|
|
|
Theories
By
R.A.Chan
Theories,
views, ideas and opinions abound, whenever some incident takes
place, particularly
as big as Sep 11. All kind of stories are in the air, both
from pro and anti Americans. Facts,
fictions and mixture of both are advanced by many “analysts.”
The most favourite theory
is “conspiracy” now a days. In America, the Americans
in their attempt to explain the events of
9/11, they have done extensive research; they quote both reliable
and not so reliable media reports, weaving unrelated events
into a jumbled yarn. Though their theories are as wild and
as
speculative as all conspiracy theories are supposed to be,
yet the arguments and corroborative
evidence they offer is interesting, to say the least.
|
No
wonder these individuals are reaping a windfall. They
are busy on the lecture circuit. Their websites are getting
unprecedented hits in this grief- stricken time when the
Americans are still trying to grab a grip on the new phenomenon.
The theories prove nothing conclusively as they leave
the most important questions out of the gamut of their
inquiry. However, they succeed in talking their audience
on a sinister roller- coaster ride.
Their ringleader is Michael Ruppert. He is a former LA
drug investigator whose “From the Wilderness”
publications and “copvcia.com” are doing great.
He claims that many congressmen subscribe to his website
and prestigious publications like Le Monde Diplomatique
highly recommend it. He is going from one campus to another
giving |
|
|
presentations to packed
halls and jamming the lines on radio talk shows. He claims to
be on a noble mission: to expose what is rotting in the American
body politic. It is worth one’s while to take a look at
his web of reasoning. The following is a brief summary of the
timeline of events before and after September 11 and their explanation
posted on his website. In the weeks and months prior to the
9/11 bombshell, the Bush administration was busy setting the
stage for the forth coming conflict in Afghanistan while coldly
ignoring the Russian, French and German intelligence agencies’
clear warnings of the impending terrorist attack on the US soil.
The largest British naval armada, since the Falklands war, was
steaming toward the Gulf of Oman as part of “ Operation
Swift Sword”. Some 17,000 US troops were exercising in
Egypt under” Operation Bright Star” also, around the
same time. Two US carrier battle groups arrived in the Arabian
Gulf just off the coast of Pakistan, long before the first plane
had hit the world Trade Center.
Two months prior to the attack, Osama Bin Laden, while undergoing
treatment for kidney aliment, had a meeting with the local CIA
Station Chief in his hospital room in Dubai, may be to trash
out the final details. Former ISI chief, General Mehmud Ahmed
was not in Washington during the week before 9/11 just by a
coincidence. He was busy giving final touches to the plans in
his meetings with Deputy Secretary of State, Richard Armitage,
and the CIA chief George Tenet. He was fully involved with Muhammad
Atta having wired him $ 100,000 few weeks before as reported
by the Times of India. |
 |
The
Bush administration was orchestrating all this to pursue
a very dark agenda, an agenda of total global hegemony
in the 21st century, even at the cost of such a great
human tragedy on its own soil. The intellectual framework
for this agenda had been provided by Zbigniew Brzezinsky,
the most pre-eminent geostrategic thinker in the US, in
his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard: America Primacy and
its Geostrategic Imperatives. He says: “America is
not only the first, as well as the only truly global superpower,
but it is also likely to be the very last.” And to
remain one as |
|
long as possible, advises
former president Carter’s National Security Advisor, the
US needs to control Eurasia, particularly theCentral Asian republics
and their vast energy and mineral reserves.
Given American public’s aversion to any projection of military
might abroad in peace time, a military action against Afghanistan
would have been impossible without a pretext like the Japanese
attack on Pearl Harbour, which gave President Roosevelt the
excuse to join the World War II.
What has transpired in the after wash of 9/11 also confirms
a well-planned sequence of events. Developments such as the
setting up of US bases in Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan
despite the end of the shooting war in Afghanistan, the reported
revival of the Turkmenistan pipeline project, are all pointers
in the same direction. The monopolarity, Brzezinsky so avidly
advocates, has also been manifestly asserted in President’s
Bush’s post 9/11 “you are with us or against us”
doctrine. A global power configuration is increasingly evident
where other international actors have to either |
play
the American tune or risk becoming the next victims of
its military
or diplomatic wrath.
In the classic paranoid tradition of the conspiracy theorists,
he and others of his ilk seem to believe that cabals of
cigar-smoking billionaires and their pet politicians are
cooking up schemes of world domination while sitting in
their palatial salons in front of cracking fireplaces.
Such scenarios are a throwback to the era of cabals such
as the Rosicrucian, Illuminati, and Freemasons. Their
modern-day reincarnations, according to Antony Sutton
who runs the Ctrl.com, are packs like the Carlyle group,
which in reality is an investment firm with George Bush
Sr. as one of its advisors. (The bin Ladens had $2 million
invested in it, which they withdrew right away after the
WTC and Pentagon attacks.) The other cabals cited by Ruppert
include the Bilderberger Group, allegedly a non-partisan
group of the richest individuals in |
 |
|
America,
and the Trilateral Commission, allegedly founded by none other
than Mr. Brzeznisky himself.
Ruppert seems to solely rely on Brzezinsky for providing the
grandeostrategic backdrop to his conspiracy theory. |
Brzezinsky
does not need any introduction.
He is one of the most respected geostrategists in the
US and this status has given him a bipartisan access to
the corridors of power. He is also an advisor to the Carlyle
Group. And along with Henry Kissinger, was on the payroll
of the Unocal, the energy company that nursed grand ambitions
in Central Asia.
Policy mavens and academics took Brezezinsky’s book
very seriously when it came out. In this book, he, like
a grand chess master lays out a game plan with several
moves planned ahead for the US domination of Eurasia,
which he calls “the globe’s central arena”
in the 21st century. He says the key to controlling Eurasia
lies in controlling Central Asia (“the Eurasian Balkans”)
with its enormous concentration of natural resources.
And, the key to controlling central Asia is Uzbekistan,
whose homogenous population of 25 million and vast oil
reserves make it the chief arbiter of power in the region.
With the world’s energy consumption expected to go
up by more than 50 percent during 1993 and 2015, with
the fastest increase in consumption occurring in the Far
East, the pressure is already mounting for the exploration
and development of new resources. The Central Asian region
including the Caspian Sea basin, furnishes the answer
to that demand. The strategy Brzezinsky offers in multi-pronged:
promoting geopolitical pluralism in the space of the former
Soviet empire to induce Russia to exercise its European
option, identifying the goals of the political elites
of these republics, the likely consequences of their seeking
to attain them and offsetting, co-opting and controlling
the above.
His views are immersed in the Anglo-American imperial
geostrategic thought, which seeks “to prevent collusion
among the client states, maintaining their security dependence
and
keeping the tributaries paint”. He warns against
the emergence of the forces of global disorder that could
come to dominate the world scene. He advises: “This
puts a premium on manoeuvre and manipulation in order
to prevent the emergence of a hostile coalition.”
Coming back to Ruppert, who seems to believe that Brzezinsky’s
game plan is already being translated into reality, the
9/11 attack was nothing more than a replay of the Pearl
Harbour attack. He puts undue emphasis on a fleeting reference
Brzezinsky mentioned in his book to Pearl Harbour attack
as a spur for the US intervention in the World War II,
to bolster his claim that the 9/11 was a trigger, the
US needed to set the final conquest in motion. To support
this claim, he twists many unrelated media reports into
finger directly pointing at American involvement all along.
He did not say in so many words but insinuates that Osama
is an agent and he took his hosts, the Taliban, for a
ride.
The famous anti-US establishment commentator Naon Chomsky
to rejects these theories out rightly of the window. When
asked in a recent meeting in the New York to comment upon
the conspiracy theories of the garden variety, he only
took a second and dismissed them as “breathlessly
idiotic”.
 |
Game
Plan
By J. Lobe
Evicting
Al Qaeda and the Taliban was
the easy part; the aftermath is turning
out to be much more difficult. The US military
so far has failed to find Osama
bin Laden and other top Al Qaeda or Taliban
leaders. Most of Afghanistan appears to have
fallen back under the control of tribal and
ethnic warlords - the same people who made the
rise of the Taliban possible in the first place.
These are the conclusions of a classified report
by the CIA, parts of which were leaked to the
New York Times. The
report went on to warn that the "seeds
of possible internal chaos" have
been planted.
|
Not only have
the warlords, armed and empowered by the US military
campaign itself, begun to jostle and skirmish for
position in post-Taliban Afghanistan, but also foreign
powers - including Russia, Uzbekistan, Iran, and
Turkey - are providing aid to their favourites,
setting the stage for a broader and potentially
more violent set of conflicts.
While the countryside prepares for the chaos to
come, the central government headed by Hamid Karzai
is forced to beg the US and other Western powers
for money to pay the salaries of its officials,
even as the donors spend week after week arguing
over whether the British-led international security
force should be deployed outside Kabul, or a new
Afghan army should be built over the next six months.
The report illustrates the degree to which the administration
of President George W. Bush has failed to think
through the consequences of its "war against
terrorism," not only in Afghanistan, which
at the momenthas the most to lose from the administration's
lack of planning, but also in other regions where
it is intervening with US troops and other assets
to fight alleged terrorists. A fatal crash of a
helicopter ferrying newly arrived US Special Operations
Forces (SOF) to the southern Philippines as part
of an "anti-terrorism exercise," for example,
drew renewed attention to the deployment of some
650 US troops to the country's most impoverished
region.
While the specific target of US intervention is
a small rebel group, Abu Sayyaf, which holds two
US kidnap victims, the same region is home to two
much larger armies, the Moro National Liberation
Front (MNLF) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front
(MILF), only one of which has negotiated peace with
the central government. Local officials in the area
have already complained that the mere presence of
US troops, which fought a bloody counter-insurgency
against the Moros a century ago, could weaken still-fragile
peace efforts between the army, whose tactics have
become more aggressive in recent weeks, and the
two movements, according to published reports.
"The real aim of the US mission is political:
to demonstrate momentum in the war on terror, deploy
troops in a country where they are welcome, show
the flag in Southeast Asia, and find an enemy that
can be quickly beaten," noted New York Times
columnist Nicholas Kristof. According to Kristof,
the reality there is much different and more dangerous,
particularly for an enduring peace in the area.
The same pattern is clear with respect to Iraq,
for which military and intelligence planners are
even now drawing up options for an intervention
designed to oust long-time Bush nemesis and charter
member of the current President Bush's "axis
of evil," President Saddam Hussein. Or, as
noted by Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman
Joseph Biden, "The easy part is going to be,
in a bizarre sense, taking Saddam out. The hard
part is what do you do after that?" Just like
Afghanistan. |
|
|
|
|
