October 23, 2012
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has told the daily newspaper Rossiiskaya that the United States is playing a geopolitical game in the Middle East. Lavrov said accusations against al-Assad “are only a camouflage to cover a big geopolitical game. Another round is playing now, aimed at re-making the Middle East geopolitically. And players are taking pains to secure their geopolitical positions.”
According to Lavrov, the orchestrated Arab Spring uprisings that swept Arab states in the Middle East and North Africa and led to the proxy war against Libya and now the al-Assad regime in Syria are the fruit of George W. Bush’s labor and his Middle East “pro-democracy policy,” The Voice of Russia reports.
Bush’s Middle East policy was crafted by the American Enterprise Institute and other neocon think tanks. “Of course he should be getting credit because he socialized the world to the notion that somehow democracy was possible in the Arab world,” Daniele Pletka, described as a foreign policy expert at the American Enterprise Institute, told McClatchy last November. “This was an almost ridiculous notion before his presidency. And we shouldn’t discount the liberation of 50 million Muslims who’d lived under oppressive Afghan and Iraqi rule.”
In June, the benefactor of the Arab Spring hatched by the CIA, the Egyptian Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, staffed with former Mubarak loyalists, put a capstone on its victory and declared a military dictatorship in Egypt. After the Muslim Brotherhood was installed in the Egyptian parliament, it engaged in a predictable purge and began jailing opponents and journalists like Egyptian television presenter Tawfiq Okasha, who was imprisoned for defaming Salafist president Mohamed Morsi, a former member of the Muslim Brotherhood.
The Muslim Brotherhood from its inception has served the interests of British intelligence and later worked with the CIA. Without the British, “radical Islam would have remained the illegitimate, repressive minority movement that it has always been, and the Middle East would have remained stable and prosperous,” notes John Coleman, a former British Intelligence agent.
The clash of civilizations agenda fomented by the globalists and the neocon faction requires endless discord and sectarian violence if the balkanization of the Arab and Muslim world is to be accomplished.
In his translation of Oded Yinon’s “The Zionist Plan for the Middle East,” Israel Shahak notes that the idea of sowing discord and fragmenting the Arab and Muslim world “is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units has been a recurrent theme.”
Shahak points out that the American neocons who dominated foreign policy under Bush – and may once again do so under Romney – enthusiastically adopted the Israeli plan, which was conceived in the early 1950s soon after the establishment of the Israeli state. It resurfaced in the “Clean Break” document prepared in 1996 by a study group led by Richard Perle for Benjamin Netanyahu, at the time the prime minister of Israel.
In 2006 during the Bush administration, I wrote that “the Straussian neocons who run U.S. foreign policy imagined long ago what the ‘political outcomes’ would be – an easily manipulated Middle East, broken down into ethnically and religiously divided and antagonist components, led by dictators and monarchs answering to the United States and Israel, and acquiescing to harsh diktat and economic ‘medicine’ passed down from international bankers and venal neolibs determined to suck up all natural resources and impoverish millions of people in the process.”
Sergei Lavrov’s comments about the effort to remove al-Assad and the “geopolitical game in the Middle East” played by the United States (shorthand for the ruling elite) only hints at the scope and dimension of the effort to transform the region and make it amenable to the ultimate goals of the global elite.
Arch globalist and Rockefeller minion Zbigniew Brzezinski addressed “the careful handling of geopolitically catalytic states” in his 1997 book, “The Grand Chessboard.”
In order to realize the “preservation of its unique global power and in the long-run transformation of it into increasingly institutionalized global cooperation,” the global elite will implement the “grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy,” which “are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together.”
Brzezinski’s “long-run transformation” requires that Syria and ultimately Iran fall victim to the “grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy” the elite and their neocon minions like Daniele Pletka duplicitously characterize as democracy.