US-Saudi Funded Terrorists Sowing Chaos in Pakistan


Fauzia Qurban
Photo: AP Pakistani sister Fauzia Qurban an ethnic Hazara, tries to hold back her tears as she talks about her brother Ali Raza Qurban, at her family home in Quetta, Pakistan.
Brutal sectarian bloodletting has killed hundreds of Shiite Muslims in Pakistan’s Balochistan province and fired a flourishing human smuggling business in the provincial capital of Quetta.
·

Balochistan, Pakistan – long target of Western geopolitical interests, terror wave coincides with Gwadar Port handover to China.

·

QUETTA KILLINGS: ORCHESTRATION FOR A PAKISTAN SPRING?

·

by Tony Cartalucci

·

Quetta, the capital of Pakistan’s southwest Balochistan province, bordering both US-occupied Afghanistan as well as Iran, was the site of a grisly market bombing that has killed over 80 people. According to reports, the terrorist group Lashkar-e-Jhangvi has claimed responsibility for the attack.

Billed as a “Sunni extremist group,” it instead fits the pattern of global terrorism sponsored by the US, Israel, and their Arab partners Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

Why Balochistan? Gwadar in the southwest serves as a Chinese port and the starting point for a logistical corridor through Pakistan and into Chinese territory. The Iranian-Pakistani-Indian pipeline would enter from the west, cross through Balochistan intersecting China’s proposed logistical route to the northern border, and continue on to India. Destabilizing Balochistan would effectively derail the geopolitical aspirations of four nations.

The terrorist Lashkar-e-Jhangvi group was in fact created, according to the BBC, to counter Iran’s Islamic Revolution in the 1980′s, and is still active today. Considering the openly admitted US-Israeli-Saudi plot to use Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups across the Middle East to counter Iran’s influence, it begs the question whether these same interests are funding terrorism in Pakistan to not only counter Iranian-sympathetic Pakistani communities, but to undermine and destabilize Pakistan itself.

THE US -SAUDI GLOBAL TERROR NETWORK

While the United States is close allies with Saudi Arabia and Qatar, it is well established that the chief financier of extremist militant groups for the past three decades, including Al-Qaeda, are in fact Saudi Arabia and Qatar. While Qatari state-owned propaganda like Al Jazeera apply a veneer of progressive pro-democracy to its narratives, Qatar itself is involved in arming, funding, and even providing direct military support for sectarian extremists from northern Mali, to Libya, to Syria and beyond. (more…)

Advertisements

Pakistan can make Russia Queen of Asia


The constant and rude attempts of the United States to interfere in the internal affairs of a nuclear power raise overt anger in Pakistan at all levels. An opinion poll conducted by Pew Research Center (USA) in the beginning of 2012 showed that 74 percent of Pakistanis view the U.S. as an “enemy.”
Not that long ago, the whole country was discussing the scandal connected with the resignation of the Pakistani ambassador to the United States.
But even this pro-American official said last August that the goals and priorities of the two countries would not be the same in near future. That is why, he said, the USA and Pakistan should give up their attempts to build a partnership and pay attention to their own interests instead.
“If in 65 years we haven’t been able to find sufficient common reasons to live together … It may be better to find friendship outside the family ties,” Haqqani told Reuters.
·

PAK RUSSIA COLLABORATION: POSSIBILITY OF A MEGA BREAKTHROUGH

·

by Lyuba Lulko

·

The relations between the U.S. and Pakistan, despite the numerous attempts to revive them, are falling apart. Therefore, establishing close cooperation with Pakistan will give Russia a real chance to gain a foothold in Central and South Asia. In addition, Russia will be able to access the Indian Ocean, and make the U.S. troops in Afghanistan directly dependent on its logistics.

The constant and rude attempts of the United States to interfere in the internal affairs of a nuclear power raise overt anger in Pakistan at all levels. An opinion poll conducted by Pew Research Center (USA) in the beginning of 2012 showed that 74 percent of Pakistanis view the U.S. as an “enemy.” Not that long ago, the whole country was discussing the scandal connected with the resignation of the Pakistani ambassador to the United States. Husain Haqqani who it was alleged wrote a secret letter, in which he asked for help in preventing a military coup, which was allegedly plotted in Pakistan, and promised certain concessions in return.

But even this pro-American official said last August that the goals and priorities of the two countries would not be the same in near future. That is why, he said, the USA and Pakistan should give up their attempts to build a partnership and pay attention to their own interests instead. “If in 65 years we haven’t been able to find sufficient common reasons to live together … It may be better to find friendship outside the family ties,” Haqqani told Reuters.

The brazen drone bombings of the Pakistani territory, the uncoordinated military operation to destroy Osama bin Laden, the accusations of supplying materials for Iran’s nuclear program have prompted Pakistan to seek cooperation with Russia.

A special envoy of the President of Russia visited Pakistan in May 2012. Putin himself accepted the invitation to come to Pakistan for a bilateral meeting in Islamabad, prior to the IV quadrilateral meeting on Afghanistan. The meeting was to be held in Islamabad on 26-27 September 2012 with the participation of Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Pakistan and Russia. 

A new strategic partnership is brewing in the region. The meeting was indeed held, however, Russian president because of his pressing engagements at home, could not attend as expected.

Pakistan was one of three countries that officially recognized the power of Taliban movement in Afghanistan. There is no logic in the decision of the USA to make Pakistan its ally after 9/11. Indeed, Afghanistan and Pakistan are two brotherly nations. Ten billion dollars that the States invested in Pakistan’s economy during ten years are not enough to make the country “sell and destroy itself,” as then Pakistani Minister of Science and Technology Azam Khan Swati said.

In case of partnership with Pakistan, Russia could take control of the logistics of the U.S. military bases in Afghanistan. Russia already controls the Northern Distribution Network in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan that border on Afghanistan. If we add the southern routes from Karachi to Chaman and Torkham, then all deliveries will have to be coordinated through the Russian-Pakistani alliance.

If this scenario becomes reality, Russia will obtain enormous leverage over the United States. In one full sweep, it will remove the Mideastern loop, which can not be tightened today just because of Iran. What is more, Russia will receive access to the Indian Ocean through the Arabian Sea and the ports of Gwadar or Karachi and then to the Strait of Hormuz, bypassing the alliance with Iran, which is not beneficial for Russia now.

In addition, Pakistan has been an observer at the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization – a regional international organization, founded in 2001 by the leaders of China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan) since 2005. One could go further on the geopolitical level, and make the country a permanent member of the SCO. Given that Afghanistan, India and Iran also look for partnerships in the bloc, one should welcome them as members too. The U.S. would thus face a dilemma: either give away South Asia to the SCO (to Russia and China that is) or try to retain the region at all costs.

With Pakistan’s help, Russia would be able to control terrorist activities in Central Asia. The Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) is the largest Islamist political organization in Central Asia. It is present in Afghanistan on both sides of the Afghan-Pakistan border, and Pakistan’s role could be crucial in the fight against this menace.

The Commander of Pakistan Air Force, Air Marshal Tahir Rafique Butt, visited Russia in August. He told Thenews.com.pk portal that “it was a great visit with a positive result, and we can expect closer cooperation with Russia in the field of defense, particularly air defense.” According to experts, Pakistan is interested in buying Mi-35 attack helicopters, Mi-17 transport helicopters, engines for JF-17 program, missile defense systems, submarines and so on.

Russia made another thoughtful decision as it offered Pakistan help in solving the country’s energy crisis. Gazprom is ready to invest in Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) gas pipeline, rather than in the risky TAPI (Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India), which has the support of the United States. In addition, Russia’s Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Factory (MMK), with 75 percent of shares, will help expand the capabilities of Pakistan Steel Mills from 1 million to 3 million tons of production a year. Pakistan, in turn, can provide access to mineral resources in Balochistan and the Thar coal deposit.

It is important to remember that Pakistan sits on the crossroads of east to west and north to south trade corridors, including the new Silk Road Project in South Asia, which the Americans cherish. Russia needs to firmly define its economic priorities and defend them strongly. If the resources are not needed, then one should keep the transportation routes of those resources under control. A mega breakthrough is possible in the future: the “Persian Gulf – Bering Strait” railroad. The road will cross the Trans-Siberian Railway, the Turksib and the Trans-Asian Railway from China to Europe.
Pravda.Ru

Previous:Russia – Pakistan: the Way is Open for New Projects

Related Article:

Analysis of Pak-Russia relations (Urdu Column)
Source   Title image   
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the ‘Wonders of Pakistan’. The contents of this article too are the sole responsibility of the author (s). WoP will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statement / s contained in this post.
Wonders of Pakistan supports freedom of expression and this commitment extends to our readers as well. Constraints however, apply in case of a violation of WoP Comments Policy. We also moderate hate speech, libel and gratuitous insults.

YOUR COMMENT IS IMPORTANT

DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF YOUR COMMENT

We at Wonders of Pakistan use copyrighted material the use of which may not have always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We make such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” only. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.


Russia – Pakistan: the Way is Open for New Projects


Following withdrawal of the majority of NATO troops from Afghanistan in 2014, there will remain approximately 10,000 American servicemen (as of 1 January 2013, there were 66,000 American soldiers and officers in the country).
The American contingent staying on in Afghanistan will, just as before, need supplies of food, fuel and other products and these will be delivered to Afghanistan via tried and tested routes – through Pakistan and Russia. This means that the coordination of actions between Moscow and Islamabad is also important from this angle…
In general, improving relations between Russia and Pakistan could have a positive influence on the situation both in Afghanistan itself and in Central Asia.
·

BREAKTHROUGH IN RUSSIA PAKISTAN  RELATIONS ON THE ANVIL

·

by Sergey Kamenev

·

At the start of February this year, a trilateral meeting between the presidents of Pakistan, Afghanistan and British prime minister dealing with the situation in Afghanistan came to an end in London. The outcome of the meeting was an agreement for a strategic Pakistan-Afghanistan partnership.

Following the withdrawal of NATO troops from Afghanistan in 2014, close cooperation between Kabul and Islamabad will have a decisive influence on the situation in Afghanistan.

For Russia, the importance of relations with Pakistan is already on the increase, if only the involvement Afghanistan in drug trafficking is considered, as the bulk of the drugs ends up in Russia and the rest goes to Europe. 

Following the withdrawal of the majority of NATO troops from Afghanistan in 2014, there will remain approximately 10,000 American servicemen (as of 1 January 2013, there were 66,000 American soldiers and officers in the country). The American contingent staying on in Afghanistan will, just as before, need supplies of food, fuel and other products and these will be delivered to Afghanistan via tried and tested routes – through Pakistan and Russia. This means that the coordination of actions between Moscow and Islamabad is also important from this angle… In general, improving relations between Russia and Pakistan could have a positive influence on the situation both in Afghanistan itself and in Central Asia.

Russia, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Tajikistan head of states meeting in Sochi, August 2010

A breakthrough in relations between Russia and Pakistan was made possible by the annual quadrilateral summits between Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia and Tajikistan, which included bilateral meetings between the presidents of Russia and Pakistan. Initially (in Tajikistan, 2009), an expansion of Russia-Pakistan cooperation was reflected in the establishment of more trusting relationships at a higher level, the signing of several memorandums of mutual understanding and a number of other specific agreements.

Even at that time, substantial discussions were under way at a meeting in Dushanbe between the presidents of Russia and Pakistan regarding the possibility of a concerted combat against drug trafficking (including the direct and active participation of Afghanistan in this process), terrorism and extremism, the involvement of Gazprom in Pakistani energy projects, the possibility of developing regional trade, the creation of a favourable investment climate and a number of other issues.

The expansion of bilateral relations continued at a similar summit in Sochi in August 2010. At that time during bilateral meetings between the presidents of Russia and Pakistan, opportunities to collaborate in the financial sector were explored (the opening of branches of Russian banks in Pakistan and Pakistani banks in Russia), the admission of Pakistani students to study in Russia and many others.

Russia and Pakistan seem to have realised their mutual role in resolving the issues plaguing the region. Pakistan also sems to be contemplating on the way to lessen her reliance on America and to diversify its support base among the powerful states in the region.

Most important, however, was the decision to hold the first meeting of the Russia-Pakistan Inter-Governmental Commission on Trade, Economic, Scientific, Technological and Cultural Cooperation in September 2010, which took place as planned. On the Russian side, the commission is headed by the Minister for Sport, Tourism and Youth Policy, V.L. Mutko, while the Pakistani side at that time was headed by the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, Hina Rabbani Khar.

The agenda for the 4th quadrilateral summit in Islamabad (2-3 October 2012) included, at the top of the list, discussions regarding the domestic political situation in Afghanistan. However, the meeting was cancelled several days before it was due to start as V.V. Putin was unable to attend the “Dushanbe Four” summit in Islamabad. After the quick cancellation of the summit on 2-3 October 2012, the government of Pakistan diplomatically expressed hope that the Russian president would nevertheless still have the opportunity to visit Pakistan.

As such, there was much speculation in the media that the “Indian factor” had played a major role in the cancellation of V.V. Putin’s visit to Pakistan, with reports that Moscow continues to look at Pakistan through Indian eyes. However, in our opinion, Russia-Pakistan relations will increasingly develop no matter what. All the prerequisites are present for this and there is no doubt that it will have a positive impact on the general situation in Central Asia and on the situation in Afghanistan and surrounding areas.

In this context, a particular mention needs to be made of the relations between the military leaders of the two countries i.e. the visit made to Moscow at the beginning of October 2012 by virtually the most important military official in Pakistan, Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, Chief of Army Staff of the Pakistan Army. During hisvisit, talks took place between General Kayani [COAS Pakistan] and his Russian counterpart, Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Ground Forces Colonel General A.N. Postnikov, as well as the-then Chief of the General Staff N.E. Makarov. A meeting was also held between the Pakistani military leader and the chairman of the State Duma Committee on Defence, V.P. Komoedov. It is possible to suppose that one of the main subjects of the talks was Afghanistan.

The arrival of Air Marshal Tahir Rafiq Butt, chief of the Pakistan Air Force, in Moscow in August 2012 to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Russian Air Force also indicates that there are real prospects for military-technical cooperation between Russia and Pakistan. According to Russian experts, at the first stage this cooperation could well be developed within the framework of supplies of Russian dual-use technologies to Pakistan, for example heavy-duty trucks (which can transport both soil and troops across rough terrain, if and when required).

There has already been similar cooperation in the history of Russia-Pakistan relations. Alternatively, the supply of civilian helicopters (which has also happened in the past), are comparatively easy to convert into military transport helicopters.

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov with his Pakistani counterpart Ms. Hina Rabbani Khar in Moscow, February 2012

It should also be noted that during the visit made by the Russian Foreign Affairs Minister S.V. Lavrov to Pakistan at the beginning of October 2012, three Memorandums of Mutual Understanding were signed – in the areas of metallurgy, energy production and railroad transportation.

There is no doubt that the talks held between the prime ministers of Russia and Pakistan at the beginning of November 2012 in Laos as part of the “Asia-Europe” summit will also promote the development of cooperation between Russia and Pakistan. An unconventional document was signed following the meeting – a Decree on the willingness to sign a Memorandum of Mutual Understanding to modernise a Pakistani metallurgical plant.

During the course of the talks, the heads of the two countries’ governments referred to the trade figure for 2011 (348 million dollars) and expressed regret that this was 40% lower than before the financial crisis (prior to 2008); at that time, the volume of bilateral trade had amounted to approximately 570 million dollars. At a meeting of the Business Council for Cooperation with Pakistan held at the end of December 2012, meanwhile, it was noted that according to preliminary figures, the volume of trade between Russia and Pakistan had shown a steady upward trend overall and in 2012 had reached 660 million dollars. In our view, however, this figure is far from the total wealth of existing possibilities.
* * *
The contours of the geopolitical situation in Asia are literally changing before our very eyes. Large areas of intergovernmental cooperation that convey the ideas of a Greater East Asia and a Central East Asia macro region are taking shape. At an organisational level, this is reflected in the stepping up of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.

We would like to quote a few words from one of the leading Russian experts on Southern and Central Asia, Professor Vyacheslav Belokrenitsky, who as much as five years ago wrote that, firstly, “strengthening Russia-Pakistan relations would enable Moscow to equalise their chances with China’s in a multilateral dialogue on the expanses of Central and Eastern Asia. Secondly, it would enable Russia to make it clear to India that the time has passed, first and foremost, for its interests in terms of Russia’s priorities regarding South Asia to be taken into account.

If New Delhi is going to strengthen its strategic partnership with the United States by entering into an exclusive long-lasting peaceful nuclear cooperation agreement with them and opening up the way for cooperation with the West in the military-technical sphere, can it rely on the fact that Russia will still refrain from military cooperation with Pakistan that would be to Russia’s advantage?

The point here, of course, is not that the vector of Moscow’s military-technical cooperation itself will change, but that the implementation of certain corrections is possible and even necessary”.

In short, the way for the implementation of new projects between Russia and Pakistan is open. From the point of view of the needs of the Pakistan economy, cooperation with Russia would be most productive in the infrastructure, in energy production, including atomic energy, and in the sectors of communication, metallurgy, irrigation and amelioration. Here is something for both Islamabad and Moscow to think about.

Professor Sergey Kamenev is Director of the Centre for Pakistan Studies, in Moscow, Russia.

Next:: Pakistan can make Russia Queen of Asia

Previous:Pak–Russia Relations

Related Article:

Analysis of Pak-Russia relations (Urdu Column)
Source   Title image   Image next
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the ‘Wonders of Pakistan’. The contents of this article too are the sole responsibility of the author (s). WoP will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statement / s contained in this post.
Wonders of Pakistan supports freedom of expression and this commitment extends to our readers as well. Constraints however, apply in case of a violation of WoP Comments Policy. We also moderate hate speech, libel and gratuitous insults.

YOUR COMMENT IS IMPORTANT

DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF YOUR COMMENT

We at Wonders of Pakistan use copyrighted material the use of which may not have always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We make such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” only. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.


Afghanistan: the Smell of Defeat


There’s a reason why the US media doesn’t use the term defeat however applicable it may be. It’s because your average “Joe” understands defeat, the shame of defeat, the sting of defeat, the anger of defeat.
Defeat is a repudiation of leadership, proof that we are ruled by fools and scoundrels. Defeat is also a powerful deterrent, the idea festers in people’s minds and turns them against foreign interventions, police actions and war.
That’s why the Times won’t utter the word, because defeat is the antidote for aggression, and the Times doesn’t want that. None of the media do.
 ·

CUT-AND-RUN TIME

·

by Mike Whitney

·

Note for WoP writers: In the post that follows, Mike Whitney raises an important point. Selecting an excerpt from the New York Times, he quotes: America thinks it is in Afghanistan to help the Afghan women. Take a look at this August 2012 editorial titled “The Women of Afghanistan”:

“Afghanistan can be a hard and cruel land, especially for women and girls. Many fear they will be even more vulnerable to harsh tribal customs and the men who impose them after American troops withdraw by the end of 2014.

Women s’ rights have made modest but encouraging gains over the past decade. But these could disappear without a strong commitment to preserve and advance them from Afghan leaders.

The editorial continues:

…all Afghans should be invested in empowering women. As Mrs. Clinton has argued, there is plenty of evidence to show that no country can grow and prosper in today’s world if women are marginalized and oppressed.” (“The Women of Afghanistan”, New York Times)……

***

The author has rightly pointed out that actually its not the rights of women in Afghan society, but Washington and other international partners….

So says Whitney, its more It is about “America’s global interests”, particularly, pipeline corridors, mineral extraction and the Great Game, controlling real estate in thriving Eurasia, the economic center of the next century. That’s why the US invaded Afghanistan, the rest is propaganda.

***
In addition to what the oped writer of Counterpunch has so tacitly answered about this pseudo feelings for Afghan women, question arises what about the women of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan etc. where women can’t even vote, go to a shopping center if not accompanied by their menfolk.

Fact is that the American administration gets passionate for women’s rights only when a country goes astray from the goals set for it by the US. Similarly, the other US passions for human rights, democracy, enlightened moderation and such bla bla come only in action when a country follows an open, independent policy in its national interests, but may not fit into the agenda set by the US and its allies in the West.

In our context we have seen a manifestation of this hypocritical, sinister policy with respect to its stance on Kashmir. When respective Pakistani governments sided with US vis-a-vis its arch rival in the cold war era, US had espoused the human rights for Kashmiris with perhaps still more warmth than Pakistan itself. But after the demise of the erstwhile Soviet Union there was nothing left by which the US could get an advantage from Pakistan and hence the same Kashmiri freedom fighters are now branded as “terrorists” same as US has termed the Afghan Mujahideen who fought against the USSR on America’s behest, but now are fighting a war of independence as terrorists. [Nayyar] (more…)

Strategy for the South East China Sea: U.S. Bid for Full Spectrum Global Dominance [3 of 6]


Right after the concept finalization of the Project for a New American Century, practical work on its implementation was started a decade before the 9/11 happened. In the Balkans, soon after the  NATO members cooperated with a wide variety of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda and Bin Laden’s Mujahideen, the USA financed, trained, and sent arms to the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA/UCK) which was heavily supported by Al Qaeda brigades and which to a large extend was financed by the Heroin trade and trafficking from Afghanistan to Europe and Northern America. 
·

THE DETERIORATION OF THE PRINCIPLES ENSHRINED IN THE TREATY OF WESTPHALIA AND NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY

·

by Christopher Black., James Henry Fetzer, Alex Mezyaev, Christof Lehmann

·

·

Many of these principles and laws were implemented after unspeakable human suffering. Unless this regression into global barbarism is opposed by all necessary popular, political, diplomatic, economical, legal, and if necessary military means, humanity will descend into a state of global barbarism and unspeakable outrages. The most serious deteriorations over the past two decades are:

THE DETERIORATION OF THE PRINCIPLES ENSHRINED IN THE TREATY OF WESTPHALIA AND NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY

The treaty of Westphalia xxii was one of the international legal principles that was used as a guideline for the drafting of the Charter of the United Nations and it is by many considered as thé most important principle of international law with respect to the regulation of bi-lateral and multilateral diplomacy and politics. 

RESPONSIBIITY2PROTECT HAS NO MORAL AND LEGAL JUSTIFICATION. ITS PURE ‘MIGHT IS RIGHT’

The principle of non-interference into domestic affairs and the principle of national sovereignty enshrined in the UN Charter is increasingly being challenged by those who argue, that is the Americans, that the “international community”, again that is the Americans, has a “responsibility to protect” civilians in cases where the government of a sovereign state is not able to protect its citizens, or when the government of a sovereign state is committing severe violations of other principles such as human rights. A resolution that implemented the responsibility to protect was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 2009, in violation of the UN Charter. xxiii

This false responsibility was first termed humanitarian intervention, but it appears that that term could only be used in propaganda when a crisis was already in progress.

The slogan responsibility to protect was coined in order to give this strategy more flexibility so that “intervention” could be used even before the US had succeeded in creating a crisis.

The ”responsibility to protect” (R2P) also had the advantage of claiming to make a moral argument, of course never addressing how the USA came to claim this “responsibility” or why it operates only against its enemies and never its vassals and allies.

Although the guiding arguments for the primacy of human rights and the responsibility to protect “R2P” may sound convincing at first inspection, a closer analysis reveals that the erosion of national sovereignty based on the R2P opens a Pandora´s Box of serious problems.

The first instance where the R2P, which was then still termed humanitarian intervention, was used to override national sovereignty was NATO´s intervention into the internal affairs of Yugoslavia during the Clinton Administration in which the Secretary of State was Madeleine Albright.

It is now a well established and documented fact that the internal conflict in Yugoslavia was initially manufactured by an alliance of Slovenian and Croatian separatists with ties to WWII German National Socialism, with the covert support of the German government and the German Intelligence Service BND xxiv, and the Vatican. The German intelligence service BND provided the first weapons, second-hand Bulgarian AK 47 assault rifles, to Slovenian and Croat separatists.

As the conflict escalated and the country was forced apart along ethnic, and religious lines, the USA and other Western powers became increasingly involved, resulting in NATO´s “intervention” in fact its outright aggression against the Federal Republic, without approval from the United Nations Security Council and in complete violation of the UN Charter and NATO’s own Charter.

NATO member states cooperated with a wide variety of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda and Bin Laden’s Mujahideen. xxv The USA financed, trained, and was arming the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA/UCK) which was heavily supported by Al Qaeda brigades and which to a large extend was financed by the Heroin trade and trafficking from Afghanistan to Europe and Northern America. xxvi, xxvii

The war on and dismemberment of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has according to retired French Brigadier General Pierre Marie Gallois been planned and prepared by European powers in unofficial meetings on a farm in Germany since 1976; more than a decade ahead of the first public Slovenian and Croatian demands for secession from Yugoslavia. Brig. Gen. Pierre Marie Gallois was the French representative to these meetings and has disclosed many of the details in a stunning interview. xxviii, xxix

According to Gallois, one of the principle motivating factors for the covert and subsequent overt war on Yugoslavia was that Yugoslavia was the sole Russian ally in the Balkan region and the last functioning socialist state in Europe. Other motivating factors were that Germany wanted to re-establish its geo-political influence in the region which it had lost subsequent to world wars one and two. Yet another factor was to define a post cold war role for NATO. In fact, so the former French Brigadier General, the war on Yugoslavia provided the model for the war on Iraq and subsequent wars.(ibid.) xxx

The sole correlation between the intervention in Yugoslavia and Serbia, and the still ongoing NATO occupation of Kosovo and human rights is, that a humanitarian crisis was cynically manufactured with the intention to create a pretext for a military “intervention” in fact a military attack, based on the “R2P” the claimed responsibility to protect.

The usurpation by the United States of the role of the United Nations by arrogantly claiming to itself this invented responsibility has resulted in the deterioration of the principles of the Treaty of Westphalia and the UN Charter that both guarantee the sovereignty of nations and the concomitant right of the self determination of peoples.

It is is nothing less than western colonialism once again justified by the “white man’s burden”. In a recent article, Dr. Henry Kissinger discussed whether nations like Syria and other Arab nations would at all qualify for protection against interference into their internal affairs under the principles of the Treaty of Westphalia. xxxi

Kissinger argues, that almost all Arab nations, with the exclusion of eventually Iran, Turkey and Egypt, were nations whose borders had been more or less arbitrarily drawn by former colonial powers and that it was therefore questionable whether they could be defined as nation states that would be protected by the provisions in the Treaty of Westphalia. Iran, Turkey, and Egypt on the other hand, so Kissinger argues, had a long history as nations.

Lehmann has written an article in response to that of Dr. Kissinger. According to Lehmann, Kissinger´s interpretation is representative of the condescending, ethnocentric, colonialist attitude of Western nations towards countries world wide. It is also symptomatic for the social constructionism that guides Western foreign politics. While Kissinger questions the national sovereignty of almost all Arab nations on the basis that their borders were arbitrarily drawn by former colonial powers, he does not mention Israel, whose borders have been arbitrarily drawn by the same former colonial powers. xxxii

Neither does he mention the fact that the United States itself is also an artificial creation resulting from the extermination of the native peoples, the Louisiana Purchase of the south from France in 1803, and Florida from Spain, the War of 1812 against Canada, the war of conquest against Mexico in 1846, the war between two nations the United States and the Confederates states, known as the Civil War in the 1860s and the artificial extensions into Alaska, Hawaii and Puerto Rico.

The most recent example of a successful abuse of the erosion of national sovereignty under the pretense of a manufactured Responsibility to Protect is NATO´s abuse of UNSC Resolution 1973 (2011) on Libya. xxxiii

It can be argued that this Resolution never existed as the UN Charter requires that resolutions have the concurring votes of all permanent members of the Security Council. Russia and China abstained. An abstention is not a concurrent vote. It may be that Russia and China expected that the abstentions were enough to kill the resolution from being passed. Legally they were correct, but regardless whether Russia and China were taking a calculated Risk, or whether Russia, which was then under the presidency of Medvedyev was trying to appease the USA/NATO, which would have left China to deal with the impact of the US and NATO and GCC member states as well as Israel alone, will only be answered by future historical analysis.

What is certain, however, is that both the Russian and Chinese political leadership must have been aware that even though a UNSC resolution arguably is not legally valid unless all Security Council members vote in favor of it, it is a long established political practice that only a veto is sufficient for blocking an intervention. Since the first Russian, then USSR, abstention on UNSC Resolution 4 (1946) on Spain, an abstention has interpreted as not preventing the adoption of the resolution.

The claim that the USA, France and the UK abused the UN Charter was compounded when the US and its allies exceeded even the terms of their own resolution and conducted a war of aggression against Libya. A repetition of this abuse, directed against Syria, has so far been successfully stopped by Russia and China at the Security Council who since have consequently vetoed resolutions on Syria.

 

Contd…

Next: The Deterioration of the Geneva Convention

Pages  1   2   3  4  5  6

Related Posts: 

1. NATO Tied to Muslim Slaughter at Srebrenica (in two parts)

 Source    Title image

YOUR COMMENT IS IMPORTANT

DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF YOUR COMMENT

Wonders of Pakistan supports freedom of expression and this commitment extends to our readers as well. Constraints however, apply in case of a violation of WoP Comments Policy. We also moderate hate speech, libel and gratuitous insults.
We at Wonders of Pakistan use copyrighted material the use of which may not have always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We make such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” only. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
%d bloggers like this: