested in the
Balkanization of Syria, the same method that was used to break up Yugoslavia
in the 1990's. The rebels are supported and have been trained by the West to
start a war against Syria. It started in 2011 where demonstrations
(inspired by the Arab Spring) were either for or against President Assad.
Those that were against Assad demanded his resignation. That is what
started the civil war. Now the West is capitalizing on the situation that
is tearing Syria apart. France is now on board with the United States and
Israel to invade Syria. In a New York Times report called 'France Urges
'Force' in Syria if Chemical Attacks are Confirmed' states that France wants
a full scale invasion if chemical weapons were used:
As Western powers pressed the Syrian authorities to permit United Nations
inspectors to examine the site of a claimed poison gas attack outside the
capital, Damascus, France said on Thursday that outside powers should
respond "with force" if the use of chemical weapons was confirmed.
The recent terrorist attacks in Lebanon are to create divisions among the
Sunni and Shiites as well. Is it a coincidence that Lebanon is now
experiencing more terror attacks in recent weeks as Egypt and Syria are
facing civil wars and sectarian violence? On Friday more than 42 people
were killed and hundreds more injured as car bombs explode targeting 2
mosques in Tripoli, the largest city in Northern Lebanon. There was also a
car bomb explosion that targeted Southern Lebanon where Hezbollah members
and supporters live. It killed more than 20 people and injured well over
200. The Lebanon based Daily Star reported that Lebanese President Michel
Sleiman blamed Israel for the attack:
President Michel Sleiman said the car bomb attack in the Beirut southern
suburbs was a "terrorist act" that bore the fingerprints of Israel.
The car bomb attack in the Beirut southern suburb of Ruwaiss - a stronghold
of Hezbollah- claimed the lives of at least 16 people and wounded over 200.
Security sources earlier put the death toll at 22.
"This is a criminal act that bears the fingerprints of terrorism and Israel
and is aimed to destabilize Lebanon and deal a blow to the resilience of the
Lebanese," Sleiman said.
President Sleiman is blaming Israel for the attack which would make sense
because it would benefit Israel if Lebanon was in a civil war. The Israeli
online newspaper Haaretz reported that a group calling itself the 'Brigades
of Aisha' was responsible for the attack:
A Sunni Islamist group calling itself the Brigades of Aisha claimed
responsibility for a deadly explosion in southern Beirut, saying it targeted
the militant group Hezbollah and promising more attacks.
The powerful car bomb ripped through a neighborhood that is a stronghold of
the militant group Hezbollah on Thursday, killing at least 14 people,
wounding 120 and trapping many others in burning buildings, witnesses and
emergency officials said.
Lebanese President Michel Suleiman said Israel was behind the blast. "The
fingerprints of the Israeli terrorism are all over it. Their goal is to
destabilize the region and undermine the steadfastness of the Lebanese
people." Druze leader Walid Jumblatt also attributed the blast to Israel, as
did former Hezbollah MP.
It's the second such blast in just over a month in south Beirut. Groups
opposed to Syria's President Bashar Assad have threatened to retaliate
against Hezbollah for intervening on behalf of his regime in the Syrian
civil war.
It is perfect timing that a newly formed rebel group out of the Syrian
conflict emerged to strike Southern Lebanon, a Hezbollah dominated territory
while Egypt and Syria are fighting internal conflicts.
Egypt is a country that has largest population in the Middle East with over
80 million people. It also benefits Israel if Egypt was ruled by a military
dictatorship to control the people. Why does Israel prefer a military
dictatorship in Egypt? According to the Pew Research Center poll in 2012
say that 61% of Egyptians want to end the peace treaty between Egypt and
Israel. The Los Angeles Times reported that Israel would prefer a Military
government. Why? The answer is obvious:
Worried about its 1979 peace treaty with Egypt, Israel is skirting a fine
line between maintaining its usual silence on the unrest in its neighbor and
openly supporting Egypt's military-led government, which many in Israel view
as the best bet for keeping a quiet border.
On July 3rd, General Abdul Fatah al-Sisi and the Egyptian military removed
President Mohamed Morsi in a coup that suspended the Egyptian constitution
after ongoing public protests against the government of Morsi and the Muslim
Brotherhood. The British based newspaper The Independent reported that
General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi called for mass demonstrations to crack down on
terrorists. It was to justify military rule in wake of the overthrow of
President Morsi. The report said that "A decisive confrontation may be
looming between Egypt's military and the Muslim Brotherhood after General
Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, the country's top commander, issued an unprecedented
call for mass demonstrations on Friday to grant his forces a "mandate" to
crack down on "terrorism". Many opposition groups and human rights
organizations opposed this move because it reinstated the military over
civilian rule on the Egyptians. Israel wants to make sure that the military
would remain in power with unlimited Western support. An Israeli official
clarified its position to the Los Angeles Times on the ongoing violence in
Egypt:
The official said that Israel would begin lobbying Western governments with
the message that the military is the only actor in Egypt that can prevent a
civil war. "Like it or not, no one else can run the country right now," the
official said.
This concerns the Israeli government, but if the Egyptian military remains
in power, then Israel can continue to destabilize and then prepare military
interventions against their enemies, namely Syria, Lebanon and then Iran.
The civil war in Egypt will continue to escalate as the Western sponsored
Military Junta takes control of the country. Egypt has been receiving close
to 1.5 billion dollars in Military Aid from the US since 1981, only behind
Israel who receives close to 3 billion dollars per year. Israel is the top
recipient of US military aid since 1976.
The United States, Great Britain, France and Israel are preparing the region
for the next war. Iran is the ultimate target in the Middle East. Israel
wants to topple Iranian influence and its power. Israel is confident that
if it were to attack Iran, its response would last a few days at most. The
Times of Israel released a report stating that "Iran is unlikely to unleash
a war in response to a military strike on its nuclear facilities" according
to Strategic Affairs and Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz. The article
titled 'Iran would barely retaliate if its nuclear program were attacked'
states that Steinitz estimates that Iran would retaliate with "two or three
days of missile fire" against the State of Israel and other Western targets
in the region, including US military bases. He says that it will only cause
"very limited damage." The Israeli government has no faith in Iran's new
President Hasan Rouhani because he will "offer minor goodwill steps"
according to the Times. Israel wants to strike Iran while the US is aiming
towards a confrontation with Syria with new claims that the Assad government
used chemical weapons. It is also convenient that Egypt's civil war will
continue to create chaos in the country. In an interview with the Times of
Israel, Steinitz mentioned what would happen after an attack on Iran:
And I don't think the result would be a world war or even a regional war,"
the Likud minister added. "I think Iran's possibilities to retaliate are
very limited. It's also not in their interest to start a drawn-out war with
the US. After all, their relations in the region are rather sensitive. I
suppose there would be a response of two or three days of missile fire,
perhaps even on Israel, on American bases in the Gulf. But I don't think it
would be more than that - very limited damage
But the Times of Israel admits that statement is a contradiction:
Steinitz's assessment contradicted previous estimations of some Israeli
government ministers, who said they expected hundreds of casualties in an
Iranian retaliatory response if Israel attacked Iran.
Former home front defense minister Matan Vilnai last year spoke about
possibly hundreds of rockets and missiles falling on Israeli population
centers each day, with anticipated 500 deaths. "It could be that there will
be fewer fatalities, but it could be there will be more," he said. Former
defense minister Ehud Barak made similar assessments.
Iran would retaliate. If Iran were to be attacked by Israel, the Iranian
people would no doubt rally behind the flag in defense of their country.
"There is no third way, there is nothing in the middle, there is no more
room to maneuver. Enough is enough." Steinitz is pushing for war with Iran
because it is confident several Western powers including Saudi Arabia would
back its attack on the Islamic Republic.
He believes that an Israeli attack on Iran could cripple Iran "within a few
hours." The report also said that Israel does not need permission to attack
Iran from the U.S.:
Steinitz refused to talk about potential Israeli plans for a strike on
Iran's nuclear facilities, but he did reject reports about Washington
vetoing an attack. "Israel doesn't need a green light or a red light," he
said, noting that US President Barack Obama has said the Jewish state needs
to be able to defend itself by itself. "Between Israel and the US there is a
relationship of mutual respect."
The Times of Israel also stated:
Promises by American leaders that Tehran will not be allowed to get an
atomic bomb, and their statements "that all options are on the table," are
insufficient, he said. Rather, the US or NATO need to issue an explicit
ultimatum, with a deadline, that makes plain that if Tehran does not comply
with relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions, Iran "shouldn't
be surprised" if its nuclear facilities are attacked.
It is misleading to think that Iran and other Middle Eastern nations would
not be able to retaliate militarily. Iran and Hezbollah are prepared for
such a confrontation with Israel, a nation that has one of the most advanced
military capabilities in the Middle East with US support. However, the 2006
confrontation did not prove the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) were capable of
defeating the Guerilla tactics of Hezbollah. Steinitz and the Likud party
are dishonest to the Israeli people. A war with Iran would be a catastrophe
to the entire region especially Israel. All of the people in the Middle
East would be outraged that would result in a "blowback" of unlimited
proportions against Israel and the United States. Iran also has the
capability of closing the Strait of Hormuz. The Strait of Hormuz is where
close to 40% of the world's petroleum ships through. In a report conducted
by the U.S. Energy Information Administration called 'World Oil Transit
Chokepoints' clearly defines the strategic importance of the Strait of
Hormuz:
Located between Oman and Iran, the Strait of Hormuz connects the Persian
Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. The Strait of Hormuz is the
world's most important oil chokepoint due to its daily oil flow of about 17
million bbl/d in 2011, up from between 15.7-15.9 million bbl/d in 2009-2010.
Flows through the Strait in 2011 were roughly 35 percent of all seaborne
traded oil, or almost 20 percent of oil traded worldwide. More than 85
percent of these crude oil exports went to Asian markets, with Japan, India,
South Korea, and China representing the largest destinations. In addition,
Qatar exports about 2 trillion cubic feet per year of liquefied natural gas
(LNG) through the Strait of Hormuz, accounting for almost 20 percent of
global LNG trade. Furthermore, Kuwait imports LNG volumes that travel
northward through the Strait of Hormuz. These flows totaled about 100
billion cubic feet per year in 2010.
An attack on Iran would be an economic disaster for the world. Remember,
oil exports from Kuwait, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia must go through the Strait
of Hormuz on a daily basis. Iran's oil output would stop immediately
effecting oil prices overnight. China and India's economic growth would be
disrupted because they depend on Iranian oil. But the US and Israel will
continue its march to war. They want to control the Middle East. They
already control the Gulf States including Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, United Arab
Emirates (UAE), Kuwait, Oman, and Qatar. All ruled by corrupt Monarchies
with an 'Iron Fist' under the direction of the US, Israel and British
governments. Turkey and Jordan is also under Western control. Iraq has
been invaded and destroyed with frequent atrocities committed by both Sunnis
and Shiites every month through sectarian violence. Under Israeli
occupation Palestine has broken up into two main areas the West Bank and the
Gaza Strip where Palestinians live under constant tyranny and
discrimination.
What stands in the way of the Western powers and Israel from taking control
of the entire Middle East that has valuable resources that includes
petroleum and water? Lebanon, Syria and Iran are the main obstacles for
total domination of the region. Russia and China can prevent the West from
expanding a war in the Middle East. They understand what serious
consequences this would have politically and economically. Both countries
have economic interests in the Middle East for trade, oil and other
investments that they need to grow economically. Divide and Conquer has
been used since the Roman Empire under Julius Caesar when the Roman army
invaded Macedonia and ousted King Perseus. Macedonia was then divided into
four regions that were not allowed any political or economic relationships
with one another. That is how Rome ruled the people. Syria, Lebanon and
Iran are the last obstacles for Western domination of the region. 'Divide
and Conquer' is the strategy, and then perpetual war will follow. War in
the Middle East will affect all nations on the planet. The world must stop
this war. If Israel and the United States attack Iran, then Russia and
China would be the next targets. It is obvious with U.S. military bases
surrounding both countries. The United States is an empire who wants to
dominate the world and its resources. The question is when will the world
say "enough is enough" to Imperial powers trying to start another world war?
The US is now in preparation to strike Syrian military targets if UN
inspectors declare chemical weapons were used. If Syria is defeated, then
it could become another Iraq or Libya. Then a future attack on Iran is
inevitable.
------------[ Sent via the dehai-wn mailing list by dehai.org]--------------
(image/jpeg attachment: image001.jpg)