Hello!
This week has seen two events that threaten to shatter the carefully constructed narative about regime change in the Middle East and Africa. Firstly, the US lost a city, and bombed a hospital in Afghanistan, a country which it has occupied for over a decade. The same week, Russia destroyed the command centres and weapons depots of ISIS, centres that ISIS had built in areas of Syria that have been controlled by the US and its allies for the last year.
The bombing of the hospital is not unusual; the US have bombed dozens of hospitals in Iraq and other places. But the contrast with the bombing of ISIS puts it in stark relief. It is no longer possible to believe that the US have been fighting ISIS; with half a dozen jets Russia destroyed in 1 day what the US had failed to destroy in a year. It is no longer possible to believe that the US avoids civilian targets; the hospital bombing was not an accident. The hospital is in a war zone, and made sure that its coordinates were known. The US claimed there were rebels in the grounds; but every precision missile hit the main block. Calls to the NATO hotline were ignored. Medecins Sans Frontieres, the charity running the hospital do not believe this was stupidity; they have called the bombing a war crime, and have called for an international enquiry.
What are the US trying to achieve? Who knows? One can only guess.
In 2000, a group called “Project for the New American Century” published a report recommending the use of military force to achieve its strategic and economic objectives. Its members included Dick Cheney (vice president under George Bush), Donald Rumsfeld (Defense Secretary), and Paul Wolfowitz Under Secretary of State. Five countries were mentioned in the report as “deeply hostile”. General Wesley Clarke (Supreme Allied Commander, NATO Europe) has said the talk at the time was of destroying 7 countries in 5 years. The countries were Iraq, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Lebanon and Iran. But the report lamented that without a “Pearl Harbour”, the opportunity for action would be lost.
One year later, in 2001, the Twin Towers were destroyed, and the US launched a tidal wave of destruction across North Africa and the Middle East. In the last 5 years, the US and its allies have bombed Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Pakistan and Sudan (they also threatened Iran with attack, even nuclear attack, although that threat has receded). In each case, there has been enormous destruction of civilian infrastructure, and the total death toll is in the millions. Several of these countries have been completely destroyed, and all are reduced to anarchy and chaos. The destruction and death toll is comparable to the Nazi holocaust. And all that seems to have been achieved is the restoration of the Afghan opium crop. It is very difficult to understand what benefit the US has gained from this expense.
Regardless of US motives and intentions, that facts are clear. For 14 years they have actively engaged in the military overthrow of foreign governments, resulting in the destruction of civil society and enormous loss of life. And it has cost the US trillions of dollars (yes, trillions), when their own road, rail, power and water infrastructure is crumbling. The details of the “Colour Revolutions” that the US uses to overthrow governments vary, but there are common patterns. The process is most clearly seen in Ukraine.
First, the US sets up “pro democracy” groups in the target country, to spread anti government propaganda at home and abroad. The budget for Ukraine was reported to be 11 billion dollars, a very large sum for any country. Next, a marginalised group is identified who can be encouraged to protest. In Iraq it was the marsh arabs; in Libya, the Benghazis; in Syria the middle class Sunnis; in Ukraine it was the historically powerful right wing nationalists (a.k.a. Nazis). A protest is arranged in the main square of the capital, and US agents go undercover to ensure that it makes trouble (in Iraq, MI5 agents were caught dressed as Arabs, driving a battered car full of improvised explosives). After the protest ends, and the moderates go home, the hard core are encouraged to stay behind.
If the National Front were to occupy Trafalgar Sqare, they would be cleared by the police with horses, tear gas and water cannon in short order. But the Ukraine government knew that any use of force would be used as an excuse to sanction the country, so the main square of Kiev was occupied by fascists for weeks, smashing buildings, looting shops and lighting fires, whilst the security forces stood by. Eventually, the US got bored and decided to act. Secretary of State Victoria Nuland was taped discussing who they would install as president with the head of the CIA. When the CIA chief suggested that the EU might have an opinion, Nuland famously said “Fuck the EU”. Snipers were sent in to the square to shoot at both protesters and security services, in order to cause havoc (as testified by the Estonian foreign minister to the UK representative to the UN). The shootings were blamed on the government; the parliament was stormed, the president fled, and the fascists took control.
Their first act was to ban Russian as a second language in Ukraine. Now large areas of Ukraine, including Crimea, are historically Russian, and the inhabitants do not speak Ukrainian. Naturally these areas protested, and response, they were bombed. It was as if the National Front had stormed Westminster, and bombed Edinburg when the Scots asked for independence. There has been civil war in Ukraine ever since.
For the last 4 years the US have been attempting to do the same in Syria. But against all odds, Assad clung on, (with some help from his friends), perhaps due to his popular support as confirmed by Western polls. And finally, perhaps, the wave has exhausted its strength and the tide has turned. It is a cliche, but true, that like Napoléon, Hitler, and others before them, the US have awoken a giant, and the gansters in charge have met their match.
Putin is a ganster too, and Putin’s Russia is not somewhere I want to live, but he is a Grand Master at the game of international chess, and he has played a masterly game. He has nothing like the resources of the US at his disposal; he could not hope to win a straight fight. For over a decade he has patiently waited whilst his allies were bombed, his friendly neighbours overthrown with “Colour Revolutions”, his economy ruined; he has shrugged off a personal hate campaign, threats of regime change and personal threats to his life. He has ignored every provocation, one imagines to the fury and chagrin of his enemies- and now the time is ripe. Quietly, in the background, he has forged alliances with Iran and China. Iran has been enormously strengthened by the destruction of Iraq, and is the regional superpower now that the Saudi economy has collapsed. China is a world economic superpower, and Russia a military superpower. I hope and believe that Russia’s intervention signals the begining of the end of war in Syria and Iraq; the US mercenary armies are on the run, and finally, I hope, those regions will be able to start to rebuild. And I hope too, that the US will come to its senses and start to contribute to global cooperation as one among equals.