Showing posts with label Jim Miles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jim Miles. Show all posts

Thursday, June 20, 2019

How America’s National Security State Fueled the Rise of al-Qaeda, ISIS, and Donald Trump

Even though the ending is known, Max Blumenthal’s book The Management of Savagery draws the reader through an intriguing tale of media management, political management, financial management all with the goal of achieving the management of savagery. The title derives from a 2004 al-Qaeda document of the same title which advises “jihadist groups to exploit the chaos that resulted from the destabilization of previously stable states.”
The savagery is to eliminate all opposition and as per the author Abu Baker Naji, “If we succeed in the management of savagery, that stage will be a bridge to the Islamic state….” In a sense, these sentiments reflect the neoconservative agenda to destabilize and fragment the Middle East in order to “manage” the petrodollar, oil resources, and to allow Israel to “manage” the region as the neocon outpost of civilization.
The story starts in Afghanistan, the first war in the series of managed wars by the U.S. hoping to trap the Soviet Union in its own Vietnam. It is a mix of CIA, ISI (Pakistan’s intelligence service), a variety of warlords, arms merchants, the Pakistan army, and the newly created Taliban. It follows swiftly through areas suffering the fallout from these activities – Bosnia, Yugoslavia, Chechnya.
In “The dawn of the forever war” – pre 9/11 – CIA collusion with the Taliban was “swept away” – allowing a “close knit band of neoconservatives to build the case of a full scale military confrontation with Iraq.” The CIA’s long standing “sordid history of collusion with jihadist elements” created “colossal failures of judgment….” The push behind the U.S.’ attitude came from the neoconservatives – Wolfowitz, Feith, Perle, Kagan, Kristol et al – whose essays “A Clean Break” and “Project for a New American Century” outlined the case for a “benevolent global hegemony,” but it would require a long “process of transformation….like a New Pearl Harbour.”
On the other side, al-Qaeda’s strategy was essentially the same, Brzezinski’s “Afghan trap” in reverse, a “strategy to trigger a series of American interventions and bleed an overstretched empire.” For both sides, 9/11 was the critical factor.
After 9/11 the world was polarized, “with us or against us.” It became a religious war, a civilizational war, and a sectarian war. From there the story continues its winding, twisting , convoluted path through Afghanistan again, into Iraq, and increasingly with its blowback effects into the U.S. and its allies, in particular Great Britain.
One of the blowback results from this were the refugees/migrants suddenly flooding over into Europe. Domestically in the U.S. Islamophobia was nurtured by Stephen Bannon and other “monomaniacal” and “trash-talking” Islamophobes. The stage was set for the rise of right wing populist forces,”counter-jihadists”, establishing a “comfortable, mutually reinforcing symbiosis that relied on a constantly escalating sense of antagonism.”
Much of the story concerns the most recent war, the war in Syria. It is at the extreme end of convoluted affairs with Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Gulf states supporting al-Qaeda/ al-Nusra/ISIS in its various formations. The U.S. and its NATO allies while pretending to be against the savagery of ISIS and its related groups, provided military and training assistance along with its Middle East surrogate Israel. Israel created what was essentially a safe zone around the Golan Heights, helping ISIS with supplies, medical and military support.
Turkey played a double game, supporting ISIS, countering Kurdish forces and interests, controlling to some degree the mass movement of refugees from the fighting. Lebanon played a passive role providing a protective international air space for Israeli and NATO air incursions while unwillingly harbouring ISIS forces on the Syrian border. Iran provided military and logistic support to Syria, broadening its influence in the “Shia crescent”.
And then along came Russia, a long time Syrian ally that proved the lies about U.S. interests in defeating the jihadists. Once the U.S. recognized its waning influence, Russia’s role took on its old familiar place within U.S. mainstream media as the bad guy. The “moderate rebels”, who never really existed, and the supposedly humanitarian White Helmets who assisted ISIS became the good guys in western media.
Blumenthal manages to weave his way through all these storylines, highlighting the manner in which the chaos of savagery was not truly controllable. The main U.S. domestic result of these long wars, the media rants, Islamophobia, worked out to the advantage of the neoconservative agenda. “With the strange and sudden transformation of the democrats into a paranoid war party, a quiet neoconservative campaign set into motion a decade before was being realized.”
Hearkening back to the post Soviet 1990s, “the goal was clear: to encircle the largest and most militarily powerful nation in Eurasia and gradually transform it into a toothless, economically dependent vassal of the United States.” U.S. actions, the “shock doctrine” imposed by the “Harvard boys”, “should have stood alongside some of most titanic crimes of the twentieth century.” After years of slow understated resurgence, Russia re-entered the global political scene via Georgia, Libya, Ukraine and on into Syria.
The Democratic party has positioned itself now on the side of the neocon warhawks, and as the Syrian war settled into a simmering aftermath, the old Cold War Russia haters dominated supposedly liberal thinkers, stoked by the ultimate blowback from all the military and political muckraking – the election of Donald Trump.
With Trump painted as Putin’s puppet, with both sides calling out “fake news”, with the national security state under the influence of John Bolton and Mike Pompeo, “the reality of America’s waning influence on the world stage” is obvious. “In the face of their own failure, America’s national security elites had successfully engineered a new Cold War, wagering that the reignited conflict would preserve their management savagery….As the dust cleared from two decades of regime change campaigns a new cast of evil doers was coming into focus.”
Most people know the superficialities of this history, mainly the mainstream media broadcasts of the U.S./NATO/western obfuscation, omissions, and contrivances around events. Max Blumenthal’s The Management of Savagery clearly exposes the many twists, turns, and convolutions of the various actors. In spite of its complexity, this book is a fascinating read into the many aspects of how the initial setup of support for the Afghan mujahideen has morphed into today’s Russophobic, Islamophobic, right wing security state, with the savagery expressed more and more domestically while it is still pushed into foreign countries. It needs to be on everyone’s bookshelf in order to understand the roots and pathways of our current global situation.
Jim Miles is a Canadian educator and a regular contributor/columnist of opinion pieces and book reviews for The Palestine Chronicle. Miles’ work is also presented globally through other alternative websites and news publications.

Friday, April 26, 2019

Preventing Palestine – A Political History From Camp David to Oslo

Preventing Palestine – A Political History From Camp David to Oslo. Seth Anziska. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2018.
In all my recent readings of history and current events, Preventing Palestine stands out as being one of the best written – if not the best – and one of the most essential for understanding the overall historical process of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories of Palestine. Given the nature of the book, it also hints at the gradual process through which all of Mandatory Palestine west of the Jordan River gave way to the acceptance of only a partial space – the West Bank and Gaza – within the overall colonial-settler area of Israel, as a region for a Palestinian state. Its general focus however is the political process beginning with Jimmy Carter to find a solution to the stalemate between the Arab countries and Israel, including a settlement of the Palestinian position, after the Yom Kippur war of 1973.
The result was a highly watered down document – the Camp David Accords – providing Anwar Sadat of Egypt with his original territory, peace with Israel, and the usual billions of dollars from the U.S. Palestine and the other Arab states were not included in the deal with Palestine receiving the first in a series of many talking points but no commitments or action towards an actual sovereign entity.
Among the many players, Sadat is criticized for his lack of concern for the Palestinian cause. Carter’s National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski appears as making an honest effort to find a regional settlement, partly from concerns of the era about the Soviet Union’s strength in the region. Arafat obviously plays a significant role, in this era through the expulsion of the PLO from Jordan then Lebanon (with the chapter on Lebanon being one of the clearest presentations of that nasty little war) and the lead up to the Oslo Accords. The main player is Israel’s Menachem Begin who persevered with the single most important element of the talks – a denial of any sovereign rights to the Palestinians – at most offering them “individual autonomy” with respect to civil law, but no sovereign or state entity was ever proffered.
Political history can be boring, but author Set Anziska has obviously done a tremendous amount of work researching the material and making it come to life. He achieves this through access to newly released unredacted archival material within Israel, a long list of secondary reading sources, unpublished manuscripts, and many personal interviews. From this is crafted an interesting and detailed read reflecting much of the personalities of the characters involved and the processes they undertook in an attempt to reach their goals. The format of Preventing Palestine is one of the finest I can remember for a political history, with strong topical presentations, well presented story lines, and very strong summaries of each chapter leading to the next sections topic.
The strongest idea reiterated over and over – until Begin finally had his way – is that of not giving any land up for a sovereign Palestinian state. It starts with “100 years ago Palestine was mostly empty….There was no such thing as an Arab-Palestine that existed for 1300 years before we came.” It continues on through “We will not negotiate over a Palestinian state,” with Anziska summarizing, “Israeli leaders were in fact proffering comprehensive negotiations as a means to maintain indefinite political sovereignty over the territories.” Those ideas continue on throughout the work, with the final clear summary,
“In continuing with the post 1967 “decision not to decide” on the fate of the territories and deferring substantive negotiations over the Palestinian question in an autonomy process explicitly designed to prevent sovereignty, Camp David actually enabled the triumph of an Israeli vision intent on suppressing the demand for self-determination. This highly consequential strategy was a defining feature of Begin’s statecraft, often lost in the broader picture of the peace treaty with Egypt….autonomy for the local inhabitants of the occupied territories was diluted to a point where it signaled indefinite Israeli control of the territories rather than a means to eventual self government.”
In short, the two state solution has not died, it was stillborn, with the Oslo Accords essentially extending Begin’s denial of sovereignty and statehood into the indefinite future.
Preventing Palestine is an excellent read, and an essential one for a much more clear understanding of the current Palestinian situation.
Jim Miles is a Canadian educator and a regular contributor/columnist of opinion pieces and book reviews for The Palestine Chronicle. Miles’ work is also presented globally through other alternative websites and news publications.