Russia – E.U. Meeting in Brussels: Risk of Middle East and European War increased.
Christof Lehmann (nsnbc)(video reader). On 21. December 2012 the political leaders of 27 E.U. countries and Russia´s President Vladimir Putin met in Brussels On the top of the agenda were problems which are directly related to the ongoing war in Syria.
Russian control over major parts of the energy which the European Union will require over the course of the next 100 years, Russian-Iranian dominance over the most competitive gas resources and pipelines in the Middle East, US-American and British initiatives to change the energy-dynamics militarily and a European dilemma between Trans-Atlantic allies who are pushing Europe toward a war with Russia to save the Petro Dollar and greater integration of Russian and European energy sectors and market economies.
After the apparent failure to solve the most pertinent issues the positioning games about rioting Pussies, subversive NGOs and abusive adoptive parents continue. The chances for solving the crisis in Syria peacefully have become minimal. Are we heading toward a regional war in the Middle East and Europe ? The risk is significantly increased.
The European Union currently relies on Russia to provide between 22 % and 26 % of the natural gas it needs. The global trend, away from oil and toward gas as energy-source for the coming 100 – 150 years will continue and increase.
On Tuesday, only days before the Russian – E.U. meeting, the President of the Ukraine pulled the plug on Russian Ukrainian talks about the pricing of Russian gas deliveries for the Ukraine. The Ukraine, covertly lobbied by the UK and USA, has previously sabotaged the transit of Russian gas to the E.U., threatening to block the pipeline permanently unless it was granted unreasonable discounts.
The sudden pullout of the Ukraine on Tuesday is by energy insiders with whom the author consulted perceived as yet another Ukrainian, US and UK backed attempt to force the expansion of NATO and to drive a wedge between an increased integration of the Russian and E.U. economies. As it will become obvious below it is related to an aggressive attempt to save the value of the Petro Dollar.
The tensions between Russia and the European Union rose already in September, when the E.U. Executive Commission, after much lobbying from the UK, opened an investigation into alleged anti-competitive market practices by Russia´s Gazprom where the Russian state holds the majority of shares.
To counter the effect of the Ukrainian attempts to destabilize the flow of gas between Russia and the E.U. and the attempt to drive a wedge between the integration of the Russian and E.U. energy sectors and market economies, Russia and the E.U. have established the North Stream project, which went online in 2012. The submarine North Stream pipeline circumvents the Ukraine or Belarus by connecting Russia from St. Petersburg to northern Germany through the Baltic Sea. Even though the North Stream project provides better energy security there is an ongoing Russian European dispute about it which would have been solved long ago, was it not for the crisis in the Middle East.
Gazprom owns 51 % of the North Stream project which conflicts with E.U. laws, which prohibit suppliers of energy from dominating European energy distribution networks. Russia perceives this provision as violation of World Trade Organization rules and as an illegal restriction of trade. Continental European politicians are reluctant to change their position, knowing that both the USA and UK are attempting to sabotage the further integration of the Russian and European energy sectors by aggravating hostilities between Russia and Europe.
The failure to resolve the issues in Bruxelles is indicating that Europe and Russia risk to be driven into a conflict over Syria and the Middle East by the US/UK alliance in an attempt to save the Petro Dollar.
Concerns about the Implosion of the Petro Dollar behind US/UK push for Middle East and European Conflict.
Over the last decade the USA, UK, Turkey and Gulf Arab states, most prominently Qatar and Saudi Arabia have consistently been losing the competition for the development of natural gas resources in the Middle East to Russia, Iran, Iraq and Syria. The Russian sponsored South Stream gas pipeline which is delivering gas directly from Russia through the Black Sea to Turkey and from there to the E.U. is by far more competitive than the US backed Nabucco pipeline project. The discovery of the Pars gas field in the Persian Gulf, between Qatar and Iran in 2007 has aggravated the situation further.
Remarkably, 2007 is the year when the global financial crisis set in. 2007 is also the year when Qatar began investing billions of USD in financing the Freedom and Justice Party of Turkish Prime Minister R. Tayyip Erdogan and the Muslim Brotherhood in Turkey, the Muslim Brotherhood in Tunisia, Algeria, Libya, Jordan, Syria,and Lebanon in preparation of the so-called Arab Spring and a war on Syria. In 2007 Qatar succeeded at realigning Hamas and Al Jamaa al-Islamiya with the Muslim Brotherhood and to covertly abandon their alliances with Iran, Syria and Hezbollah. In 2007 Saudi Arabia began a massive sponsorship program of Salafist and Wahabist groups throughout the Greater Middle-East and Northern Africa in preparation of the war on Syria.
The Arab Spring and war on Syria are a desperate attempt of the USA, UK, Turkey, and the European Union to prevent the completion of the pipeline from the Pars gas field in Iran, through Iraq and Syria to the Mediterranean and a desperate attempt to save the value of the Petro Dollar.
Should the Pars pipeline go online and remain under Russian, Iranian, Iraqi and Syrian control, then Russia would get into a position where it can control approximately 40 % of Europe´s gas consumption. With a Russian allied Syria, Russia would also be able to take part in the development of major gas fields in the eastern Mediterranean Levantine Basin.
Irans involvement would provide potent political leverage with regard to Israel´s occupation of the Syrian Golan and Palestine as well as sensitive nuclear issues. Israel possesses between 200 and 600 nuclear warheads. Its nuclear industry in Damona has never been inspected and Israel refuses access for IAEA inspections. With Iran and Russia jointly controlling more than 40 % of Europe´s gas consumption and a Dollar in rapid decline, Iran would gain a leverage which is unacceptable for the Netanyahu government and Zionist lobbies.
The opposition of most continental European countries to the project and participation in the aggression against Syria is however, predominantly based on US American, British and Israeli pressure and American and British threats to derail the integration of the Russian – European energy sectors. The awareness among continental European governments, of the fact that its “allies” would not hesitate to destabilize European energy security is a significant motivation for their participation in the aggression against Syria.
To underpin that the US/UK/GCC alliance does not hesitate to use terrorism, it is noteworthy that 2007 also was the year in which the refugee camps of the internally displaced Rohingya in Bangladesh experienced a significant influx of fighters of the Al Qaeda associated HuJi in preparation of the so-called inter-communal violence between Muslim Rohingya and Buddhists in Myanmar´s Rakhine State. Rakhine State is the richest area in the Greater Mekong Region in terms of natural gas and other resources.
European Terror Threats.
A recent analysis of the German intelligence service Bundes Nachrichten Dienst, BND, documents that over 80 % of the fighters in Syria who are involved in the attempted armed subversion are foreign fighters. Approximately 65.000 foreign fighters, predominantly members of Salafist or Wahabist terrorist organizations with ties to Al Qaeda are currently fighting in Syria. According to recent media reports the leader of the Al Qaeda associated, Saudi financed Al Nusra has declared that Al Qaeda, after the fall of Syria, will use Syria as a basis of operations against Europe.
Even though Germany hosts a Friends of Syria office in Berlin and although Germany is actively and illegally involved in the armed aggression against Syria, it does so ever more reluctant.
In December, no more than two weeks prior to the E.U. – Russian meeting in Bruxelles, and after western media had been seeded with information about a growing terror threat from Al Qaeda in Syria, a mysterious suitcase bomb in Bonn, which failed to explode was discovered. No clear technical or other information about the bomb was provided other than that it failed to explode and that it contained “a flammable substance”. Paper is a flammable substance too. Germany, and continental Europe had received a warning call. (1) The most reasonable explanation for this bomb, which is supported by political and security analysts with whom the author has consulted, is that it was a warning from Germany´s allied friends, from MI6 the CIA or Israel´s Mossad to close ranks.
Doubts about whether the US/UK/Israeli dictated aggression against Syria, Russia and Iran are the best course of action for Europe are not tolerated. For anyone who doubts whether CIA, MI6 or Mossad would carry out terrorist operations against European civilians consider this:
The person who according to former Spanish Prime Minister Aznar was the mastermind behind the 2004 Madrid Train Bombings, the professional Libyan terrorist Abdelhakim Belhadj, who is on the payroll of NATO intelligence, who is a former inmate at Guantanamo which by many analysts is described as terrorist training camp, this Abdelhakim Belhadj, who is responsible for the death of countless American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, is currently the Military Governor of Tripoli.
During the Free Syrian Army´s two major campaigns against Syria in June and July 2012 Belhadj was in command of approximately 23.000 fighters from Libya. The utility of the Madrid Train Bombing in 2004 was the Spanish Parliament´s approval of the deployment of Spanish troops to Afghanistan. Would Germany´s or continental Europeans “allies” hesitate to “help making the right decisions” about a war on Syria.
The Writing on the Wall.
The time for developing an approach toward a peaceful resolution in Syria and the Middle East is indeed soon running out. Neither Russia nor China will accept any Security Council resolution which would pave a way for a repetition of NATO´s criminal abuse of UNSC Resolution 1973 – 2011 on Libya.
There are no signals which indicate that the E.U. will compromise with Russia with regard to Syria and the belligerent attempt to deny Russia, Syria and Iran the peaceful development of their natural resources. On the contrary, it seems that continental European countries like Germany let themselves be intimidated by Washington, London and Tel Aviv or rather Wall Street, the City of London and the Rothschild Family.
Even though Washington is doing all it can to avoid giving the impression that it is involved in the military aggression against Syria, it is obvious that the conflict would end within weeks after Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the USA and UK stop sponsoring, arming and supervising or commanding the mercenaries in Syria.
In spite of western mainstream media´s attempts to convey the opposite, the Syrian government enjoys the support of the majority of the Syrian population. The massive influx of Salafist extremists who daily commit the most serious atrocities and war crimes on behalf of the NATO/GCC/Zionist alliance have had the effect that the population of Syria rallies in support of its government, its peaceful opposition and in support of the Syrian military.
The Syrian government is by far more stable than one is led to believe by western propaganda. Even if the insurgency would succeed in ousting the Syrian government it is highly unlikely the ousting of the Syrian government and its substitution by Salafist extremists would not warrant a response from both Iran, Hezbolla. The result would invariably be a widening of the conflict into a regional war which may at first be limited to include Lebanon and Israel, but which would be almost impossible to contain.
Russia and China may propose a Security Council Resolution which would secure the deployment of Russian led UN-Peace Keeping Forces in Syria. Behind the scenes such an initiative would most likely to be paralleled by intense negotiations about how to save the ailing Petro Dollar without risking a regional war in the Middle East and Europe.
A regional war in the Middle East, with the involvement of Turkish NATO troops, of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Israel, Iran and eventually Russian troops would have a propensity toward an escalation into a conflict in Europe. The deployment of NATO missiles along Russia´s European and Middle Eastern borders would in such a situation become a risk factor which Russia would have difficulties to tolerate.
The writing on the wall spells ” Regional War in the Middle East and Europe”. Are there solutions ? Yes there are. A US-Administration and a E.U. which is willing to engage in joint ventures rather than adventurous venture capitalism, a US-Administration which is willing to confront the Zionist Axis inside the USA, more self-confident continental European governments who recall the lessons of two world wars and who resist against the US/UK/Zionist push toward a conflict with Russia.
The possible appointment of Hagel, who dared the unthinkable when he stated that he is an American Senator and not a representative of Israel as US-Foreign Secretary may indeed be a step into the right direction. How many steps can still be taken before the abyss ? Nobody knows. Global security is as volatile as the gas that fuels the conflict. There seem to be more firestarters than reasonable thinkers among the major stakeholders. We don´t need a Planet X, Alien Invasions or Pole Shifts to end the world as we know it.
Note: “ Bombe hätte Hunderte Menschen töten können“; Stern, December 2012, accessed online at: http://www.stern.de/panorama/vereitelter-anschlag-in-bonn-bombe-haette-hunderte-menschen-toeten-koennen-1940686.html
NATO`s 25th Summit in Chicago in Preparation of Global Full Spectrum Dominance, Interventionism, Possible Preparations for A Regional War Directed against Russia and China, and Developments in Global Security.