Nafeez AHMED: Die NATO beherbergt den Islamischen Staat …; Insurge Intelligence, 21.11.2015 – dt. Übers.

globalcrisis/globalchange NEWS

Martin Zeis, 25.11.2015

Aufgrund einiger Nachfragen aus den gc-Listen, ob es eine deutsche Übersetzung des gestern geposteten Textes von Nafeez AHMED „NATO is harbouring the Islamic State …“ gebe, reiche ich hier eine solche (z.T. von mir sprachlich überarbeitet) weiter. Der Text zeigt faktengesättigt wesentliche Hintergründe, Motive + Interessen der Akteure im Syrien-Konflikt auf, u.a. den Konflikt Türkei – Russland (siehe die gestrigen Ereignisse).

zum Rechercheablauf:
Unter dem Link http://www.mmnews.de/index.php/politik/59090-isis-turkei-gefahr ist heute eine Übersetzung des o.a. Textes von Nafeez AHMED ins Deutsche (mit verfälschtem Titel und gekürzt) von einem Anonymus „FritztheCat“ zu finden. Dieser Anonymus schrieb am 21.11.2015: „Ziemlich langer Artikel, obwohl ich ihn etwas gekürzt habe. Aber in der zweiten Hälfte wird endlich sehr gut das Energiespiel sichtbar. Und das miese Spiel der Türkei (der Tanz mit dem Teufel). Hoch interessant! Mit vielen Links (bis jetzt nur im Original, aber wir haben ja Dok:) Viel Spaß!
Quelle: https://propagandamelder.wordpress.com/2015/11/21/propagandameldungen-vom-21-november-2015/comment-page-1/#comment-39318

Die englische Originalfassung und die deutsche Übersetzung sind in dem beigefügten Dokument (pdf, 22 S.) verfügbar (dt. Übersetzung ab S. 11).

Grüße,
Martin Zeis

Die NATO beherbergt den Islamischen Staat
Warum Frankreichs beherzter neuer Krieg gegen ISIS ein schlechter Witz ist und eine Beleidigung für die Opfer der Anschläge in Paris. – Über Staatsterrorismus und den Pipelinekrieg –
by Nafeez Ahmed19.11.2015
Übersetzung: FritztheCat

Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed (1978) ist ein britischer Autor, Journalist, und Referent für internationale Sicherheit. Er ist Geschäftsführender Direktor des Instituts für Politikforschung und Entwicklung (IPRD), einem unabhängigen Think-Tank für die Untersuchung von gewalttätigen Konflikten im Zusammenhang mit der globalen Umwelt-, Energie- und Wirtschaftskrise; ein Filmemacher, der “The Crisis of Civilization” co-produziert und geschrieben und “Grasp the Nettle” co-produziert hat – beide Filme wurden von Dean Puckett gedreht. Seine wissenschaftliche Arbeit fokussiert auf die systemischen Ursachen der Massengewalt. Er hat am Fachbereich für Internationale Beziehungen der University of Sussex und am Fachbereich Politik und Geschichte der Brunel University Undergraduate- und Postgraduate-Kurse für Theorie der internationalen Beziehungen, Zeitgeschichte, Imperialismus und Globalisierung gelehrt. Er ist ein ehemaliger Umwelt-Blogger für The Guardian. Ahmed hat eine wöchentliche Kolumne im Middle East Eye, einem in London ansässigen Nachrichtenportal des Ex-Guardian Leitartiklers David Hearst und ist ‘System Shift’-Kolumnist für VICE’s Motherboard. Ahmed ist Gründer und Herausgeber von Insurge Intelligence, eines crowdfinanzierten, investigativen Journalismus-Projekts.

(…)

AHMED_Nafeez-NATO-harbouring-ISIS-engl-dt151121.pdf

Prof. Michel CHOSSUDOVSKY: “Going After” the Islamic State. Guess Who is Behind the Caliphate Project? – Nov 17, 2015

“Going After” the Islamic State. Guess Who is Behind the Caliphate Project?

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, November 17, 2015

URL: http://www.globalresearch.ca/going-after-the-islamic-state/5401439

Author’s note and Update

The following article was first published in September 2014 at the outset of the air campaign “against the ISIS”. In recent developments Russia has officially joined the campaign against the Islamic State (ISIS). What are the implications?

Amply documented but rarely mentioned in news reports, the ISIS is a creation of US intelligence, recruited, trained and financed by the US and its allies including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Israel and Jordan.

What this means is that the ISIS terrorists are the foot soldiers of the Western alliance. While America claims to be targeting the ISIS, in reality it is protecting the ISIS. The air campaign is intent upon destroying Syria and Iraq rather than “going after the terrorists”.

But now Russia is involved in the campaign against the ISIS in coordination with the Syrian and Iraqi governments.

What does that mean? The official story is that Russia supports America’s resolve to fight the terrorists. It’s all for a good cause.

In reality, however, Russia is (indirectly) fighting America by supporting the actions of the Syrian and Iraqi governments against the ISIS terrorists, who happen to be the foot soldiers of the Western military alliance, with Western mercenaries and military advisers within their ranks.

The forbidden truth is that by providing military aid to both Syria and Iraq, Russia is (indirectly) confronting America. Moscow will be supporting both countries in their proxy war against the ISIL which is supported by the US and its allies.

Michel Chossudovsky, September 30, 2015

(…)

CHOSSUDOVSKY-Who’s-Behind-The-Caliphate-Project151117.pdf

Interview von weltnetz.tv mit Elizabeth Murray und Ray McGovern

Veröffentlicht am 24.09.2015

Interview von weltnetz.tv mit Elizabeth Murray (ehemalige Offizierin im National Inteligence Council) und Ray McGovern (ehemaliger CIA-Analyst und Russlandspezialist) über Whistleblower, den Einfluss von Geheimdiensten auf politische Entscheidungen und Drohnenkriege.

Mid-East-geopolitics — Endgame: Putin Plans To Strike ISIS With Or Without The U.S.; zerohedge/Bloomberg Sep 23, 2015

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-23/endgame-putin-bomb-isis-or-without-obama

Endgame: Putin Plans To Strike ISIS With Or Without The U.S.

… As Bloomberg reports*, The Kremlin is prepared to launch unilateral strikes against ISIS targets if the US is unwilling to cooperate. Here’s more:

President Vladimir Putin, determined to strengthen Russia’s only military outpost in the Middle East, is preparing to launch unilateral airstrikes against Islamic State from inside Syria if the U.S. rejects his proposal to join forces, two people familiar with the matter said.
Putin’s preferred course of action, though, is for America and its allies to agree to coordinate their campaign against the terrorist group with Russia, Iran and the Syrian army, which the Obama administration has so far resisted, according to a person close to the Kremlin and an adviser to the Defense Ministry in Moscow.
Russian diplomacy has shifted into overdrive as Putin seeks to avoid the collapse of the embattled regime of Bashar al-Assad, a longtime ally who’s fighting both a 4 1/2 year civil war and Sunni extremists under the banner of Islamic State. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flew to Moscow for talks with Putin on Monday, followed by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Tuesday.
Putin’s proposal, which Russia has communicated to the U.S., calls for a “parallel track” of joint military action accompanied by a political transition away from Assad, a key U.S. demand, according to a third person. The initiative will be the centerpiece of Putin’s one-day trip to New York for the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 28, which may include talks with President Barack Obama.
“Russia is hoping common sense will prevail and Obama takes Putin’s outstretched hand,” said Elena Suponina, a senior Middle East analyst at the Institute of Strategic Studies, which advises the Kremlin. “But Putin will act anyway if this doesn’t happen.”

And that, as they say, it that. Checkmate. (…)Second, even if Russia does agree to some manner of managed transition away from Assad, you can be absolutely sure that Moscow is not going to risk the lives of its soldiers (not to mention its international reputation) only to have the US dictate what Syria’s new government looks like and indeed, Tehran will have absolutely nothing of a regime that doesn’t perpetuate the existing Mid-East balance of power which depends upon Syria not falling to the West. Additionally – and this is also critical – Russia will of course be keen on ensuring that whoever comes after Assad looks after Russia’s interests at its naval base at Tartus. (…)“ — emphasis, zerohedge —

* http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-23/putin-said-to-plan-islamic-state-strikes-with-or-without-u-s-

Pepe ESCOBAR: US Fears Russian Syria Peace Plan Not Russian Intervention; RI Sep 10, 2015

RI, 10.09.2015 http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/us-fears-russian-syria-peace-plan-not-russian-intervention/ri9642

US Fears Russian Syria Peace Plan Not Russian Intervention
US isn’t worried about Russian military action in Syria. It’s worried about a Russian initiative that would see power sharing in Syria and a joint front against ISIS and Al Qaeda in the region
By Pepe ESCOBAR

The Russians are coming! The Russians are coming! Well, the Russians are always coming. The Russians never stopped coming since those heady Cold War days. The Russians are “invading” Ukraine. Every day. For over a year now. Now the Russians are “invading” Syria.

That’s just a prelude. Soon the Russians will be invading the whole Middle East, the whole of Eastern and Western Europe, the whole Arctic. And then, one day, surreptitiously, they will be back in Cuba, ready to invade Florida and then the whole homeland.

History now repeats itself under the eternal recurrence of farce. About the best illustration of the propaganda modus operandi underlying the current exceptionalist hysteria over Russia’s alleged “military incursion” in Syria was penned way back in 2011 on Counterpunch by the late, great Alex Cockburn. Enjoy:

“Suppose the CIA leaks a national security review concluding that the moon is actually made of cheese, and the Chinese are planning to send up a pair of gigantic bio-engineered rats to breed in numbers sufficient to eat the cheese and thus sabotage US plans for Missile Defense radar deployment on the moon’s dark side.
The headlines will initially proclaim, “Doubts on Chinese Rat Threat Widespread. Many scoff.” The lead paragraph in news stories in the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal will quote the scoffers, but then ‘balance’ will mandate respectful quotation from ‘intelligence sources’, faculty professors, think tank ‘experts’ and the like, all eager to dance to the government’s tune: Many say rat scenario ‘plausible’, etc.
Lo and behold, by the end of a couple of days of such news stories, the Chinese rat plot is firmly ensconced as a credible proposition. News reports then turn to respectful discussion of the US government’s options in confronting and routing the Chinese rat threat: Vice President says ‘all options are on the table,’ etc.”

There you go. China – as well as Russia – are of course major threats, according to the Pentagon’s military doctrine; as bad if not worse than ISIS/ISIL/Daesh. So Russia must have a rat threat of its own. Which brings us to the “The Russians are Coming” Syria plot, which has submerged think tanks such as the CIA front Stratfor in profoundly thoughtful speculation, everything of course based on prime, second-hand, ideologically-corrupted, lousy – and fake – intel.

That power-sharing dilemma

(…)

ESCOBAR-US-fears-Russia’s-Peace-Plan150910.pdf

Hat Washington sich gerade selbst in den öligen Fuß geschossen? | The Vineyard Saker – Deutsche Version

Hat Washington sich gerade selbst in den öligen Fuß geschossen? | The Vineyard Saker – Deutsche Version.

Der Autor F. William Engdahl ist Berater und Dozent für strategische Risiken; er hat Politik-Diplom der Princeton Universität und ist Bestseller-Autor über Öl und Geopolitik exklusiv für das Magazin “New Eastern Outlook”.

The Galician Backhand (II) – orientalreview 05.11.2014

The Galician Backhand (II)

By Andrew KORYBKO (USA)

Part I

Playing With Fire

Bandera’s fascist ideas were rightfully repressed during the Soviet period, but after Ukraine’s independence in 1991, they began to attract followers anew. Although they remained largely on the political fringe, the extreme nationalists received a boost in legitimacy when former President Viktor Yuschenko (the hero of the pro-Western ‘Orange Revolution) decreed in 2010 that he be given the title ‘Hero of Ukraine’. Although this was promptly rescinded by returning President Viktor Yanukovich, the damage was already done – fascism was given legitimacy in post-independence Ukraine, and anyone who was against it was a ‘pro-Russian puppet’ like Yanukovich was accused of being.

Of course, Poland was uncomfortable with its neighbor granting its highest state award to an anti-Polish genocidal symbol like Bandera, but then again, Warsaw had up to this point unconditionally supported its proxy government in Kiev since it usurped power in 2004. Although it had no power over Yuschenko’s extreme announcement, it certainly created the fertile ground to facilitate it. After Yanukovich returned to the presidency in 2010, Poland set out to become the

Title Hero of Ukraine that was given to Stepan Bandera was met with high controversy.

Slavic Turkey’ of regime change next door, actively training and utilizing whatever extremist elements it thought necessary to achieve its goal, including radical Ukrainian nationalism modeled off of Stepan Bandera. As counter-productive and dangerous as this may seem to level-headed observers, it was justified by the Polish political elite in the name of the larger anti-Russian struggle that it was preparing to spearhead in the region.

Getting Burned

While patronizing Poland may have marketed its explicit support of EuroMaidan (and covert assistance to and implicit acceptance of the Banderites) as helping Ukrainians break off the yoke of ‘Russian domination’, what it really wanted was to increase its own influence over its former Commonwealth’s territories. In this manner, it is nothing different than what was pursued during the Polish-Ukrainian and Polish-Soviet Wars. Strikingly, whenever Poland tried to interfere in Ukraine ‘for its own good’, this has led to the same result – virulent Ukrainian nationalism that backfires against it. Back then, the OUN was created in reaction to Polish policies and began carrying out terrorist attacks against the Polish state, but this time, Poland actually abetted the rise of the OUN’s spiritual successors with the intention that they would carry out terrorist attacks against the Yanukovich-led Ukrainian state (which they did, most popularly seen through the firebombing of police).

The thing is, violent Ukrainian-Banderite terrorism could not be controlled (unlike what Poland may have thought) and did not disappear with Yanukovich, but instead, it became an even stronger force in the country after the coup. Its de-facto institutionalization in Western Ukraine (specifically Eastern Galicia and Volhynia, both of which were all but cleansed of Poles because of the Banderites) now poses an obstacle for Polish plans to economically and culturally colonize the area, as history has taught Warsaw that the nationalist-fascists there will never allow Poland to impose its will on the inhabitants.

As a case in point, Poland is already beginning to feel the burn. Rossiya Segodnya reports that Ukrainian nationalists are now infiltrating into and trying to destabilize parts of Southeastern Poland that they claim as their own. There’s even talk of Galicia breaking off from the rest of Ukraine to officially form its own state, which uncomfortably seems all too plausible right now given the nationalist and civil divisions in the country. Importantly, the region actually did this back in February, when insurgents overthrew the regional governments and declared Lvov’s independence a few days before the 21 February coup. The situation was so out of control at the time that even Newsweek Magazine published an article entitled “Ukraine: Heading for Civil War”, and the National Interest took it even further by speculating upon a (then) pro-Western resurrection of the WUPR. With the Galician nationalists gaining control of the entire country a few days afterwards because of the coup, however, there was no more need for their region to secede, and the secessionist news was lost amid the flurry of talk about aftermath of Yanukvoich’s ouster.

Things are a bit different now, though, since the nationalists are not happy with the Poroshenko government for what they view as Ukraine’s surrender through the 5 September Minsk Protocol and have been threatening to overthrow him. With this in mind, the prospect that the Banderites might instead separate from Ukraine and declare an independent Galicia all their own no longer looks so farfetched. Such dynamic developments make one wonder whether these are threats that the Polish military was speaking of when it announced its recent decision to permanently reorient its military to the east of the country, and whether or not it is entertaining the idea of a conventional military intervention there.

Concluding Thoughts

As complicated as Polish-Ukrainian relations are, it is evident that nationalism on either side has worked to the extreme detriment of the other. Looking back at history, it is clear that interwar Polish nationalism was the impetus for its violent Ukrainian counterpart, which would then tragically go on to slaughter over 100,000 Polish civilians. In what is probably the largest twist of Eastern European irony in history, Poland then sided with those exact same forces to help overthrow the democratically elected Yanukovich government over half a century later. Now that the cat of Ukrainian-Banderite nationalism is out of the bag, it no longer wants to get back in, and it is running wild and clawing at all that get in its way.

Poland has thus fulfilled the ‘Slavic Turkey’ comparison originally made the author last February, since it, just like its Mideast NATO ally and destabilizer-in-arms, is now finally beginning to experience the blowback of its disastrous proxy policy. Whereas Turkey is confronted with the threat posed by the extreme Islamists of ISIL, which it helped create and assist all throughout the destabilization of Syria, so too is Poland confronted with the threat posed by the extreme Bandera nationalists, which it aided and abetted in destabilizing Ukraine. The comparison becomes even more pronounced and prescient when one realizes that the Eastern European Banderites, just like their Mideast counterparts ISIL, are now on the cusp of forming their own state. Before it is too late, as may already be the case for Turkey in the Mideast, Poland needs to break the ‘Slavic Turkey’ mold and take ownership for its disastrous blunder, realize that the West has misled and manipulated it as it is historically prone to do, and start genuinely working with its ‘adversary’ Russia (or in the case of Turkey, Syria) to eradicate this backfiring Black Hole threat once and for all before more people get killed.

Andrew Korybko is the American political correspondent of Voice of Russia who currently lives and studies in Moscow, exclusively for ORIENTAL REVIEW.