America's Disgraced Hawks Turn to Middle East Plan B (Al-Iraq
News, Iraq)
"The makers of these policies, past and future, are still present
in the center of decision making. They have decided to further invest in their
failed experiments, modifying their tactics by setting out a new U.S. approach to
the region, which has already been set in motion. In practical terms this will
lead to elevated U.S. dominance by immersing the region in decades-long wars …"
The new Iraq looks alot like the old: a policeman in Sadr City, Baghdad, near burning vehicles just after one in a series of bombs exploded in the Shiite stronghold, May 13.
Obsolete
American policies for defense and offence were geared to confront the following
threats: Islam, China, a scarcity of energy sources, the dwindling population of
citizens in the industrialized countries, and the emergence economic powers of the
BRICS quintet, i.e. Brazil, Russia, India, China and
South Africa. This required taking the fight against terrorism to its source,
toppling regimes that didn't cooperate with Washington, or at least twisting arms,
encouraging other regimes toward increased internal political openness, direct
control of oil resources by stable allies with good reputations, and through
exporting the best American version of freedom and democracy, promoting an
image to the people of the region of America as a savior and rescuer delivering
freedom and economic prosperity. These policies had very negative results, the
opposite of what was intended:
·Transformed those
known as the leaders of Islamist terrorism - bin Laden, al-Zawahiri
and Zarqawi - into legendary figures
·Evoked
unprecedented sympathy on the Arab street for Saddam Hussein and MoammarQadhafi
·Turned Iraq then
Syria into centers for global jihad
·Created a deep
rift between the United States and the Islamic World
·Isolated the United
States internationally
·Cost the
enormous sum of $5 trillion and 5,000 American lives in Iraq and Afghanistan
·Gave renewed
momentum to radical Islamist movements to the extent that they strengthened
their positions in stable allied countries like Jordan, Saudi Arabia and
Tunisia
·Is now an
ongoing threat to a return to presidential and legislative power for the U.S.
Republican Party
The
makers of these policies, past and future, are still present in the center of
decision making. They have decided to further invest in their failed
experiments, modifying their tactics by setting out a new U.S. approach to the
region, which has already been set in motion. In practical terms this will lead
to elevated U.S. dominance by immersing the region in decades-long wars …
The
new U.S. approach is based on the following set of rules:
·Unleash natural
contradictions, religious, national, ethnic and sectarian
·Incite divisions
and separation without any regard to the borders delineated by the countries that
emerged victorious from WWI, and even to the countries that emerged as victors
of the Cold War
·Don't strain U.S.
diplomacy by focusing on problems that cannot be resolved and offer superficial
solutions
·Create a balance
of power that ensures a continuous state of war, provided that such wars remain
within limits and don't spread or threaten the that balance
·Play down the
subject of spreading democracy in the region, because that threatens the
stability of allied countries. Since each and every election will be in favor
of the trending religious authorities, Muslim or Christian. The election results
invariably confirm that the main and dominant affiliation is religious rather
than national
·Replace market
control of the oil industry with military control to prevent powers like China
and Russia from gaining greater control over oil resources
·Fill the U.S.
military void in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Gulf, with an invisible American
presence protected by long-term agreements with governments and close ties with
local militaries in these countries, which keeps both armies and central
governments enfeebled
Posted By Worldmeets.US
·Maintain permanent
military strike forces in central Asia, Turkey, and Europe, sufficiently strong
to strike any enemy or adversary, or “quasi-friend” jeopardizing the "natural"
balance of power
·Following its
invasion of Baghdad, having recognized the immense moral and diplomatic price it
paid with its disregard for international law, Washington was obliged to beg the
United Nations to give it cover. Accordingly, Washington will, through fraud
and misinformation, use international law to achieve its purposes. If that
proves impossible, it will resort to unilateral economic, diplomatic, legal,
and technological sanctions
·Depend on the
cover by acting under the umbrella of international forces, and when that isn't
feasible, resort to the use of NATO acting under an international mandate, as
was the case in Afghanistan.
