A NEW TERRORIST
THREAT?
US, ALLIES SET STAGE
FOR AL-QAEDA RESURGENCE: Analyst
Brief introductory question?
Is there a solid
evidence that the “undetectable, non-metallic bomb” really exist? Or is just one more war-monguer-trick intended to blackmail the world with “I want your submission or my NATO and
my allies the jihadist and neo-nazis will destroy the world”. If such a bomb
exist, we are in front of a new crime against peace, so the door are open for honest judges of the
world to indict and prosecute these “terrorists”.
Hugo Adan, July 5, 2014
-------------
Here the news:
Press TV has conducted an interview
with Richard Becker, with the ANSWER Coalition, from San Francisco, about the
backlash against the West’s policy of encouraging violent terrorism in the
Middle East, particularly in Syria and Iraq.
The following is an approximate
transcript of the interview.
Press TV: We have a warning from the US, this being an al-Qaeda
effort to create an undetectable bomb. It could be smuggled through airport
security; it’s called a new generation of non-metallic bombs that could bypass
airport security. What do you think?
Becker: I think if we look at over the last several decades going
back to 1979 when the CIA began its intervention in Afghanistan, we can see a
pattern where these interventions by the United States, by the CIA in
Afghanistan, the invasion and occupation of Iraq have opened the space for the
development of al-Qaeda.
There was no al-Qaeda before the US
intervention in Afghanistan, it did not exist, it’s an outgrowth of that war,
which at that time was the largest CIA operation ever – up until that point.
In 2003 at the time when the United
States invaded, carried out this criminal invasion and occupation of Iraq there
was no al-Qaeda functioning inside of Iraq and there was no al-Qaeda
functioning or any of its affiliates inside of Syria. So, now we’ve seen that
develop in Iraq and in Syria.
Whether
the weaponry came directly from the United States to the al-Qaeda, al-Nusra
Front of ISIL or others it doesn’t really matter, it’s that the United States
and France and Britain and Qatar and Saudi Arabia through their intervention
and support of the so-called rebels in Syria opened the way for the resurgence
of what was almost a defunct organization ISIL inside Syria, which in turn
allowed that organization go into Iraq and occupy much of Iraq in connection
with its allies in the area.
So, we can see the disaster that the
policy of the United States has meant for the people of those countries first
and foremost, but also rebounding to have the kind of impact that’s now being
discussed with new threats inside the United State and European countries,
Canada and so
forth.
Press TV: It’s interesting though the way that this threat is coming
through at this point in time if there’s any significance behind that and
additionally let me add to it that these weapons as the US has announced are
being developed by al-Qaeda groups based in Yemen and it’s then being
collaborated with the Syrian al-Nusra Front – another terrorist organization –
the destination being Europe and the US.
Especially the concern being that
terrorists are going to be coming either to the United States or the EU, back
to their countries, on flights to the United States who don’t require visas to
enter the country.
So, obviously the question comes –
and you referred to the war in Afghanistan and the invasion in Iraq of which US
occupation created terrorists – we’re having a severe case of blowback when
these types of threats are occurring don’t we?
Becker: I think that’s definitely the case and the idea that the
arrogance of the policy makers in Washington. You know… Brzezinski, Zbigniew
Brzezinski who was the national security advisor to Carter, when the
intervention began in Afghanistan in 1979, we encountered 19 years later that he
was very proud of having done this and who cared and this were his words – who
cared if there were some angry Muslims in the world that helped us bring
down the Soviet Union.
And then we have the extreme
arrogance of the neo-Cons around Bush in 2002-2003, Cheney claiming that we’ll
be welcomed as liberators in Iraq and everything will be great; and dismantling
the entire government; dismantling the military; tearing the country apart;
favoring certain sectarian groups against others inside the country and then
acting surprised that the outcome of that is what we see today.
Well, it shouldn’t be a surprise to
anybody. It’s the arrogance of power; it’s the arrogance of imperial Washington
and its allies with the chickens coming home to roost.
Press TV: This is what I’m trying to understand if you can picture
this and help me maybe get an insight into how the US President Barack Obama
thinks. I mean, here we have this threat that’s now been announced officially
by the US and I’m sure their intelligence was relayed to Barack Obama earlier
than its coming out yesterday, but it kind of coincides with the time that
Obama asks Congress for the 500 million dollars to support the moderate
opposition in Syria.
So… I’m thinking you have Obama on
one hand looking at this terrorist threat and then on the other hand he goes
and makes this request from Congress to back what he calls moderate insurgents
in Syria. Does he not see that there’s something wrong in that picture?
Susan Rice came out and said lethal
and non-lethal support has been given to these Syrian insurgence, that
incidents like this might happen given the ideology of these terrorists…
because there are no good or bad terrorists; they’re all terrorists aren’t
they?
Becker: The first question that has to be asked is, are there any
moderates in the Syria opposition? I mean, that claim has been going on for a
while, but it is quite amazing to hear this from the president and from
legislation that is moving through Congress to appropriate another 500 million and
who knows how much more because the CIA budget very much is concealed.
But the idea that they would go
ahead with this at a time when it’s clear and has to be clear to the entire
world that it’s the disastrous, arrogant, imperial policies that have created
this situation now on the ground, which I first have to say that the greatest
threat is to the people of Iraq, the people of Syria and the other people in
the region who are having this kind of regime extremist regime imposed upon
them in what have basically been secular societies; and now the threat to
others as well.
The fact that the United States
government the Obama administration would say well we’re going to more of the
same in light of what we see the consequences to be is really quite amazing.
Press TV: It doesn’t make sense that he’s supporting these
insurgents in Syria, but then he’s saying, no, the one’s in Iraq, they’re the
bad ones.
Many of them have actually come from
Syria into Iraq and in turn obviously, well, it’s been said that this threat
the ISIL Takfiri terrorists are a threat to regional countries also.
Let’s switch gears and look at this
piece of news that was run by Britain’s state-run BBC in terms of Britain a
couple of years back had plans to train and equip about 100,000 militants in
Syria to fight against the government of Bashar al-Assad – 100,000 of them to
be trained in Turkey and in Jordan. What’s your reaction to that
news?
Becker: There have been all kinds of plans that have been floated
and many of them have been carried out; and many, many thousands of those in
opposition to the Assad government have been trained have been armed have been
funded by the US, by Britain by France, by Qatar by Saudi Arabia, by Turkey.
That has been going on. The scope of it is just one step further that was being
contemplated.
But you know, the outcome of these
interventions - this intervention by the former colonial powers in the region
and others - has really been a disaster for the people of Syria. This war could
not have gone on like this without this intervention from outside, without this
massive intervention from outside.
And now we have reports from the
United Nations that nearly half of the Syrian population urgently needs aid in
order to survive under the conditions that have been created by this protracted
and devastating war against a country that… all countries have problems but not
in this state five years ago at all.
When I was in Syria last, which was
nine years ago the country was doing fairly well and people weren’t starving;
half the population was not in need of outside aid in order to survive.
What the US policy and its allies’
policy has done to Syria and I should also say to Libya and to Iraq really
constitutes a tragedy, a disaster and a crime against the peoples of those
countries.
Press TV: The US policy is something we are trying to figure out
here in the region and it’s filled with contradictions.
I’m look at this 100,000 figure, I’m
curious how they came up with that, did they actually inform, train, how did
they come up with that 100,000? That’s maybe a question best left unanswered at
this point.
But now the point about what is now
common knowledge, a few hundred of these insurgents who have been trained by
the CIA in Jordan, supposed to have been active in Syria, but it appears that
they’ve been deployed to Iraq. This perhaps could be part of the 100,000.
Why was there are change of tack
there – why was there a change of destination when it comes to the CIA and
these insurgents who it’s been said are now part of the ISIL in
Iraq?
Becker: I don’t think that the ISIL is controlled by… I think that
it’s been helped tremendously through objective developing conditions created
by the intervention, the space that they’ve been given in Syria to develop.
They were almost defunct, they were defeated not by the US
as much as by others in the predominantly Sunni regions of northern and Western
Iraq who turned against the al-Qaeda policies in Iraq and didn’t want to live
under that kind of rule.
But now in the eastern part of Syria
they were able to develop and thrive, gain resources, gain resources from
outside, take over oil fields – gain revenue that way – impose their rule ,
impose taxation, grow as an organization.
And then it was from Syria not that
they weren’t also present already in Iraq, but came from Syria and with the
collapse of a large part of the corrupt Iraqi army, came from Syria and were
able to takeover Mosul and move further south towards Baghdad to takeover
Tikrit and takeover other cities and regions of the country.
So it’s very clear that it was the forces that gained
strength inside Syria that were able to come back into Iraq and to conquer
territory at least for the time being they’ve been able to conquer a very large
amount of territory.
Press TV: One country we have not mentioned here, it was a country
the US President Barack Obama visited and it was one country amongst a host of
Persian Gulf countries that John Kerry actually hosted in Paris and they were
talking about the ISIL how much of a threat it is – And that country is Saudi
Arabia.
What is the role that Saudi Arabia
has when it comes to terrorists because they display the fact that they’re a
threat to the kingdom; that they are a threat to the regional countries in the
Persian Gulf; but at the same time we have the news that they’re actually
supporting some of these terrorists groups, the one that comes to mind in the
big picture is Islamic Front, which is the combination of these terrorist
groups under one umbrella?
Becker: I think that we can see that the role that both Saudi
Arabia as a government and very wealthy people have become millionaires and
billionaires from the Saudi oil have played a very important role in the
development of these forces.
And again going back to the
Afghanistan war we really can’t take it out of that historical context because
that’s really where al-Qaeda originated was in the context of that war, the
development of it led by Osama bin Laden and then the turning of al-Qaeda against
the government of Saudi Arabia based on the fact that US troops were based and
remain based in Saudi Arabia for many years.
So we have to see this as the
contradictions that are inherent in these kinds of policies. They’re not
funding and arming people who are really totally with them – either the Saudi
government or the US government – they’ve formed temporary alliances or
pragmatic alliances of convenience, but have their own agenda and their own
view and you know, we’ve heard that the self-proclaimed Caliph of the Islamic
State saying that their intention is to take Mecca.
So, the Saudi government is funding
forces for its own purposes in terms of trying to overturn the government in
Syria, but they too face the blowback, the consequences because they are not
really completely in control anymore than anyone of the other foreign
actors.
SC/NN
--------------------
RELATED INTERVIEWS:
- ‘ISIL creation of Western powers’
- 'US must be held accountable over ISIL'
- ‘US funding terrorists in Mideast’
- 'Iraq moving to form unity govt.'
- US behind push for ISIL caliphate
- ‘US relies on Pakistan domestic groups’
==============
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario