A Proposal to Unite Muslim World - A Union of Muslim Countries (UMC)

Bismillahi rahmani raheem,
A critic of Islam said, “Even if Islam were to sweep the entire area from South Africa to Philippines we [i.e the western powers] need not fear for they are utterly and hopelessly disunited. The Islamic world would probably turn in on itself over sectarian and national divisions before it would be a major threat to even India.” I wish it was not but I fear this is the truth. Today Muslims number 1.5 billion and counting. Oil drives the world and 3/4 of the proven oil reserves lie under Muslims feet. Islam the religion of Muslims is a potent force as it was when it first spread out of Arabia 14 centuries ago. From the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific isles is a landmass spanning 15,000 km inhabited by Muslim majorities.
Yet how do Muslims figure in the world arena? Sad to say it’s nothing less that pathetic. The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of ALL the Muslim countries combined is less than or equal to that of France. 15 years ago when 50,000 Muslim women are raped by Christian Serbs in Bosnia, Muslims watched as spectators. Now when country after country falls to the hands of American and other neo-colonialists Muslims look on helplessly. When Lebanon is bombed to Stone Age and Palestine is no more we heat our seats. Millions starving in Africa, many more oppressed by cruel dictators in Central Asia does not disturb the Muslim peace of mind. YaAllah! I dare say they’ll be heating their chairs even if Mecca is vaporized or millions butchered in Saudi Arabia and Iran. “The less we think about the Muslims the happier we’ll be,” seems the thought of the day.
Disunited as we are I don’t think Allah will help us if we don’t try to correct ourselves. Allah’s help comes only when we change ourselves for the better. The darkest hours are the nearest to dawn. There are ways out of this seemingly stalemate situation of the Muslim world.
Presented here is a vision to unite Muslims countries. If it can be realized there’ll be a Muslim federation or union stretching from the shores of Atlantic to the isles in the edge of the Pacific Ocean. First let’s look at the some facts.

Map of the union of Muslim countries we made for the article - "A Proposal to Unite Muslim World – A Union of Muslim Countries (UMC)" at 1MuslimNation.com

The map shows the current worldwide Muslim population distribution. The vision foreseen here is for a united union/federation of Muslim countries. Lets call it The Union of Muslim Countries or simply UMC for now, for easier reference. Here is the map of Union based on the above Muslim distribution. The countries with a Muslim majority population will belong to the Union of Muslim Countries (UMC). This is map of the intercontinental UMC.

The Union of Muslim Countries or UMC could be like the European Union, and inshaallah can be formed in phases and stages via discussions, consensus, coordination etc. The current national borders, nation governments etc. will be intact, but there will also be a federal government and parliament for the whole UMC. The people from one part of the federation, for instance a citizen of Nigeria would be able to go to Bangladesh or Malaysia without the need for a passport or other travel documents, just like within the EU. An investor from Kuwait will be able to start a business enterprise in Senegal or Pakistan as easily as he would in Kuwait. An Indonesian, Pakistani farmer will send his harvest to be sold to Moroccans and Yemenis without much hassle or import duties he presently has to pay. People within the UMC will be able to move and settle anywhere within the UMC union’s borders as if in the same country. The movement of people and goods within the union will have as much freedom as available in a country now. All people irrespective of gender, religion, nationality, caste, colour or language currently living within the UMC border will belong and be citizens of the UMC. They’ll have all the rights they enjoy now. There’s no need for Muslims living outside of the UMC federation to come and live in a UMC country, but of course if anyone wants they’ll be able to settle and obtain citizenship of any of the UMC countries be a citizen of UMC.
It’s worth remembering 60 years ago a European Union (EU) was a dream of a few enlightened people. But today it is a reality. And also Muslim countries have an advantage European nations didn’t have back then. That is, there always exists an urge in the Muslim psyche for something like a Caliphate or an intercontinental Islamic state covering the whole Muslim world. Similar proposals like these have been voiced before. That’s good. But to bear fruits, these proposal and ideas needs to reach as many people as possible. So as the first step to form a Union of Muslim Countries that can protect and act on behalf of Muslim peoples and countries interests is to spread the idea to many as possible.
Leaving things as it is or engaging in wishful thinking without action or allowing and appealing to non-Muslims Super Powers and countries to decide the fate of our Muslim people and our lands, in all likelihood leads to the devastation of both. We Muslims must decide our future and not leave it at the hands of other powerful nations. We are making a grave mistake in underestimating the abilities, resources and knowledge Allah has given us. Inshaallah if we try we can make it.
August 13th, 2006

Washington’s crimes against Iran

Peter Symonds

The murder of Iranian nuclear scientist Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan on January 11 is further testimony to the criminality of US foreign policy. Despite the official denials of the Obama administration, the assassination bears all the hallmarks of an operation carried out by the Israel intelligence agency, Mossad, in league with the US.

The Iranian regime has taken the unusual step of addressing a letter to Washington declaring that it has “reliable documents and evidence that this terrorist act was planned, guided and supported by the CIA.” A second letter to the British embassy alleges that the British intelligence agency MI6 “assisted” in the plot.

Roshan is the fourth Iranian nuclear scientist to be murdered over the past two years as part of a barely disguised covert war inside Iran that has included unexplained explosions at key military and nuclear facilities and the use of the Stuxnet computer worm to infect and damage nuclear equipment. Several of the assassinations, including the latest, involved the same modus operandi—a “sticky” magnetic bomb planted by motorbike on the side of a car.

While implausible, the Obama administration’s “categorical denial” of any involvement in the latest assassination serves a definite legal purpose. The White House rationalises its murderous campaign by drone attack inside Afghanistan, Pakistan and other countries as supposedly sanctioned by the authorization for use of military force passed by Congress in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. The killing of Iranian citizens, or providing aid or intelligence to Mossad to do so, can hardly be legally justified with reference to a 2001 resolution ostensibly directed against Al Qaeda and the Taliban. The assassination of Roshan and the other scientists is a clear breach of an executive order dating back to the 1970s that officially bans assassinations, opening up the Obama administration to legal action.

The involvement of the US in assassination and sabotage inside Iran raises fresh questions about the killing of the young woman, Neda Agha-Soltan, at the height of US support for the so-called Green Movement protests in Iran in June 2009. The US and international media immediately blamed President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and turned the victim into a martyr to whip up public support for efforts to install a regime sympathetic to Western interests. It is at least as plausible that Neda was set up for murder by US or Israeli agents, with her death conveniently filmed, in order to add further fuel to the hysterical media campaign against Ahmadinejad’s election victory.

As in the case of every other crime of US imperialism, the American media has stepped in to justify the campaign of sabotage and murder inside Iran. A front-page New York Times article published January 12 and entitled “Adversaries of Iran Said to Be Stepping Up Covert Actions” reported what is commonly accepted in the US intelligence community—that Israel was responsible for the murder and that the US, in alliance with Israel, is engaged in “covert efforts against the Iranian nuclear program.”

The Times does not criticise the criminal and reckless character of these actions, but accepts them as a legitimate tool of foreign policy. It quotes, without comment, Patrick Clawson, director of the Iran Security Initiative at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, as saying, “Sabotage and assassination is the way to go, if you can do it.”

The brazen defence by the Times and virtually the entire establishment media in the US of assassination as a legitimate tactic underscores the criminalization of US foreign policy, particularly over the past twenty years since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. It also expresses the collapse of any democratic consciousness or commitment to democratic rights within the ruling class.

The hypocrisy of the media establishment knows no bounds. Only three months ago, the American press was demanding retaliation over entirely unsubstantiated claims by the Obama administration that Iran was involved in an improbable plan to hire a Mexican drug cartel to kill the Saudi ambassador to Washington on American soil.

Like so much of the commentary on the assassination of Roshan, the Times focuses not on its criminality, but the efficacy of covert action in achieving US ends. “The multifaceted covert campaign against Iran has appeared to offer an alternative to war,” the article declared. “But at most it has slowed, not halted, Iran’s enrichment of uranium.”

The British-based Sunday Times yesterday published a blow-by-blow account, based on unnamed sources, of the carefully-planned Mossad bombing of Roshan’s car in peak hour traffic in Tehran. Significantly, according to one Israeli source, “the killings were a precursor to a military strike, not merely an alternative, to make it more difficult for Iran to rebuild facilities if they are bombed.”

In reality, the killing of top nuclear scientists and the sabotage of facilities was never to stop or significantly hinder Iran’s nuclear programs, which Tehran has repeatedly insisted are for peaceful purposes. Rather, the murders are provocations calculated to incite retaliation by Tehran that can, in turn, be exploited to further demonise Iran and provide the pretext for war.

The murders go hand-in-hand with an intensification of economic warfare and a military build-up against Iran since the beginning of the year. The US, in collaboration with its European allies, is in the process of imposing a de facto embargo on Iran’s oil exports that threatens to collapse the Iranian economy. The latest sanctions are being imposed unilaterally, without even the fig leaf of a UN Security Council resolution. The US is not only menacing Iran, but threatening penalties against those countries opposed to the embargo, such as China.

At the same time, the Pentagon has just doubled the number of US aircraft carrier battle groups in the immediate vicinity of the Persian Gulf, greatly enhancing its ability to wage a devastating aerial and naval war against Iran.

The killing of Roshan underlines the fact that the US will stop at nothing as it seeks to destabilise the Iranian regime and replace it with a more pliable alternative. Washington’s predatory activities in the Middle East are being driven by the vast erosion of the global economic position of the United States. As it has already done in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, the US is using its military muscle to undermine the economic and strategic interests of its main European and Asian rivals.

The same political gangsters in the White House who are plotting against Tehran are also responsible for the devastation of the living standards of the American working class. The escalating propaganda campaign against Iran and heightened danger of a catastrophic new war serve as a convenient political diversion from sharpening class tensions at home.

The American and international working class must oppose any war, covert or overt, against Iran on the basis of a socialist and internationalist strategy directed at abolishing the crisis-ridden capitalist system, which can offer nothing but plummeting living standards and the slide towards a third world war.

Peter Symonds 

Sanctioning Syria: Who is the Real Loser?

By Dr. Elias Akleh - Intifada-Palestine.com

Dr. Elias Akleh is an Arab writer from a Palestinian descent born in the town of Beit Jala. His family was first evicted from Haifa after the “Nakba” of 1948, then from Beit Jala after the “Nakseh” of 1967. He lives now in the US, and publishes his articles on the web in both English and Arabic.


(Corona,Calif.) - Economic sanctions are arrogant open acts of war against other nations. Their goal is to devastate the lower and middle classes and to weaken the country. The regime of the imposing country believes that its economy is superior and is so influential that other countries are so dependent on it and could not survive without it.

Economic sanctions are deceitfully justified as punishing a ruthless political regime and protecting human rights of an oppressed people. Such people are the most devastated when their economy is hurt while the ruling regime may become more oppressive in its reaction in order to protect and to preserve itself. Case in point is the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children who died due to lack of medicine during the economic embargo after the Gulf War while the Iraqi regime had its own reserve of all kinds of medications stored for itself.

The sanctioning regime hopes that the sanctioned population would hurt so bad that, with some external encouragement and hope for economic relief; they would rise up and topple their own regime. The other scenario is that the military industry of the sanctioned regime becomes so weak and ineffective that the regime would not stand a chance in any military confrontation, similar to what happened in Iraq.

Such scenarios take place in a country that is faced with sanctions by the majority of the international community. On the other hand countries facing partial sanctions rise up to the challenge and become more self-sufficient and more independent. Cuba, with the longest economic embargo, North Korea and Iran are examples of such countries. Due to its large size and important natural resources, Iran had advanced its industry even to achieve nuclear technology.

Due to its leadership in resisting the Zionist expansionist plans in the Middle East, and for supporting the national resistance and liberation groups of Lebanese Hezbollah and Palestinian Hamas, and due to its alliance with Iran, Syria was subjected to many Western schemes of regime change. The whole Arab Spring movement has been primarily orchestrated and geared towards regime change in Syria, that is meant eventually to lead to a regime change in Iran; a frontier for Russia and China. Under the justification of protecting the lives of Syrian civilians rebelling against their government and protecting their humanitarian rights, Syria is subjected to economic sanctions imposed first by Western countries then by the Arab League.

Economic sanctions are not new to Syria, who was subjected to such sanctions since mid 1970’s imposed by the US. Since then Syria had risen to this challenge and had developed immunity against sanctions. What is new today is that the Arab League, with many of its member countries, joined by Turkey, had also imposed economic sanctions against Syria. The Arab League, with the leadership of Qatar, has been manipulated and used as a Trojan horse by an American/British/French triad to topple Syrian regime and to inflict the country with a civil war, similar to Libya, in the service of terrorist Israel and the expansionist Zionist plan in the Middle East.

Syrian economy is not dependent nor tied to any Western economy, thus these sanctions have no real effect on Syria. Syria is mainly an agricultural country and thus is mostly self-sufficient except in the technological sector which is filled mainly by Asian countries such as China, India, Russia and Iran. Also Syria has good economic trade with some Latin American countries.

Many neighboring Arab countries such as the Gulf States, Jordan, Iraq, and Lebanon import and are dependent on Syrian agricultural products. Lebanon and Iraq rejected the Arab League sanction and continue trade with Syria. The mostly desert Jordan shares borders with Syria and is heavily dependent on Syrian food products and water resources. Many Jordanian students study in Syrian universities. Jordan will hurt greatly by the sanctions. So the Jordanian king requested the Arab League to relief Jordan and to be treated as an exception in the sanctions.

Expecting the sanction Syria had withdrawn its money from the rest of the Arab central banks, especially the Jordanian Central Bank, causing a shortage and crises in these banks. Gulf States, especially Qatar and Saudi Arabia, have to compensate these shortages. Food prices in Syrian neighboring countries may double to cover the extra expenses of importing food from other resources. Tourism industry will also suffer greatly. Tourists, who used to travel to neighboring Syria, have now to pay extra for travelling to farther countries.

Some energy companies, who are invested in Syria and now withdrawing, will also suffer greatly for abiding with the sanction. French companies are the largest losers in these sanctions. French Total Oil Company, Lafarge Construction Company, and Airbus Company will lost millions of dollars worth of investment in Syria.

Royal Dutch Shell had also announced its withdrawal from Syria with a loss of 40% shares of oil production; a huge investment in the industry.

Canadian Suncor Energy, the second largest Canadian oil company, had announced cessation of its oil, gas and electricity production in Syria. Suncor had big investments that include 50-50 joint venture with the Syrian General Petroleum Corporation producing about 80 million cubic feet of natural gas per day, and roughly 1,000 barrels of oil per day. Suncor’s cessation will cost the company a lot of money and privileges.

Syria used to export about 150,000 oil barrel per day to European countries, whose revenue comprised roughly 30% of Syria total revenue. The withdrawal of these energy companies and the ban on oil imports from Syria are planned to have a great impact on Syria’s ability to produce and export oil and gas, and thus devastate the country’s economy. Fortunately this is far away from reality and the real loss was to these energy companies and to European consumers, who have now to pay more money to compensate for these losses and to cover the cost of importing oil from more expensive sources.

The withdrawal of these European energy companies had created a golden opportunity for other eager energy companies to fill this vacancy. State-owned companies of countries, who rejected the sanctions, including the China National Petroleum Corporation and India’s Oil and Natural Gas Corporation, had made significant investments in Syrian energy industry offering Syria better deals than their European counterparts. Russia and Iran are expected soon to follow. Iran had already signed an all inclusive trade agreement with Syria last Tuesday December 13th.

Turkey’s role in the Syrian crisis draws a special attention. In the recent past Turkey has improved its trade dealing with Syria tremendously. Now-a-days Turkey had turned its face complete 180 degrees and started criticizing and even directly attacking the Syrian regime. It also seemed that Turkey, a non-Arab country, had occupied the Syrian seat in the Arab League. Turkey had played a great role with Qatar in persuading the Arab League to declare the sanctions against Syria. Turkey was the first to adopt the sanctions by freezing $110 million of Syrian money in its banks, by imposing high taxes on imported Syrian products, and by declaring a safe zone on its Syrian borders to protect what is called Free Syrian Army (FSA); a terrorist group who attack the Syrian army and terrorize Syrian civilians loyal to Bashar Al-Assad.

Turkey’s slap had returned to its face. Turkey has more than $250 million worth of investment in Syria that will be lost. Syria had countered with banning Turkish goods. Turkish sanction came as blessings in disguise to the Syria, whose industry, comprising 27% of its economy, had suffered by the past Turkish/Syrian trade agreement due to the cheap Turkish goods that were favored over the local Syrian goods. After the Turkish sanction the local Syrian industries got revived. Recep Tayyip Ordogan, the Turkish Prime Minister, is faced now with huge criticism from oppositional parties as well as his own accusing him of harboring terrorist group (FSA) in Turkey.

The economic sanctions have important political awakening in the Arab nation in general and the Syrians in particular. The decisions of the Arab League in dealing with the Syrian crisis in particular and with the Arab Spring movement in general, particularly in Libya, Yemen, and Bahrain, had shown the League without any further doubt as a political tool manipulated by the West to oppress Arabs, keep their land divided, and to open their natural resources for theft. It had never served any of the Arab’s national causes. In the primary Arab cause; the Israeli occupation of Palestine, the League had given Israel 10 long years, so far, to respond to the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative while not giving Syria more than just one week to deal with its rebels before imposing sanctions. For rebuffing their Peace Initiative major Arab leaders had welcomed Israel to open embassies in the capitals rather than fighting Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

While aggressively and hastily supporting the alleged popular Syrian revolution against the ruling regime the League refuse to accept support petition letters from leaders of genuine popular revolution against very oppressive regimes of Yemen and Bahrain.

When Syrian citizens rallied behind their leadership, the president of the supposed Syrian National Council, Burhan Ghalioun, hurried back to his Western handlers licking their hands begging for more support. He declared that once receiving Syrian leadership he would cut ties with Iran, end arms supplies to Lebanese Hezbollah and Palestinian Hamas, and would negotiate with Israel over Golan Heights.

Economic sanctions against Syria are blessings in disguise. Economically they challenged Syrians to become more independent and look for other avenues for trade. The sanctions rather than splitting Syrian from Iran have really pushed Syria deeper into Iran’s arms. They have also awakened Syrian national pride and loyalty to their country and leadership. The realities of many Arab leaders and the Arab League have been clearly exposed as Western puppets.

Iran’s cyber attack brings down US “stealth” drone

Contrary to early Western media reports designed to de-flect the fallout from a major tactical reversal, this Lockheed RQ-170 drone did not “crash” in eastern Iran. In fact it was reprogrammed by Iranian engineers and counterespionage experts, during its illegal reconnaissance mission into Iranian airspace in violation of multiple international laws, to land safely at an undisclosed location in Iran.


American hubris is predicated primarily on its claim to technological superiority. This is best reflected in the radar-evading stealth technology used in unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) called drones. To be sure, these are deadly weapons. Ask the Pakistanis, Yemenis and the Somalis — principal victims of its lethal wares. American operators sitting thousands of miles away manipulate them to unleash missiles, incinerating people with the push of a button. This video-game type of warfare has exacted a heavy toll in human life.


The US has not only deployed a vast array of UAVs in Afghanistan and Pakistan but also against Islamic Iran. In the latter case, these are used to spy on Iran’s military and nuclear installations by intruding into its airspace in clear violation of international law as well as an agreement signed with Iran in January 1981. But American rulers — military and civilian — have never been constrained by legal niceties. Rules are for others; America does what it likes and people must get used to it.


Americans had become so intoxicated on the prowess of their drone technology that they thought it was impossible to detect much less bring down. This is nothing new; throughout history bullies have relied on superior weapons. Goliath tried to intimidate opponents by his massive size and body amour until David (a) knocked him out with a slingshot. Abraha’s elephant was driven back by pebble-carrying birds before it could destroy the Ka‘bah; Hizbullah knocked out Israel’s Merkava tanks with shoulder-held missiles in 2006 and now Islamic Iran has brought down a US drone by overriding its computer controls.


On December 4, when Iran’s military commanders announced they had brought down the RQ-170 Sentinel, one of the most sophisticated aircraft in the US drone fleet, it generated global excitement. American officials have not denied deploying a fleet of aircraft against Iran to carry out surveillance of its military and nuclear installations. This is an act of war and if any law governed the world, American rulers would be tried as war criminals. But there is only one law operable today: that of the jungle where might makes right. It is revealing that instead of apologizing for violating Iran’s airspace, US President Barack Obama had the gall to demand Tehran return the drone!


In the war against Islamic Iran, going on for more than 30 years now, successive US regimes have used numerous weapons from terror bombing campaigns, assassination of its top leaders, to war unleashed through Iraq. All these have failed to destroy the Islamic system. In recent years, several Iranian scientists have been assassinated in what is clearly a US-Israeli-British-sponsored campaign. Mujahideen-e Khalq and Jundullah (proxy) terrorists may have pulled the trigger but the forces behind these evil acts are unmistakable. American officials have publicly admitted boosting sales of bunker-busting munitions, fighter jets and other military hardware to Persian Gulf states as well as to Zionist Israel, in attempts to undermine Islamic Iran. The US and its European allies have also imposed stiff sanctions against Tehran to bring it to its knees by crippling it economically, so far unsuccessfully.


But we must return to the story of Iran’s downing of the much-vaunted US drone. Initially, American officials said the drone had malfunctioned and its controllers lost contact. If this were so, the drone’s electronic system would have automatically destroyed the aircraft. It was blind faith in the superiority of their technology that the Americans initially dismissed Iranian claims of bringing down the plane through cyber attack. Iranian specialists captured the drone by exploiting what they knew was its weakest point. They hacked into its GPS system and re-configured its coordinates to make it land at a chosen location of their choice. This was made possible when Iranian electronic warfare specialists, using knowledge of the drone’s GPS system acquired from studying previously downed drones — also claimed by Iranian officials and equally strenuously denied by the Americans — developed a technique that allowed them to cut off the drone’s communications links before reprogramming its GPS to make it land. The fact that the drone was recovered in almost perfect condition has confirmed Iranian claims. “The GPS navigation is the weakest point. By putting noise [jamming] on the communications, you force the bird into autopilot. This is where the bird loses its brain,” said an Iranian engineer, a member of the specialists’ team that brought down the drone.


Iran’s electronic specialists then used a “spoofing” technique which took into “account precise landing altitudes as well as latitudinal and longitudinal data” and caused the drone to “…land on its own where we wanted it to, without having to crack the remote-control signals and communications.” Once the “bird loses its brain”, reprogramming it to land at another location is a simple process, according to Iranian specialists.


When the drone was shown on Iranian television in near-perfect condition, it sent the Pentagon and the entire military top brass into panic. How could people living under stiff sanctions and denied any “Western technology” for decades manage to achieve such a feat, they asked themselves. This is where the Muslims’ reliance on Allah (swt) comes into play. When the US imposed sanctions against the Islamic Republic in 1980, Imam Khomeini had said this was a blessing in disguise. This provided an opportunity for the country to break out of the dependency cycle that has stymied the development and growth of other countries in the world. Iran’s development of cyber capabilities is the direct result of the liberation of the mind from dependency on others and the self-confidence that comes with reliance only on Allah (swt).


True, US sanctions have hurt Iran’s economy but its ability to stand on its feet brings immense satisfaction. The US and its allies would do well to realize that Islamic Iran has development capabilities far beyond the West’s wildest imagination. They must learn to live with this reality or be prepared for many more surprises.

Capturing the spy drone foils US war rhetoric on Iran

By Seyfeddin Kara


The prowling Beast of Kandahar that roared but did not scare its clever captors. It appears that the rising level of sophistication of the Islamic resistance is an unexpected but timely development: when a superior adversary is routinely surprised by its inferiors, then parity is not far behind.



One of the most striking events in post-Revolutionary Iranian history unfolded in early December 2011 when Iranian state TV showed a captured RQ-170 Sentinel, the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) used by the US for spying. It is one of the most sophisticated planes in the US arsenal and had been kept largely hidden from public eye in order to not risk its top secret spy missions. Until now, only a grainy photo taken at Qandahar airbase in 2009 was seen. The photo created a myth around the Sentinel due to its bizarre shape and speculation about its myriad capabilities were widely circulated to project it as something awesome hence its nickname, the “Beast of Kandahar”.
That is why the world was shocked — the Americans even more so as victims of their own propaganda — when they saw images of the very “beast”, tamed and put on display by its new masters in Iran. The display scenery was carefully prepared by the Revolutionary Guards to mark the significance of the occasion and to gain the upperhand in the on-going cold war with the US. A banner hoisted next to the Sentinel depicted a memorable quote in Farsi from the late Imam Khomeini: “The US cannot do a damn thing.” The Imam had made the statement in the face of US threats of a military attack during occupation of the US Embassy in Tehran by revolutionary students. The embassy was little more than a den of spies, as the Iranians quickly dubbed it, from which were captured thousands of secret documents exposing the Americans’ illegal activities and their links with agents in Iran. The Imam’s memorable statement was later turned into a slogan of the Islamic Revolution and repeated on many occasions.


However, words do not have much effect without action and perhaps that is why the quote had never had so much impact until it was proclaimed on a banner next to the captured US spy plane. Capture of the Sentinel in almost perfect condition caused huge embarrassment, not to mention problems, for the US. Not surprisingly, Washington attempted to play down the significance of the capture of its top of the line spy plane by Iran. Initially, US officials only admitted they had lost an unmanned drone but insisted it was over Afghanistan. They denied it was brought down by the Iranians stating instead “malfunction” had caused its loss. In contrast to the US story, Iranian officials announced they had captured the plane on December 4, some 140 miles inside Iranian territory from the Afghan border.


Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi finally announced Iran’s technological victory over the US: “Regardless of whether the US believes it or not, the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran brought down the aircraft largely intact without assistance from any foreign country.” This was perhaps the biggest single blow that directly smashed US war propaganda that has been going on since its occupation of Iraq in 2003. Hitherto, Iran had had only moderate successes against covert US operations to destabilize the Islamic Republic. These included capturing a major CIA operative, Abdolmalek Rigi who had launched deadly attacks against Revolutionary Guards for several years; breaking US spy rings and capturing a number of CIA operatives inside the country both last May as well as more recently when Iranian television on December 18 showed Amir Mirzaei Hekmati, the CIA spy. Hekmati is of Iranian origin and was trained for nearly a decade by the CIA to penetrate Iran. He came under the Iranian intelligence radar when he was sent to the notorious Bagram Airbase in Afghan-istan from where he was sent into Iran. The US government had the gall to ask for his return. Hekmati’s capture dovetailed that of the drone spy plane.


According an article in the Christian Science Monitor quoting from a European intelligence source, Iran shocked Western intelligence agencies, sometime in last two years when it managed to “blind” a CIA spy satellite by “aiming a laser burst quite accurately.” But none of the previous operations, impressive as they were, matched the significance of the capture of the RQ-170 spy plane in near perfect condition. It was a game changer and has made great impact in several aspects.
Rhetoric of War


While the last active duty US troops left Iraq on December 15, a full two weeks before the stipulated deadline of December 31, 2011, many commentators still cannot fathom why the US invaded Iraq in March 2003. There was no imminent threat to US interests from a badly weakened Saddam regime; it was widely known that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction, duly confirmed by UN Weapons Inspectors, yet the US invaded the country. The US ended up spending nearly one trillion dollars directly on the eight-year war and suffered 4,500 war dead (the actual cost when payments to injured soldiers and other related items are included, it climbs to nearly $4 trillion). Indeed it also caused irreparable damage to US reputation in the world due to the murder of more than 1.5 million Iraqis and the torture inflicted on many in Abu Ghraib Prison.


Yet the US did not benefit from lucrative contracts to exploit the vast oil resources of Iraq, as was anticipated prior to the invasion. The occupation of Afghanistan should also be taken into account. It has also cost the US dearly, in terms of manpower and economic loss. It was not initially clear why the US had embarked on such a disastrous course but subsequent events have shown that the US had its eyes on the bigger prize: Iran, the sole obstacle to US-Israeli domination of the Muslim East. During the US’s 10-year occupation of Afghanistan, which is ongoing, an unprecedented political, military and intelligence effort was launched to destabilize Iran and pave the way for regime change through supporting their agents inside Iran. This was augmented by threats of air strikes on the Islamic Republic’s power sources as well as nuclear installation. The US used every opportunity to try and weaken Iran.



However, thanks to the support of the Iranian masses, robust deterrence of the armed forces and the handy work of Iranian intelligence, all such US attempts have failed. Realizing that regime change is not an option in Iran anymore, Washington is now going for the second best option: containment of Iran’s influence in the region. The US has shifted its war policy to increasing economic and political isolation of Iran, which would be reinforced through heightened rhetoric of war to exert psychological pressure on Iran. According to this thinking an anxious Iran will be forced to focus on its own security unable to exert influence in the face of regional developments, especially during the post-US occupation era.





Capturing the “beast” turns the tables


The drone is a perfect tool for spying on countries that have a credible air defence system. The drone uses stealth technology to evade radar detection, can fly at extremely high altitudes and can stay in the air for prolonged periods of time to gather intelligence. The Sentinel has multiple state of the art sensors; it can intercept communications in the area as well take air samples to keep a close eye on Iran’s nuclear program. More importantly it has a psychological effect on the targeted countries since the aircraft can violate their airspace at will and capture images of their most heavily guarded secret installations without facing any resistance.


But the Revolutionary Guards have been preparing themselves for capturing the “beast”. They mastered their knowledge of the drone collected from previously downed US drones, and bought some equipment from the Russians. Moscow had delivered the Avtobaza ground-based electronic intelligence and jamming system to Iran three months ago. It is designed to jam side-looking and fire control radars on aircraft and manipulate the guidance and control systems of incoming enemy missiles. Combining their knowledge, skills and creativity with Russian equipment they set up an ambush to catch the prize.


When the Sentinel trespassed into Iranian air space, Iranian specialists first jammed the aircraft communications and forced it to switch to autopilot. On autopilot, the Sentinel is programmed to follow GPS signals to navigate to its home base. It is well known by the Pentagon that the GPS navigations were the weakest point of the UAVs as they are prone to manipulation. Iranians were also aware of this and exploited the simple weakness without having to crack the remote-control signals and communications from the US control centre. Once the plane was on autopilot, the Iranian experts sent their signals from the ground and manipulated the drone’s GPS coordinates to make it land at a nearby Iranian airbase that has similar coordinates to the drone’s home airbase in Afghanistan. This way the drone’s computer assumed it was actually landing at its home base in Afghanistan. This is why the self-destruct mechanism of the drone did not work.


The Russians provided the Avtobaza system to Saddam Husain before the US invasion but they could not make good use of it. Even the Russians themselves could not use the system effectively during the war with Georgia in 2008 as they were helpless against Israeli-supplied Georgian drones and suffered casualties due to information provided by these drones. With their achievement, the Iranian electronic warfare units have gained great respect in the world. But more importantly, Iran has foiled the US war rhetoric by showing that Iranian airspace is not a park for US or Israeli planes. They have advanced technology to detect stealth aircraft, and capability to disable them through jamming.


The US air warfare doctrine has been built upon using satellite guided missiles for attacking enemy targets. By bringing down the drone, which had a more sophisticated satellite navigation system, the Iranians have shown they have the capability to control advanced US missiles in midair and perhaps re-direct them against US targets. Further, once Iranian specialists decipher the drone’s codes they will be able read the data stored in its computer on possible targets marked out by the US. Hence they will know the mind of the enemy. Marking out these targets was a result of a long and arduous process for the CIA; the Iranians can either replace the position of these targets now or reinforce the defence around these areas. This of course would make a US airstrike too risky if not impossible.


By capturing the drone Iran has turned the tables in its psychological war with the US. The US might still continue its belligerent war mongering but everyone and most importantly the Iranians know that US threats of war are a lot of hot air.

Are majority Muslim countries truly independent?

Zafar Bangash, Reflections




Given that there are 56 “Muslim” nation-states, all members of the United Nations and the Organization of Islamic Conference, the question may raise some eyebrows. Each country also has defined borders, a government headed by a king, amir, president, prime minister or even a general. Further, there is a cabinet, a standing army, national airline (or two), a national flag, and even an anthem for each country. Do these not represent independence?


We must define the term “independence” accurately to fully grasp the Muslim world’s current situation. Possessing territory, having a government, army, etc, do not necessarily mean independence. The term independence must be viewed more broadly. Neo-Marxist writers — Hans Singer, Raúl Prebisch, Paul A. Baran, Paul Sweezy, Andre Gunder Frank, Theotonio Dos Santos et al — have written extensively about dependency theory demonstrating how difficult it is for a society to break out of this cycle. We need not go into the details of dependency theory but suffice it to say that the natural resources and cheap labour of dependent societies are exploited to enrich wealthy societies (in reality, these enrich the top 1% of society as the Occupy Wall Street Movement has so clearly shown!). The elite in rich societies actively perpetuate a cycle of dependency through economic, political, social, cultural, banking, and financial policies. Societies that attempt to break out of the dependency cycle are coerced back into the fold through sanctions and/or the use of military force. The price exacted for trying to break loose is exceedingly high.


Even societies that go through a revolution — Cuba, Vietnam, Nicaragua, etc — show how difficult it is to throw off the yoke of dependency. Most countries in Africa gained “independence” from colonialism in the 1960s but they are still dependent on the colonial masters for survival. Africa is gripped by mass starvation even though it is a resource-rich continent, due largely to the manufactured nation-state conflicts managed by Western powers (read that: starvation policies) coupled with their structural adjustment programs (read that, slavery to debt), which regard material resources in the ground to be more valuable than human resources on the ground. African countries have been trapped into a spider web-type relationship from which they cannot escape. Institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund are used to reinforce dependency on the colonial powers. Colonel Muammar Qaddafi of Libya paid the price with his life for attempting to break the Western stranglehold on Africa by proposing to establish an African Monetary Fund as well as an African Central Bank. More resources and capital have been sucked out of Africa into the West after “independence” than during direct colonialism.



Let us, however, return to our discussion of majority Muslim countries. Are they free to formulate their own economic, political, military, cultural or social policies? Even societies that are not financially dependent on the West suffer from the dependency syndrome. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates offer good examples. These are artificial constructs that were created by Britain to serve its interests. While financially secure, they are still subservient to the West when formulating political, social, cultural, military or educational policies. Even in the economic field, these countries cannot formulate policies to benefit their own people. Saudi Arabia pumps excessive amounts of oil far beyond its needs because it must serve US and Western interests. This keeps the price of oil low depriving producers of much-needed income while transferring wealth to the West. For every dollar drop in the price of oil, producers lose $1 billion per day. On the political front, few majority Muslim countries can stand up to Zionist Israel. Instead they are aligned with US/Zionist aggressors against the Palestinian people.


Flags and national anthems aside, what is the solution to the problem facing Muslim societies? Any attempt to answer this question merely through economic analysis will not yield the correct answer. Muslim societies are unable to formulate their own policies to serve the interests of their people precisely because they are not independent. For true independence, they must first undergo an Islamic revolution to overthrow the colonial imposed order. Iran has shown how this is done. For more than 30 years, Western “experts” and “pundits” have been predicting the collapse of the Islamic system. What they fail to understand is that an Islamic revolution changes the very nature of society and renders it impervious to sanctions and boycotts. As the Noble Qur’an states so eloquently: “Allah does not alter the condition of a people until they change their attitude” (13:11).


It is through this consummate change — a clean break from the exploitative milieu created by fear of temporal power to an Islamic system that fosters confidence by reliance only on the Sustainer of the worlds — that Muslims will gain true independence. Until then, Muslims will only delude themselves into believing they are independent.

'ஈரான் மாத்திரமே நேர்மை ஒழுங்கை கடை பிடிக்கும் தேசம்'

'ஈரான் மாத்திரமே நேர்மை ஒழுங்கை கடை பிடிக்கும் தேசம்'
ஈரான் ஐனாதிபதி மஹ்மூத் அஹ்மதி நெஜாத் சூளுரை.

நேர்மை ஒழுங்கை கடை பிடிக்க ஒன்று திரளுமாறு உலக சமாதான விரும்பிகளுக்கு ஈரான் தலைவர் அழைப்பு விடுத்தார். ஐநா சபையின் கட்டமைப்பில் ஏற்பட வேண்டிய மாற்றம் அதன் முதலாவது நடவடிக்கை என்றும் அவர் வலியுறுத்தினார்.

'இம்மாற்றம் அத்தியாவசியமாக இருப்பதால் அது நடைபெற்றே தீரும் என நாம் நம்புகின்றோம்' என்று சமீபத்தில் கடாரில் நடைப்பெற்ற வெளிநாட்டு தூதுவர்களின் சந்திப்பின்போது அஹ்மதி நெஜாத் குறிப்பட்டதாக ஈரானிய செய்தி ஸ்தாபனமான irna தெரிவித்தது.

முதலாவது மற்றும் இரண்டாவது உலகப்போர்களின் விளைவாக உருவான தற்போதைய உலக நடைமுறை ஒரு தலைப்பட்சமான ஒன்றாவதால் அது சுயநலப்போக்கையே கொண்டுள்ளது. கடந்த 60 வருட காலத்தில் உலகிற்கு நீண்டு நிலைத்திருக்கக் கூடிய சமாதானத்தையோ மனித சமூகத்திற்கு பாதுகாப்பையோ அதனால் உறுதி படுத்த முடியாமல் போயுள்ளது. அத்தோடு இஸ்ரேல், பலஸ்தீனப் பிரச்சினைகளை தீர்ப்பதற்கோ ஆப்கானிலும் ஈராக்கிலும் நடந்து கொண்டிருக்கும் பிரச்சினைகளை முடிவுக்கக் கொண்டு வருவதற்கோ அதனால் முடியாமல் போயுள்ளது' என்றும் நெஜாத் சுட்டிக்காட்டினார்.

சூறையாடல், கொள்ளை படுகொலைகளை நிறுத்தும், மனித சமூகத்திற்கு உண்மையான முன்னேற்றத்தை கொண்டு வரும் ஒரு புதிய உலக ஒழுங்கை நிறுவுவதன் முக்கியத்துவம் பற்றி வலியுறுத்தினார். தொடர்ந்து கருத்தத் தெரிவித்த ஈரானியத் தலைவர், பிராந்தியத்தில் பிளவுகளை ஏற்படுத்த முயற்சிக்கும் எதிரிகளின் சதித்திட்டங்கள் விடயத்தில் முஸ்லிம் நாடுகள் விழிப்புடன் இருக்க வேண்டியதன் அவசியம் பற்றியும் எச்சரித்தார்.

பிராந்தியத்தின் மிகவும் முக்கியத்துவம் வாய்ந்த இணைப்பு வழியான பாரசீக வளைகுடாப் பகுதியை ஆளுகை புரிவதற்கு எதிரிகள் கடந்த பல தசாப்தங்களாக பலத்த முயற்சி செய்து வருவதையும் அவர் சுட்டிக்காட்டினார்.

பிராந்தியத்தில் தாங்கள் நிலைத்திருப்பதற்கு ஒரு காரணத்தை ஏற்படுத்தி அதன் மூலம் இப்பிரதேச நாடுகளுக்கு தமது ஆயுதங்களை விற்பதற்கான பதட்ட மனநிலையை உருவாக்கும் குயுக்தியில் மேற்குலக உளவியல் முன்னெடுப்புகள் மேற்கொள்ளப்பட்டு வருகின்றன என்றும் ஈரானிய ஜனாதிபதி குறிப்பிட்டார்.

இருந்த போதிலும், பிராந்திய நாடுகள் விழிப்புடன் இருந்து வருவதால் எதிரிகளின் சூழ்ச்சிகள் தொடர்ந்து பயனற்றுப் போயுள்ளதாகவும் நெஜாத் மகிழ்ச்சியுடன் தெரிவித்தார்.

இதே வேளை அதே தினத்தில் கடாரில் வாழும் ஈரானியர்களுடன் நடைபெற்ற மற்றொரு சந்திப்பில் 'மக்களின் சொத்துக்களை சூறையாடி படுகொலைகளை செய்வதன் ஊடாக முதலாளித்து நாடுகளுக்கு வால் பிடிப்பைதயே இன்றைய உலக ஒழுங்கு நோக்கமாக கொண்டுள்ளது' என்றும் நெஜாத் சாடினார்.

'இன்று உலகில் நேர்மையான ஒழுங்கு முறை ஒன்றை ஸ்தாபிக்கும் ஆற்றள் உள்ள ஒரே நாடு ஈரான் மட்டுமே' என்றும் ஈரானியத் தலைவர் கூறினார். மேலும் கருத்துத் தெரிவித்த அவர் பிராந்தியத்தில் ஈரானை தனிமைப்படுத்துவதற்கு எதிரிகள் மேற்கொண்ட சதி முயற்சிகள் அனைத்தும் தோல்வி அடைந்துள்ளது என்றும் சுட்டிக்காட்டினார்.

'எதிரிகள் எம்மை பற்றி அதிகம் பேசும் போதே நாம் ஒரு பலமிக்க நாடாக உலகில் உருவாகயுள்ளோம் என்பது ஊர்ஜிதமாகின்றது' என்றும் அவர் குறிப்பிட்டார்.

சூழ்ச்சிகளை அழிப்பதற்கும் பிராந்தியத்தல் உள்ள பிரச்சினைகளை தீர்ப்பதற்கும் ஈரானுக்கும் கடாருக்குமிடையில் பொதுத்திட்டங்கள் பல உள்ளதாகவும் நெஜாத் கூறினார்.

Syria: A Few Lingering Questions

Huda Jawad

In recent weeks, the surge in protests in Syria has dominated the international stage. Suddenly, countless individuals have become experts on the current situation in Syria after reading a few articles on CNN, watching Barbara Walters interview Bashar al-Assad, and because Barack Obama said so. However, the situation in Syria is unique from its sister protests in Egypt, Tunisia, and the rest of the conveniently timed uprisings in the Middle East. It should be noted that this article is far from an absolute gospel on who to believe about Syria and which side to be on. Instead, it is an invitation for readers and concerned global citizens to consider the facts and disparities between what the mainstream media is reporting about Syria and the actual conflicts taking place inside the country.



Ironically, many individuals who typically question the objectivity of the media have eagerly believed the mainstream narrative about Syria, despite clear contradictions between independent reports regarding the situation and the media's spin. This is where the uniqueness of Syria comes into play: Bashar al-Assad is by no means an angel, and he is certainly not in the running for world's most compassionate leader award. However, very little initiative has been taken to answer the following questions:

How reliable is the United Nations Human Rights report on Syria? The report authors, who happen to include munitions manufacturer Raytheon (they supplied NATO with salvos for its operations in Libya), themselves admit that they were never inside Syria to complete their investigation. Instead, they interviewed witnesses provided by the Syrian opposition. The Syrian government did not respond to allegations in the report, and to say it is one-sided would be putting it gently. Media outlets have done little to investigate the UN report and have instead used it to promote sensational headlines calling for regime change in Syria.

What's at stake for the United States? Hidden interests in the Middle East are nothing revolutionary to expose. In fact, everyone expects the United States and other Western powers to meddle in the affairs of sovereign nations. What is surprising is the lack of questioning directed towards US interests when it comes to Syria. According to the Washington Post, "Classified US diplomatic cables show that the State Department has funneled as much as six million dollars to opposition groups since 2006 to operate the satellite channel and finance other activities inside Syria."

Why is the Arab League Mission being questioned? Initially the opposition in Syria welcomed the visit by 150 Arab League observers into Syria. The mission was also endorsed by Syria in what was an Arab League plan which called for the withdrawal of military forces and a halt of violence against civilians. However, the Arab League mission has taken issue with some of the narratives emerging from media sources concerning Syria. Many were anticipating the Arab League mission to fail in stopping the violence and allow for possible foreign military intervention in Syria. Instead, the officials in the mission are reporting findings that contradict accusations which were previously wildly held against the Syrian regime, including that of government snipers attacking protestors. However, the Syrian government has also complained that snipers are attacking both protestors and Syrian troops. The head of the Arab Parliament recently called for the withdrawal of the Arab League monitors, claiming it gave Syria "cover" for its ongoing violations. The timing of the call to pull the Arab League out of Syria and the ongoing campaign to discredit the head of the Arab League monitors, Sudanese Lt. Gen. Mohamed Ahmed Mustafa al-Dabi, raise questions regarding the motive behind the mission and whether or not a truly independent task force can be sent to Syria.

What and who is backing the Free Syria Army? Very little is known about the movement to overthrow the Syrian regime aside from the clear foreign backing it receives. Are the protestors aligned with this movement? How many opposition parties are involved, and what is the end goal of the protests? Civil unrest in a country rarely warrants the funding and backing of numerous outside countries, unless there are vested interests at stake. Recent terrorist attacks which are unusual to Syria but common in countries where foreign intervention has been staged have added to the growing list of puzzles when it comes to Syria. What is known, according to the Telegraph, is that Abdulhakim Belhadj, head of the Tripoli Military Council and the former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, "met with Free Syrian Army leaders in Istanbul and on the border with Turkey," said a military official working with Mr Belhadj. "Mustafa Abdul Jalil (the interim Libyan president) sent him there." What should be questioned or at least researched into is Belhadj's ties to al-Qaeda and the fact that his organization, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), is listed by the US State Department as a foreign terrorist organization. Is it a mere coincidence that as soon as groups affiliated with terrorism start associating with segments of the Syrian opposition that car bombs start to go off in the middle of Damascus?

When it comes to Syria, asking one question leads down a road populated with others. Although it would be more convenient to simply believe what the media and world powers are insisting about the country, individuals with conscience should consider the above questions and the many ahead when it comes to the situation in Syria.

Capturing the spy drone foils US war rhetoric on Iran

By Ahmet Aslan

One of the most striking events in post-Revolutionary Iranian history unfolded in early December 2011 when Iranian state TV showed a captured RQ-170 Sentinel, the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) used by the US for spying. It is one of the most sophisticated planes in the US arsenal and had been kept largely hidden from public eye in order to not risk its top secret spy missions. One of the most striking events in post-Revolutionary Iranian history unfolded in early December 2011 when Iranian state TV showed a captured RQ-170 Sentinel, the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) used by the US for spying. It is one of the most sophisticated planes in the US arsenal and had been kept largely hidden from public eye in order to not risk its top secret spy missions. Until now, only a grainy photo taken at Qandahar airbase in 2009 was seen. The photo created a myth around the Sentinel due to its bizarre shape and speculation about its myriad capabilities were widely circulated to project it as something awesome hence its nickname, the “Beast of Kandahar”. That is why the world was shocked — the Americans even more so as victims of their own propaganda — when they saw images of the very “beast”, tamed and put on display by its new masters in Iran. The display scenery was carefully prepared by the Revolutionary Guards to mark the significance of the occasion and to gain the upperhand in the on-going cold war with the US. A banner hoisted next to the Sentinel depicted a memorable quote in Farsi from the late Imam Khomeini: “The US cannot do a damn thing.” The Imam had made the statement in the face of US threats of a military attack during occupation of the US Embassy in Tehran by revolutionary students. The embassy was little more than a den of spies, as the Iranians quickly dubbed it, from which were captured thousands of secret documents exposing the Americans’ illegal activities and their links with agents in Iran. The Imam’s memorable statement was later turned into a slogan of the Islamic Revolution and repeated on many occasions. However, words do not have much effect without action and perhaps that is why the quote had never had so much impact until it was proclaimed on a banner next to the captured US spy plane. Capture of the Sentinel in almost perfect condition caused huge embarrassment, not to mention problems, for the US. Not surprisingly, Washington attempted to play down the significance of the capture of its top of the line spy plane by Iran. Initially, US officials only admitted they had lost an unmanned drone but insisted it was over Afghanistan. They denied it was brought down by the Iranians stating instead “malfunction” had caused its loss. In contrast to the US story, Iranian officials announced they had captured the plane on December 4, some 140 miles inside Iranian territory from the Afghan border. Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi finally announced Iran’s technological victory over the US: “Regardless of whether the US believes it or not, the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran brought down the aircraft largely intact without assistance from any foreign country.” This was perhaps the biggest single blow that directly smashed US war propaganda that has been going on since its occupation of Iraq in 2003. Hitherto, Iran had had only moderate successes against covert US operations to destabilize the Islamic Republic. These included capturing a major CIA operative, Abdolmalek Rigi who had launched deadly attacks against Revolutionary Guards for several years; breaking US spy rings and capturing a number of CIA operatives inside the country both last May as well as more recently when Iranian television on December 18 showed Amir Mirzaei Hekmati, the CIA spy. Hekmati is of Iranian origin and was trained for nearly a decade by the CIA to penetrate Iran. He came under the Iranian intelligence radar when he was sent to the notorious Bagram Airbase in Afghan-istan from where he was sent into Iran. The US government had the gall to ask for his return. Hekmati’s capture dovetailed that of the drone spy plane. According an article in the Christian Science Monitor quoting from a European intelligence source, Iran shocked Western intelligence agencies, sometime in last two years when it managed to “blind” a CIA spy satellite by “aiming a laser burst quite accurately.” But none of the previous operations, impressive as they were, matched the significance of the capture of the RQ-170 spy plane in near perfect condition. It was a game changer and has made great impact in several aspects. Rhetoric of War While the last active duty US troops left Iraq on December 15, a full two weeks before the stipulated deadline of December 31, 2011, many commentators still cannot fathom why the US invaded Iraq in March 2003. There was no imminent threat to US interests from a badly weakened Saddam regime; it was widely known that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction, duly confirmed by UN Weapons Inspectors, yet the US invaded the country. The US ended up spending nearly one trillion dollars directly on the eight-year war and suffered 4,500 war dead (the actual cost when payments to injured soldiers and other related items are included, it climbs to nearly $4 trillion). Indeed it also caused irreparable damage to US reputation in the world due to the murder of more than 1.5 million Iraqis and the torture inflicted on many in Abu Ghraib Prison. Yet the US did not benefit from lucrative contracts to exploit the vast oil resources of Iraq, as was anticipated prior to the invasion. The occupation of Afghanistan should also be taken into account. It has also cost the US dearly, in terms of manpower and economic loss. It was not initially clear why the US had embarked on such a disastrous course but subsequent events have shown that the US had its eyes on the bigger prize: Iran, the sole obstacle to US-Israeli domination of the Muslim East. During the US’s 10-year occupation of Afghanistan, which is ongoing, an unprecedented political, military and intelligence effort was launched to destabilize Iran and pave the way for regime change through supporting their agents inside Iran. This was augmented by threats of air strikes on the Islamic Republic’s power sources as well as nuclear installation. The US used every opportunity to try and weaken Iran. However, thanks to the support of the Iranian masses, robust deterrence of the armed forces and the handy work of Iranian intelligence, all such US attempts have failed. Realizing that regime change is not an option in Iran anymore, Washington is now going for the second best option: containment of Iran’s influence in the region. The US has shifted its war policy to increasing economic and political isolation of Iran, which would be reinforced through heightened rhetoric of war to exert psychological pressure on Iran. According to this thinking an anxious Iran will be forced to focus on its own security unable to exert influence in the face of regional developments, especially during the post-US occupation era. Capturing the “beast” turns the tables The drone is a perfect tool for spying on countries that have a credible air defence system. The drone uses stealth technology to evade radar detection, can fly at extremely high altitudes and can stay in the air for prolonged periods of time to gather intelligence. The Sentinel has multiple state of the art sensors; it can intercept communications in the area as well take air samples to keep a close eye on Iran’s nuclear program. More importantly it has a psychological effect on the targeted countries since the aircraft can violate their airspace at will and capture images of their most heavily guarded secret installations without facing any resistance. But the Revolutionary Guards have been preparing themselves for capturing the “beast”. They mastered their knowledge of the drone collected from previously downed US drones, and bought some equipment from the Russians. Moscow had delivered the Avtobaza ground-based electronic intelligence and jamming system to Iran three months ago. It is designed to jam side-looking and fire control radars on aircraft and manipulate the guidance and control systems of incoming enemy missiles. Combining their knowledge, skills and creativity with Russian equipment they set up an ambush to catch the prize. When the Sentinel trespassed into Iranian air space, Iranian specialists first jammed the aircraft communications and forced it to switch to autopilot. On autopilot, the Sentinel is programmed to follow GPS signals to navigate to its home base. It is well known by the Pentagon that the GPS navigations were the weakest point of the UAVs as they are prone to manipulation. Iranians were also aware of this and exploited the simple weakness without having to crack the remote-control signals and communications from the US control centre. Once the plane was on autopilot, the Iranian experts sent their signals from the ground and manipulated the drone’s GPS coordinates to make it land at a nearby Iranian airbase that has similar coordinates to the drone’s home airbase in Afghanistan. This way the drone’s computer assumed it was actually landing at its home base in Afghanistan. This is why the self-destruct mechanism of the drone did not work. The Russians provided the Avtobaza system to Saddam Husain before the US invasion but they could not make good use of it. Even the Russians themselves could not use the system effectively during the war with Georgia in 2008 as they were helpless against Israeli-supplied Georgian drones and suffered casualties due to information provided by these drones. With their achievement, the Iranian electronic warfare units have gained great respect in the world. But more importantly, Iran has foiled the US war rhetoric by showing that Iranian airspace is not a park for US or Israeli planes. They have advanced technology to detect stealth aircraft, and capability to disable them through jamming. The US air warfare doctrine has been built upon using satellite guided missiles for attacking enemy targets. By bringing down the drone, which had a more sophisticated satellite navigation system, the Iranians have shown they have the capability to control advanced US missiles in midair and perhaps re-direct them against US targets. Further, once Iranian specialists decipher the drone’s codes they will be able read the data stored in its computer on possible targets marked out by the US. Hence they will know the mind of the enemy. Marking out these targets was a result of a long and arduous process for the CIA; the Iranians can either replace the position of these targets now or reinforce the defence around these areas. This of course would make a US airstrike too risky if not impossible. By capturing the drone Iran has turned the tables in its psychological war with the US. The US might still continue its belligerent war mongering but everyone and most importantly the Iranians know that US threats of war are a lot of hot air.