US ON THE WANE EVERYWHERE

The decline and coming fall of the USA

K Gajendra Singh
March 30, 2008

"History is ruled by an inexorable determinism in which the
free choice of major historical figures plays a minimal
role", Leo Tolstoy

When I went back to Ankara in late 1992 to head the Indian
Embassy, many of my friends from the Turkish Foreign Office
from my 1969-73 tenure as First Secretary, were going out
as ambassadors to newly independent states in Central Asia
and the Baltic, following the breakup of the Soviet Union.
Looking at the creation of so many new missions, a cheeky
young Turkish diplomat in the Foreign Ministry said rather
mischievously than hopefully, that only if United States of
America broke up into 50 independent states, could he ever
hope to head like them a Turkish Embassy, in north America.
Turkish diplomats trace their traditions and archives to
six centuries of Ottoman rule over an empire from which
more than two dozen nations have emerged.

But the wish of the young diplomat is not going to be
fulfilled any time soon, if ever. But still—

An editorial titled ' Collapse of U.S. economy ' in
Belleville Intelligencer of 27 Feb, 2008 confirms , by now
generally accepted ill health of US economy . Harry Koza in
the Globe and Mail recently quoted Bernard Connelly, the
global strategist at Banque AIG in London, that the
likelihood of a Great Depression is growing by the day.
Martin Wolf of U.K.'s Financial Times cited Dr. Nouriel
Roubini of the New York University's Stern School of
Business, who outlines how the losses of the American
financial system will grow to more than $1 trillion, an
amount equal to all the assets of all American banks.

The next domino to fall will be credit card defaults, and
after that... who knows? There are so many exotic funds out
there, with trillions of dollars in paper - or rather
computer-screen money - all carrying assorted acronyms, and
all about to disintegrate into nothingness. Over the next
couple of years, scores of banks that have thrived on these
devices, based on quickly disappearing equities, will fail.

The most frightening forecast so far comes from the Global
Europe Anticipation Bulletin (GEAB), "The end of the third
quarter of 2008 (thus late September, a mere seven months
from now) will be marked by a new tipping point in the
unfolding of the global systemic crisis. "At that time
indeed, the cumulated impact of the various sequences of
the crisis will reach its maximum strength and affect
decisively the very heart of the systems concerned, on the
front line of which (is) the United States, epi-centre of
the current crisis.

"In the United States, this new tipping point will
translate into -get this - a collapse of the real economy,
(the) final socio-economic stage of the serial bursting of
the housing and financial bubbles and of the pursuance of
the U.S. dollar fall. The collapse of U.S. real economy
means the virtual freeze of the American economic
machinery: private and public bankruptcies in large
numbers, companies and public services closing down." "We
are not experiencing a "remake" of the 1929 crisis nor a
repetition of the 1970s oil crises or 1987 stock market
crisis. What we will have, instead, is truly a global
momentous threat - a true turning point affecting the
entire planet and questioning the very foundations of the
international system upon which the world was organized in
the last decades."

After the end of the cold war in the wake of the two World
Wars ,the decline of western hegemony over the East and
South during the last few centuries ,first exercised by
rapacious and brutal European colonialists and then from
Washington ,is now likely to morph into a fall because of
the new forces unleashed by the US led invasions of
Afghanistan and Iraq .The two debt financed wars have
brought US economy close to a recession ( Indian economy
including the realty sector would also be affected ,Indian
officials and media still remain oblivious if not dishonest
in spite of the fall in Indian Sensex). Forces and changes
have been set into motion which will completely alter the
existing international financial and strategic structures
and result in a new dynamics. Unless of course the
irresponsible leadership of USA, still with colossal powers
of destruction at its command or say a reckless Israel,
bomb Iran and hurl the world towards a rapid general
warfare between Israel & West vs Muslim nations and masses,
leading to even a nuclear holocaust and Armageddon. Verily
, it would then be the last Crusade vs Jihad !

Contrary to the self proclaimed congratulatory triumphalism
of neo-liberals after the collapse of Communism and
Socialism in end 1980s, celebrated from house tops by the
so called philosophers , think tanks and analysts with
delusions of permanent world domination of Western
financiers and corporate houses based on dubious theories
of 'the End of History 'or 'the Clash of Civilizations' and
even claims of Washington- the new Rome with absolute
control planned in the 'Project for American Century ' by
arrogant and historically ignorant Straussian neo-cons and
their supporters ; the religious , economic , scientific
and historic forces and currents unleashed during the last
few centuries are coalescing towards a major East-West
conflagration , which will bring about results quite
opposite to those dreamed up in Washington , London and
Paris.

The importance of petroleum in warfare and economy had
become obvious even before the Second World War. By 1940s ,
the British who dominated the Middle East and still ruled
over India, realising the importance of oil and the
strategic importance of Middle East as lifeline to India,
had created military alliances with most of the countries
of the Middle East including Iran to protect oil wells from
the Soviet Union. The British created a weak and dependent
Pakistan as a bulwark against any USSR overture into the
Gulf. After the Second WW, USA was formally anointed the
leader of the Western Christian nations although after the
end of the First WW the financial power centre had started
shifting towards the Wall Street from the City of London,
but the latter still has great leverage for manipulation.

From 1950s onwards , USSR made inroads into many Arab
states led by secular, and nationalist leaders like Gamal
Nasser of Egypt. West used religion and conservative and
hereditary rulers to counter the egalitarian waves of
socialism sweeping the Middle East, Asia and Africa. The
battle lines for influence and control between the West and
USSR ( and China) saw many ups and downs . An epochal
change occurred when Iran was lost in 1979 and US ally the
Shahenshah was overthrown by Khomeini led Shia revolution ,
threatening the Sheikhdoms and Kingdoms in the region.
Western world and its frightened allies in the region,
taken aback , encouraged and helped financially and
militarily Saddam Hussein to douse the leaping flames from
the volcano of Shia revolution with its belief in
martyrdom. Iran and Iraq lost over a million young men ;
the 1980s Iraq –Iran war only protected the vested
interests of the West and its allies in the region.

From the Middle East , Western strategic lever to
manipulate and control the region and its resources
extended into South Asia through an axis between the USA,
Saud dynasty, obscurantist Wahabi clerics and Pakistan
military. This axis along with support from other Muslim
countries and even China fathered , nurtured , trained and
financed with arms and billions of dollars ,the present
monster of militants and Jihadis to battle and force out
the Soviet forces from Afghanistan .The nurseries of
terrorism were left behind intact which morphed into Al
Qaeda and Talebans , the latter with full support from
Pakistan and the Gulf's Arab rulers and US acquiescence ,
which wanted a 'stable' Afghanistan for its Multinationals'
pipelines to carry energy from central to South Asia and
beyond. That project remains unfulfilled.

For his cooperation ,Pakistan President Gen Zia- ul- Haq
was suitably rewarded with money and military aid which
emboldened Islamabad to carry out an invasion in Kargil in
India .With abundance of arms ,Pakistan acquired a
Kalashnikov culture of violence while increased opium
production in Afghanistan , with Pakistan as an exit route
left millions of it citizens addicted to the drug. Gen Zia
Islamised Pak polity and completed nuclear bomb program
with acquiescence and even support form the West.

But Al Qaeda chief Osama Ben Laden , chosen for the Jihad
in Afghanistan by the Saudi rulers nurtured dreams of
taking over Muslim states gone astray and conquer other
peoples too. The victims were India and newly independent
central Asian states like Tajikistan , Kyrgyzstan and
Uzbekistan and Arab states which had supported and sent
volunteers to fight in Afghanistan.

In its strategy to defeat the Christian West and the
Crusaders in the Middle East , even on the sacred soil of
Arabia after the 1991 US led war on Iraq , Al Qaeda first
attacked US missions in East Africa .But the stunning
events of 9/11 showed up the fundamental contradictions in
the US-Saudi –Pak axis , with 14 of the 19 hijackers being
of Saudi origin ,led by an Egyptian and Al Qaeda's octopus
like tentacles deeply embedded in Pak military, ISI and the
establishment .

The hyper power USA then mounted an invasion of Afghanistan
, the objective being to control the region and extending
into central Asia with its resources . But the strains and
stresses in the Crusader-Jihadi axis became even more acute
after the US led illegal invasion of Iraq in March, 2003,
angering and pitting Muslim masses all over the world
against USA , UK and other western nations in the backdrop
of continued illegal occupation and encroachments on
Palestinian land by Israel since 1967 and daily killings of
Palestinians telecast on channels like Al Jazeera and
others.

This is acutely true in US-Saudi relations with the latter
being the leading Sunni Muslim state , protecting the holy
Islamic shrines in Mecca and Medina and blessed with vast
oil resources. With increasing public support for Al Qaeda
inside the Kingdom ,Riyadh is now in a quandary. Its power
and prestige have been eroded as a result of its rival Shia
power Iran's strengthened position in Iraq and the region ,
just the opposite of what Washington had foolishly hoped
for. President George Bush did not even know the difference
between Shia and Sunni Islam and Ahmet Chalebi ,a wily
Iraqi ,exiled after the 1958 overthrow of the Hashemite
dynasty , had sold to the willing in the Pentagon the
charade that US troops would be welcomed with flowers by
the Iraqis .No body ever cared to read the history of Iraq
or the region.

US invasion and occupation has divided Iraq into at least
three parts, Shia, Sunni and Kurdish ; it now appears
difficult to hold them together .Apart from exposing the
hollow claims of the US success of its 'Surge ' and
stability in Iraq ,the current fighting between the puppet
government Iraqi troops and Mahdi army ,the Moqtada –as
Sadr militia , specially in Basra and Baghdad is" a result
of an attempt to impose Colombian-style democracy on the
unstable country. Iraqi PM Maliki's goal, shared by the
like-minded allies among the Shia, Sunni and Kurdish
parties that dominate his administration, and with U.S.
approval and air support , is to kill off the opposition
and then hold a vote." Moqtda is fighting to retain control
for provincial elections in October, as" the winners of
those elections will determine the future of the Iraqi
state. Control of the country's oil wealth, and how its
treasure will be developed, will also be significantly
influenced by the outcome of the elections." Washington
which had coerced President Gen Pervez Musharraf after
9/11, under threat to bomb Pakistan back to stone ages (
some ally?), to align Islamabad in its so called 'War on
terror 'wanted Pakistan to destroy Al Qaeda , Pushtun
Talebans and Muslim Jihadis in Pakistan and Afghanistan,
with whom Saudi Arabia , Pak Army , ISI and the
establishment have umbilical connections since their holy
Jihad against atheist Soviet Union in Afghanistan during
1980s.( Israel now wants PLO to destroy Tehran aligned
Hamas-originally incubated by Mossad to counter Al Fattah.)

US has lost the war on the ground in Iraq and Nato is in
disarray in Afghanistan . At the end of 'Operation Iraqi
freedom ' transmuted into a ' war on terror' , really the
mother of all battles for oil, raw materials and strategic
space in west , south and central Asia , the frontiers in
the Middle East and even Pakistan are likely to be redrawn
, but not by the West but by the movements , militias and
peoples of the region. Say by Shias in south Iraq and
Pushtuns in Pak-Afghanistan border who might obliterate the
Durand Line officially , to begin with. But West has
invested too much in the region and its prosperity depends
on it. It is unlikely to give in or give up without a
bloody fight.

The Kingdom of Afghanistan was accepted as a defacto buffer
state by the British and Russian empires at the end of 'the
Great Game' in Central Asia in 19th century .By the end of
the 20th century , the British and Russian empires in Asia
had vanished and many new states have emerged out of them.
Thus the very raison d'etre of that buffer state no longer
holds good. The Afghan territory is under control of
different armed groups , foreign and local , with
Washington installed President Hamid Karzai, with US
mercenaries as his bodyguards, barely controlling the city
of Kabul. Look at new states sprung from former Russian and
British empires now , at Europe after the two world wars
and at the end of the Cold War . State and national
boundaries are always waxing and waning , some times
changing drastically. So what is new if Pakistan breaks
apart .Little effort has been made by its leaders since
1947 to even develop a territory based nationalism. China
would not escape further problems in Tibet and may be even
in Xinjiang.

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, USA went about
methodically in dismantling Russia and its near abroad and
succeeded, with ample help from a naive Gorbachev and an
often drunk or drugged Boris Yeltsin. The 9/11 assaults on
US symbols of power was exploited by the Bush
administration to spread its tentacles to Afghanistan and
beyond in central Asia . For USA the Cold War never really
ended and all means were employed to push Western military
arm NATO to encroach into and encircle Russian strategic
space. In central Europe it was carried out by dismantling
Yugoslavia, an Orthodox Christian Slav nation like and
friendly to Russia and by aligning Georgia and Azerbaijan
to Washington. US franchised street revolutions failed in
Belarus but succeeded in Serbia and Georgia and partially
in Ukraine. When USA tried the same in Uzbekistan and
Kyrgyzstan, Uzbek ruler Islam Karimov expelled the
Americans from the air base and Kyrgyzstan placed new
restrictions. The eastward movement of NATO has resulted in
the creation of Shanghai Corporation Organisation which is
now promoting military coordination and collaboration among
its members and possibly even a formal military alliance in
future to counter Nato.

In its backyard Latin America, USA maintained its dominance
under Monroe doctrine except for defiant Cuba under Fidel
Castro. But Washington is losing its sway and total
control, led against it by Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and
other leaders who represent and implement aspirations of
their people and not of the old elites in cahoots with
corporate interests in USA and Europe. US attempt for a
colonial style control of its oil has been brought to a
halt by fierce Sunni Iraqi resistance ; full Shia
resistance would also emerge. Defied by Iran and even
forced to engage with it , there are limitations to what
Washington, now caught in the Iraqi quagmire, can do in
Latin America . With a defiant nuclear North Korea, and
China, an emerging economic power house, the policies of
Japan, the second economic industrial power in the world
which can quickly transmute its formidable industrial base
into a lethal military machine, the situation in East Asia
remains pregnant with many unpredictable possibilities. But
certainly the US writ and influence are on the wane every
where.

K Gajendra Singh, Indian ambassador (retired), served as
ambassador to Turkey and Azerbaijan from August 1992 to
April 1996. Prior to that, he served terms as ambassador to
Jordan, Romania and Senegal. He is currently chairman of
the Foundation for Indo-Turkic Studies. Copy right with the
author. E-mail: Gajendrak@hotmail.com .

ON BIN LADEN'S LATEST STATEMENT

Beyond Caricatures

By Sukant Chandan*
20 March, 2008
OURAIM

As George Bush announced ‘strategic victories’ in Iraq by
helping to foment the ‘first Arab uprising against
Al-Qaeda’, Bin Laden again stole the limelight by issuing a
five minute audio statement in time for the fifth
anniversary of the invasion of Iraq and of the birthday of
the Prophet Mohammed. Leaving aside Bush’s dubious claims
about successes in Iraq (which even analysts very close to
the US political elite have been warning against) Bin Laden
directs his comments to the European governments and
people. Bin Laden’s Islamist views and violent struggle may
very well be reprehensible to many but Bin Laden remains
one of the most high profile Islamist voices that is
expressing the opinions and feelings of many Muslims across
the world. There are issues raised in Bin Laden’s statement
that European would do well to address, being mainly the
problem of European troops in Afghanistan as well as in
Iraq and the high-handed and provocative way in which
Europe deals with Muslim sensitivities. It is incumbent
that Europe does so as these issues impact directly on
race-relations in Europe and Europe’s relationship with the
Muslim world, a relationship which is tense and often
violent and will continue to be so if current attitudes and
policies remain unchanged.

In what is becoming increasingly common practice Al-Sahab
the media arm of Al-Qaeda provide their own English
subtitles to the statement so as to make their messages
readily understood by Westerners and Al-Qaeda’s English
speaking supporters. The audio message is readily available
to view on many video sharing sites and news outlets on the
internet and shows Bin Laden brandishing an AK-47 assault
rifle in a training camp in Afghanistan from some years ago
and.

Although there are many subjects that Bin Laden touches
upon in this latest statement the one issue that the
Western media has homed in on are the comments around the
re-publication this year of the Islamophobic Danish
cartoons and Bin Laden’s threat to hit back ‘not with what
you will hear but with what you will see’. While it is true
that Bin Laden sees the atrocities committed by European
forces against Muslim civilians in Afghanistan as ‘paling
in comparison’ to the re-printing of these cartoons in
Danish newspapers, there are a number of other issues that
Bin Laden raises that are just as important but which is
given little to no airtime in the mainstream media. The
media’s coverage of Bin Laden’s comments on the
re-publication of the cartoons does not give an accurate
representation of the way in which Bin Laden is presenting
the subject. By focusing only on the Danish cartoons issue
in Bin Laden’s speech, the media continues its culture of
caricaturing Muslims; taking issues out of context,
portraying Muslims as people who do not respect freedom of
speech and who are irrationally intolerant.

In fact Bin Laden’s statement puts the cartoon issue into
context by talking of Europe’s military action in
Afghanistan which results in the killing of innocent men,
women and children in mud huts; that the cartoons and the
aggression against the ‘weak and oppressed in our
countries’ are together evidence of the ‘continuation of
the war’ against Muslims. Bin Laden argues that Europe has
violated the rules of war by killing innocents deliberately
and in so doing means Al-Qaeda too is not tied to any
rules. He derides Europe’s lack of ‘etiquette’ in the war
between them and points out that amongst the billion and a
half million Muslims across the world, not one of them has
insulted the Prophet Jesus which is a revered prophet in
Islam. These themes of European insult and hypocrisy are
the main themes in this latest statement.

Perhaps unsurprisingly what most of the media seem very
reluctant to report are Bin Laden’s comments about the
allegations of bribery from the Saudis to Britain over
British BAE deals to Saudi Arabia, and how a probe into
these allegations was stopped by Blair at the insistence of
the Saudi King. Seen by many as a tenuous excuse for a
cover-up Blair cited security concerns for halting all
investigations. A little over a month ago the British
Campaign Against the Arms Trade told a judicial review in
London that the government acted unlawfully when it told
the Fraud Office to stop looking into alleged bribes to
Saudi officials by BAE. Last year the British media
reported that more than $2 billion from BAE ended up in
Prince Bandar’s bank accounts in Washington, money which is
said to be linked to an arms deal negotiated in 1985 worth
$43 billion.

The Bin Laden statement points out the hypocrisy of the
British and the Saudis. One the one hand Bin Laden states
that while the ‘crownless’ King of Saudi Arabia can stop
this British investigation, he cannot stop the
re-publication of the offensive cartoons, something which
Bin Laden argues he is capable of doing. On the other hand
Bin Laden argues that while the Europeans are happy to use
the ‘sacredness’ of their freedom of speech to literally
add insult to injury on Muslims, they are not so keen on
these freedoms when it comes to investigating possible
corruption. Bin Laden links the cartoons issue with
European hypocrisy and corruption with Saudi Arabia, a
state which has been one of Al-Qaeda’s main targets for
guerrilla operations in recent years.

Bin Laden raises another issue which has hardly seen a
murmur of protest is the appointment of Blair to the
Quartet. After Blair’s infamous role in being the closest
and most loyal ally of Israel and Bush in the wars against
Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon, he has been
appointed by the EU to be the head of the Quartet in
dealing with the Middle East. Bin Laden explains that this
is confirmation of Europe’s attitudes towards Muslims. Bin
Laden has raised an important issue as Blair’s appointment
does indeed signal a worrying sign to Muslims that Europe
is failing to put distance between itself and the US
military and propaganda campaign against independence
movements of the Middle East. Soon after the appointment of
Blair in June last year, one of the most respected Arab
journalists raised the same issue. Abdel Bari Atwan
editor-in-chief of the pan-Arab newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabi
wrote in his opinion piece that the selection of Blair
indicates “once again the insistence of the western states
and the US in particular in provoking the feelings of the
Arabs and Muslims and continuing to adopt wrong policies
which led to the current state of bloody chaos in the
Middle East. Blair, whom President Georges Bush wanted to
reward for blindly following his administration, completely
lost his credibility and is considered the most hated
person by Arabs and Muslims after President Bush”.
Furthermore Atwan wrote that rotten eggs were the only
befitting welcome for Blair when visiting Arab capitals,
especially Jerusalem.

What seems to be lost in the headlines and selective
reports about this latest statement is that Bin Laden is
essentially arguing that the re-publication of the cartoons
are significant in that they are a sign to Muslims that not
only will Europe treat Muslims in Afghanistan and other
countries with military terror, but will also treat them
with extreme insensitivity, failing to recognise that there
are certain ‘moral rules’ even in war that great powers in
history have followed. Bin Laden opens his address “to the
intelligent ones” in Europe, indicating that he is again,
like his previous offer of a security covenant, trying to
reach out to those in Europe who want to distance
themselves from the war against Arabs and Muslim peoples,
and thus contribute to a more peaceful world. For those who
ridicule the possibility of people and governments
responding positively to Bin Laden, one can point to the
recent comments by Jonathan Powell, former senior aide to
Blair who argues for keeping lines of communication open
with even the most bitter of enemies: "There's nothing to
say to al-Qaida and they've got nothing to say to us at the
moment, but at some stage you're going to have to come to a
political solution as well as a security solution. And that
means you need the ability to talk." Judging from the
latest Bin Laden message, Al-Qaeda have got something to
say to us. If the British could start talks without
pre-conditions with hooded guerrilla fighters from the
Irish Republican Army who were blowing up bombs left, right
and centre in English towns, then developing negotiations
towards a peaceful and just agreement with today’s hooded
gunmen who happen to be Muslim and want to expel foreign
troops from their countries is not so much of an
unimaginable prospect as it might appear to some. The
prospects for peace are grim, and one hopes that we do not
come to our senses about our flawed foreign policies only
after tragic events such as those in Madrid in March 2004.

__________________________________________

*Sukant Chandan is a consultant for Conflicts Forum, a
freelance journalist and independent publisher. He runs two
websites: Sons of Malcolm, and OURAIM.
He can be contacted at: sukant.chandan@gmail.com

BEHIND ISRAEL'S MASSACRES

A Global Massacre Against Gaza
Adel Samara

March 2, 2008

Kanaan Online

The debate on whether Israel will launch a large scale or
"limited" aggression against Gaza is pure nonsense and
meaningless. Any "limited" aggression against civilians, by
an army with most recent US inventions of war machine and
Zionist inhuman behavior, will kill many people.

The most important question, however, is somewhere else:
What are the reasons and who is really behind this
holocaust?

The main reason can be summarized as "No Resistance in the
Era of Globalization" (NOREG). This should remind us of the
fact that US neo-cons regime, western capitalist regimes,
and Arab comprador regimes support and encourage Zionists
to wipe out Hezbollah as the main force of resistance in
this era. That is why, the war of summer 2006, was a
precious gift for Arab regimes. But fortunately, the
results were deeply disappointing.

Since 2006, if one does not mention the holocaust in Iraq,
Arab regimes and the Palestinian Authority (PA) stand in
the camp of: "No Resistance in the Era of Globalization"
NOREG.

This is an international camp. It transcends national,
ethnic, religious and ideological boundaries. That is why,
Arab rulers, Zionists, US neo-cons, Anglo-Saxon, French,
German regimes are in one camp.

Accordingly, the war against Gaza is a decision from a
terrorist leadership of all these regimes, and the Zionists
are its paw. It is the war of regimes and ruling classes
that is aimed at liquidating all forms of resistance.

Any Palestinian, Arab or Thirdworld-ist who stands on the
line of resistance is a candidate for termination: Baghdad
, Gaza , Lebanon , Serbia …etc are all fields for
implementing this rule.

Rockets are not the Reason

Those who pretend that rockets are the reason behind the
current Zionist massacre are liars. If we have to look for
a reason for that massacre, it should be found in the1948
Zionist occupation of Palestine, the eviction of
Palestinians from their homeland, and the Zionist
insistence on terminating the Palestinian Right of Return
(RoR) by all means. Three quarters of the population of
Gaza are refugees who were evicted as a result of the
occupation of Palestine in 1948, and who are part of a
large community of Palestinian refugees amounting to 6.5
million scattered all over the globe. Why shouldn’t they
resist?

The Zionist regime, US and most of western capitalist
regimes, and later many Arab regimes are hand in hand
supporting the Zionist settler and criminal regime working
on terminating the RoR. Oslo Accords follow the same
direction albeit it is not directly written in their text.

It is worth noting that the Zionist massacre is not only
because Hamas stands for the RoR and refuses the
recognition of the Zionist regime. It is well known that
the Zionist massacres against the Palestinian people had
never ceased since 1948, and Palestinian resistance will
never stop as well.

It should be also noted that Palestinians are the only
native people who still resist the white settlers, while in
other white settlements, i.e. USA, Canada, New Zealand,
Australia, the native people had been mainly terminated
while some have given up the struggle.

Will there be a big war?

This form of question is a simplification of facts. Israel
does not need more than this level of holocaust against
civilians. It is in Israel’s interest to force Palestinians
into another mass eviction than to kill all of them at
once. Zionists have never changed their plans: to occupy
Palestine in its entirety, but ….void of its people. That
is why; they prefer Palestinians' self- 'transfer’.

Of course, this does not eliminate the possibility of
launching a massive war against Gaza or a massive
destruction as the Zionists did in Lebanon 2006[1]
considering the fact that the camp of globalization in
their support. It is not an exaggeration to note that the
transfer of Palestinians is a real possibility now.

One of the reasons for delaying a more extensive war is the
Zionist expectation that they will lose more soldiers in a
fierce face to face battle, a loss they are never ready
for. For a colonial settler entity that fights for
importing more settlers, losses of soldiers is of
catastrophic consequences. The Zionist entity, Israel, is
the only white settler regime that is still 'buying’ new
settlers, while the US white settlement is building a wall
against Mexican immigrant workers who are fighting to enter
the country even as slaves. During 2007, the number of
settlers who left the Zionist regime exceeded the new
incoming immigrants.

Bin Laden in Gaza !

A year or so ago, the PA repeated that some al-Qaeda
fighters are in Gaza. Later, the PA and some Arab rulers
repeated the same lies and accused Hamas of facilitating
the infiltration of al-Qaeda militant to Gaza.

This propaganda is another war against resistance. As a
matter of fact, many do not buy the story that there is a
single al-Qaeda organization. I believe that the NOREG
consider any militant all over Arab, Islamic and even Third
world as al-Qaeda. Even if there is one single al-Qaeda,
the question is: Who created it? Who started terror in the
modern world history? It is the western capitalist regimes
and later the comprador capitalist classes in the periphery
against their own people.

The most dangerous part of the peoples’ enemy propaganda is
its ability to mix all Arab and Islamic militants in one
pot[2] and show that they are the so-called al-Qaeda or the
Salafi!

Unfortunately, some Arab thinkers fall into that trap. In
their criticism to Political Islam (PI), they are being
lured by the hatred of the Zionist and western leftists
towards Arab and Moslem resistance. Some of these writers
are keen to proof to the Zionists and western leftists that
they are not religious, and they are anti pan-Arabism …etc.
They strive to be accepted in western leftist circles!

One of the bad results of this subjugation is that they
confirm that Arab people support Salafiyah! That is why;
Zionists and many western leftists used the victory of
Hamas to 'prove’ this pretence. These Arab writers failed
to explain that in the Occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip
and other Arab countries, the people have to choose between
PI and the comprador which betray their history, memory,
present, and future.

As long as these Arab leftist writers help the deformity of
PI groups, they are, whether they mean it or not, placing
socialist/Communist Arabs in the camp of imperialism. This,
in fact, delays the re-emergence of an Arab radical left.

If Hamas wants to create something, it will not create
al-Qaeda; it will create other fighters for Hamas! But,
since the war machine is that extensive and is declared
against the Palestinian people, why would not Palestinians
create many al-Qaedas?

Israel Fights for Arab Regimes as well

This is another dimension or reason of the massacre in
Gaza. We must remember that Arab regimes were and still are
terrified by the Palestinian struggle. When the first
Intifada erupted, the goal of Arab regimes was to keep
their citizens away from its influence. When Hezbollah
liberated South Lebanon, and later defeated the Zionists in
2006, Arab regimes were devastated.

When Hamas won the Palestinian elections in January 2006,
Arab regimes were terrified again, and a global, though
gradual, coup d'état started against it. The crisis reaches
its peak when Hamas defeated Fateh in June 2007.

Consider the following developments: the Zionist aggression
in Gaza is a protection for Arab regimes from the expansion
of this phenomenon. One should keep in mind that these
regimes are ready to pay any price to avoid the provocation
of their suppressed people.

The Two Weak Wings

Anyone who believes that the Zionists will reduce their
aggression, is either naïve or cooperating with them. It is
an entity that was created against the Arab Homeland
especially the Palestinian people. That is why, they have
no alternative but to prove and emphasize their role.

If radical people in the region want to re-build their
power and to fight for a united Arab socialist Homeland,
defeat of the Zionist regime, and achieve the RoR, they
must first start their battle against two local groups:

· The ruling comprador classes in Arab Homeland;

· The various groups of local intellectuals: the
westernized, renegade communists, NGOized political
activists and many academicians who are tied (and financed)
in one way or another, by the bloody regimes of the United
Sates, many other western regimes, and even the Zionist
regime.[3]

____________

[1] The arrival of the US Cole warship to the Lebanese
shores is a direct threat for another destruction of that
country.

[2] That is why; the comprador regime in Morocco arrested
lately some leftists with Political Islamists. It should be
noted that these arrests are in fact directed against the
influence of Hezbollah of Lebanon as a new current which is
not a fundamentalist. It might attract leftists as well.

[3] A very recent example of those intellectuals is the
Moroccan poet Abdullatif Al-Lua’bi, who is visiting the
occupied WBG now during the mass extermination of
Palestinians in Gaza under occupation invited by the French
Cultural Center. For those who are not familiar with the
issue of normalization, any Arab who visits the occupied
WBG is in fact normalizing with the Zionist occupation and
recognizes the Zionist regime.

--------------------------------------------------------
Please write to us or send your contributions to:
mail@kanaanonline.org. To visit Kana’an (KOL) website,
please go to: http://www.kanaanonline.org To subscribe to
our mailing list, please send a blank e-mail message to
english-join@kanaanonline.org
--------------------------------------------------------


The Author is a Palestinian Marxist Economist living in
Ramallah.

ENGLAND: 'THOUGHT CRIME' OVERTURNED

Five students win terror appeal

BBC NEWS

[PICTURE: Clockwise from top left: Irfan Raja, Awaab Iqbal,
Aitzaz Zafar, Akbar Butt, Usman Malik]

The convictions of five young Muslim men jailed
over extremist literature have been quashed by
the Appeal Court.

Freeing the men, the Lord Chief Justice said there was no
proof of terrorist intent. The lawyer for one said they had
been jailed for a "thought crime".

A jury convicted the students in 2007 after hearing the
men, of Bradford and Ilford, east London, became obsessed
with jihadi websites and literature.

The Home Office said it would study the judgement
carefully.

'Serious threat'

It said it understood the Crown Prosecution Service was
considering whether to appeal against the ruling, which it
must do within seven days.

It added that the threat of terrorism remained serious and
real and the government was committed to ensuring it had
the strongest possible anti-terrorism legal framework.

Irfan Raja, Awaab Iqbal, Aitzaz Zafar, Usman Malik and
Akbar Butt were jailed for between two and three years each
by the Old Bailey for downloading and sharing extremist
terrorism-related material, in what was one of the first
cases of its kind.

But at the Court of Appeal, Lord Phillips said that while
the men had downloaded such material, he doubted if there
was evidence this was in relation to planning terrorist
acts.

He said the prosecution had attempted to use the law for a
purpose for which it was not intended.

'Huge implications'

Lawyers for the men say the decision to restrict how the
law on extremist literature works has huge implications for
counter terrorism prosecutions.

Critics inside the Muslim community and civil liberty
campaigners say section 57 of the 2000 Terrorism Act has
been used as a blunt instrument to prosecute young Muslim
men where there is no proof of genuine links to terrorism.

The BBC understands there have been three other convictions
under this legislation - more cases are expected before the
courts this year.

Imran Khan, solicitor for Mr Zafar, said the five had been
prosecuted for "thought crime" and that the ruling would
have an significant impact.

He told BBC News: "Young Muslim men before this judgement
could have been prosecuted simply for simply looking at any
material on the basis that it might be connected in some
way to terrorist purposes."

He said section 57 of the 2000 Terrorism Act had been
written in such wide terms that "effectively, anybody could
have been caught in it" but prosecutors would now have to
prove such material was intended for terrorist purposes.

'Unknown students'

In a statement released through his solicitors, Mr Malik
said he had always maintained his innocence.

"It is a great thing to live in a country where the Lord
Chief Justice takes the time from hearing important cases
to see if a group of unknown students have been fairly
convicted for reading the wrong kind of literature," he
said.

"As I said when I was arrested, I do not, have not and will
not support terrorism in any form against innocent people.

"My prosecution was a test case under the 2000 Terrorism
Act. Today's decision means no first year student can ever
be prosecuted again under this Act for possessing extremist
literature."

Mr Malik's solicitor, Saghir Hussein, said it was a
"landmark judgement", with implications for other cases,
including those alleging glorification of terrorism.

Zahid Iqbal, father of Awaab Iqbal, said he was feeling
"great" after the decision.

"Justice has been done. It's restored my faith in the
justice system," he said.

Asked if he had any advice for other young Muslim men who
were looking at similar material, he said: "I don't think
these boys did anything wrong. It was just propaganda they
were looking at. They had no links to terrorism - everybody
looks at websites."

'Knee-jerk terror laws'

Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said
the government's "knee-jerk drafting of new terrorism
offences" had led to confusion on the part of prosecutors.

He said: "Ministers need to be more cautious when drafting
new offences and more effective in enforcing old ones."

Justice Secretary Jack Straw said it would not be
appropriate for him to comment on the decision the Court of
Appeal had made after "very careful consideration".

Muslim Parliament of Great Britain leader Dr Ghayasudin
Siddiqui told BBC Radio 5 Live he welcomed the ruling but
hoped that the students' experiences would serve as a
warning to other young Muslims.

He said: "It must go out to other young people that it is a
dangerous area and they have to keep themselves far, far
away from visiting these websites."

Inayat Bunglawala, assistant secretary-general of the
Muslim Council of Britain, said the Lord Chief Justice had
been "right" to quash the convictions.

He said: "If there is no actual terror plot uncovered by
the police then we do not believe we should be convicting
people for what is effectively a thought crime."

Online chatrooms

During the trial, the jury heard the four Bradford students
were arrested after Mr Raja - then an Ilford schoolboy -ran
away to join them.

He left a note for his parents saying he was going to fight
abroad after getting to know the others via online
chatrooms used by extremist recruiters.

He returned home within days but his parents had already
alerted the police, who arrested all five and collected the
extremist material.

In their appeal, the men argued they should not have been
convicted solely on the basis that they had downloaded and
shared literature from the internet.

The material included publications popular among extreme
Islamist organisations, encouraging Muslims to fight. One
of the five had also used a computer to superimpose his own
face on a montage of the 9/11 hijackers.

But their lawyers said the law was designed to catch people
holding plans for bombs rather than propaganda.

None of the men possessed information suggesting they were
plotting a bomb attack, although there had been talk of
heading to Pakistan for paramilitary training.

Published: 2008/02/13 17:42:42 GMT

Al-QAEDA WITH AMERICAN CHARACTERISTICS

Bin Laden and 'Azzam the American'
Sukant Chandan*
September 11th 2007

Released in time for the 6th anniversary of the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Centre, the Pentagon and Camp David, Al-Qaeda's 'al-Sahab' media organisation has released Osama Bin Laden's first video statement from for nearly three years, followed by another today in which Bin Laden praises Abu Musab Walid, one of the 911 hijackers.

These statements generally accepted authenticity has put to
rest speculation that Bin Laden might have died, and has
put the West's most wanted man back into the forefront of
the politics of the 'war on terror'. The coverage that the
first video statement has been given throughout the
international media has proven again that Bin Laden is the
most important spokesperson on behalf of militant Islamism
even though his direct organisational involvement in
Al-Qaeda affairs may have possibly been curtailed. What is
most noticeable about this latest statement is the
stridently radical anti-capitalist rhetoric which many have
attributed to the influence of former white US citizen
Azzam Al-Amriki - 'Azzam the American' - previously known
as Adam Gadahn, the son of a Jew and a Catholic, who has
family members who live in Israel, who now runs al-Sahab,
Al-Qaeda's media wing. The British Telegraph on September
9th quoted former CIA covert operations officer Mike Baker
who stated that the Bin Laden statement 'has Adam Gadahn
all over it'. Amriki's own speeches and possible influence
on the statements of Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda's second leader
Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri, has raised an interesting development
in Al-Qaeda propaganda strategy in adapting its message to
the politics, history and even culture of US society.

Most recognize Amriki as being the main person behind the
al-Sahab media organisation, and it is thought that he runs
its editing suite from the back of a van somewhere in and
around the border areas between Afghanistan and Pakistan,
where Bin Laden and Zawahiri are also thought to be in
hiding. Amriki has previously made video statements in
English and is thought to be the third most important
spokesperson for Al-Qaeda. Although nominally involved in
al-Sahab he has been the only person apart from Bin Laden
in Al-Qaeda who has directed his messages specifically to a
US audience. It seems likely that Amriki is relied upon by
Bin Laden and Zawahiri, and also possibly more widely in
Al-Qaeda, as someone who is most sensitive to and
knowledgeable as to the most effective ways targeting the
US in its propaganda war.

Although Bin Laden and Zawahiri have directed many comments
and statements at the people and government of the US,
recent statements have shown that Al-Qaeda is attempting to
improve this particular media strategy. One of Zawahiri's
latest statements stated that Al-Qaeda is fighting on the
behalf of "all the weak and oppressed in North America and
South America, in Africa and Asia, and all over the world",
being possibly the first time that Al-Qaeda leadership has
stated that their struggle is also aimed at assisting the
world's oppressed. Zawahiri's statement also contained many
references to Malcolm X / Malik el-Hajj Shabazz, a figure
that still holds an emotive and profoundly political place
in the hearts and minds of radicals, Muslims and especially
Black people in the US. Zawahiri cited the famous militant
Black leader to call on Black soldiers in the US army to
recognise their historical and continuing oppression by the
US and to refuse to fight in a war that is not in their
interests; "And I tell the soldier of color in the American
army that the racist Crusader regime kidnapped your
ancestors to exploit them in developing their resources,
and today it is using you for the same purpose, after they
altered the look of the shackles and changed the type of
chains and try to make you believe that you are fighting
for democracy and the American dream ... And after you
achieve for them what they want, they will throw you out
into the street like an old shoe".

In Bin Laden's latest statement he takes up a similar theme
of racial divisions and tensions in US society by citing a
short Guardian Film which was syndicated by ABC about a US
Black soldier in Iraq; "Among them is the eloquent message
of Joshua which he sent by way of the media, in which he
wipes the tears from his eyes and describes American
politicians in harsh terms and invites them to join him
there for a few days. Perhaps his message will find in you
an attentive ear so you can rescue him and more than
150,000 of your sons …"

It has been speculated that Amriki is the person who is
essentially script-writing sections or even large parts of
Zawahiri and Bin Laden's speeches, this seems especially so
in the case of Bin Laden's latest video statement perhaps
drafting the entire speech. The question has to be posed:
is this an effective strategy on the part of al-Sahab? If
put into the historical context of conflicts in times gone
by, the current media strategy by al-Sahab has the
potential of being successful to some extent, and there is
even evidence that this is working on young people across
the West.

The period of Black, Hispanic and white leftist and
anti-imperialist movements of the 1960s and '70s in the US
saw these organisations ally themselves to struggles which
the US government considered a part of what was at the time
then the parallel of Al-Qaeda in terms of the way the
communists and the 'Evil Empire' were demonized and seen by
the US government to epitomize the very opposite of its
principles of American democratic and free-market values.
Significant sections, but by no means a majority of Black
political movements of Black radical movements in the US
have throughout the last century sympathized and even sided
with those the US are at war with. This has included Saddam
Hussein in the 1991 war, at which time influential rapper
Rakim in his pioneering Hip-Hop outfit with DJ Eric B
expressed support for Saddam Hussein with a mixture of
Third Worldist, Islamist and anti-capitalist lyrics on the
track 'Causalities of War':

… let's see who reigns supreme
Something like Monopoly: a government scheme
Go to the Army, be all you can be Another dead soldier?
Hell no, not me So I start letting off ammunition in every direction
Allah is my only protection
But wait a minute, Saddam Hussein prays the same
and this is Asia, from where I came
I'm on the wrong side, so change the target Shooting at the general;
and where's the sergeant?

One of the pet hate figures of the US establishment has
been the leader of possibly one of the biggest Black
political organisations: Louis Farrakhan, leader of the
Nation of Islam, whose international allies include Cuba's
Castro and Libya's Ghadaffi. One of the earlier leaders of
the Nation of Islam, Malcolm X, was well-known for
supporting practically any militant opposition to US power
in the world from guerilla movements Vietnam to the
Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the equivalent of the 911
attacks of its time.

Following the Zawahiri statement in which he quotes Malcolm
X, one of the best documentaries on Malcolm X's life and
political beliefs overseen by his wife Betty Shabazz, was
edited into a pro-Al-Qaeda version of the original film,
renaming it 'Prince of Islam'. This was also accompanied by
the release of a pro-Malcolm X rap song and video entitled
'By Any Means Necessary' by the clandestine rap group 'Soul
Salah Crew' with which the aforementioned 'Prince of Islam'
film opens. The music video and the 're-mixed' film are
popular on video-sharing websites, showing that Zawahiri's
statement has been successful in fusing Al-Qaeda's jihadist
ideology with the radical message of Malcolm X.

Further back in history we can find examples of white US
soldiers defecting to North Korea during the war against it
by the US in the early 1950s, who broadcasted radio
statements encouraging US soldiers to defect, and who also
played acting roles in North Korean propaganda films
portraying the ignorant and racially chauvinist American.
Then there is the case of Robert F Williams from Monroe,
North Carolina, maybe the person most responsible for the
rise of the Black Power movement in the early 1960s who
conducted radio broadcasts encouraging Black US soldiers in
Vietnam to defect and also got Mao Tse Tung to issue a
statement in support of the Black civil-rights movement at
a time that Mao and Red China were seen as irreproachable
anti-imperialist radicals by the US government. Today there
is no sign of any radical Black movement in open support of
Al-Qaeda, but judging from the fact that throughout history
sizeable sections of Black people who have no trust
whatsoever in the US system, one can be sure that Al-Qaeda
are receiving some sympathetic nods when they raise the
parallels between the history of US oppression of Black
people and the way in which they are treated today.

The South Asia Analysis Group states that the Bin Laden
statement reads more like the text of a disgruntled
American than that of an 'Arab Sheikh' and that 'there are
more allusions to contemporary American history than to
ancient Islam'. Most of Al-Qaeda's statements are highly
political, derided by some trends within Islam as being
concerned too much with politics. In their statements
Al-Qaeda raise events in Islamic history to prove a very
contemporary political proposition. Nevertheless, it is
true to say that this latest statement has very few
references to Islamic history apart from the last section
whereby Bin Laden explains that rather than being guilty of
massive anti-Semitic practices, Islamic history, especially
that of the 700 years of Islamic rule in Spain, proved that
it was under an Islamic government that Jews and Muslims
lived together in peace and security at a time when they
were both persecuted. Bin Laden points the finger at the
West as the architects and executers of the genocide
against the Jewish people; "They [Jews and Christians] are
alive with us and we have not incinerated them".

This section of the statement has been derided by many
commentators and analysts which is rather heavy on Islamist
rhetoric calling on people in the US to convert to Islam,
something which Al-Qaeda has done in many statements. It
should be remembered that many Muslims, including rather
reformist Islamic trends which Western governments tend to
encourage, see the obligation of dawa - a religious call -
to the West to convert to Islam as one of the greatest
challenges facing the Ummah - the international community
or nation of Muslims - in establishing peace and justice
which they see as only being possible under Islamic law. So
it should not come as any surprise that Bin Laden also
calls upon people in the West to do so, albeit with the
obvious difference being that refusing to do so might
result in terrorist guerilla attacks. However Al-Qaeda like
many Muslims believe Islam to be the only viable
alternative to what they see as the morally decadent nature
of the West. If yesterday it was Marxism or communism that
was seen by many as, on the one hand the greatest enemy of
the West, and on the other hand, as the best possible
alternative to Western democracy and capitalism, it
shouldn't be so shocking in a context where Islam is seen
as having replaced communism as the great threat, that it
is seen by many Muslims as the great alternative to Western
capitalist democracy. Bin Laden sees that only Islam can
save the people of the US, and that of those Islamic
countries with which it is fighting, from war and
exploitation as he does not see any effective movement in
the US that fights the wars against Afghanistan and Iraq,
let alone a cohesive political movement that is able to
fundamentally challenge the system. Bin Laden argues: "you
can still carry anti-war placards and spread out in the
streets of major cities, then go back to your homes, but
that will be of no use and will lead to the prolonging of
the war."

Bizarrely, Bin Laden has become one of the most well-known
personalities in the world that is championing
anti-capitalist, anti-racist and environmentalist demands,
and all the while favorably quoting one of the greatest
radical minds of our times: Noam Chomksy. It is rare, even
on anti-war demonstrations in the West, to find such
radical pronouncements as those from Bin Laden when he
calls on people who have 'previously liberated yourselves
before from the slavery of monks, kings, and feudalism', to
liberate themselves from 'the deception, shackles and
attrition of the capitalist system', a system he continues
to argue that 'seeks to turn the entire world into a
fiefdom of the major corporations under the label of
"globalization" in order to protect democracy.'

This Islamist leftist rhetoric has inspired annoyance in
some left-wing and radical circles in the West. While they
might share Bin Laden's radical comments they perhaps don't
appreciate Bin Laden picking holes in their political
strategies and movements so publicly. One has to wait and
see whether Chomksy shares this sentiment or like William
Blum, another leftist intellectual that Bin Laden has
previously praised, will be 'glad' about Bin Laden's name
dropping. If Bin Laden quoting Chomsky as a great writer
wasn't surreal enough, he goes on to praise the author of
the book Imperial Hubris, Michael Scheuer, currently one of
the main writers on the conflict-analyst organisation
Jamestown and former head of the CIA Bin Laden unit.
Scheuer has said in the past that "the Islamic media's
correspondents and editors work harder, dig deeper, and
think more than most of their Western counterparts."

This latest Al-Qaeda statement indeed shows that Bin Laden
has done his research, or perhaps Amriki has done the
legwork for him, in crafting a statement well-suited
politically to a US context. The calls for people in the
West to convert to Islam are not as outrageous and
important as they might seem; in this statement, like so
many others by Zawahiri, Al-Qaeda's main emphasis remains
the demand for a security pact with the people of the West
conditional on the cessation of hostilities against Islamic
nations, especially in the Arab world and in Afghanistan.
In this latest statement it is probable that Amriki has
helped Bin Laden gear this statement for a US audience. No
matter how much analysts, journalists and commentators
rubbish Al-Qaeda's attempts at developing a discourse that
aims to bridge the political and cultural chasm created by
Western mainstream media in the present conflicts, Al-Qaeda
are, as shown in the example of the Prince of Islam and
Soul Salah Crew song, achieving some successes in this
strategy. As for Amriki, one can imagine that Amriki is
rather flattered by the amount of attention and
responsibility that he has been attributed in Al-Qaeda's
media campaign against the West, in addition to being the
first person since 1952 to be charged with treason,
something which undoubtedly boosts his jihadi kudos, and
may well be satisfied with his efforts. Possibly Amriki's
aim at the very least is to have got people in the world to
take notice as to this the latest development of al-Sahab's
media campaign, something which he has achieved, and in so
doing, has contributed to one of the most extraordinary
cultural accomplishments of our times - Al Qaeda with
American characteristics.

*Sukant Chandan is a London-based freelance journalist and political analyst. He runs two blogs http://ouraim.blogspot.com/ and http://sonsofmalcolm.blogspot.com/ and can be contacted at sukant.chandan@gmail.com