The ISIS/ISIL offensive of June 2014 in Iraq and any political or military responses to it cannot be understood without first “unveiling ISIS”. ISIS/ISIL brigades seized Iraq’s northern city of Mosul and most of western Iraq within days. Iraqi military withdrew from Iraq’s second-largest city after no more than token resistance. Unveiling ISIS, all trails lead to the royal house of Saud, CIA headquarters, and their shared network for global mercenary and terrorist operations called Al-Qaeda.
Origin of ISIS/ISIL as Al-Qaeda in Iraq – Weaving the Veil of ISIS. ISIS / ISIL is a successor organization of the former Al-Qaeda in Iraq, allegedly established by Abdullah al-Rashid al-Baghdadi. Al Baghdadi, however, was a creation of Al-Qaeda, a publicity figure with the function to endow the Saudi-U.S. creation “Al-Qaeda” with an Iraqi face, whom radicalized Iraqi Sunni Muslims could identify with.
Dean Yates reports in a Reuters article dated July 18, 2007:
A senior operative for al Qaeda in Iraq who was caught this month has told his U.S. military interrogators a prominent al Qaeda-led group is just a front and its leader fictitious, a military spokesman said on Wednesday.
Brigadier-General Kevin Bergner told a news conference that Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, leader of the self-styled Islamic State of Iraq, which was purportedly set up last year, did not exist.
The Islamic State of Iraq was established to try to put an Iraqi face on what is a foreign-driven network, Bergner said. The name Baghdadi means the person hails from the Iraqi capital.
One of the persons behind the al-Baghdadi brand was the Egyptian Abu Ayyub al-Masri, a close aide to and successor of Al-Qaeda’s Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi who was killed in a U.S. air strike on June 7, 2006. Al-Masri was politically active in Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan) where he joined Ayman al-Zawahiri’s Egyptian Islamic Jihad in 1982. He went on to the Osama Bin Laden run al-Farouk training camp in Afghanistan in 1999. He came to Iraq via the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia in 2002.
ISIS reborn – Iraq closes Saudi smuggling routes in Al-Anbar Province, creating Saudi – Jordanian and Jordanian – U.S. tensions.
ISIS/ISIL had been relatively dormant in Iraq while some of its brigades became involved in the admittedly Saudi Arabia, U.S. and Qatar and Turkey sponsored war on Syria. Weapons, other logistic supplies and mercenaries for ISIS were predominantly transported from Saudi Arabia via smuggling routes in the Al-Anbar province.
The Iran-friendly Iraqi government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was left “relatively” unchallenged by ISIS, that is Saudi Arabia and the U.S.’, until the Al-Maliki administration, in the autumn of 2012, decided to increase its military presence in Al-Anbar.
The objective was to stop the flow of arms and fighters from Saudi Arabia to Syria. Although there is no detailed documentation for it available, it is likely that both Damascus and Tehran lobbied Baghdad to secure the smuggling routes.
The closing of the smuggling routes led to increased tensions between Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United States. Shipments of weapons and fighters which previously were routed via Iraq to Syria had to be re-routed from Saudi Arabia via the Jordanian border town of Al-Mafraq.
U.S. troops and foreign fighters arrived in Al-Mafraq in late 2011. When traffic via al-Mafraq increased in late 2012 and early 2013, the situation in Jordan turned critical.
Jordanian Members of Parliament began to complain about the increased presence of U.S. troops, the flow of weapons via Jordan to Syria and the increased presence of foreign fighters.
In July 2013, the Deputy Speaker of the Jordanian Parliament, Khalil Atiya expressed his concerns about the increased presence of U.S. Troops in Jordan, saying:
” As deputies, representing the Jordanian people, we do not accept the United States or any other country’s troops in Jordan. Jordanians do not think that Syria could pose a threat”.
The head of the al-Kudsk Center for Political Studies, Oraib Rintavi stated in an interview with AFP:
“The Jordanians do not feel comfortable with the presence of U.S. troops and their weapons in the country. For the common people of Jordan, the U.S. military presence is associated with a conspiracy against Jordan´s neighbors. . . Society does not welcome Americans here, even if they say that they want to protect our country”.
The Al-Maliki Administrations Dilemma. The Decision that prompted the Rebirth of ISIS. As one can see, the administration of the Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was confronted with a dilemma.
One option was to let Saudi Arabia use the smuggling routes via the Al-Anbar province to appease Saudi Arabia, the U.S. and Jordan while falling out with Iraqi Shia lobbies, Tehran and Damascus.The option would have bought al-Maliki time; at least until the eventual fall of Damascus.
The other option was to appease Damascus and Tehran by confronting the ISIS/ISIL militants in Al-Anbar, Saudi Arabia, the U.S. and the western anti-Syrian alliance.
Two factors may have contributed to the al-Maliki administrations decision for the second option.
One of the primary reasons for core GCC member’s, core NATO member’s and Israel’s decision to launch the war on Syria was their determination to prevent the completion of the Iran – Iraq – Syria gas pipeline from the Iranian PARS gas fields in the Persian Gulf to the eastern Mediterranean coast of Syria.
Al-Maliki must have known that Iraq would be next once Damascus would have fallen. The second is that the al-Maliki administration is closely aligned with Tehran and pro-Iranian, Shia lobbies in Iraq. Falling out with Tehran would have been equivalent to cutting ties with the only regional support the al-Maliki administration could count on.
The decision came in the autumn of 2012, when the Iraqi military was ordered to secure the smuggling routes in Al-Anbar and confront the Saudi – U.S. mercenaries, ISIS/ISIL.
In December, a senior Iraqi legislator issued a warning to media stressing that plots were being hatched by Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia against Iraq, calling on all Iraqi citizens to be vigilant.
A month earlier, P.M. al-Maliki warned that Saudi Arabia and Qatar are attempting to carry out:
“an Syria style plot against Iraq in an attempt to topple the government by deploying terrorists”.
In an interview with the Lebanese al-Mayyadeen satellite network, al-Maliki spelled out that a coup was planned against Iraq, saying:
” Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are meddling to topple the Syrian government are now doing the same meddling to topple the Iraqi regime. Their goal is overthrowing the Iraqi government. Their goal is overthrowing the Iraqi ruling system and not overthrowing me”.
It is noteworthy that the U.S. think tank Stratfor, in 2002, suggested to divide Iraq into three states. Nouri al-Maliki and members of his administration must have been aware of the fact that U.S. Vice-President Joe Biden has endorsed this plan since 2002, when he still was a U.S. Senator.
ISIS and the royal family of Saudi Arabia.
The direct involvement of Saudi Arabia’s Interior Ministry and intelligence service in running al-Qaeda brigades in Syria, Iraq and beyond is well documented.
To mention one example; the founder and supreme commander of Liwa-al-Islam, which was directly involved in the chemical weapons attack on the Damascus suburb East Ghouta on August 21, 2013, Zahran Alloush, has been working for Saudi intelligence since the 1980s.
ISIS/ISIL is under the direct command of members of Saudi Arabia’s royal family. January 2014, Al-Arabiya published an article and video, featuring the interrogation of an ISIS fighter who had been captured in Syria. The article and the full video have since been removed, but the Saudi Arabia funded Institute for Gulf Affairs still has an excerpt of the video on its Youtube channel which was uploaded on January 22, 2014.
Briefly about the background. Saudi Arabian and Qatari proxy brigades have been involved in heavy infighting in Syria since 2012, leading ultimately to the near elimination of Qatari proxy brigades while Saudi brigades have gained the upper hand throughout Syria.
Details about this infighting are explained in the article “Top-US and Saudi Officials responsible for Chemical Weapons in Syria”.
When questioned why ISIS is “shadowing the moved of the Free Syrian Army” and who had given the orders, the captured ISIS fighter states that he didn’t know why, but that the orders were given by Abu Faisal, also known as Prince Abdul Rachman al-Faisal, the brother of Prince Saud al-Faisal and Prince Turki al-Faisal.
Interrogator: Why do you (ISIS) monitor the movement of the Free Syrian Army?
ISIS Detainee: I don’t know exactly why but we received orders from ISIS command.
Interrogator: Who among ISIS gave the orders?
ISIS Detainee: Prince Abdul Rachman al-Faisal, who is also known as Abu Faisal.
The “supreme commander” of ISIS/ISIL is Prince Abdul Rachman al-Faisal, the royal Saudi family, Saudi Arabia’s Interior Ministry and its intelligence service. ISIS Unveiled discloses a standard Saudi – U.S. – NATO – run intelligence operation and mercenary army. There is nothing “mysterious” about ISIS / ISIL. It is not even mysterious that western mainstream media fail to report the facts.
Preemptive Disclosure. Saudi and U.S. governments have a standard response to embarrassing public disclosures about prominent Saudis involvement in running mercenary / terrorism operations.
The example of Osama bin Laden is the prototype from which the standard model for disinformation campaigns was developed. Osama, the world is told, was “the black sheep” of the bin-Laden family. The veil of misinformation is held up by complicit mainstream media, including those who do most to convince their readers that they are no intelligence front, like “the guardian”.
After the incidents on September 11, 2001, which became the justification for the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, under false claims, “the guardian” did what was expected of an MI5-6 infiltrated newspaper. October 12, 2001, the guardian published an interview with Osama bin-Laden brother Abdullah, titled “No brother of mine”. The guardian is letting Abdullah tell “the guardian’s readers:
“It is my understanding that in the early 90s the family repeatedly reached out and made attempts to plead with Osama to moderate his views,” Abdullah says. “After these attempts failed, there was a reluctant but unanimous consensus that Osama should be disowned.”
To preempt a similar disinformation campaign about ISIS / ISIL Chief Prince Abdul Rachman al-Faisal, let us clearly state that Prince Abdul, in no way, belongs to the “fringe” of the Saudi royal family.
The man who is commanding the 2014 Saudi – U.S. war on Iraq, has been Saudi Arabia’s Deputy Minister of Defense from 1978 to 2011. He is also the brother of Prince Saud al-Faisal and of Prince Turki al-Faisal.
Prince Saud al-Faisal has been the Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia since October 13, 1975. He is also the second son of King Faisal. Turki al-Faisal has served as Saudi Arabia’s Director of Intelligence from 1979 to 2001. He has been Saudi Arabia’s Ambassador to both the United States and to the United Kingdom. He resigned from his post as Director of Intelligence only days before the “terrorist” attacks in the U.S. on September 11, 2001.
Turki al-Faisal publicly blamed Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki “for the loss of large parts of northern Iraq to terrorists”.
ISIS Unveiled – A Two-Headed Monster. We have unveiled ISIS, and ISIS Unveiled turned out to be a two-headed monster. Its body consists of volunteers, mercenaries and Saudi, Turkish and U.S. intelligence operatives and special forces. Its two heads are the royal family of Saudi Arabia and the CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, U.S.A. with its twin JSOC at the Pentagon.
Any appraisal of any foreign, political or military intervention in Iraq without considering these facts would lead to the wrong conclusion. It is precisely therefore, that one will not find any of this information in other than fragmented form in any of the western or Gulf-Arab media.
Not long after the publication of this article, the author had a conversation with a person close to the former Lebanese PM Saad Hariri. During the conversation the Hariri-insider revealed the identity of a rogue network of prominent U.S. citizens centered around the Atlantic Council and high-ranking members of the Turkish, Iraqi-Kurdish and countries’ governments behind the ISIS campaign. For more information, read:
Egypt rejects IMF and Indicated Historical Realignment
Egypt has rejected that it is seeking an IMF loan and states that the North African nation is facing an international plot. Analysts expect a historical political realignment of Egypt, unseen since the country realigned itself, away from the Soviet Union and towards the USA in the early 1970s.
Myanmar, Gas and the Soros-Funded Explosion of A Nation State.
Early 2012 violent clashes between Muslim Rohingya and Buddhists broke out in Myanmar´s Rakhine State which is bordering to Bangladesh. In 2011 Myanmar ended 49 years of military rule. It is slowly implementing political, social, legal and economical reforms. It has been troubled by supposed ethnic conflicts for decades; Remnants of the British Divide and Conquer Strategy, aggravated by world war two and modo-colonial influences. It is the most rich country in the greater Mekong region in terms of natural resources. Yet it is one of the lowest ranking on the Social Development Index.
The end of military rule opened the doors for western corporations, NGOs, think-tanks, human rights organizations and to a greater influence of UN Agencies. Many of them, UN-agencies included, are associated to and sponsored by the likes of the self-proclaimed philanthropist and multi-billionaire George Soros. Together they establish a loosely associated network, consisting of new local players and well established international players who are notorious for exploding targeted nations into ethnic violence. Their philanthropy and advocacy for freedom, democracy and human rights has left a trail of ethnic violence, death and devastation from Bosnia and Kosovo to Nepal. Is Myanmar´s geo-strategically significant location, a planned gas-pipeline, and its wealth in resources turning Myanmar into the next target for globalization and the strategic encirclement of China?
Independence and Common Denominators of Modo-Colonialism .
Myanmar became independent from British colonial rule in 1948. Two wars of global reach had depleted European nations military and economies. Maintaining colonial administrations had become too costly, cumbersome, expensive and unfeasible. The divide and conquer strategy of colonialism had left the newly independent Myanmar to cope with internal conflicts which are still devastating national coherence, stability, peace as well as economical, social and political development. The 49 years of military rule in Myanmar were in fact a by product of western modo-colonialism and a nations defense against a protracted subversion.
After the end of the cold war, the peaceful transfer of Hon-Kong to Chinese rule, the gradual transformation of the Chinese economy, and the expansion of the Chinese economy into the markets of former western colonies in Africa and Asia, the internal conflicts in Myanmar acquired new dimensions. The meta-dimensions of a US/NATO ambition for global, full spectrum dominance, the dimension of Myanmar´s natural resources, the dimension of a gas-pipeline project, and the meta-dimensions of Myanmar as a nation that is being targeted as part of the US/NATO strategic encirclement of China.
Every western-backed subversion common denominators. The involvement of foreign nations, the instrumentalization of local elements, and the goal to control resources, economy, and geo-politically as well as strategically significant locations. The product is internal conflict based on diversity and the manufacturing of a crisis that lends apparent legitimacy to calls for political, economic or military interventions. Western media manufacture popular consent for interventions by eliciting a fabled advocacy for stability, human rights and democracy. Stability and human rights are the modern propagandists tool for manufacturing apparent legitimacy for aggressive modo-colonial subversion, invasion, long-term military presence and control. The strategy has been successfully implemented in Bosnia and Kosovo. In 2010 and 2011 it was successfully implemented in Ivory Coast and Libya.i It is currently being used against Syria and fermented and Nepal.ii It has been fermented in Myanmar for decades and the recent violent clashes, supposedly between the 2012 clashes between the Muslim Rohingya and Buddhists signal that yet another attempt is made to explode the country.
The ethnic or religious violence between the Rohigya and Buddhists in 2012 is, as it will become evident below, a function of western imperialists to destabilize Burmese national reconciliation and to derail attempts to find a Burmese and Asian solution for Myanmar´s problems within a the regional framework of ASEAN. The policy of obstructing an ASEAN, Myanmar, Thailand, China brokered solution began being implemented by the USA during the administration of G.W. Bush. As we will see below, the Bush administration was involved in an attempted subversion in Rakhine State in collusion with intelligence services of Bangladesh and Pakistan. While the entire nation is targeted for subversion the specific function of the clashes however, is to gain control over Rakhine State and its abundant oil and gas resources.
Ethnic Awareness in Myanmar, the Root Causes for Ethnic Awareness and Conflict in Myanmar, and the Obstruction of National Consolidation of Myanmar within a Regional Paradigm by US/NATO Imperialism.
Myanmar can look back at a more than one thousand year long history as empire and nation. In fact it can be argued that Myanmar, even though several ethnic groups are represented in it, has developed an actual national identity and national awareness long before the first European nation states were created. A national awareness based on ethnicity developed first after years of British colonial rule. It was fermented and aggravated by Britain as a standard colonialist instrument for social and political control.
The first to develop national awareness based on so-called ethnicity were the Burman and the Karen during the early 1900s. The development resulted in ethnic groups demanding representation within various colonial institutions that were being introduced by the British. One could argue the British genius of making the Burmese people themselves demand the institutionalization of colonialists primary instrument of control.
National awareness along ethnic lines was heightened during the 1930s development of ultra nationalism in Germany, Italy and Japan and the Japanese-Thai occupation of Myanmar. The developments during colonialism and world war two resulted in agony between Japanese-fostered anti western and partially anti-Chinese ethnicity based nationalism in i.e. Burman, Shan, Rakhine, and an Allied-fostered ethnicity based nationalism in Karen and Kachin.
The majority of the ruling elite in the Karen State are either Christians or have close ties to Christian communities and Britain. Many Burmese considered the Karen elite as collaborators with the colonialists and during the Japanese-Thai occupation of Myanmar many of them were persecuted. This situation was exacerbated due to the fact that the British, when leaving Myanmar, negotiated a settlement with the non-communist former Japanese allies. It came to armed clashes between Karen and mainly Burman militia. Infighting began as an artifact of colonialism and the occupation of Myanmar by Japan. The tragic reality of post-colonial and post-war Myanmar is that the still ongoing violence in Karen State and other regions has nothing whatsoever to do with ethnicity or ethnicity based nationalism.
The conflict, including the countless death and maimed, the decades of suffering of Karen in refugee camps in Thailand, the devastating impact of the conflict on social and political development and for the national coherence and security of Myanmar are an artifact of foreign colonial and occupying powers cynical use of the divide and conquer strategy. On a positive note, it may well be the recognition of this fact that holds the key to national reconciliation.
There is no doubt that atrocities, human rights violations, and serious crimes have been committed on all sides of the decades long conflicts. One-sided western criticism of the military government and the new civilian government in Myanmar however, do not contribute to conflict resolution and national reconciliation. It transpires with ever more clarity that this criticism is not intended to contribute to reconciliation. On the contrary, as it will become evident below, further conflicts are being fermented with the aid of foreign interests, domestic players, United Nations Agencies, including the Soros funded UN Framework Team for Preventive Action, and western funded NGOs which are notorious for justifying western sanctions and interventions on the basis of the very conflicts they manufacture and aggravate.
Myanmar, Gas/Oil-Pipelines and Explosive Energy.
Myanmar is currently involved in two international pipeline projects which to a certain degree are in competition with each other. The Myanmar-Bangladesh-India (MBI) pipeline project which is transporting gas from Myanmar to Bangladesh and India, and the dual Oil&Gas China-Myanmar pipelines.
Due to a lack of convergence in the energy and security needs of India and Bangladesh the MBI project was initially met with considerable resistance from Bangladesh. Bangladesh considered that the deliveries of gas to India threatened both the energy and security needs of Bangladesh. Bangladesh first agreed to the project in 2010, after new and more accurate estimates of the available gas reserves had been accumulated, and after a new contract had been negotiated.
Another motivating factor for Bangladesh to finally agree to the MBI project in 2010 is the fact that the China-Myanmar pipeline project reduced the available amount of gas reserves for export to Bangladesh and India. While the first project, the MBI has predominantly regional implications, the second project, the China-Myanmar dual Oil&Gas pipeline, is not well perceived by western energy cartels and the US-Administration whom the project causes grave concerns with regards to the US/NATO strategic encirclement of China. The pipeline is considered yet another in China´s “String of Pearls”, as a defense department commissioned study calls China´s regional interests.iii
In 2012 violent clashes erupted in Rakhine State; supposedly between the predominantly Muslim Rohingya who are demanding that they no longer be considered as foreigners and refugees, and that Myanmar should grant them Burmese citizenship, and Buddhists who supposedly want to oppress the Rohingya´s legitimate aspirations. Among the victims of the violence were Rohingya, Buddhists as well as Burmese police and security forces.
As already discussed above, non of the presumably ethnic conflicts that have destabilized Myanmar for decades were or are ethnic conflicts. An analysis of the supposedly religious and ethnic conflict between the Rohingya and Buddhists will show that the causes of the violence and conflict have nothing whatsoever to do with religion or ethnicity, and that this conflict shares a common denominator with all other internal conflicts in Myanmar. Foreign influences that use internal factors to destabilize the country.
To gain an in depth understanding of the so-called Rohingya – Buddhist violence it is necessary to briefly review the recent history of Bangladesh, its transformation from secular state to Islamic state , the interplay between internal developments and the US/CIA war on the USSR, the rise of Islamic extremism in Afghanistan and Bangladesh, and the position of the Rohingya within this context.
The development of a feasible model for conflict resolution, which necessarily must take cultural, humanitarian, as well as security concerns of Myanmar into account is not possible without a prior analysis of this context.
Social Injustice in Bangladesh, The US-Manufacturing of Islamist Terrorism, Abuse of the Rohingya for the Subversion of Myanmar and the Strategic Encirclement of China.
After a protracted war with Pakistan the largely secular and nationalist forces in Bangladesh won independence in 1971. In 1972 Bangladesh received its first constitution. It was based on democratic principles, nationalism, human rights and secularism. Strong forces within the powerful military of Bangladesh however, soon embarked on a project of turning the secular state into an despotic Islamic state. The project was opposed by both the majority of nationalists, secularists, as well as by the many of the religious communities in the country.
During the twentieth century Bangladesh experienced internal conflicts based on social issues. The conflicts developed into ethnic, racial and religious conflicts. The country had previously experienced considerable violence based on ethnic, religious and social issues.
Racial, ethnic and religious violence resulted in the encouragement of migration as well as the forced displacement of segments of the population. The Islamic elites anti-secularism of that period spilled over into the post-liberation military as well as into domestic politics of the newly created state of Bangladesh. As usual in such situations neither the ordinary peaceful Muslim, Hindu, Secular or other segments of the population had much or any influence on this development. In fact, secularism and tolerance for religious diversity had been practiced in the region for centuries.
Dictators as well as nationalist politicians began abusing Islam as instrument of social and political control and for consolidating power structures. The abuse of Islam for consolidating political power and a decade long Maoist insurrection in western Bangladesh created the basis for the development of radical Islamic movements in rural districts.
Radicalized Islamist movements began receiving substantial funding from Saudi-Arabia and oil-billionaires who funded the spread of the radical and extremist Wahabi branch of Islam. Also the Qatar-based international wing of the Muslim Brotherhood soon became active in Bangladesh, financing, recruiting, arming and training youth for Jihad.
Bangladesh developed into a hot-bed of militant Islamic movements and a major exporter of Jihadi idealists and mercenaries. During the war against the USSR backed Democratic Republic of Afghanistan thousands of Bangladeshi youth were recruited for Holy War against “the infidels”. Many of them were recruited into the CIA created Al-Qaeda network led by Osama bin Ladin. The facilitators of the recruitment were the CIA, the Pakistani ISI as well as the Military Intelligence Service of Bangladesh, DGFI.
The recruitment potential for young “Freedom Fighters” in Bangladesh was enormous. Being one of the lowest ranking nations on the Social Development Index and with lack of access to adequate education for the socio-economically under-privileged and staggering unemployment rates, Bangladesh was to become one of the primary exporters of Al-Qaeda operatives and mercenaries. Many of them were then, and still are unwittingly recruited into fighting wars on behalf of US/NATO-Imperialism.
The DGFI´s involvement in Afghanistan began accumulating vast sums of revenues from the lucrative drugs and arms trade. In 1978, expecting that the military government of neighboring Myanmar was weakened by internal conflicts, aware of the fact that the neighboring Rakhine State was rich in natural gas and oil resources, and aware of the fact that the previously very small population of Rohingya in Rakhine State had grown in numbers due to a large influx of Rohingya who had been displaced during the internal conflicts in Bangladesh in 1943, the DGFI embarked on the mission of radicalizing the Rohingya in Rakhine State. The goal was the establishment of a Rohingya State with a Bangladesh controlled proxy-government that would give Bangladesh access to Myanmar´s rich oil and gas reserves in the region.
The criminal abuse of the displaced Bangladeshi Rohingya population in Rakhine State had the direct approval of the USA.
The plan was designed by the Military Leader of Bangladesh, General Ziaur Rahman with assistance from the CIA. The execution of the subversion was delegated to Brigadier general Nurul Islam Shishu. Diplomatic ties between Myanmar and Bangladesh froze when Myanmar expelled the military attache of Bangladesh and the Burmese military forced many of the militant Rohingya to flee back to Bangladesh. Atrocities were committed on both sides. The government of Myanmar however, was positioned as the villain by western governments and became the focus point of a western media coverage which at best can be described as one sided and less euphemistically as well designed propaganda to cover up the fact that the USA and Bangladesh had criminally abused a refugee population to manufacture a subversion. The situation escalated in border clashes.
If Bangladesh was a hot-bed of terrorism then, after the so-called war on terror and the war on Afghanistan, Bangladesh became one of the primary bases of operations of Al-Qaeda. Al Qaeda operatives and mercenaries from Bangladesh were among other involved in missions in the Ache province of Indonesia, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Myanmar, Chechnya, Egypt, India, Kashmir, Tajikistan.
The coordination is mainly organized through the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islam network, (HuJI). Besides these operations, Al-Qaeda fighters recruited via Bangladesh took part in the successful 2011 NATO/GCC backed subversion of Libya, and they are currently taking part in the ongoing subversion of the Syrian Arab Republic. Both the US´s CIA and DIA, Pakistan´s ISI and the DGFI play significant roles in coordinating Al-Qaeda operations via Bangladesh, although deteriorating ties between Pakistan and the USA have reduced the role of the ISI and contributed to an influx of Al-Qaeda operatives in Bangladesh.
The fermenting of a new subversion in Myanmar´s Rakhine State is among other organized through Rohingya camps of the militant, intelligence supervised Rohingya Solidarity Organization (RSO) in Bangladesh. The camps have experienced a significant influx of Al-Qaeda associated Islamist organizations and fighters. The 2012 violence in Rakhine State can not be understood independently from its causes. The above mentioned dimensions are also a precondition for fully understanding the role of Aung San Suu Kyi, international and Burmese media, NGOs and UN-Agencies in the attempted subversion.
Myanmar, Political reforms in a targeted nation.
The primary problem for the former military and present civilian government in Myanmar could be reduced to the following. Lack of political, social, legal and economical reform and development is reinforcing the subversion. Much needed reforms increase the likelihood of a successful subversion. Lack of pluralistic or more representative political processes have resulted in the permeation of political, administrative, legal, economical and other systems by military and military associated cartels. Reforms will be met with inertia from those who are the beneficiaries of these structures. The political influence of the military stands between a successful subversion and national sovereignty, integrity, security and genuine reform. Implementing political reforms under such circumstances is not only extremely difficult but also inherently dangerous for national security.
The case of Aung San Suu Kyi is a prime example for how the attempted subversion of a nation drives a political opposition into the camp of the subversion, and how the subversion influences a political opposition. No other case in recent history is in fact more exemplary for this interplay. The prospect of implementing peaceful political reforms in Myanmar has suffered considerably from it for decades. In the West, Aung San Suu Kyi is the most prominent Burmese pro-democracy and human rights activist. Western governments and media have made her into an icon of freedom. A heroin under house arrest, Nobel Peace Laureate and into a “beacon of hope” for freedom and democracy in Myanmar.
In fact, Suu Kyi has been developed into a franchise or icon under whose banner it is possible to position the government of Myanmar as villains while waging an undeclared war on the country. From a Public Relations perspective it was a disaster for the military government to keep Suu Kyi under house arrest. From the perspective of national security she would have been of grave danger to the country´s national coherence, stability and security had she been released before a peaceful transition to a civilian government could be safely implemented. Unless Suu Kyi and her party are willing and able to adjust to the reforms by re-aligning their policy towards national sovereignty and regional integration of Myanmar, Suu Kyi and the party will remain a threat to national sovereignty as well as national and regional security.
Whether one supports her or not, Aung San Suu Kyi has been and will be playing a significant role in the politics of Myanmar. Her position, function and influence can only be understood and used to the benefit of Myanmar when it is being taken into account that she is both representing a consortium of power-brokers who are trying to destabilize Myanmar, and that she is a willing victim, but never the less a victim of circumstances. The circumstances of being a prolific politician in a country that has had a repressive government because it was under attack. The circumstance of having been targeted as asset as much as she herself needed those whose interest it is to destabilize Myanmar.
The next coming years will show if Suu Kyi is able and willing to abandon some of the most subversive of the allies that have supported her over the last decades or not. Her decisions will be crucial for how swiftly comprehensive reforms can be implemented safely. Sadly it looks as if the subversive network, reaching from the US-State Department over the United Nations to the National Endowment for Democracy, Human Rights Watch, and a cohort of Soros-Funded NGOs has such a degree of control over Suu Kyi and her party, that it will be virtually impossible for them to work for the best interest of Myanmar and its national integrity and security, even if she wanted to.
Suu Kyi´s main sponsor over the last decades is the George Soros. In 2012 George Soros opened his first office in Myanmar.iv Soros stated that he has had talks with “Pro-Democracy Leader Suu Kyi” and that they had agreed that he would open the office. The full bearing of this “deal” becomes evident when having a look at the range of organizations, initiatives and agencies in Burma which are Soros-Funded.
Soros-Funded organizations in Myanmar include, the Open Society Foundation, Mizzima News, Burma News International, Human Rights Watch, Initiatives to promote the education of young journalists, stipends for students, fellowships at institutes which are notorious for their involvement in subversion and not to forget, UN-Agencies.
Other organizations in support of Suu Kyi are Amnesty International, whose Director for Amnesty International USA, Suzanne Nozzel, is Hillary Clinton´s and the US State Departments adviser for NGO – Governmental relations, the Clinton Global Initiative, and the Burma Campaign UK, whose 2006 report clearly shows that it is financed by the very globalist forces that are targeting Burma for subversion.v
How all pervasive this globalist, predominantly Soros-Funded network against Myanmar is and how it interfaces with the radicalization of the Rohingya via Bangladesh and Bangladesh supervised and sponsored Al-Qaeda operatives and mercenaries becomes evident when having a closer look at the track record of the also Soros-Funded United Nations Interagency Framework Team for Preventive Action, short FT. vi
The Soros-Funded Framework Team is a UN-Agency which is overseeing the cooperation of UN-Agencies on international, regional and national levels. It is also supervising and coordinating the interplay and cooperation between UN-Agencies and NGOs such as Human Rights Watch, the Open Society Foundation, Amnesty International, Burma Campaign and numerous others. The FT has been instrumental in the fermenting and explosion of ethnic violence in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Today that FT is actively involved in fermenting ethnic and religious violence in Nepal, Myanmar and numerous other targeted nations.
Example Nepal. To provide an understanding of how the UN Framework Team for Preventive Action is complicit in the fermenting and exploding ethnic and religious violence in targeted nations Nepal is a prime example and worth investigating in great detail.
In 2006 a protracted armed popular struggle for political reforms in Nepal ended successfully with the victory of the United Communist Party of Nepal – Maoist against the Nepali Monarchy. A pluralistic and representative form of government was installed, elections held, in which the party won over 40 % of the parliamentary seats. Other communist parties were represented in a coalition government. The former centralist governmental structures should be reformed, power delegated to regions and communities. A commission was formed and the UN Framework Team became involved. The amount of UN-Agencies and NGOs that became involved in Nepal grew exponentially.
Nepal has a hundreds of years old history of tolerant and peaceful co-existence of ethnic and religious communities. Over 100 religions and 300 casts are represented in the country. With the “help” of the UN Framework Team for Preventive Action and NGOs which lobbied for an ethnicity and religion based “fair distribution of landownership”, such as NEFIN, the population was made suspicious and envious of each other. In fact, the very same head of the FT in Nepal, Ian Martin, is the person who has been responsible for the same subversion strategy in Bosnia Herzegovina where it resulted in serious ethnic violence and civil war.
An originally planned six districts plan for Nepal was opposed. Eleven regions were suggested. The problem is, that regardless how one divides Nepal along ethnic and religious lines there will always be elements of one group being a minority within the supposed “territory or the other”. Ethnic violence erupted in Nepal, implemented with the aid of CIA associated Islamic extremists and in collusion with the UN Drug Agency. It is precisely the same model, and precisely the same Soros-Funded network of UN-Agencies and loosely associated NGOs, as well as Al-Qaeda associated, intelligence controlled network of Islamic extremists that is behind the eruption of the violence in Rakhine State and the planned subversion of Myanmar.
2012 Violence in Rakhine State and Involvement of UN-Employees.
The violence in Rakhine State, supposedly between Muslim Rohingya and Buddhists, has been planned and executed in collusion between the Al-Qaeda associated Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islam (HuJI) and the Rohingya Solidarity Organization. The basis of operations for these organizations and for the violence are Rohingya camps in Bangladesh. Both organizations as well as the camps are under supervision of Bangladesh´s intelligence service, DGFI. The violence has been incited in an attempt to destabilize regional gas-pipeline projects which contradict the energy policy of Bangladesh and the US/NATO strategic encirclement of China.
July 2012 authorities in Rakhine State arrested two UN Employees. Although the reason for their arrest was kept as quiet as possible by both the United Nations and the government of Myanmar to avoid a diplomatic scandal, it is a well established fact that the UNHCR and the WFP employees were working as intelligence agents for a foreign nation and that both were directly involved in the manufacturing and aggravation of the so-called ethnic clashes.
On 27 August 2012 both were sentenced by a court in Maungdaw, Myanmar. The United Nations insists that the two are treated in accordance with all applicable international conventions and immunities they may be entitled too. Immunity however, is not applicable when UN-Staff has abused the privileges that are granted to the United Nations for espionage and the subversion of a nations territorial sovereignty. The arrest and subsequent sentencing of the UN staffers indicates that the government of Myanmar is self-confident and signaling that it will not accept a Bosnia-Herzegovina or Nepal style subversion of national sovereignty by manufacturing ethnic or religious violence. It is also a healthy indication of Myanmar´s functioning anti-terrorism and counter-insurgency structures. It has after all, had decades with foreign backed terrorism and subversion to develop them.
Solving “The Rohingya Problem” and Protecting National Sovereignty and Human Rights.
Even many otherwise progressive western intellectuals who are aware of the complexity of international, state-sponsored terrorism operations, such as Arabist and Islamologist Dr. Kevin Barret are making blanketing statements about “the Muslim – Buddhist Clashes” about “The Rohingya” and about “The Brutal Regime”. In a recent article, The US rewarding Myanmar for massacring Muslims, published by Iran´s Press TV on 26 August, Prof. Kevin Barret wrote something to the effect of: “The Rohingya should just bee granted citizenship which they are entitled to under international law. That will solve the problem for the Rohingya and Myanmar. Muslims and Buddhists ought to unite against fanaticism driven nationalism of the regime”.vii Blanketing statements, demands, and subsequent calls for public action against the government of Myanmar such as those of Dr. Barret are symptomatic for a misinformed US-American and western public and representative for numerous western scholars simplistic approach to conflict resolution. Moreover, these blanketing statements and demands reenforce the problem rather than offering constructive and feasible solutions.
Primary Considerations for Conflict Resolution Models.
Myanmar´s Rakhine State has had a population of Muslim Rohingya for centuries. The vast majority of these Rohingya is well integrated into Myanmar´s society and they enjoy the rights which follow with citizenship of Myanmar, including religious freedom. This population is suffering as much as any other of Myanmar´s citizens from the political, social and economical consequences of decades of conflicts and sanctions.
The Rohingya which fled to Myanmar during the social, ethnic and religious violence in Bangladesh during the 1940s have partially been integrated into the civil society of Myanmar. The majority however, is living in both formal and informal refugee camps in Rakhine State. They enjoy protection under international law as well as Burmese law as refugees. Myanmar has no obligation under international law to blanketing grants of citizenship to this population. There is no doubt that the condition of many refugee populations throughout the world is tragic but the problem of displacement due to violence is not solved by sweeping measures such as automatically granting citizenship in host nations.
Taking into account that Bangladesh previously has attempted to establish a Rohingya State on Myanmar´s territory and to install a proxy-government to control Myanmar´s oil and gas resources makes considerations about the status of the Rohingya refugee population in Myanmar particularly complex and difficult.
The average Rohingya refugee in Myanmar is most certainly not served by imposing additional hardships on them by unleashing a CIA/DGFI supervised Al-Qaeda insurgency which forces the government of Myanmar to implement sharper controls with the refugee population. The unethical and criminal abuse of human rights by western governments, UN-agencies and NGOs to cover over insurgencies and subversion and to justify sanctions and interventions is not solving the problems of the Rohingya and imposing the danger of victimizing them as pawns in a covert war on them.
A resolution to the Rohingya´s problem in Myanmar can not be found without clarifying the role of Bangladesh, the UN, western intelligence services, and state sponsored terrorism in Bangladesh. Any constructive suggestions for resolving the problems of the Rohingya must take the underlying causes for their situation into account. Failing to take these underlying causes into account would in deed be failing the Rohingya and the People of Myanmar.
French Africa Policy Damages African and European Economies.
Since the independence of the former French colonies in western Africa they are in spite of the richness of their natural resources and the productivity of their populations still catastrophically under-developed.
In 2007 the French and European economies began deteriorating into a devastating recession. France seems to be like a man who is standing at the edge of a cliff, transfixed by the thought of falling into the abyss. In fear of losing the lucrative racket of controlling the western African economies he forgets that there is Terra firma and a possibility for both French, European and African prosperity behind him. Africans and leading European politicians expected that the administration of President Hollande would bring much-needed change with respect to French control over the economies of Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Equatorial Guinea, Ivory Coast, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, the Republic of Congo, Senegal and Togo. However, also Hollande´s administration seems to be so transfixed by the prospect of falling into the abyss that it does not fathom the possibility of taking one step back.
Will France remain transfixed in fear and drag western Africa and Europe with it when it falls or does it dare to loosen up its grip on control over the good old CFA racket in its former colonies and discover the true potential and value of the African markets. As painful as it may be, the primary prerequisite for a progressive development and prosperity is the truth about the current state of affairs.
The root causes for the lacking development of the western African economies are closely related to the fact that France, contrary to other former colonial powers, managed to install its commissars at the heart of its former colonies economic and monetary system and that it still maintains almost unchallenged control over them. The system was created by German National Socialists during the 1930s and 40s. It was used to usurp France and other German occupied nations.
The Genesis of the CFA-System in Nazi Germany and the German Occupation of France.
On 9 Maj 1941 Hemmen, the German Ambassador to France declared that he had signed a treaty with the French Admiral Darlan. The treaty would place German commissars within the French National Bank´s departments for foreign currencies and international commerce.(1) The treaty was negotiated under the auspices of German Minister of Finance Herman Göring, whose father, Heinrich Ernst Göring has been the German Governor of German West Africa, todays Namibia, from 1885 to 1890. Herman Göring was among other notorious for his plundering the occupied nations’ economies through operations accounts and for his special interest in treasures and art from the German occupied areas.
At the end of world war two and the occupation of France, the French President Charles de Gaulle created the CFA Franc as a currency for the western African colonies. De Gaulle created a monetary union whose functions of control were based on the model Germany had used to usurp German occupied France.
Even though the colonies have since gained independence, the system of almost absolute control over their economies by the installment of commissars with the Central Banks of the West African Monetary and Economic Unions, the B.E.A.C., the B.C.C., and the B.C.E.A.O. persists.
Modo-Colonialism, the Veto Right by French Commissars over African Economies.
Together, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Equatorial Guinea, Ivory Coast, Gabon, Guinea Bissau, Mali, Niger, the Republic of Congo, Senegal and Togo, establish the Monetary and Economic Union of West Africa (U.M.E.O.A. / UMEAO. Their currency, the CFA-Franc is printed under supervision of the French National Bank in Charmaliéres, France. The Council of Presidents of the fifteen U.M.E.O.A. member states constitutes the highest authority of the union. Decisions of the Presidential Council are made unanimously. The Ministerial Council of the U.M.E.O.A. defines the monetary and credit policy of the union and it is responsible for the economic development of the region. According to the constitutions of all fifteen member states the creation of their currency, the regulation of its value as well as the regulation of parities and modalities is the exclusive privilege of the nation and its people and decisions about it are made by the parliament.
The placement of French commissars within the heart of the nations and the union`s banking system however, creates an obvious dichotomy between the apparent sovereignty of the union, its constituents, and direct control from the previous colonial power.
Three of the thirteen of the Directors of the B.E.A.C. are French and four of the eight Directors of the B.C.C. are French. The Board of Directors of the B.C.E.A.O. is constituted by sixteen Directors; two from each country plus two additional Directors from France who take part in the management of the bank under the same conditions and with the same privileges as the other Directors. The number and placement of the commissars gives them a Veto right at the board of each of the Central Banks. No decision can be made without their approval and France can enforce its policy by threatening to deadlock the economies unless decisions are made in compliance with French suggestions.
The French Veto right also extends to the nomination of the Governor of the B.E.A.C.. The Governor is elected with the unanimous vote of the Board of Directors, on suggestion of the government of Gabon, and after the approval of the other member states as well as France.(2)
The Central Bank does not only have the privilege to create the currency. It also has the privilege to grant credit for the current accounts of the national treasuries at its discount rate. The Board of Directors is making the decisions about the temporalities and about the total amount that is granted for financing the economies of each of the member states.
Feeding France, Bleeding Africa – Current Accounts and the System of Usurpation.
While the primary instrument of control is the installment of French commissars, the primary instrument for usurping the western African economies is their current accounts. The member states agree to deposit their foreign currency reserves in a shared reserve fond.
The foreign currency reserves are subject to deposition in an operations account at the French National Bank. Between 1945 and 1973 one hundred per cent of the foreign currency reserves had to be deposited in the operations account, in 1973 it was reduced to sixty-five, and on 27. September 2005 to fifty percent. (3) Another fifteen percent is kept in a guaranty fund.
In other words sixty-five per cent of all foreign currency reserves of the fifteen nations and all revenue generated outside of the unions territory is kept at the French National Bank. On 3 Mai 2010 the website of Jeune Afrique quotes the former French Minister of Finance and Commerce, Christine Lagarde: “The Bank of the States of Central Africa, for instance, places an almost 90 per cent of their reserves in the French National Bank”. (4)
In 1960 Jean Boissonat, a member of the currency committee of the French National Bank wrote: “Almost all decisions were made in France .. The Franc Zone allowed France to deliver certain natural resources to itself without having to spend any foreign reserves. It was estimated that this represented two hundred and fifty million US-Dollar savings in terms of foreign reserves per year …” Boissonat continues by stating that approximately half a million Frenchmen in Paris receive their means of survival from the Franc Zone.(5)
The French socialist Jean-Noël Jeanny wrote in 1963 that: “all that the African nations achieve by increasing their export is the generation of more foreign currency reserves for France”.(6) He could as well have added “and the creation of debt for themselves”. Beside profiting on African foreign currency reserves which are returned to the West African nations in the form of debt, France is also profiting from African gold.
The gold reserves of the fifteen nations are kept in France, supposedly to guaranty for the value of the CFR Franc. In 2001 the West-African gold reserves at the French National Bank had an estimated value of 206,528 billion CFR Franc. In an interview for Le Liberation in 1996 the late President of Gabon, Omar Bongo said: “We are in the Franc Zone. Our operations accounts are managed by the French National Bank in Paris. Who profits from the interests that our money generates ? France.” (7)
France is indebting and enslaving Africans by means of Africa’s own wealth; for example: 12.0000 billion invested at three per cent creates 360 billion in interests which France grants as credits to Africa at an interest rate of five to six per cent or more. The allegory of “Bleeding Africa and Feeding France” is no exaggeration, not alarmist, and not revolutionary. It it is a sobering fact of French modo-colonialism and the cost in terms of under-development and human suffering is staggering. The current accounts and the French usurpation are a humanitarian disaster that is induced by France and financed by those who are suffering from it.
Coups, Crisis and French Finance-Nazism in Africa.
In 1996 France devalued the CFR Franc in spite of the protest of most western African nations. Former French Prime Minister Eduard Balladour justified the French dictated devaluation of the CFR Franc because “ it was considered to be the best possibility for aiding the development of the western African countries” (8), even though another statement by Balladoure indicates that he was aware of that the regulation of a currency is a matter of national sovereignty(9).
The late President of Togo, Etienne Gnassingbé said about the devaluation: “One uses to say that violence overrules justice. I was not the only one who issued the warning….. But France has decided otherwise. The African voices don´t count for much in this affair”.(10)
The words of the late Etienne Gnassingbé indicate that the Bleeding of Africa can be taken literally. According to the statutes of the monetary and economic union every member state is free to leave it. So much to theory. In practice, France has left a trail of post-modern coup d´etats, violence, and murder in those nations who tried to get out from under what many West-Africans perceive as French Finance-Nazism in Africa.
In January 1963 the President of Togo, the late Sylvanus Olympio was murdered three days before the issuing of a new currency.
On 19. November 1968 the late President of Mali Modibo Kéita was ousted in a coup and arrested. In 1977 Modibo Kéita died in prison. Kéita was poisoned.
On 27. January 1996 the President of Mali was ousted in a military coup d´etat.
On 15. March 2003 the late President of the Central African Republic Angè Félix Patassé was ousted by the “rebel leader” Francois Bozizé. In all cases the monetary union and France have played a role.
Ivory Coast´s President Laurent Gbagbo, France, the ICC and Modo-Colonialism.
When Laurent Gbagbo became the President of Ivory Coast one of his first official initiatives was the erection of a concrete wall in the tunnel that connects the French Embassy with the Presidential Residence. Gbagbo wanted Ivory Coast to abandon the CFA and institute a new regional and if possible a Pan-African, gold-backed currency. The initiative toward the establishment of a gold-backed Pan-African currency enjoyed the sympathy of many African nations and enjoyed unequivocal support from Libya, which until the so-called Arab Spring in 2011 was the richest and most developed of all African nations.
As if it was a conditioned reflex, France seemed transfixed by is fear of falling into the abyss, of losing the CFR racket that has kept the French economy afloat since it was conceived by de Gaulle in 1945. Rather than seeing a potential, France was biding its time until an opportunity for a post-modern coup d´etat. The 2010 Presidential elections in Ivory Coast. France sided with Alessanne Outtara. Libyan intelligence reports from 2009 and 2010 indicated that the French Intelligence Service D.G.S.E. had begun infiltrating, financing and arming a group of “rebels” in the northern region of Ivory Coast.
The outcome of the Presidential election was apparently very close. The electoral commission declared Alessanne Outtara the winner but the election result was disputed by Laurent Gbagbo.
There had been registered serious irregularities. In one particular village with a population of approximately ten thousand, Alessanne Outtara seemed to have received almost one hundred thousand votes.
Western mainstream media began building a narrative: The electoral commission had declared Outtara to be the winner. The despotic Laurent Gbagbo refused to hand over the reins of power to the winner of the elections. Gbagbo is cracking down on peaceful protesters. Gbagbo is cornered in his bunker…
What western media generally failed to report, underreported, or conveyed in a distorted and strongly biased fashion was that: Laurent Gabgbo and his party had brought the case to the Supreme Court; that the Supreme Court of Ivory Coast had recounted the votes; that the Supreme Court had taken notice of election fraud in favor of Outtara; and that the Supreme Court of Ivory Coast had declared Laurent Gbagbo to be the winner of the elections and the rightfully elected President of Ivory Coast. That French backed guerrilla began attacking predominantly pro-Gbagbo villages, committing massacres, and that French backed “rebels” were attacking the Presidential Residence.
What was emphatically reported in French and western media like the BBC was that “security forces” clamped down on peaceful protesters, and that “Ouattara´s Army” is cornering “Gbagbo in his bunker”.(11)
Nobody seemed to ask the important question. Where in the world had Outtara, who just claimed to have won the elections gotten an “army” from ?
It is symptomatic for the high prevalence of racism and condescending modo-colonialist reasoning among European populations that only very few commentators and analysts said:
“But the electoral commission is not the one who has the competence to approve of election results, it is the Supreme Court”.
A comparison can illustrate the point: When George W. Bush and Al Gore had the closest of all elections that have been held in the United States of America; who certified the election ? The Supreme Court, of course. (12)
Many Americans felt utterly disenfranchised but the population respected the Supreme Court. Could anyone have even thought about the remote possibility of “Al Gore´s Army cornering Bush in his Bunker” of “Gore neglecting the Supreme Court because the electoral commission had pronounced him to be the winner ?” And where in the world would Al Gore have gotten his army from Anyways ? And where did Alessanne Outtara get his army from ?
The capture of Laurent Gbagbo cost the lives of approximately 1.600 young Ivorian soldiers. Young patriots who were willing to defend the President of Ivory Coast from the onslaught of a French-backed post-modern coup d´etat. The capture an arrest of President Laurent Gbagbo was possible only after French special forces violated international law by blasting a hole into the wall which Laurent Gbagbo had erected inside the tunnel that connects the French embassy with the Presidential residence.
The sealed boxes with the ballots from the 2010 elections are kept at the United Nations. So far U.N. Secretary General Ban Kyi-moon has failed to order an independent re-count of the ballots. The fact that the United Nations has so far failed to re-count the ballots to determine the legitimacy of either Laurent Gbagbo´s or Alessanne Outtara´s claim for the Ivorian Presidency, combined with the selective and one-sided prosecution of Laurent Gbagbo at the ICC and of military officers who were loyal to him in 2010 is symptomatic for grave systemic and procedural problems at the United Nations and the International Criminal Court at The Haag. The case against Laurent Gbagbo ought to have been dismissed on the basis of selective prosecution from the very start. His prosecution at the ICC after French involvement in the aggravation of post-election violence in Ivory Coast and the arrest with the aid of French special forces is a blatant example for the abuse of the ICC as an instrument of modo-colonialist control. The most recent selectively prosecuted case is that against General Dogbo Ble in Ivory Coast. Also here western media are de-facto sentencing a political opponent of modo-colonialism before he is even heard in court.(13)
A recent analysis of the systemic and political problems with the ICC, the United Nations, the Rome Statute and the explosion of international law at its very root by Dr. Hans Köchler (14) reads as if it was written to elicit the injustice that is being perpetrated against Laurent Gbagbo and the people of Ivory Coast.
Missed Chances for African and European Economies and the Urgency of Change.
A growing number of African and European leaders are becoming impatient about the paralysis of France. African leaders are impatient because the obvious usurpation of their nations is unbearable for the African economies and their populations. European leaders are mostly impatient because France prevents a European adaptation to the last decades geopolitical changes in Africa and because the crisis of the Euro requires initiative rather than stagnation. Failure to integrate the western African economies into the economic sphere of Europe is bound to have devastating long term consequences for both Africa and Europe.
China has recognized the colossal market potential of a developing African middle class. The French and Trans-Atlantic model of usurpation and subjugation is not only criminal and unethical, it is also uncompetitive.
Recent statements made by the French political heavyweight Jacques Chiraq, who said that France does not have to be a benefactor, it must merely stop usurping Africa, are indicating a potential for change. Chiraq stated that failure to change French-African relations can have catastrophic consequences. 2012 Presidential candidate Jean Luc Mélenon stated that the CFA represents the severe mistake not to tie the western African economies to the economies of the European Union. Mélenon demanded that France abandons its veto right at the Boards of the African Central Banks.
The European Council stated that France is blocking for any project of the European Central Bank that attempts to change the nature or the bearing of the French involvement in the western African Central Banks. The French approach to managing French-African relations is not only bleeding Africa. It is increasingly bleeding both the French and European economies who are missing out on the market potential of an emerging African middle class.
Some political analysts have suggested the establishment of an African-European Peace and Reconciliation Commission that is dealing with the crimes of the past, the building of trust, the review of highly politicized cases at the International Criminal Court, such as the prosecution of Ivoryan President Laurent Gbagbo to ease a transition toward new African-European relations.
The question for this and the coming year is whether France will continue standing at the edge of the cliff and fall while dragging both western Africa and Europe into the abyss together with it, or if it dares to listen to the voices of reason from Africa and its European partners, turn its gaze away from the abyss and see that there is fertile land, right behind it.
“We want to express our recognition and gratitude to Prof. Nicolas Agbohou. The historical context of the article and references about it are inspired by his speech at the Conference on African-French Relations in Paris City Hall, on 09 October 2012. – NSNBC International.”
NB.: If you like this kind of journalism, please sign up for a free subscription for our newspaper at the bottom left of this page and if possible, donate a few coins per month by using the donate button in the right side column. Thank you for informing yourself and for your support.
Egypt rejects IMF and Indicated Historical Realignment
MH17 – The Methodology of an International Cover-Up
Myanmar, Gas and the Soros-Funded Explosion of A Nation State.
Top US and Saudi Officials responsible for Chemical Weapons in Syria
The Vaccine Hoax is Over. Documents from UK reveal 30 Years of Coverup
French Africa Policy Damages African and European Economies.
Analysis6 years ago
Top US and Saudi Officials responsible for Chemical Weapons in Syria
Health and Lifestyle6 years ago
The Vaccine Hoax is Over. Documents from UK reveal 30 Years of Coverup
Analysis2 months ago
French Africa Policy Damages African and European Economies.
Health and Lifestyle6 years ago
Bill Gates’ Polio Vaccine Program Caused 47,500 Cases of Paralysis Death
Health and Lifestyle2 years ago
Experts urge WHO to urgently revise its post-vaccination philosophy
News5 years ago
BUSTED: Leaked Phone Tape with EU’s Ashton reveals, Kiev Snipers hired by Maidan Leaders
News6 years ago
Egypt rejects IMF and Indicated Historical Realignment
Environment2 months ago
Myanmar, Gas and the Soros-Funded Explosion of A Nation State.