NIGHTWATCH Plus: Syria – Iran RECAP

Syria a Satellite of Iran? Nah….

NIGHTWATCH: Syria, Iran, and the Regional Context

NIGHTWATCH: US Invades Iraq, Creates first Arab Shi’ite State

NIGHTWATCH: Push-Back on US Across AF PK IR SY

Mini-Me: Smoking Gun Documents on Iran From Israel Mossad?

Josh Kilbourn: Dollar Disappearing, US Sidelined on Syria / Iran

Journal: Turkey’s Emerging Grand Strategy

Journal: Turkey Emergent

Journal: The Rise and Rise Further of Turkey (Along with the Collapse of Israel and the NeoCons)

Journal: Stupid Is As Stupid Does–Israel…Again

Journal: Nuclear War Against Iran…Again

Journal: Here’s a Great Idea–Lets Piss Off Turkey

Iran–and the USA–Blew Arab Spring, Both Irreleva

Iran–and the USA–Blew Arab Spring, Both Irrelevant

Chuck Spinney: Israel, Not Iran, is Central Threat in Middle East

Chuck Spinney: Middle East New Geopolitical Map

Chuck Spinney: Paris-Berlin-Moscow Axis Reinstated

Chuck Spinney: Should We Fear Nuclear Iran or Nuclear Israel?

23 Worst Tyrants/Dictators (Yes, there’s more than 23) and Oops, there’s Saudi Arabia..

Phi Beta Iota:  Does not include relevant book reviews.

Comments Off
Feb 3

US Guarantees Israel’s Oil Supply At ANY Cost

Did You Know That By Law The US Guarantees Israel’s Oil Supply – No Matter What?

…even if it causes US a DOMESTIC SHORTAGE???

I didn’t.

Money Trends Research, 12 January 2012

Under a 1975 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) the USA guaranteed all Israel’s oil needs in the event of a crisis. This Memorandum of Understanding is quietly renewed every five years. It commits U.S. taxpayers to maintain a strategic U.S. reserve for Israel, equivalent to $3 billion in 2002 dollars. Special legislation was enacted to exempt Israel from restrictions on oil exports from the USA. Moreover, the U.S. government agreed to divert oil from the USA, even if this causes domestic shortages. The U.S. government also guaranteed delivery of oil in U.S. tankers if commercial shippers become unable or unwilling to carry oil from the USA to Israel.

I wonder which israel-first bastard signed this memorandum . . .

Read full article.

Comments Off
Jan 12

Susan Lindauer: IRAQ – The Legacy of Deception and Its Costs

Susan Linauer

IRAQ: THE LEGACY OF DECEPTION AND ITS COSTS

Susan Lindauer, Former CIA Back Channel to Iraq at the United Nations

Most Americans are astonished to discover that right up to 9/11, the CIA was developing a “Real Politik” vision of Iraq that recognized the fast approaching collapse of U.N. Sanctions. The CIA was preparing for Peace—with a ruthless determination that the United States would capture the lion’s share of spoils from Iraqi Reconstruction contracts in any post-sanctions period.

German pilots transporting medical supplies and doctors into Baghdad International Airport at the end of the Clinton Administration had blasted the myth of invincibility surrounding sanctions. To this day, those pilots are anonymous—but they changed the equation in total. Their courage honoring the Berlin Airlifts in the Cold War was quickly copied. Across Europe and the Arab world, activists began to organize humanitarian flights into Baghdad. On the Security Council, France and Russia argued strenuously that the ban on air travel had been self imposed, and the no-fly zone could not prohibit humanitarian flights.

By this time, UN sanctions had killed over 1.7 million Iraqis; wiped out literacy in a single generation; and created artificial starvation in the world’s second most oil-rich nation. Iraq’s world class hospitals that once rivaled London and New York had been ravaged.  Sick of the misery, the global community refused to stay silent any longer.

The CIA saw the writing on the wall. International loathing for “genocide by sanctions” had reached such a peak of outrage that there was no possibility of re-crafting the hated policy. Secretary of State Colin Powell’s vision of “smart sanctions” had come too late.

The CIA was determined to control the agenda for the advantage of the United States, however. And so quietly through my back channel, we undertook a proactive, covert dialogue over exactly what concessions Iraq would offer the United States, in exchange for lifting the sanctions. As a long-time opponent of sanctions myself, I was eager to get results.

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments Off
Jan 2

Marcus Aurelius: The Future of Afghanistan – and US Policy

Marcus Aurelius

The Future of Afghanistan and U.S. Foreign Policy

Foreign Affairs Snapshot, December 15, 2011

In Afghanistan, even minimally accountable democracy may soon be beyond reach. If so, some form of constrained warlord rule will be the most that’s achievable.

The Three Futures for Afghanistan

Snapshot, December 16, 2011

Success in Afghanistan would not be as difficult or expensive as it was for the United States to win wars in Europe or counter the communist threat. Given the risks and the opportunities ahead, an investment in South Asia is worth making.

The Case for Continuing the Counterinsurgency Campaign In Afghanistan

Snapshot, December 16, 2011

The drawdown in Afghanistan may be afoot, but racing for the exits will leave large parts of the country — especially around Kabul in the east — infested with insurgent havens.

A Shift in the Afghanistan Strategy

Letter From, December 1, 2011

The drawdown of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan will proceed rapidly through 2014. As a consequence, the mission will change sooner than many people expect, and that means the fledgling Afghan National Army has to take charge of the fight now.

Afghanistan's Lost Decade

Snapshot, December 15, 2011

Judged by any yardstick, Afghanistan has made little progress since 2001. The United States and its allies have bred an overly centralized and ineffective government in Kabul that is hooked on foreign aid and struggles against a resurgent Taliban. Without serious reforms, the next ten years could be worse.

Washington's Colonial Conundrum in Afghanistan

Snapshot, December 15, 2011

In Afghanistan, the United States faces a choice: either establish a permanent administrative and security presence, or stand back and risk the country becoming a haven for organized criminals and terrorists. Staying forever won’t work, so Washington must accept the risks of withdrawal.

An Absence of Strategic Thinking

Snapshot, December 16, 2011

The U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan is driven largely by domestic politics. That is a privilege of a country that is both rich and safe. But the United States has security interests in Afghanistan and Pakistan that, despite its best attempts, it will not be able to ignore.

Phi Beta Iota:  Nowhere in this edition of Foreign Affairs is there any reference to an over-arching strategic model that is reality-based and focused on the public interest.  Instead, what we have here are a variety of ideological viewpoints that are totally lacking in any sort of “true cost” accounting analytics.

Comments Off
Dec 19

NIGHTWATCH: Push-Back on US Across AF PK IR SY

In summary:  US took ten years to make an issue of two Pakistani fertilizer factories that are the primary source for all Improvised Explosive Devices (IED) killing and maiming in AF.  Taliban gets what it wants in AF school programs, Iran makes progress in AF, SY and on the side with Saudi Arabia.

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments Off
Dec 14

Chuck Spinney: Break-Up of Iraq, History of Oil Invasions

Chuck Spinney

The below report by Patrick Cockburn, one of the best reporters now covering the Middle East, describes the growing tensions in Iraq over the question of sharing its oil wealth among its constituent regions.  Although his report is important in its own right, its contents become even more ominous when they viewed in a larger historical context:

The long view of history is likely to record the greatest ‘sins’ of Iraq, Iran, and Libya prompting interventions by the West have been related to the control of oil — not nuclear weapons; not any communist leanings during the Cold War; not support of worldwide terrorism.

Each country committed the unforgivable sin of being governed at one time by nationalistic leaders who believed the oil under each country belonged to that country and should be controlled by the government of that country — therefore, these leaders had to be removed:

  • Iran - Mohammed Mosaddegh, a popularly elected Prime Minister of Iran and social reformer, removed by a CIA/MI6 coup in August 1953.
  • Iraq – Saddam Hussein, a murderous neo-Stalinist dictator and social reformer (e.g., major achievements in women’s rights and education), removed by military force in 2003.
  • Libya – Muammar Qaddafy, a quirky tribal dictator and social reformer (e.g., major achievements in women’s rights and education) removed by military force in 2011.

Click on Image to Enlarge

One short-term common denominator in these imposed regime changes was that the nationalist leader was replaced by a more compliant government that agreed to an opening of that country’s oil fields to exploitation by privately owned western oil companies.

While history does not repeat itself, memories of the past condition events in the future.  Over the longer term, perceived wrongs are not forgotten, and such interventions can provoke blowbacks, which in turn provoke counteractions that enmesh the intervener in a welter of increasingly complicated conflicts.  In the case of Iran, for example, the 1953 coup eventually backfired in 1979, when  Reza Shah Pahlavi was overthrown by the Islamic revolution led by the Ayatollah Khomeini.  Khomeini then established a regime retook control of Iran’s oil fields, among other things.  But the Iranian game is not over, and the historical pattern of move and countermove is in play, with the nationalist (Islamic) regime of Iran again in the West’s crosshairs, allegedly because of its nuclear ambitions and support of international terror.  Nevertheless, the glittering temptations of re-privatizing Persian oilfields are lurking in the background, attracting the private oil capitalists of the West like flies to honey.

Finish long comment from Spinney, plus reference, plus See Also.

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments Off
Dec 12

Chuck Spinny: Obama Zero Understanding, All Shicksa

Chuck Spinney

Why the President Obama Should Study Sun Tzu

While Obama worries about appeasing Israel and Jewish vote at home, as well as being pressured to support threats of an Israeli attack on Iran, the government of Israel beavers away as usual, creating new facts on the ground.

Here (portions of which are quoted below) is an editorial in Ha’aretz, one of Israel’s leading newspapers, describing one way the Israeli government continues to plant seeds for the eventual cleansing of Palestinians from Jerusalem and the West Bank by exploiting the paralysis it created in what is absurdly known as the “peace process.”

Chuck Spinney
The Blaster

Without peace talks, Israel must leave East Jerusalem alone

Discussions on Jerusalem were postponed to a later stage of the final-status negotiations, but it was never agreed that this interlude be exploited to create facts on the ground.

Haaretz Editorial, 7 December 2011

As the diplomatic process has sunk deeper into hibernation, acts whose sole purpose is to tighten Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem have multiplied. Thus even as the Palestinians have given the Quartet a proposal on security arrangements and permanent borders in the West Bank, Israel is advancing proposals to change the master plans of neighborhoods over the Green Line.

Read full article.

Spinny Note: My favorite translations of Sun Tzu’s classic are Thomas Cleary’s for a political/phlosophical orientation and Samuel B. Griffith’s for a military orientation.  Readers interested in a modern application of Sun Tzu’s ideas, and especially the art of using Cheng & Ch’i operations to unravel an adversary’s decision cycle, will find them embedded throughout Col. John Boyd’s seminal study of conflict, A Discourse on Winning and Losing, especially Patterns of Conflict and The Strategic Game.
Comments Off
Dec 9

DefDog: War with Iran? Opening Pandora’s Box!

DefDog

Has the War with Iran Already Begun?

The evidence of an extensive Western covert program against Tehran, and Iranian retaliation, is now too obvious to ignore

Michael Hirsh

National Journal, 4 December 2011

Two incidents that occurred on Sunday—Iran’s claim of a shoot-down of a U.S. drone, and an explosion outside the British embassy in Bahrain—may have been unrelated. But they appear to add to growing evidence that an escalating covert war by the West is under way against Iran, and that Tehran is retaliating with greater intensity than ever.

Asked whether the United States, in cooperation with Israel, was now engaged in a covert war against Iran’s nuclear program that may include the Stuxnet virus, the blowing-up of facilities and the assassination or kidnapping of scientists, one recently retired U.S. official privy to up-to-date intelligence would not deny it.

Read full article.

Comments Off
Dec 6

Chuck Spinney: Is Iran an Enemy of the Arabs? NO!

Chuck Spinney

The West, especially the United States, and Israel are stoking the grand-strategic fires in Middle East by trying to intensify the conflict between the Sunnis and the Shias.  As Patrick Seale explains in this important essay, our leaders are playing very a dangerous, and I would add, ‘dirty’ game — but the United States are on the cusp of Presidential election year in the United States and Obama’s narrow vision of triangulating the Republicans in the domestic politics of foreign policy [1] is trumping the criteria for shaping a sensible grand strategy.

——————–
[1] A pathbreaking book outlining how domestic politics shaped American foreign policy between the Spanish-American War and the Cold War is Robert Dallek’s, The American Style of Foreign Policy: Cultural Politics and Foreign Affairs.

Chuck Spinney
The Blaster

Is Iran the Enemy of the Arabs?

by Patrick Seale
Agence Global, 29 Nov 2011

EXTRACT:

It would be wise for the Arab states to look to their own interests in this matter, rather than follow the bellicose lead of the Western powers and Israel. The Arabs must surely be aware that a military clash between Iran and the United States or Israel could be disastrous for the Arab Gulf region. Sensitive installations such as oil terminals and desalination plants could come under fire. The achievements of recent decades could be wiped out.

Read full article.

Comments Off
Dec 4

Chuck Spinney: Averting Civil War in Syria

Chuck Spinney

Patrick Seale is one of the finest and most experienced writers now reporting on the Middle East

Averting Civil War in Syria

by Patrick Seale

Agence Global, 22 Nov 2011

Syria is heading for a bloody sectarian civil war. The mutual kidnappings, torture, beheadings and displacement of populations taking place between the Sunni and Alawi communities in the central city of Homs — often described as “the capital of the revolution” — send a fearsome signal of what might be in store for the rest of the country.

To avert this descent into hell must surely be the immediate priority of Arab leaders and the international community.

The Iraqi example next door is there for all to see. The Anglo-American invasion destroyed a major Arab country. The country’s institutions and infrastructure were shattered; sectarian demons were released, triggering a civil war. Hundreds of thousands died and millions were displaced from their homes or forced to flee abroad. The country was dismembered as the Kurds established their own semi-independent statelet.

Syria needs the intervention of a high-powered, neutral, contact group to stop the killing on both sides.

Read more.

Comments Off
Nov 25

Warning: Unknown: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in Unknown on line 0

Fatal error: Unknown: Failed opening required '/data/16/1/35/61/1850387/user/2008605/cgi-bin/root.ini' (include_path='.:/usr/services/vux/lib/php') in Unknown on line 0