Adonis Diaries

Posts Tagged ‘colonial powers

Hazards of Revolution?

What about planned destabilizing goal by colonial powers?

Note: recall that this article was written 8 years ago. Wish that Cockburn has assimilated the new changes in the region.

Patrick Cockburn London Review of Books Vol. 36 No. 1 · 9 January 2014

Soon after the Libyan capital (Tripoli) fell to the “rebels” in August 2011 I got to know a 32-year-old man called Ahmed Abdullah al-Ghadamsi.

We met when he tried to evict me from my hotel room, which he said was needed for members of the National Transitional Council, in effect the provisional government of Libya. (Still in effect and recognized by the UN?)

I wasn’t happy about being moved because the hotel, the Radisson Blu on Tripoli’s seafront, (The capital is Not on the sea shore, but very far off) was full of journalists and there was nowhere else to stay.

But Ahmed promised to find me another room, and he was as good as his word.

He was lending a hand to the provisional government because he was strongly opposed to Qaddafi – as was the rest of his family. He came from the Fornaj district of the city, and was contemptuous of the efforts of government spies to penetrate its network of extended families.

He derided Gaddafi’s absurd personality cult and his fear of subversive ideas: ‘Books used to be more difficult to bring into the country than weapons. You had to leave them at the airport for two or three months so they could be checked.’

He had spent 6 years studying in Norway and spoke Norwegian as well as English

On returning to Libya he got a job on the staff of the Radisson Blu. One of Gaddafi’s sons, Al-Saadi, had a suite in the hotel, and he watched the ruling family and their friends doing business and enjoying themselves.

Ahmed was a self-confident man, not noticeably intimidated by the sporadic shooting which was keeping most people in Tripoli off the streets. I asked him if he would consider working for me as a guide and assistant and he agreed.

Tripoli had run out of petrol but he quickly found some, along with a car and driver willing to risk the rebel checkpoints. He was adept at talking to the militiamen manning the barricades, and helped me get out of the city when the roads were blocked.

After a few weeks I left Libya; I later heard that he was working for other journalists.

In October I got a message saying that he was dead, shot through the head by a pro-Gaddafi sniper in the final round of fighting in Sirte on the coast far to the east of Tripoli. It turned out that there was a lot that Ahmed hadn’t told me.

When the protests started in Benghazi on 15 February he had been among the first to demonstrate in Fornaj, and he was arrested.

His younger brother Mohammed told me that ‘he was jailed for two hours or less before his friends and the protesters broke into the police station and freed him.’

When Gaddafi’s forces regained control of Tripoli, Ahmed drove to the Nafusa Mountains a hundred miles south-west of the capital to try to join the rebels there, but they didn’t know or trust him so he had to return.

He smuggled weapons and gelignite into Tripoli and became involved in a plot, never put into action, to blow up Al-Saadi Gaddafi’s suite in the Radisson.

Mohammed said Ahmed felt bad that he’d spent much of the revolution making money and, despite his best efforts, had never actually fought.

He went to Sirte, where Gaddafi’s forces were making a last stand, and joined a militia group from Misrata. 

He had no military experience, as far as I know, but he didn’t flinch during bombardments and was stoical when he was caught in an ambush and wounded by shrapnel from a mortar bomb, and the militiamen were impressed.

On 8 October his commander told Ahmed to take a squad of five or six men to hunt for snipers who had killed a number of rebel fighters. He was shot dead by one of them a few hours later.

What would Ahmed think of the Libyan revolution now?

An interim government is nominally in control but the streets of Tripoli and Benghazi have been full of militia checkpoints manned by some of the 225,000 registered militiamen whose loyalty is to their commanders rather than the state that pays them.

When demonstrators appeared outside the headquarters of the Misrata militia in Tripoli on 15 November demanding that they go home, the militiamen opened fire with everything from Kalashnikov to anti-aircraft guns, killing 43 protesters and wounding some 400 others.

This led to popular protests in which many militias were forced out of Tripoli, though it’s not clear whether this is permanent.

Earlier the prime minister, Ali Zeidan, was kidnapped by militia gunmen without a shot being fired by his own guards to protect him. (He was released after a few hours.)

Mutinying militias have closed the oil ports to exports and eastern Libya is threatening to secede.

The Libyan state has collapsed, for the simple reason that the rebels were too weak to fill the vacuum left by the fall of the old regime. After all, it was Nato airstrikes, not rebel strength, that overthrew Gaddafi.

It’s a similar story elsewhere in the Middle East.

The uprisings of the Arab Spring have so far produced anarchy in Libya, a civil war in Syria, greater autocracy in Bahrain and resumed dictatorial rule in Egypt.  (All these failures thanks to US/Saudi Kingdom/Israel/France ) who don’t want changes and democracy in the region)

In Syria, the uprising began in March 2011 with demonstrations against the brutality of Assad’s regime. ‘Peace! Peace!’ protesters chanted. But ‘if there was a fair election in Syria today,’ one commentator said, ‘Assad would probably win it.’

It isn’t only the protesters and insurgents of 2011 whose aspirations are being frustrated or crushed. In March 2003 the majority of Iraqis from all sects and ethnic groups wanted to see the end of Saddam’s disastrous rule even if they didn’t necessarily support the US invasion.

But the government now in power in Baghdad is as sectarian, corrupt and dysfunctional as Saddam’s ever was. (Not true, even then. Obama dispatched ISIS to occupy Mosul because Maliki PM refused to have US military presence in Iraq)

There may be less state violence, but only because the state is weaker. (just witness what is happening by the end of 2017)

Its methods are equally brutal: Iraqi prisons are full of people who have made false confessions under torture or the threat of it. An Iraqi intellectual who had planned to open a museum in Abu Ghraib prison so that Iraqis would never forget the barbarities of Saddam’s regime (you mean USA occupation?) found that there was no space available because the cells were full of new inmates.

Iraq is still an extraordinarily dangerous place. ‘I never imagined that ten years after the fall of Saddam you would still be able to get a man killed in Baghdad by paying $100,’ an Iraqi who’d been involved in the abortive museum project told me. (Isis is now defeated in Iraq and US still claim it is Not in order to remain militarily in the region)

Why have oppositions in the Arab world and beyond failed so absolutely, and why have they repeated in power, or in pursuit of it, so many of the faults and crimes of the old regimes? (Simple: still confronting the colonial powers who refuse any change)

The contrast between humanitarian principles expressed at the beginning of revolutions and the bloodbath at the end has many precedents, from the French Revolution on. But over the last twenty years in the Middle East, the Balkans and the Caucasus the rapid degradation of what started as mass uprisings has been particularly striking.

I was in Moscow at the start of the second Russo-Chechen war in October 1999, and flew with a party of journalists to Chechnya to see the Chechen president, Aslan Maskhadov, in his headquarters in Grozny, where he was desperately trying – and failing – to avert the Russian assault by calling for a ceasefire.

We were housed in a former barracks which seemed worryingly vulnerable to Russian air attack. But it soon became evident that the presidential guard’s greatest anxiety was that we would be abducted by Chechen kidnappers and held for ransom.

The first Chechen revolt in 1994-96 was seen as a heroic popular struggle for independence. (An extremist Islamic regime, as the one ISIS was trying to install?)

Three years later it had been succeeded by a movement that was highly sectarian, criminalized and dominated by warlords. The war became too dangerous to report and disappeared off the media map. ‘In the first Chechen war,’ one reporter told me, ‘I would have been fired by my agency if I had left Grozny. Now the risk of kidnapping is so great I would be fired for going there.’

The pattern set in Chechnya has been repeated elsewhere with depressing frequency. The extent of the failure of the uprisings of 2011 to establish better forms of governance has surprised opposition movements, their Western backers and what was once a highly sympathetic foreign media.

The surprise is due, in part, to a misunderstanding of what the uprisings were about. Revolutions come into being because of an unpredictable coincidence of forces with different motives targeting a common enemy. (Never confuse long-term causes with instant catalysts)

The political, social and economic roots of the upsurges of 2011 go deep. That this wasn’t obvious to everyone at the time is partly a result of the way foreign commentators exaggerated the role of new information technology. Protesters, skilled in propaganda if nothing else, could see the advantage of presenting the uprisings to the West as nonthreatening ‘velvet’ revolutions with English-speaking, well-educated bloggers and tweeters prominently in the vanguard.

The purpose was to convey to Western public that the new revolutionaries were comfortingly similar to themselves, that what was happening in the Middle East in 2011 was similar to the anti-communist and pro-Western uprisings in Eastern Europe after 1989.

Opposition demands were all about personal freedom: social and economic inequality were rarely declared to be issues, even when they were driving popular rage against the status quo. (Wrong. Personal freedom was the slogan, Not the real demands)

The centre of Damascus had recently been taken over by smart shops and restaurants, but the mass of Syrians saw their salaries stagnating while prices rose: farmers ruined by 4 years of drought were moving into shanty towns on the outskirts of the cities.

The UN said that between two and three million Syrians were living in ‘extreme poverty’; small manufacturing companies were put out of business by cheap imports from Turkey and China; economic liberalization, lauded in foreign capitals, concentrated wealth in the hands of a politically well-connected few.

Even members of the Mukhabarat, the secret police, were trying to survive on $200 a month. ‘When it first came to power, the Assad regime embodied the neglected countryside, its peasants and neglected underclass,’ an International Crisis Group report says. ‘Today’s ruling elite has forgotten its roots. It has inherited power rather than fought for it … and mimicked the ways of the urban upper class.’

The same was true of the quasi-monarchical families and their associates operating in parallel fashion in Egypt, Libya and Iraq.

Confident of their police-state powers, they ignored the hardships of the rest of the population, especially the underemployed, over-educated and very numerous youth, few of whom felt that they had any chance of improving their lives.

The inability of new governments across the Middle East to end the violence can be ascribed to a simple-minded delusion that most problems would vanish once democracies had replaced the old police states. (No delusion here. Cannot construct anything in the presence of extremist violent factions created by the US and its allies)

Opposition movements, persecuted at home and often living a hand to mouth existence in exile, half-believed this and it was easy to sell to foreign sponsors. A great disadvantage of this way of seeing things was that Saddam, Assad and Gaddafi were so demonized it became difficult to engineer anything approaching a compromise or a peaceful transition from the old to a new regime.

In 2003  Iraq former members of the Baath Party were sacked, thus impoverishing a large part of the population, which had no alternative but to fight. The Syrian opposition refuses to attend peace talks in Geneva if Assad is allowed to play a role, even though the areas of Syria under his control are home to most of the population.

In Libya the militias insisted on an official ban on employing anyone who had worked for Gaddafi’s regime, even those who had ended their involvement 30 years before. These exclusion policies were partly a way of guaranteeing jobs for the boys. But they deepen sectarian, ethnic and tribal divisions and provide the ingredients for civil war.

What is the glue that is meant to hold these new post-revolutionary states together?

Nationalism isn’t much in favour in the West, where it is seen as a mask for racism or militarism, supposedly outmoded in an era of globalisation and humanitarian intervention. (everything but capitulation is Not favored by the Western colonial powers, even now)

But intervention in Iraq in 2003 and Libya in 2011 turned out to be very similar to imperial takeover in the 19th century. 

There was absurd talk of ‘nation-building’ to be carried out or assisted by foreign powers, who clearly have their own interests in mind just as Britain did when Lloyd George orchestrated the carve-up of the Ottoman Empire.

A justification for the Arab leaders who seized power in the late 1960s was that they would create powerful states capable, finally, of giving reality to national independence. They didn’t wholly fail: Gaddafi played a crucial role in raising the price of oil in 1973 and Hafez al-Assad created a state that could hold its own in a protracted struggle with Israel for predominance in Lebanon.

But to opponents of these regimes nationalism was simply a propaganda ploy on the part of ruthless dictatorships concerned to justify their hold on power. But without nationalism – even where the unity of the nation is something of a historic fiction – states lack an ideology that would enable them to compete as a focus of loyalty with religious sects or ethnic groups.

It’s easy enough to criticise the rebels and reformers in the Arab world for failing to resolve the dilemmas they faced in overturning the status quo. Their actions seem confused and ineffective when compared to the Cuban revolution or the liberation struggle in Vietnam. (Simply because one people  in Syria, one people in the Nile river and one people in north Africa were artificially divided in pseud-States by colonial powers)

But the political terrain in which they have had to operate over the last twenty years has been particularly tricky. The dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 meant that the endorsement or tolerance of the US – and the US alone – was crucial for a successful takeover of power.

Nasser was able to turn to Moscow to assert Egyptian independence in the Suez crisis of 1956, but after the Soviet collapse smaller states could no longer find a place for themselves between Moscow and Washington. Saddam said in 1990 that one of the reasons he invaded Kuwait when he did was that in future such a venture would no longer be feasible as Iraq would be faced with unopposed American power.

In the event, he got his diplomatic calculations spectacularly wrong, but his forecast was otherwise realistic – at least until perceptions of American military might were downgraded by Washington’s failure to achieve its aims in Afghanistan as well as Iraq.

So the insurgencies in the Middle East face immense difficulties, and they have faltered, stalled, been thrown on the defensive or apparently defeated. But without the rest of the world noticing, one national revolution in the region is moving from success to success.

In 1990 the Kurds, left without a state after the fall of the Ottomans, were living in their tens of millions as persecuted and divided minorities in Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria.

Rebellion in Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War of 1980-88 failed disastrously, with at least 180,000 killed by poison gas or executed in the final days of the conflict. (The Shah of Iran and Saddam resolved this conflict in a single day)

In Turkey, guerrilla action by the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), who combined Marxism-Leninism with Kurdish nationalism, began in 1974 but by the end of the 1990s it had been crushed by the Turkish army; Kurds were driven into the cities; and three thousand of their villages were destroyed. (Western media never covered these atrocities)

In north-east Syria, Arab settlers were moved onto Kurdish land and many Kurds denied citizenship; in Iran, the government kept a tight grip on its Kurdish provinces.

All this has now changed. In Iraq the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), though it shares power with the central government in Baghdad, is close to becoming an oil-rich independent state, militarily and diplomatically more powerful than many members of the UN.

Until recently the Turks would impound any freight sent to the KRG if the word ‘Kurdistan’ appeared in the address, but in November the KRG president, Massoud Barzani, gave a speech in the Turkish Kurd capital of Diyarbakir and talked of ‘the brotherhood of Turks and Kurds’.

Standing with him was the Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who spoke of ‘Kurdistan’ as if he’d forgotten that a few years ago the name had been enough to land anyone who uttered it in a Turkish jail. In Syria meanwhile, the PKK’s local branch has taken control of much of the north-east corner of the country, where two and a half million Kurds live.

The rebellion in the Kurdish heartlands has been ongoing for nearly half a century. In Iraq the two main Kurdish parties, Barzani’s Kurdistan Democratic Party and Jalal Talabani’s Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, were expert at manipulating foreign intelligence services – Iranian, Syrian, American and Turkish – without becoming their permanent puppets (Crappy pronouncement on these expertise)

They built up a cadre of well-educated and politically sophisticated leaders and established alliances with non-Kurdish opposition groups. They were lucky that their worst defeat was followed by Saddam’s self-destructive invasion of Kuwait, which enabled them to take control of an enclave protected by US airpower in 1991.

At this point, despite having gained more independence than any previous Kurdish movement, the KDP and PUK embarked on a vicious civil war with the Iraqi state. But then they had another stroke of luck when 9/11 provided the US with the excuse to invade and overthrow Saddam. The Kurdish leaders positioned themselves carefully between the US and Iran without becoming dependent on either.

It isn’t yet clear how the bid of thirty million Kurds for some form of national self-determination will play out, but they have become too powerful to be easily suppressed.

Their success has lessons for the movements of the Arab Spring, whose failure isn’t as inevitable as it may seem. The political, social and economic forces that led to the ruptures of 2011 are as powerful as ever. Had the Arab opposition movements played their cards as skilfully as the Kurds, the uprisings might not have foundered as they have done.

None of the religious parties that took power, whether in Iraq in 2005 or Egypt in 2012, has been able to consolidate its authority. Rebels everywhere look for support to the foreign enemies of the state they are trying to overthrow, but the Kurds are better at this than anyone else, having learned the lesson of 1975, when Iran betrayed them to Saddam by signing the Algiers Agreement, cutting off their supply of arms. The Syrian opposition, by contrast, can only reflect the policies and divisions of its sponsors.

Resistance to the state was too rapidly militarised for opposition movements to develop an experienced national leadership and a political programme.

The discrediting of nationalism and communism, combined with the need to say what the US wanted to hear, meant that they were at the mercy of events, lacking any vision of a non-authoritarian nation state capable of competing with the religious fanaticism of the Sunni militants of al-Qaeda, and similar movements financed by the oil states of the Gulf.

But the Middle East is entering a long period of ferment in which counter-revolution may prove as difficult to consolidate as revolution.

Tidbits 66

Israel, our existential enemy, is the colonial implant of the Western colonial powers to destabilize the Middle-East and cut all the trade routes among the created States. Israel has proven to be a failed State politically and socially. The defeat of Israel is very feasible. What is needed is to be able to confront the sustained sanctions of the colonial powers: history proves that the colonial powers need plenty of time to lick their wounds.

You will always be treated a pseudo-citizen until you act. Then you earned your citizenship against all odds, whether the State admit it or Not.

England (Churchill) created monarchic Jordan State, 2 decades before the recognition of Israel, in order to protect the borders of the new implanted colony in our midst.

Be warned: You have got to ask plenty of questions for any trivial demand. All the knowledge will Not shield you from being suckered into obeying subtle orders that lead to dangerous deeds. This called “Agency status”: Obeying a small order without much inquiry because the order doesn’t feel harmful. Successive such agency status devolve into a “No return” condition for committed horrors.

What will happen to the Lebanese if the UN drop the status of State for Lebanon? Will France inherit again its  mandated power?

Mais que font tous ces bureaucrates des grandes nations? Quand on leur laisse le loisir de concocter des “stratégies”?

Je considère Chateaubriand comme le Maître de la langue Française.

Would France be re-mandated to control and administer the ports of Entrance and Exit in Lebanon? Airport, maritime ports, land ports…? If the southern districts bordering Israel are excepted, maybe Hezbollah might be lenient for a temporary period.

The Dead Are Arising: The Life of Malcolm X, by researcher Tamara Payne. A book Les Payne, a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist who died in 2018, had been writing for three decades. The New Yorker published a gripping excerpt that recreates the last moments of Malcolm X’s life. More than a vivid deconstruction of that tragic day, the piece sketches his acrimonious split from the Nation of Islam and indirectly calls out media and police behavior that will feel familiar to a new generation of activists

French Oil giant Total is about to build a massive, the biggest heated oil pipeline right through the heart of Africa — ripping through critical wildlife reserves, displacing tens of thousands of families and further pushing the world to the brink of climate chaos.

Hormone cortisol can make financial traders unreasonably fearful and testosterone can spur traders to take irrational risks?John Coates, trained in neuroscience and endocrinology and also worked on trading desks at Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank. The consequences of the exaggerating financial booms and busts?

Capital and Ideologythe most recent book by French economist Thomas Piketty, got a frosty reception from Beijing. Capitalist and “communist” systems enrich the 10% top classes.

preprint of a paper from researchers based in Japan suggests that being outside is 18.7 times less risky than being indoors,

A battery-maker says radioactive nuclear byproducts can be used to power its nano diamond batteries for years.

France President Macron is visiting Lebanon icon singer Fayrouz at her fome. We expect Fayrouz to tell Macron:

  1. If Macron can claim the independence of the judiciary and the executive in France, then he should free Georges Abdullah immediately. The judiciary freed Georges but the ministry of the Interior refuses to obey the order of the Justice system
  2. If Macron expect a stable political system in Lebanon, then he should work hard to stabilize Syria, politically and economically
  3. If Macron expect any sustainable system in Lebanon, then he should urge a total normalization with Syria, Lebanon lung and only border,  and open trade border on daily basis.

Le remords s’endort durant un destin prospère, et s’aigrit dans l’adversité’. Does any Lebanese believe that the militia/mafia leaders still have any feeling of State hardship? The voting pseudo Lebanese citizens still feel they are more secure under the umbrella of these feudal/sectarian “leaders”

Le sophisme qui perd la plupart des hommes: se plaignait de manquer de force de volonté’ quand il est trop tard pour en user. (J J Rousseau)

La foi dogmatique est un fruit de l’éducation: on en ote, mais rarement on y ajoute. (J J Rousseau)

Il ne se disait pas: “Rien n’est fait encore et tu peux être innocent ou’ tu veux”. C’est qu’on s’enfonce inexorablement dans la routine du “crime”

Avec les embarras des responsibilities, les voyage ou’ je ne sentais que le plaisir d’aller, je n’ai plus senti que le besoin d’arriver.

“J’ ai suivi la voyageuse par le sentier qu’elle a foule’ a peine. En se promenant au milieu de ces Mémoires, dans les détours de la Basilique que je me hâte d’achever, elle pourra rencontrer la chapelle qu’ici je lui dédie: il lui plaira de s’y reposer: j’y ai placer son image” (Chateaubriand pour Mrs. Récamier)

The Maronite Patriarch wants Lebanon neutral: The reaction was International control of Lebanon

The introduction to the news of TV

Actually, why the US, France and British navies are parked in the port of Beirut?

We expected the backing of a neutrality from the colonial powers, and they opted to internationalize Lebanon and get away from this pseudo-State

We expected the lengthening of the economic and financial sanctions and we ended up with an atomic conflagration on Beirut

We were confronted with a Deal of Century (to totally align with colonial implant Israel) and we landed with the devastation of the Century…

Georges C. Aoun is with Georges Yasmine on Fb. 23h

مقدمة نشرة اخبار ال otv المسائية – الاثنين 17 آب 2020

ثمة مفارقات وتناقضات في المشهد اللبناني لا يمكن اغفالها وعدم التوقف عندها :

كنا بالحياد صرنا بالتدويل
كنا بايران في الجولان على حدود وتخوم اسرائيل صرنا باسرائيل على مشارف وحدود ايران في الخليج .

كنا بالانهيار صرنا بالانفجار
كنا بالتدقيق الجنائي في الاموال واين ذهبت صرنا بالتحقيق الجنائي بالارواح وكيف ازهقت

كنا بالعقوبات صرنا بالمساعدات
كنا باعادة اعمار سوريا عبر مرفأ بيروت صرنا باعادة اعمار بيروت نفسها

كنا بالتوجه شرقا عدنا لنكون الواجهة والوجهة والمواجهة غربا
انتظرناهم من الشرق فجاؤوا من الغرب كما قال الرئيس الراحل عبد الناصر اثر نكسة 1967

كنا بالاموال المسروقة صرنا بالاهراءات المحروقة
كنا بصفقة القرن صرنا بانفجار القرن

كنا بهم النازحين واللاجئين فصار ابناء مار مخايل والعكاوي والجميزة والمدور والرميل والصيفي والاشرفية وبرج حمود والخندق الغميق والباشورة نازحين في وطنهم.
كنا بتصعيد الحصار صرنا بتخفيض الدولار

كنا بحلم محاسبة الفاسدين فاستفقنا على حقيقة وواقع التغطية على المتورطين الذين حولوا العنابر الى مقابر
كنا بنفض المجتمع الدولي يده من لبنان صرنا بنصف العالم في شوارع بيروت

كنا بتكبيل الزعران بالاغلال صرنا بتحميل حسان دياب مسؤولية الاهمال
كنا بتجريم لصوص الهيكل صرنا بتكريم الفريسيين ونسل حنان وقيافا على المذبح

كنا بقيصر الروسي صرنا بقانون قيصر الاميركي
كنا على اساس طفح الكيل فعدنا الى دايفيد هيل ومع حبة هال ولا ينقص الا رفع اليد بتحية : هيل سيزر

كنا تقدمنا خطوة متواضعة الى الامام فعدنا مسافات شاسعة الى الوراء

في 6 اب من العام 1945 القى الاميركيون2  قنبلة ذرية على هيروشيما وناغازاكي . كانوا يومها امام خيارين : اما احتلال البر الياباني مع ما يترتب على ذلك من خسائر بشرية هائلة محتملة او افهام احفاد الساموراي بما ينتظرهم من اهوال وتدهور احوال . اختار اليابانيون تجرع الكأس الاميركية المرة

في 4 اب يظن من فجر او دبر او حضر او هيأ لابادة بيروت ان انفجار المرفأ انهى حربا لم تبدأ وطوى صفحة لم تفتح واسقط خصما بالضربة القاضية وسجل هدف الفوز في الثواني الاخيرة من المباراة .

ما حصل بداية وليس نهاية
في الحرب قايضوا ارضنا بالوطن البديل وبادلوا حياتنا بالبترودولار

اليوم يعودون الى النغمة ذاتها ويعزفون لحن الموت فوق غيوم بيروت

المعادلة اياها لم تتغير : الاستقرار لكم لكن القرار لنا واذا اردتم العكس فليكن. اعطونا القرار وخذوا الاستقرار .

في يوم من ايام ولايته دخل احد مساعدي الرئيس الكبير فؤاد شهاب الى مكتبه وقال له : فخامة الرئيس كل الدراسات والابحاث تشير الى استبطان المياه الاقليمية اللبنانية لكميات كبيرة من النفط وعلينا ان ندرس جديا البدء بالتنقيب والحفر ليصبح دولة دولة نفطية غنية . يومها اجابه الرئيس اللواء بالاتي : يا ابني مش ناقصنا اعداء بعد . بيكفينا الاسرائيلي

More ruthless than Timurlenk and more coward than Arabian Peninsula “Arab” leaders

I wrote a few poems in Arabic in January 1992, and I had no recollection of them. I just retrieve them when decluttering the house after mother passed away. I will re-edit them in English

“Arabian” leaders of treachery and indignity

Cocktailing Masters who are more ruthless than Timurlenk

And more coward than the “Arabian” leaders in the Arabian Peninsula.

In pseudo-States created by colonial powers

Where neighbors are aliens

Billions of petrodollars are burned to intimidate the “Arabs”

Their children are homeless and hungry

In cities that never sleep or give a damn.

The poorer classes live in shantytowns

Forever in “temporary” lodging.

Even the Palestinians in refugees camps managed

To build houses in stones when allowed

And breathed life in the stones

Throwing stones of fire and anger at the soldiers of our existential enemy

This Israeli implanted apartheid colonial State in our midst

Another ruthless enemy, and as coward as the “Silent Majority“.

He is mistaken who thinks that Iraq is Arabic.

Sure, we like to dwell on the illusion that Iraq

Is an intrinsic part of the Syrian people

One Nation, one people

Going back to the glorious empires of Babylon and Assyria.

We did miss the boat:

Iraq has been Pharisi since the Sassanid empire 

And its revival is at arms reach.

This 21st century started Islamic, supplanted by Covid-19, and maybe China?

Note: Re-edit of “The Century of Islam, (March 11, 2009)”

The 20th century was the communist century, particularly of the Soviet Union and China, as the nemesis for the liberal and capitalist world. 

And the Afghan cataclysm that started in the 1980’s, and which is still going on, changed the geopolitical framework and pressured the Soviet Union to disintegrate.

And the change of power system in Iran in 1979 and the 8-year savaged war between Iraq and Iran. Actually, Khomeini decided before his death to declare cease fire, otherwise, his successors will feel like continuing this senseless war that profit the colonial powers. This war was meant to create a fault ridge between the Sunni and Shia sects and all other religious sects in the Middle-East. A nasty divide that the colonial powers have been foamenting and investing in it to the hilt

The 21st century was predicted to be the century of Liberal Capitalist America after the fall of the Berlin Wall: “Liberal capitalism” was advancing globalization and the free flow of capitals to national markets by international financial companies.

And the new US strategy of dismembering Yugoslavia into several weak States and this lengthy civil war in that Serbian region.

And Iraq invading Kuwait in 2003 once the US ordered Saddam to divide Iraq into 3 States. And the Bush Jr. administration irradiating the Iraqi people with toxic and nuclear munition and open pits for burning plastic materials, for a period of 5 years that contaminated generations of Iraqis.

After the September 9, 2001 Twin Towers attack, supposedly planned by al Qaeda, the Bush Jr. Administration spewed his venom for a decade on Islam, as the major enemy to democracy and for a stable World Order.

And the prediction of the End of History.

The implementation of US-type of “Police of Democracy”quickly ended with the worst financial crisis of all time (2008), and the emergence of many players in world economics and politics.

And the Barak administration encouraging and supporting extremist Islamic organizations like Al Nusra and Daesh to enter Mosul and control northern Syria.

And this created civil war in Syria that started in 2011 and is an ongoing morass to all concerned people with millions of displaced and refugees.

This century was showing the definite characteristics that it is of Islam.

The superpowers have targeted Islam to be the main nemesis for stable world order:

The superpowers need to create a focused enemy for its people.

Before I broach on current events and realities, a little history is in point.

Islam was the world civilization for over 9 centuries.  Three centuries of Eastern Arab Empire that was first located in Damascus and then in Baghdad.  The Arab/Islam Empire shifted its center of gravity in the next two centuries to the west or the Maghreb Empire, and particularly in Spain or Andalusia.  

Two centuries of Islamic domination were marshaled by the Ottoman Muslim Empire in Turkey in the 16th and 17th centuries; and another two centuries of the Muslim Mughal Empire in India, and one century of the Islamic Safavid Empire in Iran in the 18th century.

These civilizations waned after Portugal and Spain circumnavigated the Oceans to bypass Egypt for direct trade with India and Far East Asia.

In fact, the various Crusaders campaigns failed because they could not conquer Egypt, where the major trade routes intersected before reaching Europe, the main target and purpose of the crusaders financial backers.

Christian Europe owes it to the Muslim Empires to be saved from the multitudes of invasions originated in Mongolia and Central Asia by the Mogul and Tatar hordes.

After the Indonesian dictator Suharto died, his successor Bahr el Din Habibi invested over one billion dollars to develop a small civilian airplane.  The “Financial Times” mocked the new President for investing on airplanes that can be purchased with much higher quality and performance.

The West was purposely belittling what they perceived as the new challenges coming from the largest Muslim Nation in matter of knowledge and technology. Habibi meant to build new generations of Muslims that can manufacture instead of being simple consumers.  Habibi said “Money comes and goes. Human brains can be purchased but how can we secure loyalty to a nation and to citizens?”

The Ottoman Empire was later weakened by relying too heavily on its mercenaries the “Inkisharia” (soldiers raised from foreign slaves), as the Arabic Empires were destroyed from the interior by relying on foreign mercenaries.

Pakistan had to build the first Muslim Atomic Bomb in order to challenge India’s bomb.  As Zhu Fikar Ali Bhutto said “we will have to build the atomic bomb even if we end up eating grass”. Actually, Bhutto was overthrown and put to death because he challenged the West for building the bomb.

Iran is facing constant pressure from the West for manufacturing its own arms, munitions, missiles, atomic power generators, and space satellites.

India has more Muslims than Pakistan, Indonesia, and Egypt combined.

The middle classes of Indian Moslems and Chinese Muslims are nearly as large as the total US population.

Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, and Nigeria are almost continents of their own in size and populations and they are acting and behaving as self-sufficient nations.

The West has to start trading knowledge and technologies without any pre-conditions if it seeks peace, security, stability, and prosperity.  War is a losing option for both parties and no one can hope to emerge winner anyway

I have mentioned in several articles that the 5 nations in the UN with veto power are negotiating to partition Sudan for its huge raw materials, oil reserves, and water resources.  This adventure is doomed to fail unless they negotiate a fair deal with the people in Sudan and the most populous Muslim nations in Africa such as Egypt, Nigeria, and Kenya in Africa.

And Covid-19 pandemics spread and changed this “sustained growth” notion, cleared the air from pollutants in urban cities and megapolis, as well as improving the quality of potable water.

And oil prices fell drastically and producing nations having no idea how to stop the gushing of oil (lest the wells are totally degraded) and where to store all these humongous quantities.

Note 1: The “Arabic Spring” revolts against dictators and absolute monarchies have set the tone for democratic systems in the Arabic States.  The major underlying factor for this mass indignity is the realization that western governments encouraged dictator and absolute monarchy regimes for an entire century in order to maintaining the “Muslim” people subjugated and unable to grow and develop.

Note 2: Sudan had a referendum for partition, but it does not seem that problems will vanish any time soon in Sudan:  The exploitation of oil and mineral resources will resume unabated, and turmoil in north and south Sudan will be enhanced even further.

For when the Near East Levant Union States? Economically, financially and trade?

Note 1: Re-edit of “Near East: Levant Union States (LUS)?” that I posted more than 15 years ago

Note 2: This union totally exclude the implanted colonial entity Israel, which is our existential enemy.

Levant (Rising sun with respect to Europe) is the name given by the French mandated power to the Near East independent States of Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Palestine.  Many prefer to include Iraq since it is the vastest trade market for the adjacent States that the colonial powers divided after WWI.

The current total population of the Levant is about 35 millions (excluding Iraq), or less than half each of Turkey, Iran, or the third of Egypt and about the number in Iraq, and the Arabian Peninsula (all bordering the Levant region).

Thus, focusing on internal trades among the Near East States will not make a serious dent toward expanding economic development in the short-term, but that is the best economic strategy for establishing a complementary economy that satisfy internal needs.

At least 70% of the land of this union is mostly desert and its total area is barely the third of France, but it is relatively rich in water compared to the neighboring larger States with the exception of Turkey.

The advantages of a policy of opening up the borders among these States for trades and easy communication are enormous.

For one thing, an economic coordination of the Levantine States can negotiate better deals with the bordering larger States by constituting a larger common market that may ease up the frequent tensions and anxiety that the people have been experiencing a century ago since the colonial powers did their best to divide our social fabrics.

A few guidelines may go a long way toward a project of common market.

First, it is inevitable that all borders among the Near East States be definitely demarcated, resolved, and registered in the United Nation.  This first step will eliminate foreign interventions in our internal affairs and appease unfounded fears of forced or implicit annexation.

Second, The Levant Union States (LUS) should drop all territorial claims with the neighboring States (except with Israel) that do not agree with the UN drawings.

Third, the LUS needs to institute a restricted Parliament that deal with the most urgent laws applicable to the union.  The prime areas for legislations are: Water resources, agriculture and industrial production coordination,  financial coordination, infrastructure, education, military, and energy resources.

Fourth, the establishment of a unified internal currency for internal trades among the States and leaving the States independent national currencies for external trades.  Thus, the central banks in each State will set aside reserves for the internal united currency to cover up any internal difficulties for conversion into particular “national” currencies as the internal market expand.

Fifth:  The institution of a central bank for managing and administering the internal currency to satisfy the growing internal trade.

Sixth, establishment of standards for armed forces and internal forces in the eventual coordination for securing the borders of the LUS.

Seventh, establishment of standards for public schooling systems in order to facilitate transfers of students among the States. It is essential that uniformed textbooks in geography of the region, its common history, and the various civic educational systems be introduced to all citizens.

Eight, establishing “Free trade zones” with neighboring States.  For example, one in Iskandaron (Alexandretta) between Turkey and Syria on the coast, one at the junction among Turkey, Iraq, and Syria (in the Kurdish populated zone), one between Syria and Iraq in the desert region on the Euphrates River, one among Jordan, Syria and Iraq, one in Gaza between Egypt and Palestine, and one in Aqaba between Jordan and Saudi-Arabia.

Nine:  Having coordinated foreign political positions with respect to the UN assembly.

Tenth, setting up a high political command in charge of negotiating any peace treaty with Israel as a Union of common interests.  The piece meal negotiation process with this antiquated vassal mentalities is not going to insure any lasting peace.

Note: This post is an ongoing process and will be frequently edited for more details.  Your focused comments will enrich the re-editing process.

Before colonial powers took over Africa: Africa history

Note 1: Repost of 2014 of “Africa, Uncolonized: A Detailed Look at an Alternate Continent”

Note 2: Maps were drawn upside down during the Arabic Empire and they skew the current traditional eurocentric point of direction.
Africa was called before the European colonization Al-Kebulan or Alkebulan meaning ‘Garden of Life’, ‘Cradle of Life’, or simply ‘the Motherland’
Frank Jacobs, November 12, 2014
Uitsny_suid_afrika

What if the Black Plague had killed off almost all Europeans?

The Reconquista in Spain would have never happened.

If Spain and Portugal didn’t kickstart Europe’s colonization of other continents in the 16th century, this is what Africa might have looked like.

The map shows an Africa dominated by Islamic states, and native kingdoms and federations.

All have at least some basis in history, linguistics or ethnography.

None of their borders is concurrent with any of the straight lines imposed on the continent by European powers, during the 1884-85 Berlin Conference and in the subsequent Scramble for Africa.

By 1914, Europeans controlled 90% of Africa’s land mass.

Only the Abyssinian Empire (modern-day Ethiopia) and Liberia (founded in 1847 as a haven for freed African-American slaves) remained independent.

This map is the result of an entirely different course of history. The continent depicted here isn’t even called Africa [1] but Alkebu-Lan, supposedly Arabic for ‘Land of the Blacks’ [2].

That name is sometimes used by those who reject even the name ‘Africa’ as a European imposition.

It is therefore an ideal title for this thought experiment by Swedish artist Nikolaj Cyon.

Essentially, it formulates a cartographic answer to the question: What would Africa have looked like if Europe hadn’t become a colonizing power? 

To arrive at this map, Cyon constructed an alternative timeline. Its difference from our own starts in the mid-14th century.

The point of divergence: the deadliness of the Plague.

In our own timeline, over the course of the half dozen years from 1346 to 1353, the Black Death [3] wiped out between 30 and 60% of Europe’s population. It would take the continent more than a century to reach pre-Plague population levels. That was terrible enough.

But what if Europe had suffered an even more catastrophic extermination – one from which it could not recover?

Allohistorical Africa, seen from our North-up perspective. The continent’s superstates (at least size-wise): Al-Maghrib, Al-Misr, Songhai, Ethiopia, Kongo and Katanga.

European colonies in Africa in ‘our’ 1913.

Blue: France, pink: Britain, light green: Germany, dark green: Italy, light purple: Spain, dark purple: Portugal, yellow: Belgium, white: independent. Lines reflect current borders.

Cyon borrowed this counterfactual hypothesis from The Years of Rice and Salt, an alternate history novel by Kim Stanley Robinson. The book, first published in 2002, explores how the depopulation of Europe would have altered world history.

Robinson speculates that Europe would have been colonized by Muslims from the 14th century onwards, and that the 20th century would see a world war between a sprawling Muslim alliance on the one side, and the Chinese empire and the Indian and native American federations on the other.

Cyon focuses on Africa – or rather, Alkebu-Lan – which in his version of events doesn’t suffer the ignominy and injustice of the European slave trade and subsequent colonization.

In our timeline, Europe’s domination of Africa obscured the latter continent’s rich history and many cultural achievements.

On the map of Cyon’ s Africa, a many-splendored landscape of nations and empires, all native to the continent itself, gives the lie to the 19th- and 20th-century European presumption that Africa merely was a ‘dark continent’ to be enlightened, or a ‘blank page’ for someone else to write upon.

Basing himself on Unesco’s General History of Africa, Cyon built his map around historical empires, linguistic regions and natural boundaries.

His snapshot is taken in 1844 (or 1260 Anno Hegirae), also the date of a map of tribal and political units in Unesco’s multi-volume General History.

Al-Andalus, in this timeline still a dependency of Al-Maghrib; and the Emirate of Sicily to the left of the map.

Zooming in on the northern (bottom) part of the map, we see an ironic reversal of the present situation: in our timeline, Spain is still holding on to Ceuta, Melilla and other plazas de soberania in Northern Africa.

In Cyon’s world, most of the Iberian peninsula still called Al-Andalus, and is an overseas part of Al-Maghrib, a counterfactual Moroccan superstate covering a huge swathe of northwestern Africa.

Sicily, which we consider to be part of Europe, is colored in as African, and goes by the name of Siqilliyya Imārat (Emirate of Sicily).

The Arabic is no accident.

Absent the European imprint, Islam has left an even more visible mark on large swathes of North, West and East Africa than it has today.

Numerous states carry the nomenclature Sultānat, Khilāfat or Imārat. And what are the difference between a Caliphate, Sultanate and Emirate?

A Caliph claims supreme religious and political leadership as the successor (caliph) to Muhammad, ideally over all Muslims.

I spot two Caliphates on the map: Hafsid (centered on Tunis, but much larger than Tunisia), and Sokoto in West Africa (nowadays: northwest Nigeria).

Sokoto, Dahomey, Benin and other states in country-rich West Africa. 

A Sultan is an independent Islamic ruler who does not claim spiritual leadership.

Five states in the greater Somalia region are Sultanates, for example: Majerteen, Hiraab, Geledi, Adāl and Warsangele. Others include Az-Zarqa (in present-day Sudan), Misr (Egypt, but also virtually all of today’s Israel), and Tarābulus (capital: Tripoli, in our Libya).

An Emir is a prince or a governor of a province, implying some suzerainty to a higher power. There’s a cluster of them in West Africa: Trarza, Tagant, Brakna, all south of Al-Maghrib. But they are elsewhere too: Kano and Katsina, just north of Sokoto.

Islam of course did not originate in Africa, and some would claim that its dominance of large areas of Africa, at the expense of pre-existing belief systems, is as much an example of foreign cultural imperialism as the spread of Western religions and languages is in our day.

But that is material for another thought experiment. This one aims to filter out the European influence.

Neither European nor Arab influence is in evidence in the southern part of Africa – although some toponyms relate directly to states in our timeline: BaTswana is Botswana, Wene wa Kongo refers to the two countries bearing that name. Umoja wa Falme za Katanga is echoed in the name of the DR Congo’s giant inland province, Katanga.

Rundi, Banyarwanda and Buganda, squeezed in between the Great Lakes, are alternative versions of ‘our’ Burundi, Rwanda and Uganda.

Some familiar-sounding names around the Great Lakes.

There is an interesting parallel to the Africa/Alkebu-Lan dichotomy in the toponymic ebb and flow of Congo and Zaïre as names for the former Belgian colony at the center of the continent.

Congo, denoting both the stream and the two countries on either of its lower banks [4], derives from 16th- and 17th-century Bantu kingdoms such as Esikongo, Manikongo and Kakongo near the mouth of the river.

The name was taken up by European cartographers and the territory it covered eventually reached deep inland.

But because of its long association with colonialism, and also to fix his own imprint on the country, Congo’ s dictator Mobutu in 1971 changed the name of the country and the stream to Zaïre.

The name-change was part of a campaign for local authenticity which also entailed the Africanisation of the names of persons and cities [5], and the introduction of the abacos [6] – a local alternative to European formal and business wear.

Curiously for a campaign trying to rid the country of European influences, the name Zaïre actually was a Portuguese corruption of Nzadi o Nzere, a local term meaning ‘River that Swallows Rivers’.

Zaïre was the Portuguese name for the Congo stream in the 16th and 17th centuries, but gradually lost ground to Congo before being picked up again by Mobutu.

After the ouster and death of Mobutu, the country reverted to its former name, but chose the predicate Democratic Republic to distinguish itself from the Republic of Congo across the eponymous river.

Kongo – a coastal superstate in the alternative timeline.

This particular tug of war is emblematic for the symbolism attached to place names, especially in Africa, where many either refer to a pre-colonial past (e.g. Ghana and Benin, named after ancient kingdoms), represent the vestiges of the colonial era (e.g. Lüderitz, in Namibia), or attempt to build a postcolonial consensus (e.g. Tanzania, a portmanteau name for Tanganyika and Zanzibar).

By taking the colonial trauma out of the equation, this map offers a uniquely a-colonial perspective on the continent, whether it is called Africa or Alkebu-Lan.

Map of Alkebu-Lan and excerpts thereof reproduced by kind permission of Nikolaj Cyon.

See it in full resolution on this page of his website. Map of Africa in 1913 by Eric Gaba (Wikimedia Commons User: Sting), found here on Wikimedia Commons.

_______________

Strange Maps #688

[1] A name popularized by the Romans. It is of uncertain origin, possibly meaning ‘sunny’, ‘dusty’ or ‘cave-y’.

[2] The origin and meaning of the toponym are disputed. The Arabic for ‘Land of the Blacks’ would be Bilad as-Sudan, which is how the present-day country of Sudan got its name.

Other translations offered for Alkebu-Lan (also rendered as Al-Kebulan or Alkebulan) are ‘Garden of Life’, ‘Cradle of Life’, or simply ‘the Motherland’. Although supposedly of ancient origin, the term was popularized by the academic Yosef A.A. Ben-Jochannan (b. 1918).

The term is not a 20th-century invention, however. Its first traceable use is in La Iberiada (1813), an epic poem from 1813 by Ramón Valvidares y Longo. In the index, where the origin of ‘Africa’ is explained, it reads: “Han dado las naciones á este pais diversos nombres, llamándole Ephrikia los Turcos, Alkebulan los Arabes, Besecath los Indios, y los pueblos del territorio Iphrikia ó Aphrikia: los Griegos, en fin, le apellidaron Libia, y despues Africa, cuyo nombre han adoptado los Españoles, Italianos, Latinos, Ingleses y algunos otros pueblos de la Europa”.

[3] A.k.a. the Plague, a very contagious and highly deadly disease caused by Yersinia pestis. That bacterium infested the fleas that lived on the rats coming over from Crimea to Europe on Genoese merchant ships.

[4] In fact, Brazzaville and Kinshasa, capitals of the Republic of Congo and the Democratic Republic of Congo respectively, are positioned across from each other on the banks of the Congo River – the only example in the world of two national capitals adjacent to each other.

[5] The ‘founder-president’ himself changed his name from Joseph-Désiré Mobutu to Mobutu Sese Seko Kuku Ngbendu wa za Banga. The capital Léopoldville was renamed Kinshasa, after an ancient village on the same site.

[6] Despite the African-sounding name, abacos is an acronym of à bas costumes, or: ‘Down with (Western) suits’.

On stolen lands: Israeli colons rely on myths and racist laws

Note: Re-edit of 2014 post “Stolen Land: Israel built 150 Jewish-only cities”

Bostonians have been checking out the “ONE WORD” campaign in their subway system, describing Israel’s crimes against Palestinians.

The ad campaign was launched this week by Ads Against Apartheid (AAA), a local Boston-based nonprofit.

Boston subway ads are shocking– ‘and so is the reality on the ground’

(Photo: It'sApartheid)

The ads are currently running in Boston’s downtown State Street Station where they can be seen by upwards of 13,000 riders per day. AAA’s website states they are “challenging Israel’s commitment to peace”.

here

The ads have already made headlines– in Palestine and Israel that is.

Both WAFA Ads against Apartheid Launches Campaign Questioning Israeli’s Commitment to Peace  and Ynet,  MBTA approves pro-Palestinian ads in Boston subway quote Chadi Salamoun, the President of Ads Against Apartheid, and Richard Colbath-Hess, the NGO’s co-founder:

“The ads simply state the facts and are backed up with citations from credible human rights and international organizations, including the United Nations,” said Chadi Salamoun, the president of Ads Against Apartheid, who added that “if the ads are shocking, that’s because the reality on the ground is shocking.”

Richard Colbath-Hess, a Jewish-American faculty member at the University of Massachusetts, and the co-founder of Ads Against Apartheid, noted that

American tax dollars help the Israeli government maintain an incredibly brutal military occupation, which has denied the Palestinian people their basic rights for decades. These ads show what Israel’s occupation and apartheid really look like, and it is important for Americans to see that.”

Colbath-Hess told me that the ads featuring one word per ad– HOMELESS, VIOLENCE, and STOLEN–  each represented an aspect of Israel’s “unrelenting injustice towards Palestinians.” IMHO, the “ONE WORD” approach is in your face, educational and very effective:

(Photo:It'sApartheid)

Ads Against Apartheid is planning to expand the campaign to other cities all across America.

The campaign has other hard hitting ads up on their website too. Instructing readers to “Stop Talking, Start Acting” and support spreading the campaigns.

Here’s one featuring that pillar of Israeli zealotry Naftali Bennett, from AAA’s Peace or Land Series:

Naftali Bennett (Graphic: AAA)

Peace or Land Series, Naftali Bennett (Graphic: AdsAgainstApartheid)

This one is from their Palestinian Children Series:

Palestinian Children Series (Graphic AAA)

Speech of Hitler lambasting Roosevelt: As Germany declares war on the US on Dec. 11, 1941

Note: A re-edit of 2013 post.

Hitler was Not from any Elite Class circle by a long shot. The colonial powers elite classes used Hitler as a mascot Clown to popularize and spread their apartheid ideology and genocide on large scale in their colonies, through Hitler virulent populist national rhetorics, until Hitler constructed his close-knit circle of Nazi “leaders” .

Hitler knew that Roosevelt (one of the 10,000 ultra rich) favored England, but the US President was unable to counter the 80% of the US public opinion, which was very reluctant of intervening in this war.

Roosevelt has agreed to lend Churchill on credit for military hardware purchases, foodstuff and raw materials, most of the 33 million tons of supplies that England needed every month, just to survive.

Before and for a long time after the start of WWII, the US companies were exporting all kinds of products and rare raw materials to both sides, and accumulating huge profit.

Ribbentrop (German foreign minister) insists that Japan should not give Roosevelt any excuse for the USA to enter the war: We are in the same boat with you, and the US produces more military hardware than all the belligerent forces engaged around the world…”

In Nov. 23, 1941, Germany foreign minister Ribbentrop meet with Japan’s ambassador Oshima and told him:

“We know today for certain from the intransigence of the US, that the negotiations with Japan will end in failure.  If Japan decides to go to war against the USA, that option will be favorable to the Führer, and Germany will join Japan in declaring war on the US…”

On Dec. 6, 1941, Roosevelt had written to Japan’s Emperor Hirohito:

“We, State leaders, have the sacred duty of restoring the traditional friendship between our two countries”

Four weeks later, on Dec. 7, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and destroyed half the US naval fleet in Hawaii.

The US airplane carriers were not in sight of the Japanese planes and were saved from certain sinking. That was a fatal mistake that would turn the tide during the Midway sea battle.

A week later, Hitler declares war on the US and delivered this public speech:

“I accuse Roosevelt of crimes against international laws.

Roosevelt comes from a rich family and lived the privileged life that democratic States facilitate the existence of the rich classes, this class labeled the 10,000 ultra rich.

Roosevelt lived WWI in the shadow of his protector (President) Wilson, amid the sphere of the war profiteers and exploited the miseries of the poor classes riddled with soaring inflation and engaged in vast speculation deals

I was a simple soldier in WWI, and I got injured, and was released as poor as ever.

Roosevelt is intent on switching his policies from the internal public opinion demands to external affairs, aided by his Jewish cohort the Frankfurter, Baruch, Cohen and Morgenthau…”

Initially Germany’s policy was to keep the US neutral in the conflict. Germany was interested in Continental Europe, including Russia as its Vital Space.

On Feb. 1941, German foreign minister Ribbentrop had met again with Japan’s ambassador Oshima.

Ribbentrop tells Oshima that the Führer is considering to extend his vital space eastward, toward Russia, and that he accepts the risk of a war with Russia.

Hitler came to believe the view that Roosevelt is the main danger in the US and that the Jews in the White House were strongly influencing his foreign policies. Hitler said:

“The American have no future. The USA is a rotten country. The racial problems and the vast inequalities are rampant. The US inspires me with aversion and deep disgust. Half Jewish, and half niggers: This is the US society in a nutshell. How can a community founded on solely generating money and stand up among the nations?…”

It is to be noted that, when Germany declared war on the USA, it was already in deep trouble after occupying large swap of lands in Russia and facing serious counter-offensives from the Soviet armies, in this cold Russian winter…

Germany was fighting the two largest powers in the world at the same time.

If Germany coordinated its attack on Russia with Japan, the entire war scenario would have changed. Japan was already in Manchuria and occupied Korea and the coastal parts of China

But Hitler wanted all of occidental Russia to belong solely to Germany!

Note 2: It is obvious that Germany and Japan had clear ideas on the danger of antagonizing USA, but they could no longer afford the forceful tacit trade of the USA in favor of their “enemies” and military support.


adonis49

adonis49

adonis49

October 2020
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

Blog Stats

  • 1,428,299 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.adonisbouh@gmail.com

Join 775 other followers

%d bloggers like this: