#Syria: the Middle East's tipping point

NASSAR IBRAHIM FOR THE ALTERNATIVE INFORMATION CENTER (AIC)

The AIC is an internationally oriented, progressive, joint Palestinian-Israeli activist organization. It is engaged in dissemination of information, political advocacy, grassroots activism and critical analysis of the Palestinian and Israeli societies as well as the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. 

February 4 - The struggle for Syria isn’t just about Syria—it’s the struggle for a free, democratic Middle East versus one that lives under the yoke of American and Israeli hegemony.   

The conflict in Syria has reached its tipping point. At this level, it is no longer acceptable or reasonable to continue playing in a gray area in the name of diplomacy, as the struggle on Syria has a crucial significance from various strategic points of views. 

The importance of the Syrian question has to be found in Syria’s key-role in the regional geostrategic pattern. Its position is directly intertwined with the confrontations we will witness in the Arab world for the next decade, whose results will in turn be strongly affected by the transformation happening in Syria. To be clear, the moves we are witnessing nowadays will influence the fate of a number of regional and global balances on more than one axis. 

From the moment that the Arab League made the decision to suspend Syria’s membership, entailing a series of sanctions against the Syrian people, the clashes happening in Syria have moved to another level. This became even clearer with the second proposed UN resolution—calling for a democratic transition and for Bashar Al Assad to step down—which was stopped by Russia and China’s vetoes last Saturday for the second time in four months. There have been two attempts to prepare the ground for a military intervention – that the US, European, and Arab countries would like to see and that 13 out of 15 UN Security Council members voted for. Such fervor reminds of the international climate before the war against Iraq began in 2003.

With the recent developments, the façade has tumbled down disclosing the real goals hidden behind different masks, revealing that the slogans demanding freedom, democracy, and human rights have been used as a battering-ram by the advocates for an intervention to break Syria. The objective seems clear: depriving the country of its role and the Syrian people of their will.

8 Reasons Young Americans Don't Fight Back: How the US Crushed Youth Resistance

Traditionally, young people have energized democratic movements. So it is a major coup for the ruling elite to have created societal institutions that have subdued young Americans and broken their spirit of resistance to domination.  

1. Student-Loan Debt.
2. Psychopathologizing and Medicating Noncompliance
3. Schools That Educate for Compliance and Not for Democracy.
4. “No Child Left Behind” and “Race to the Top.”
5. Shaming Young People Who Take Education—But Not Their Schooling—Seriously
6. The Normalization of Surveillance.
7. Television.
8. Fundamentalist Religion and Fundamentalist Consumerism. 

(via shuashbuckler-deactivated201211)

Source: domesticterrorism

#REVOLUTION AGAINST #NWO NEW WORLD ORDER UPRISING (by edtheball69)

THE TIME HAS COME WHEN WE MUST REALISE THAT THE WORLD IS RULED BY AN ELITE GROUP OF CRIMINALS THAT ENSLAVE ALL NATIONS IN DEBT AND WARS.

Our integrity sells for so little, but it is all we really have. It is the very last inch of us, but within that inch, we are free.
I shall die for humanity trying to change your lives for the best. Every inch of me will perish. Every inch but one. An inch… It is small, and fragile, and it is the only thing in the world worth having. We must never lose it or give it away. We must never let them take it from us. I hope that, whoever you are, you escape this place. I hope that the world turns and things get better. But I hope most of all that you understand that even though I will never meet you, laugh with you, cry with you, or kiss you, I love you. With all my heart, I love you.

Source: youtube.com

#Syria turmoil: Fresh protests erupt - #Revolution

Fresh protests have flared in Syria at the end of a week that has seen dozens of demonstrators killed.

Offices of the ruling Baath party were burned down in the southern town of Tafas and coastal town of Latakia, witnesses said, while hundreds renewed demonstrations in Deraa.

The authorities earlier released more than 200 political prisoners in Damascus, a UK-based rights group said.

The protests are a serious challenge to President Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

The US and the UN had condemned the Syrian government following reports that troops fired on peaceful protesters on Friday.

However, the political and information adviser to President Bashar al-Assad, Bouthaina Shaaban, has told the BBC it was not security forces that had shot protesters but “armed groups” firing on civilians indiscriminately.

‘Downfall’

The biggest protests on Saturday were in Tafas, 18km (11 miles) north of the city of Deraa, which is close to the Jordan border and which has become the centre of the challenge to the 11-year rule of President Assad.

Thousands took to the streets in Tafas to bury three protesters who witnesses said had been killed by security forces on Friday.

Map

Reports of the deaths of protesters in Syria cannot be independently confirmed.

The witnesses said the protesters chanted anti-government slogans and burned the Baath HQ and a police station.

In Deraa on Saturday, hundreds of protesters climbed on to the rubble of a statue of ex-President Hafez al-Assad that was torn down on Friday and resumed anti-government chants.

Some were holding cardboard signs reading “the people want the downfall of the regime”, witnesses said.

A human rights activist, Ammar Qurabi, told Associated Press news agency there were also protests in the coastal town of Latakia, with another Baath party office set on fire.

A Syrian official told Agence France-Presse news agency that two people were killed by unidentified snipers in Latakia on Saturday.

Meanwhile, Ms Shaaban told BBC Arabic there were “foreign schemes” aimed at destabilising Syria and that a number of foreign nationals had been detained.

Pro-Assad protest in Damascus, 25 MarchSupporters of President Assad staged large counter-protests in Damascus on Friday

She said Syria respected the rights of people to protest peacefully.

Ms Shaaban also said political reform had been under discussion in Syria for some time and that the authorities intended to put constitutional and party reforms before the people in a referendum as soon as possible.

Earlier, the London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said more than 200 inmates, mostly Islamists, were freed from Damascus’ Saidnaya prison.

However, reports about the total number involved differ, with another human rights activist being quoted by Reuters as saying that 70 political prisoners were freed.

The Syrian government has so far made no official comment on the issue but Ms Shaaban said she would be surprised if her country had hundreds of such detainees.

Dozens of people have been killed in protests this week, rights activists and witnesses say, sparking demonstrations on Friday in towns and cities across Syria, including the capital, Damascus.

In Damascus, hundreds marched on King Faisal Street chanting: “Peaceful, Peaceful, God, Syria, Freedom.” This protest was broken up by security forces and many were arrested, reports said.

Supporters of President Assad staged large counter-protests and clashes erupted between the two sides.

Other towns witnessing protests on Friday included Tall and Hama.

It's Not an Arab Revolution ... It's a GLOBAL #Revolution

While the revolution in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and other North African countries may seem like an “Arab revolt”, it’s actually worldwide.

Protests involving thousands of protesters have recently been held in:

Predicted Years Ago

The worldwide riots are not mysterious or unforeseeable. They’ve been predicted for years, and are a direct result of the bad policy choices made by most nations worldwide.

The Bank for International Settlements - the world’s most prestigious financial agency, nicknamed the “central banks’ central bank” - warned in December 2008 that the bailouts and other bank rescue programs were transferring risks from private companies to nations.

As I noted at the time:

BIS points out in a new report that the bank rescue packages have transferred significant risks onto government balance sheets, which is reflected in the corresponding widening of sovereign credit default swaps:

The scope and magnitude of the bank rescue packages also meant that significant risks had been transferred onto government balance sheets. This was particularly apparent in the market for CDS referencing sovereigns involved either in large individual bank rescues or in broad-based support packages for the financial sector, including the United States. While such CDS were thinly traded prior to the announced rescue packages, spreads widened suddenly on increased demand for credit protection, while corresponding financial sector spreads tightened.
In other words, by assuming huge portions of the risk from banks trading in toxic derivatives, and by spending trillions that they don’t have, central banks have put their countries at risk ….

The Root Cause: Bad Economic Policy

Specifically, nations around the world decided to bail out their big banks instead of taking the necessary steps to stabilize their economies (see this, this and this). As such, they all transferred massive debts (from fraudulent and stupid gambling activities) from the balance sheets of the banks to the balance sheets of the country.

The nations have then run their printing presses nonstop in an effort to inflate their way out of their debt crises, even though that effort is doomed to failure from the get-go.

Quantitative easing by the Federal Reserve is obviously causing food prices to skyrocket worldwide (and see this, this and this).

But the fact is that every country in the world that can print money - i.e. which is not locked into a multi-country currency agreement like the Euro - has been printing massive quantities of money.

By way of example only, the Economic Collapse Blog provides the following charts:

The U.S. is printing lots of money…..

Source, The St. Louis Fed

The Bank of England is printing lots of money…..

Source: The BoE

The EU is printing lots of money….

Source: The ECB

Japan is printing lots of money…..

Source: The BoJ

China is printing lots of money…..

Source: The People’s Bank of China

India is printing lots of money…..

Source: Reserve Bank of India


Moreover, the austerity measures which governments worldwide are imposing to try to plug their gaping deficits (created by throwing trillions at their banks) are causing people world-wide to push back.

As I warned in February 2009 and again in December of that year:

Numerous high-level officials and experts warn that the economic crisis could lead to unrest world-wide - even in developed countries:

  • Today, Moody’s warned that future tax rises and spending cuts could trigger social unrest in a range of countries from the developing to the developed world, that in the coming years, evidence of social unrest and public tension may become just as important signs of whether a country will be able to adapt as traditional economic metrics, that a fiscal crisis remains a possibility for a leading economy, and that 2010 would be a “tumultuous year for sovereign debt issuers”.
  • The U.S. Army War College warned in 2008 November warned in a monograph [click on Policypointers’ pdf link to see the report] titled “Known Unknowns: Unconventional ‘Strategic Shocks’ in Defense Strategy Development” of crash-induced unrest:
    The military must be prepared, the document warned, for a “violent, strategic dislocation inside the United States,” which could be provoked by “unforeseen economic collapse,” “purposeful domestic resistance,” “pervasive public health emergencies” or “loss of functioning political and legal order.” The “widespread civil violence,” the document said, “would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security.” “An American government and defense establishment lulled into complacency by a long-secure domestic order would be forced to rapidly divest some or most external security commitments in order to address rapidly expanding human insecurity at home,” it went on. “Under the most extreme circumstances, this might include use of military force against hostile groups inside the United States. Further, DoD [the Department of Defense] would be, by necessity, an essential enabling hub for the continuity of political authority in a multi-state or nationwide civil conflict or disturbance,” the document read.
  • Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair said:
    “The global economic crisis … already looms as the most serious one in decades, if not in centuries … Economic crises increase the risk of regime-threatening instability if they are prolonged for a one- or two-year period,” said Blair. “And instability can loosen the fragile hold that many developing countries have on law and order, which can spill out in dangerous ways into the international community.”***

    “Statistical modeling shows that economic crises increase the risk of regime-threatening instability if they persist over a one-to-two-year period.”***

    “The crisis has been ongoing for over a year, and economists are divided over whether and when we could hit bottom. Some even fear that the recession could further deepen and reach the level of the Great Depression. Of course, all of us recall the dramatic political consequences wrought by the economic turmoil of the 1920s and 1930s in Europe, the instability, and high levels of violent extremism.”

    Blair made it clear that - while unrest was currently only happening in Europe - he was worried this could happen within the United States.

    [See also this].
  • Former national security director Zbigniew Brzezinski warned “there’s going to be growing conflict between the classes and if people are unemployed and really hurting, hell, there could be even riots.”
  • The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff warned the the financial crisis is the highest national security concern for the U.S., and warned that the fallout from the crisis could lead to of “greater instability”.
Others warning of crash-induced unrest include:

Unemployment is soaring globally - especially among youth.

And the sense of outrage at the injustice of the rich getting richer while the poor get poorer is also a growing global trend.

Countries worldwide told their people that bailout out the giant banks was necessary to save the economy. But they haven’t delivered, and the “Main Streets” of the world have suffered.

As former American senator (and consummate insider) Chris Dodd said in 2008:

If it turns out that [the banks] are hoarding, you’ll have a revolution on your hands. People will be so livid and furious that their tax money is going to line their pockets instead of doing the right thing. There will be hell to pay.

Of course, the big banks are hoarding, and refusing to lend to Main Street. In fact, they admitted back in 2008 that they would. And the same is playing out globally.

As I noted earlier this month:

Agence France-Press reports today:
The International Monetary Fund stands ready to help riot-torn Egypt rebuild its economy, the IMF chief said Tuesday as he warned governments to tackle unemployment and income inequality or risk war.

No wonder former U.S. National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski … warned the Council on Foreign Relations that:

 

For the first time in human history almost all of humanity is politically activated, politically conscious and politically interactive. There are only a few pockets of humanity left in the remotest corners of the world that are not politically alert and engaged with the political turmoil and stirrings that are so widespread today around the world.

***

America needs to face squarely a centrally important new global reality: that the world’s population is experiencing a political awakening unprecedented in scope and intensity, with the result that the politics of populism are transforming the politics of power. The need to respond to that massive phenomenon poses to the uniquely sovereign America an historic dilemma: What should be the central definition of America’s global role?

[T]he central challenge of our time is posed not by global terrorism, but rather by the intensifying turbulence caused by the phenomenon of global political awakening. That awakening is socially massive and politically radicalizing.
It is no overstatement to assert that now in the 21st century the population of much of the developing world is politically stirring and in many places seething with unrest. It is a population acutely conscious of social injustice to an unprecedented degree, and often resentful of its perceived lack of political dignity. The nearly universal access to radio, television and increasingly the Internet is creating a community of shared perceptions and envy that can be galvanized and channeled by demagogic political or religious passions. These energies transcend sovereign borders and pose a challenge both to existing states as well as to the existing global hierarchy, on top of which America still perches.

***
That turmoil is the product of the political awakening, the fact that today vast masses of the world are not politically neutered, as they have been throughout history. They have political consciousness.

***

Politically awakened mankind craves political dignity, which democracy can enhance, but political dignity also encompasses ethnic or national self-determination, religious self-definition, and human and social rights, all in a world now acutely aware of economic, racial and ethnic inequities. The quest for political dignity, especially through national self-determination and social transformation, is part of the pulse of self-assertion by the world’s underprivileged

***

We live in an age in which mankind writ large is becoming politically conscious and politically activated to an unprecedented degree, and it is this condition which is producing a great deal of international turmoil.

That turmoil is the product of the political awakening, the fact that today vast masses of the world are not politically neutered, as they have been throughout history. They have political consciousness.
Watch an excerpt:

Democracy in the Arab World? | Global Research TV

The protests that overthrew half a century of autocratic rule in Tunisia are spreading. The governments of Egypt, Algeria and Yemen are feeling the wrath of decades of repression as people take to the streets and demand freedom - freedom of expression, freedom from forced choices.

The spread of democratic voices in the region is unprecedented, drawing comparisons with Eastern Europe in the 1980s, but is it a false dawn?

Will the despots and strongmen of the region be able to restore their authority through bribes and belated concessions, or is the genie out of the bottle? And who will be next?

Our guests today are: Rashid Khalidi, a professor of Modern Arab Studies at Columbia University; Clovis Maksoud, the director of the Center for the Global South; and Samer Shehata, a professor of Arab Studies at Georgetown University.

Our interviewees are: Mehran Kamrava, the interim dean of Georgetown University, Qatar; and Bernard Haykel, a professor of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University.

This special episode of Empire aired from Sunday, February 6, 2011.

Egyptian Revolution 2011 COMPLETE. World MUST MUST watch this. Freedom for All! (via eyeinsidefilm) #watchthis #egypt #revolution #revolt

Source: youtube.com

Translated Escaped prisoner admitting police let them out and gave them weapons (via mmxanonymous)

ace covered per requests
Special Thanks to ahasanen87 for quickly translating this for us!

Thug admitting police let them out and gave them weapons.

1.

Speaker: Tell us your story with the interior*. (*Ministry of Interior, in reference to police forces)

Prisoner: Before all the events of Tuesday, the interior took away all televisions & telephones in prison, they would spy over prisoners to find out if any of them has any radios so they take them away as well. And after that they started preparing us that we are going to leave. (Did not say it explicitly)

2.

Prisoner: Afterwards, they told us take these cars, and get out of here, the country is yours. Whomever you want to kill, kill. Whatever you want to do, do. That’s it.

Speaker: And they gave you cars and weapons?

Prisoner: Yeah. But those thugs and others who don’t care about their lives took weapons, but people like me did not take any weapons.

Military officer: Why did you not take any weapons?

Prisoner: No. Why would I? What do with it? Go kill my brother, someone like me?

3.

Speaker & military officer: Why were you there? Which prison were you in?

Prionser: Abu Za’bal Prison.

Speaker: For how long have you been out?

Prisoner: I ran off yesterday, and surrendered today.

Speaker: So the interior were the ones who gave you weapons and cars?

Prisoner: Yes. Yes.

Speaker: And they told you to get out, destroy, break, rob, and do all you please?

4.

Prisoner: Yes. Yes. The Azbakeya & Khalifa police stations, on Friday, let out their jailed to beat up civilians. Some of those prisoners followed orders, others did not want to and just left.

Speaker: Left to where?

Prisoner: Some went home, here or there. Some of them went to stand by the police. Others went home, and did not want to beat up civilians, who are just like their families. “May be my brother is among those civilians. Would I beat up my brother?”

5.

Prisoner: El Khalifa, Imbaba & El-Warra2 are the police stations that did that.

Prisoner: El-Matareyya station, before it was put on fire, they let out prisoners.

Speaker: Who let them out?

Prisoner: Police. The officers. And you have the Matareyya people/prisoners here, ask them. If I am mistaken, punish me.

Speaker: No I want to listen to you. So now Abu Za’bal prison (a huge prison) is empty?

Prionser: Completely empty.

Speaker: And the interior are the ones who let you out?

6.

Prisoner: Yes. The only prison still under control, by the military, is El-Marg prison.

Speaker: So the interior let you out for sure? And gave you weapons and cars?

Prisoner: Yes. Yes. They said here are some weapons. Here are the storages.

Speaker: Oh! They also told you were ammunition storages were too?

Prisoner: Yes.

Military officer: Why did they do that?

Speaker: So we go out in the city, destroy and rob everything.

ahasanen87

Source: youtube.com

Asmaa Mahfouz mirror of 3 vlog post that helped Spark the Revolution in Egypt (via mmxanonymous)

from: iyadelbaghdadi’s Channel (the world thanks you for your hard work)

http://www.youtube.com/user/iyadelbag… (please visit their Channel to support their work.)

{also found this:
Asmaa Mahfouz, Organizer of Egypt Demonstrations, Talks on TV:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=… }

This is a collection of Asmaa Mahfouz vlog posts January 18th, 24th, & 26th

Below is the discriptions of the 3 videos posted by iyadelbaghdadi:

1) This vlog was recorded on January 18th by Asmaa Mahfouz, the girl who helped start it all. She had shared it on her Facebook, and it had gone viral. It was so powerful and so popular, that it drove Egyptians by the thousands into Tahrir Square, and drove the Egyptian government to block Facebook . I’ll shut up now and let Asma talk.

2) Most of you have seen Asmaa’s original vlog pleading with people to show up on January 25th, here’s a vlog she made a few hours before the big day. Tension in her voice, but determination and hope.


3) Asmaa Mahfouz recorded and posted this vlog on January 26th, after an eventful Tuesday on January 25th, the first day of th revolution. She describes what she saw and urges people to continue and join her after Friday prayers, on January 28th.

Translated & subbed by Iyad El-Baghdadi & Ammara Alavi. Find me here:
www.el-baghdadi.com
www.twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi
www.facebook.com/iyad.elbaghdadi

Source: youtube.com

US planning to replace Mubarak with torture-linked ‘CIA point man’ (mirror) (via mmxanonymous)

From: http://www.youtube.com/user/Presstvusdesk

A U.S. plan to see Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak leave office immediately is reportedly in the works and would see a transitional government formed by Mubarak’s vice-president, a former head of Egypt’s spy agency and an alleged “CIA point man” who facilitated the “extraordinary rendition” of terrorism suspects.

U.S. officials are discussing a plan with Egyptian officials that would see Mubarak quit immediately and hand over power to a transitional government run by Vice President Omar Suleiman, the New York Times reported Thursday.

As spy chief, Suleiman reportedly embraced the CIA’s controversial “extraordinary rendition” program, in which terror suspects snatched by the Americans were taken to Egypt and other countries without legal proceedings and subjected to interrogations. Raw Story

Source: youtube.com

EGYPTIAN STUPIDITY CRISIS - FKN Newz 020411 (via fknnewz) #epic

Donations DVD’s T-Shirts http://www.deekjackson.com http://www.fknnewz.com

Source: youtube.com

“Egypt’s Tiananmen Square” (via TheRealNews)

Khaled Fahmy: Protesters call for massive demonstration on Friday as they resist attacks by thugs

Source: youtube.com

Amjad Atallah: Egyptian people shaking the foundations of US policy in the Middle East

(RealNewsNetwork) – Amjad Atallah is the Co-Director of the Middle East Task Force at the New America Foundation. Mr. Atallah is also a Senior Affiliated Expert with the Public International Law and Policy Group and a co-founder of Women for Women International. Prior to working at the New America Foundation, Mr. Atallah headed Strategic Assessments Initiative, a not-for-profit organization committed to providing legal and policy assistance to parties involved in negotiations in conflict and post-conflict situations.

Mr. Atallah’s efforts included running the international policy and advocacy efforts of the Save Darfur Coalition, advising the Kosovar constitutional process, and preparing scenario planning exercises for the Palestinians and Israelis. Prior to that, Mr. Atallah advised the Palestinian negotiating team in peace negotiations with Israel on the issues of international borders, security, and constitutional issues. He was also responsible for liaising with U.S. government officials in Washington, D.C. on these issues. Mr. Atallah received a B.A. and M.A. from the University of Virginia and received his J.D. from American University’s Washington College of Law.

Transcript

PAUL JAY, SENIOR EDITOR, TRNN: Welcome to The Real News Network. I’m Paul Jay in Washington. People are still on the streets in Cairo, and whatever happens over the next hours and days in Egypt, Tunisia, and across the Arab Middle East, one thing has already become clear. Arab people are willing to sacrifice, they’re willing to risk their lives, and they’re willing to defy autocratic regimes. What does this mean to the politics of the region? What’s it mean to US foreign policy? Now joining us to discuss all of this is Amjad Atallah. He’s the codirector of the Middle East Task Force at the New America Foundation. From 2000, 2003, he served as one of the legal advisors for the Palestinian negotiating team, and he joins us from another location: in Washington. Thanks for joining us, Amjad.

AMJAD ATALLAH, NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION: Thanks, Paul. Thanks for having me.

JAY: So, first of all, did this surprise you, what’s going on in Egypt? After Tunisia, a lot of people were saying, yeah, there’ll be something small in Egypt, but not at the kind of Tunisian scale, because there’s sort of an excuse for democracy there and so on.

ATALLAH: Well, everything that’s happening was expected for 20 years, but everybody is surprised when it happens, because no one can actually predict how this will all play out or [inaudible] nobody could predict what was going to happen in Tunisia, of course. Everybody was caught by surprise by it. And I think the timing, again, with Egypt, there’s always an expectation that the system in the Arab world isn’t sustainable, that it can’t last forever, that it’s fragile. But at the same time, it has survived for a very, very long time. And so I think everyone is surprised by how quickly things are moving in Egypt right now. We’ve gone from, you know, complete stagnation to, you know, revolution on the street.

JAY: Now, from–there’s a lot of different interests at play here. From a US point of view, it probably doesn’t matter that much if they could have Mubarak without Mubarak–in other words, if more or less the system continues with some other names in front of it. On the other hand, the Mubarak family and all their allies and everyone who’s been benefiting from their patronage for so many years have a lot at stake just not to have Mubarak leave. Talk a little bit about how this all breaks down.

ATALLAH: Well, the United States, I think, needs to have a much broader interpretation of what our interests are in the Middle East than we have right now [inaudible] have always been when we say that Mubarak is a pillar of stability, as the White House said, I think, yesterday. When we say things like that, we’re actually referencing the fact that Egypt helps Israel with Israel’s policies in the region. And that’s what we mean by “pillar of civility”. It’s not a reference to what Egypt does inside Egypt. It’s not a reference to the role that Egypt might play in Sudan. It’s not a reference to the role that Egypt plays in the Arab world at large. It’s very narrow. It’s specifically related to how Egypt helps Israel. And I think we’ve got to have a much broader–we have interests in the region that are far broader than simply Israel. And if we’re going to want to be on the right side of history, I think, on this, we’re going to need to interpret our interests in a way that don’t conflict with those of the people of the region. So if people want freedom in the region, we can’t actually interpret our interests in such a way that only the denial of their freedom would promote American interests. I mean, you can’t be Americans, support American political values, and deny other people their freedom.

JAY: But that’s more or less been US policy for 65 years, since the end of World War II, been precisely to deny people their freedoms in most of the Middle East. You know, a lot of–gets talked about about US support for Israel, and people talk about one-sided support for Israel. But US foreign policy is this complex quilt of regimes, from Saudi Arabia to Egypt to Jordan and Israel. And all together are part of this fabric of how American policy plays a dominant role in the region. Are we seeing today, for the first time, perhaps, since the Iranian Revolution, the beginnings of the unraveling of that whole strategy?

ATALLAH: You know, in the State of the Union address, the president spoke about America’s crumbling infrastructure and our crumbling education and how other countries have moved on and surpassed us and how we need to get back into the game. But the same is true of our foreign policy. Our foreign policy is based on a crumbling infrastructure. Our foreign policy is based on our crumbling assumptions, the assumption that we can support autocrats in the Middle East and that we can support a system in Israel that has a prejudicial system of rights, you know, that gives Jews more rights than it gives non-Jews. We can’t actually maintain that system any longer, I think. The world is changing, whether the United States wants to address that or not, whether the United States wants to change its policy or not. And so the real question is not whether the United States can affect change in the Middle East–change is happening in the Middle East with or without the United States. The question is: what side does the United States want to be on? How can the United States benefit in the long-term future from the changes that are happening? Do we want the people that are demonstrating today in Cairo to think of the United States as a hero and as an ally? Or every time they’re picking up the teargas canisters, they’re seeing “Made in USA”, every weapon that’s being used against them by the police, “Made in USA”.

JAY: And paid for by USA on the whole, given the amount of military support. I think–what is it?–$1 billion a year or something like this.

ATALLAH: I think it’s more than that. The billions, I think, that we provide to Egypt every year as part of the Camp David Accords, Egypt uses that money and is required to use that money to primarily buy US weapons. So it’s a subsidy. In a way, it’s a subsidy for the American, you know, military industrial complex. But at the same time, it is weapons that the Egyptian government is able to use. Now, Egypt hasn’t been at war since Camp David. Since 1973, Egypt hasn’t been at war with anyone. So those weapons are not for external defense, and those weapons are not for protecting Egypt as a whole. They’ve been used primarily to maintain order inside the country.

JAY: This revolt in Tunisia and now in Egypt comes at a remarkable time, when you just had the release of the Palestine Papers. So amongst the Palestinians, there’s two things going on. You can say the final nail in the coffin of the peace process, a real discreditation of the leadership of the PA, and now something I don’t think any Palestinian ever thought they were going to see in their lifetime, [is] a mass upsurge in other Arab countries. What will that mean, do you think, for this new kind of politics that’s been developing amongst the Palestinians–civil disobedience movement, movement for rights, amongst Palestinians?

ATALLAH: If there’s anything that’s been a cement for the status quo that’s been in the region, if there’s anything that’s been cement for the current process, it’s been the role of the Egyptian government. Israel, quite frankly, it simply couldn’t do what it’s done in the Gaza Strip. It could do it without the Palestinian Authority’s assistance or connivance or support, but it couldn’t do it without Egypt’s. And so Egypt, in a sense, has been the cement that’s helped keep everything in place. There isn’t a single opposition figure in Egypt, including Mohamed ElBaradei, who hasn’t protested and decried Egypt’s policy towards the Gaza Strip. So I don’t–I can’t imagine that if there was [inaudible] representative government in Egypt, I can’t imagine that they would continue to assist Israel and the Ramallah government in the siege of the Gaza Strip. I think that that siege will end. And if that siege ends, that by itself could be a game changer in Palestinian internal politics.

JAY: Now, I’ve talked to some Israeli politicians, and, you know, you’d say–you know, they talk about the Arab street. And, you know, sometimes people say, well, such–so-and-so leader has to be careful. They have to be afraid of the Arab street. And I’ve heard Israeli politicians laugh, you know, and say, “Yeah, what Arab street?” Well, hold on here. We actually just sawArab street. What do you think they’re thinking? I’m asking you to speculate here, but what does this mean from a Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Lieberman? What do you think’s going through their minds.

ATALLAH: Well, I think an Israeli cabinet minister was urging Mubarak earlier in the day to do whatever he needed to do to stay in power. And Benny Morris, I think, has written a piece–the Israeli historian has written a piece calling on, you know, Egypt to remain an authoritarian system. And the–I think Netanyahu’s put a gag order on his cabinet to stop saying things like that. But the reality, of course, is that the–Israel has attacked Arab governments often and has actually used its lobby in the United States to attack the Egyptian government whenever it was upset with any specific little policy that the Egyptian government may or may not have been doing. But at the end of the day, the system that Israel relies on in the Middle East is based on the autocracies in the region preventing the public’s discontent from developing into policy. The last thing that Israel wants to see is a Turkey phenomenon, which is countries that don’t threaten war and aren’t, you know, bellicose and rhetorical about war, and in the same way that Arab governments in the past had been. But at the same time, it works in the international arena, that works in diplomacy, that works on the international stage, and says, your occupation of Palestine is completely unacceptable and we’re not going to participate in it, we’re not going to assist you with it, and we’re going to demand that it ends. That combination that’s represented, for example, by the policy of Turkey is far more concerning, I think, to the Israeli government than, say, the bellicose and rhetorical nonsense that comes sometimes out of the president of Iran, for example.

JAY: And, of course, you could mean the end of the siege of Gaza. Thanks for joining us, Amjad. And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.
End of Transcript

DISCLAIMER: Please note that transcripts for The Real News Network are typed from a recording of the program. TRNN cannot guarantee their complete accuracy.

Yemeni president to hold emergency parliament meeting - Monsters and Critics

Sana’a, Yemen - Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh is to address an emergency meeting of the two chambers of the parliament on Wednesday, one day ahead a ‘day of rage’ called for by opposition parties, official sources said.

The sources told the German Press Agency dpa that Saleh has called for a joint meeting of the country’s House of Deputies and Shura Council.

Saleh was to discuss ‘issues and developments of interest to the nation and citizens’ with parliamentarians, the official Saba news agency reported.

Opposition parties have called for demonstrations across the country on Thursday to call on Saleh to step down.

Inspired by protests that toppled Tunisia’s president last month and now threaten to topple Egypt’s president, thousands of opposition supporters rallied in Sana’a on January 27 to demand that Saleh, who has been in power for 32 years, leave office.

On Wednesday Saleh is expected to discuss his plans to run for re- election when his current term ends in 2013, opposition sources said.

Former Director of the CIA’s Counter-Terrorism Center: American Policy in the Middle East is Failing Because the U.S. Doesn't Believe in Democracy

Robert Grenier - a 27-year veteran of the CIA’s Clandestine Service, and Director of the CIA’s Counter-Terrorism Center from 2004 to 2006 - writes today:

Events in the Middle East have slipped away from us. Having long since opted in favour of political stability over the risks and uncertainties of democracy, having told ourselves that the people of the region are not ready to shoulder the burdens of freedom, having stressed that the necessary underpinnings of self-government go well beyond mere elections, suddenly the US has nothing it can credibly say as people take to the streets to try to seize control of their collective destiny.

***

Our words betray us. US spokesmen stress the protesters’ desire for jobs and for economic opportunity, as though that were the full extent of their aspirations. They entreat the wobbling, repressive governments in the region to “respect civil society”, and the right of the people to protest peacefully, as though these thoroughly discredited autocrats were actually capable of reform.

They urge calm and restraint. One listens in vain, however, for a ringing endorsement of freedom, or for a statement of encouragement to those willing to risk everything to assert their rights and their human dignity - values which the US nominally regards as universal.

***

There are two things which must be stressed in this regard.

The first is the extent to which successive US administrations have consistently betrayed a lack of faith in the efficacy of America’s democratic creed, the extent to which the US government has denied the essentially moderating influence of democratic accountability to the people, whether in Algeria in 1992 or in Palestine in 2006.

The failure of the US to uphold its stated commitment to democratic values therefore goes beyond a simple surface hypocrisy, beyond the exigencies of great-power interests, to suggest a fundamental lack of belief in democracy as a means of promoting enlightened, long-term US interests in peace and stability.

***

The US’s entire frame of reference in the region is hopelessly outdated, and no longer has meaning: As if the street protesters in Tunis and Cairo could possibly care what the US thinks or says; as if the political and economic reform which president Obama stubbornly urges on Mubarak while Cairo burns could possibly satisfy those risking their lives to overcome nearly three decades of his repression; as if the two-state solution in Palestine for which the US has so thoroughly compromised itself, and for whose support the US administration still praises Mubarak, has even the slightest hope of realisation; as if the exercise in brutal and demeaning collective punishment inflicted upon Gaza, and for whose enforcement the US, again, still credits Mubarak could possibly produce a decent or just outcome; as if the US refusal to deal with Hezbollah as anything but a terrorist organisation bore any relation to current political realities in the Levant.

Machiavelli once wrote that princes should see to it that they are either respected or feared; what they must avoid at all cost is to be despised. To have made itself despised as irrelevant: That is the legacy of US faithlessness and wilful blindness in the Middle East.

For background on the America’s lack of belief in democracy, see this.



The fact that the former head of counter-terrorism laments America’s failure to support democracy in the Middle East proves once again that U.S. policy is not justified by terror concerns.

As I’ve repeatedly pointed out, stopping terrorism has never been the primary goal of America’s policy towards the Middle East. For example, as I noted last year:

Starting right after 9/11 — at the latest — the goal has always been to create “regime change” and instability in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Lebanon and other countries. As American historian, investigative journalist and policy analyst Gareth Porter writes in the Asia Times:
Three weeks after the September 11, 2001, terror attacks, former US defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld established an official military objective of not only removing the Saddam Hussein regime by force but overturning the regime in Iran, as well as in Syria and four other countries in the Middle East, according to a document quoted extensively in then-under secretary of defense for policy Douglas Feith’s recently published account of the Iraq war decisions. Feith’s account further indicates that this aggressive aim of remaking the map of the Middle East by military force and the threat of force was supported explicitly by the country’s top military leaders.
Feith’s book, War and Decision, released last month, provides excerpts of the paper Rumsfeld sent to President George W Bush on September 30, 2001, calling for the administration to focus not on taking down Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda network but on the aim of establishing “new regimes” in a series of states…
***
General Wesley Clark, who commanded the North Atlantic Treaty Organization bombing campaign in the Kosovo war, recalls in his 2003 book Winning Modern Wars being told by a friend in the Pentagon in November 2001 that the list of states that Rumsfeld and deputy secretary of defense Paul Wolfowitz wanted to take down included Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Sudan and Somalia [and Lebanon].
***
When this writer asked Feith … which of the six regimes on the Clark list were included in the Rumsfeld paper, he replied, “All of them.”
***
The Defense Department guidance document made it clear that US military aims in regard to those states would go well beyond any ties to terrorism. The document said the Defense Department would also seek to isolate and weaken those states and to “disrupt, damage or destroy” their military capacities - not necessarily limited to weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

Indeed, the goal seems to have more to do with being a superpower (i.e. an empire) than stopping terrorism.

As Porter writes:

After the bombing of two US embassies in East Africa [in 1998] by al-Qaeda operatives, State Department counter-terrorism official Michael Sheehan proposed supporting the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance in Afghanistan against bin Laden’s sponsor, the Taliban regime. However, senior US military leaders “refused to consider it”, according to a 2004 account by Richard H Shultz, Junior, a military specialist at Tufts University.
A senior officer on the Joint Staff told State Department counter-terrorism director Sheehan he had heard terrorist strikes characterized more than once by colleagues as a “small price to pay for being a superpower”.
And recall that former U.S. National Security Adviser (and top foreign policy advisor) Zbigniew Brzezinski told the Senate that the war on terror is “a mythical historical narrative”.Indeed, one of the country’s top counter-terrorism experts, former number 2 counter-terrorism expert at the State Department (Terry Arnold - who I’ve interviewed twice), has repeatedly pointed out that bombing civilians in Afghanistan is creating many more terrorists than it is removing.

In fact, the top security experts - conservative hawks and liberal doves alike - agree that waging war in the Middle East weakens national security and increases terrorism. See this, this, this, this, this, this and this.

I guess Alan Greenspan, John McCain, George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, a high-level National Security Council officer and others must all have been joking when they said that the Iraq war was really about oil.

And see this.

Top