By Hwaa Irfan
“War is among the most underestimated of political forces. It has been a powerful factor in the rise of the English-speaking nations to world hegemony, and the great armed conflicts within the United States have had deep political consequences.” – Kevin Phillips American Dynasty.
The New York Times informed its readers of an expansion in clandestine military special operations in Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Somalia. How they got a hold of a secret directive given by General Petraeus we cannot say, but the apparent aim is to “gather intelligence, and build ties with local forces in the Middle East, Central Asia and the Horn of Africa. Taking from the slogan of the “Factbook: U.S. Special Operations Command” the aim is to “penetrate, disrupt defeat or destroy” Al Qaeda et al., and to “prepare the environment” for future attacks by American or local military forces”
With all the problems that the U.S. has on its hands currently with its domestic policies, the global economic crisis, wide sweeping poverty, and the mid-term elections where many threaten to commence overturning the Obama Administration, it is a wonder that a country that is the largest consumer of energy in the world, the largest consumer of petroleum in the world, and the largest military spending budget in the world, will increase expenditure on what it can ill afford. With the looming fallout from the serious drop in the stock markets in the U.S., (20 top U.S. banks vulnerable to closure), parts of the Middle East (Egypt alone lost $31 million, and Europe), the U.K has recognized that it can no longer afford the war in Afghanistan. Yet, massive street protests over the past couple of years in the U.S. concerning, welfare, unemployment, health care, immigration laws, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran, only seems to indicate a total lack of commitment to the democratic voice of the American people. The U.S. corporate oligarch however has no such allegiance to the American people, or anybody else other than the maintenance of its own power and influence in global affairs.
For instance, it was in 2005 that top corporate oligarchs, Nat Rothschild (of the Rothschild dynasty which is as multinational as its interests), Oleg Daripaska, E.U. Trade Commissioner, now former Business Secretary Lord Mandelson over dinner made a $500m deal that led to the loss of 300 British jobs in the U.K. European tariffs were removed, the product, aluminium was dumped onto the European market forcing the closure of 4 factories. For example, within a year the South Wales plant was closed losing 300 jobs, a plant in Rogerstone (third largest in Europe) was closed within a year of the deal losing 400 jobs. This is how the corporate oligarcy do business with only their bank accounts, and their spheres of influence in mind.
But is this not history repeating itself!
• The 1812 America Revolution rearranged the members of the oligarchy making war time profiteers into the forces that determined the direction of the nation.
• The same happened again as a result of the American Civil War.
• The same again in the First World War whereby those “involved” with the Germans and Russians became key members of the U.S. intelligence in WWII.
• The “Merchants of Death” is a term coined during the Special Senates Committee on the Investigation of the Munitions Industry. Leading up to WWII there was a surge (500% increase) in exports from the U.S. military to Germany at the time of Hitler. Pressure from the State Department prevented information from getting out that the U.S. helped to arm Nazi Germany.
• The U.S. fed WWII before entry through a $2 billion in loans to the German industry, as well as after WWII when it had declined in Europe. With a curious military collapse in France (within 2 months), and a Britain seeking support, the U.S. was ready and able. Bearing in mind that WWII followed the Great Economic Depression and the 1837 – 38 recession with a military expenditure of $2 billion in 1940, $14 billion in 1941, and $52 billion in 1942.
• Leading up to WWII was a proliferation of bodies run by business men with business in mind: War Resources Board (1939), National Defense Advisory Commission (1940), Office of Production Management (1941), War Production Board (1942), Office of War Mobilization (1943), and the Office of War Mobilization and Reconversion (1945).
• The CIA was formed on a blue print of an oligarch, Robert A. Lovett in 1946. Robert A. Lovett was the business partner of Prescott Bush (grandfather of G.W. Bush jnr.). By 1950, Robert A. Lovett became deputy secretary of defense
• The longstanding Cuba vendetta is about former President Fidel Castro ousting oligarchs from Cuba and taking control of their businesses, which included oil (Bush owned Zapata Offshore) while Cubans remained poor. Those oligarchs included Prescott Bush and son (G. W Bush) senior), and his uncle George Herbert Walker jnr. who lost millions in Cuba.
• The war in Iraq was not about liberation, because no reformation has taken place. One does not have to look too deeply for evidence when it comes to war –profiteering in Iraq where certain companies who were on the verge of banckruptcy before occupation of Iraq have been doing quite well since!
• The Nye hearings left many questions pertaining to the role of investment bankers and armaments in encouraging wars.
If we look at the current economic nightmare that seems to be looming in the face of the U.S., the unelected super power cannot tolerate a loss in a status that it has bullied the rest of the world into, favoring U.S interests against its own interests. Anything that threatens the above objectives is considered a threat to the U.S. An example is the social movement “Kefaya” which organized protests in defense of the rights of workers. A Rand report on Kefaya was detailed showing them to be a threat to the U.S. because of their role in Egyptian civil society, with Egypt perceived as being in the interest of the U.S. The objective of U.S. Special Operations Command, USSOCOM, is to:
– “Provide full capable Special Operations Forces and its interests”, and to
– “Synchronize planning of global operations against terrorist networks”
Using Al Qaeda as an excuse to enter any country is a weak one, given that since 9/11, many imposters (U.S.-backed ones included refer to themselves as Al Qaeda). It is a weak one because until this day, the evidence that 9/11 was an inside job prevails. It is weak because until now they have not caught bin Laden probably because bin Laden’s wealthy Arab family were close friends of the Bush dynasty. Maybe finding bin Laden would reveal the true nature of his Al Qaeda relationship with the U.S. Administration’s war on terror!
To defend the United States Using special ops in the Middle East, Central Asia, and the Horn of Africa is about three important regions of the world. The Middle East is obvious to everyone, but what is the relationship between the U.S. and Central Asia?
From the Testimony before the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific /House International Relations Committee – United States House of Representatives (1999) as presented by Ariel Cohen a senior policy analyst for the U.S., Heritage Foundation:
• The development of Central Asia could provide “lucrative business” for the U.S.
• The oil in the Caspian Sea which is surrounded by 6 countries including Iran.
• The elite of the region and their desire to maintain power could work in the interest of the U.S. along with the cooperation of western Europe with the elite acting as “regional players”, using the tool of democracy, and human rights.
• China is not in U.S. interests
• Russia is not in U.S. interests
• Taliban is not in U.S. interests
From the Strategic Studies Institute United States War College (2010)
• U.S interests challenged by Russia, China, and Iran which are against U.S. presence in the region
• Uses the poor standard of living in the region as a main objective to “democratize” the region
• Uses the strategic aspect of being located in Central Asia as a means to “fight” the war on terrorism
• “To help the region develop its potential through a process of human development in the name of “democratization”, but intrinsic to that development is the regions oil which underpins the U.S.s growing interest in the region
• “Not surprisingly, the leitmotif of U.S. energy policy has been to foster the development of multiple pipelines and multiple links to outside consumers and providers of energy, including, more recently, electricity, with regard to India.9 The Central Asian energy-producing states recognize that their security and prosperity lie in diversification of pipelines so U.S. and Central Asian interests are in harmony in this area”.
• The “deteriorating U.S. position!
Horn of Africa
There is a perceived Yemen – Somali threat with any activity unless governmental, and those activities are usually labeled as Al-Qaeda. The argument posed again and again pertaining to this region (Africa and the Middle East) is to counter the problem of piracy. First of all, “special forces” have been active in bombing raids etc in areas including the Middle East, i.e. Yemen with a military budget of $4.6 million for operations that made the massive leap to $67 million in 2009! Documents all allude to the U.S. focus being primarily of one of providing stability, democracy, humanitarian aid and development in the region, as well as to counter terrorism; to date the perceived interest of the U.S. in the region is strategic and pertains to Yemen bearing in mind the presence of oil in Sudan, Equatorial Guinea and the talk of oil in Somalia. This might not be the case, but why else would the U.S. through USAID spend $265 million (2008) in humanitarian aid for Somalia and Ethiopia according to the U.S. Senate in Foreign Relations Subcommittee. With that amount of money the benefits would have surely been quite apparent by now!
Almquist, K. “Testimony of Katherine Almquist, Assistant Administrator for Africa, United States Agency for International Development (USAID)” http://foreign.senate.gov/testimony/2008/AlmquistTestimony080311a.pdf
Cohen, A. U.S. Interests in Central Asia http://www.heritage.org/Research/Testimony/US-Interests-in-Central-Asia
Moller, B. The Horn of Africa and the U.S. War on Terror. http://www.issafrica.org/uploads/HORNUSWAR.PDF
Pendlebury, R. Mandelson, an Oligarch, and a $500m Deal Over Dinner that Cost 300 Jobs
Phillips, K. “American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune, and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush”. 2004. Penguin Books, U.K.
Rozoff, R. U.S., NATO Expand War to Horn of Africa and Indian Ocean
Swan, J. “U.S. Policy in the Horn of Africa”
U.S. Said to Order Secret Military Action
Weiss, M. Weiss Ratings: 20 Giant Banks Still Vulnerable http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/weiss-ratings-20-giant-banks-still-vulnerable-39170?FIELD9=2