The Arab Spring

The name “Arab Spring” is a term coined in distant offices in Washington, London, and Paris.

 The upheavals in the Arab World are not an Arab awakening either; such a term implies that the Arabs have been sleeping while injustice has been surrounding them. In reality the Arab world has been filled with wars and revolts that have been put down by the Arab leaders in coordination with the US, Britain, and France.

How the First Arab Spring was Manipulated

  The plans for reconfiguring the Middle East started in the early 1910s. It was during the First World War that the manifestations of this design could be first seen with the “Great Arab Revolt” against the Ottoman Empire. During this revolt, the Rothschild-controlled countries of Britain and France used the Arabs as foot soldiers against the Ottomans to further their own geopolitical schemes.

 The Arab revolt started in 1915. A year later the foreign ministers of these two countries came to an agreement as to how they would divide the spoils between the two branches of the Rothschild family. This came to be known as the Sykes-Picot Agreement. In 1917, the British government sent a letter confirming the scheme to grant to the Rothschilds the land of Palestine. Addressed to Walter Rothschild, this agreement came to be known as the “Balfour Declaration”.

The Ottoman Empire collapsed in 1921.  After its collapse, London and France denied the freedom “promised” to the Arabs – in essence- double-crossing them. The Anglo-French governments, working in tandem, for the Rothschilds, sowed the seeds of discord among the Arabs. Local leaders became partners in the project and many of them were all too happy to become clients of Britain and France.

 In the same sense, the ‘Arab Spring’ is being manipulated today. The only difference is that one has to add the factor of oil, and the involvement of America into the equation. The Anglo-American power structure comprises the US (Rockefeller) and the three Rothschild entities of Britain, France and Israel. It is this power structure that is behind the 21st century ‘Arab Spring’, whose aim is to restructure the Arab world and Africa.

 While the notion that Washington and the Anglo-American financial elite were behind the Arab Spring is laughed at, the connections are well established and open for all to independently verify. The year 2011 was truly the “Year of the Dupe”, and unless we identify this engineering of our past and by extension, our destiny, we run the risk of making true yet again the saying of Napoleon Bonaparte that, :”History is a set of lies that people have agreed upon.”

The so-called Arab Spring is one of the most pivotal geopolitical happenings of the current century.  This upheaval, because of outside interference and lack of any concrete and practical policies going forward, would increase despair, and result in political failure. In the case of Libya and Syria, it would result in the destruction of the country. While the political pieces at the bottom of the pyramid continues to shift like a jigsaw puzzle, the apex remains the same and the equation remains constant.

    The October 1973 War in the Middle East was followed by the Camp David Accord between Egypt and Israel. This freed Israel from protecting its southern border. It turned its attention to its eastern borders. First, Lebanon, then Syria was destabilized between 1975 and 1990. It was followed up by the destructive 8-year war between Iraq and Iran. Then in 1991 came the degradation of Iraq, when it fell into the ‘Kuwait trap’.

 In 1982, an Israeli academician brought out a paper called the Yinon Plan. This detailed Israel’s long-term plans for the region.

The Yinon Plan

The Yinon Plan, which is a continuation of the British/Rothschild strategy in the Middle East, is an Israeli strategic plan to ensure regional superiority. It insists and stipulates that Israel must reconfigure its geopolitical environment through the break-up, or balkanization of the surrounding Arab states into smaller and weaker states.

Israeli strategists viewed Iraq as their biggest strategic challenge from an Arab state. That is why Iraq was outlined as the centerpiece to the balkanization of the Middle East and the Arab world. In Iraq, on the basis of the concepts of the Yinon Plan, Israel has called for the division of Iraq into a Kurdish state and two Arab states, one for the Shias and one for the Sunnis. The first step towards establishing this was a war between Iraq and Iran, which had broken out a short while before.

Securing the Realm

Although tweaked, the Yinon Plan is in motion and coming to life under the “Clean Break”. This is through another policy document written in 1996 for Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel at the time. The full name of this policy document is: “A Clean Break: A new Strategy for securing the Realm”.

 In many regards, the US is executing the objectives outlined in this policy paper to secure the ‘realm’. The term ‘realm’ implies the strategic mentality of the authors. A realm refers to either the territory ruled by a monarch or the territories that fall under a monarch’s rule, but are not physically under their control and have vassals running them. In this context, the word realm is being used to denote the Middle East as the kingdom of Tel Aviv.

Target- Damascus

 This Israeli policy document calls for rolling back Syria  sometime around 2000 by pushing Syria out of Lebanon and destabilizing Syria with the help of Jordan and Turkey. This has respectively taken place in 2005 and 2011.  The document continues – – – “this effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions.”  And, “_ _ Syria enters this conflict with potential weaknesses: Damascus is too preoccupied with dealing with threatened new regional equation to permit distractions of the Lebanese flank. And Damascus fears that the “natural axis” with Israel on one side, central Iraq and Turkey on the other, and Jordan in the center, would squeeze and detach Syria from the Saudi peninsula. For Syria, this could be the prelude to a redrawing of the map of the Middle East which would threaten Syria’s territorial integrity.”

Preparing the Chessboard for the “Clash of Civilizations”

It is at this point that all the pieces have to be put together and the dots have to be connected.

The chessboard is being staged for a “Clash of Civilizations” and all the chess pieces are being put into place.  The Arab world is in the process of being cordoned off and sharp delineation lines are being created. Under this scheme, there can no longer be a melding transition between societies and countries. That is why the Christians in the Middle East and North Africa, such as the Copts, are being targeted. This is also why black-skinned Arabs and black-skinned Berbers, as well as other North African population groups which are black-skinned are facing genocide in North Africa.

 After Iraq and Egypt, Libya and Syria are both important points of regional destabilization in North Africa and Southwest Asia respectively. What happens in Libya will have rippling effects on Africa as what happens in Syria will have rippling effects on Southwest Asia and beyond. Both Iraq and Egypt, in connection with what the Yinon Plan states, have acted as primers in the destabilization of both these Arab states.

 What is being staged is the creation of an exclusively “Muslim Middle East” area –excluding Israel- that will be in turmoil over Shia-Sunni fighting. A similar scenario is being staged for a “non-Black Africa” area which will be labeled as a confrontation between Arabs and Berbers. At the same time, the Middle East and North Africa are slated to simultaneously be in conflict with the so-called “West” and “Black Africa”.

Re-Dividing Africa

 In regards to Africa, Tel Aviv sees securing Africa as part of its broader periphery. This became the basis of geo-strategy for Israel, after it lost Iran in 1979. In this context, Israel’s new “periphery” includes countries like Ethiopia, Uganda, and Kenya against the Arab states. That is why Israel was so involved in the break-up of Sudan, in 2012.

 Today, the strategy of the US, Britain, France, and Israel have not changed. What has changed is the pretext, or public justification for waging their wars of conquest. Today’s “just wars” and “just causes” are now being conducted under the banners of women’s rights, humanitarianism, and democracy.

 To make matters worse, the West is escalating its destabilization in areas most impacting on the future of the major oil companies. One particular case is against Pakistan where Chinese investments in the deep-sea port city of Gwadar in the south western Pakistani province of Baluchistan is being intentionally destabilized with an armed “Free Baluchistan” insurgency.

Zbigniew Brzezinski and the “New Middle East” Project

 The following are important excerpts and passages from former US National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski’s book, “The Grand Chessboard : American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives “.

 He states:” The traditional Balkans (in Europe) represented a potential geopolitical prize in the struggle for European primacy. The Eurasian Balkans, astride the inevitable emerging transportation network meant to link more directly Eurasia’s richest and most industrious western and eastern extremities, are also geopolitically significant. But the Eurasian Balkans are infinitely more important as a potential economic prize: an enormous concentration of natural gas and oil reserves is located in the region, in addition to important minerals, including gold.”

And  “ – – – access to that resource and sharing in its potential wealth represent objectives that stir national ambitions, motivate corporate interests, rekindle historic claims, revive imperial ambitions and fuel international rivalries. “

 “ The Eurasian Balkans include nine countries – Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia- as well as Afghanistan.”

“The potential additions to the list are Turkey and Iran, both of them much more politically viable, both active contestants for regional influence within the Eurasian Balkans, and thus both significant geo-strategic players within the Eurasian Balkans. At the same time, both are vulnerable to internal ethnic conflicts. If either or both of them were to be destabilized, the internal problems of the region would become unmanageable, while efforts to restrain regional domination by Russia could become even more futile.”

 So, there we have it folks. Let us summarize all of the above.

 The first redrawing of the Middle East took place between 1915 and 1921. Then came the Yinon Plan of 1982. Followed by the “Clean Break” policy paper in 1996. Followed by Brzezinski’s book in 1997.

 In 2003, Iraq was invaded, and the stage set for the Shia-Sunni conflict, which would lead to the partition of Iraq. In 2005, Syria was forced to leave Lebanon. In 2006, Israel failed to achieve its objectives in Lebanon.

  Then, in 2010, the Arab Spring started. In 2011, both Libya and Syria began to be destabilized.  This was followed by the break-up of Sudan in 2012.The partitioning between Black Africa and the Arabs began.  In 2013, the button was pushed to ignite the Sunni-Shia conflict.

 Before we go further, one can see the grand plan unleashed by Washington, London, France, and Israel.

An additional point to note is that the West was confident that Israel would crush Hezbollah in Lebanon. They were ready to ‘fast-track ‘this project before Russia and China gained economic strength and involve themselves in the Middle East. But, Israel let them down.

The redrawing and partition of the Middle East from the Eastern Mediterranean shores of Lebanon and Syria to Turkey, Arabia, the Persian Gulf, and Iran responds to broad economic, strategic, and military objectives, which are part of a long-standing Anglo-American and Israeli agenda in the region.

  The Middle East has been conditioned by outside forces into a powder keg that is ready to explode with the right trigger. A wider war in the Middle East could result in redrawn borders that are strategically advantageous to the Anglo-American interests and Israel.

 NATO garrisoned Afghanistan has been successfully divided in all but name. Libya is destroyed. Syria has been invaded, and its government is involved in a fight to the death against western-backed mercenaries, aka “Jihadists”. The eastern Mediterranean has been successfully militarized. Iran and Saudi Arabia continue to be demonized by the western media, with a view to justifying a military agenda. In turn, the western media has fed, on a daily basis, incorrect and biased notions that the population of Syria and Iraq cannot co-exist and that the conflict is not a war of occupation but a “civil war” characterized by domestic strife between Sunnis, Shias and Kurds.

 Attempts at intentionally creating animosity between the different ethno-cultural and religious groups of the Middle East have been systematic. In fact, they are part of a carefully designed covert intelligence agenda. This brings to mind the creation and use of ISIS by Israel to bring this about.

 Even more ominous, many Middle Eastern governments, such as Saudi Arabia, turkey, Israel, and Iran are assisting Washington (wittingly and unwittingly) in fomenting divisions between the Middle Eastern populations. The ultimate objective is to weaken the resistance movement against foreign occupation through a “divide and conquer” strategy, which serves Anglo-American and Israeli interests in the broader region.

Below is a map prepared by US Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters. He is revealing and putting forward what Washington and its strategic planners have anticipated for the Middle East. When one studies the map carefully, one finds several countries that are to be divided; Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia. In addition, a new country is shown – Kurdistan- which will be created by the Kurds living in Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Turkey. It’s an explosive cocktail. A sure-fire recipe for detonating World War 3.

The map above was prepared by Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters. It was published in the Arms Forces Journal in June 2006. Peters is a retired colonel of the U.S. National War Academy

 Aside from a divided Iraq, the Yinon Plan calls for a divided Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. The partitioning of Iran, Turkey, Somalia, and Pakistan also all fall in line with these views. It also calls for dissolution in North Africa and forecasts it as starting from Egypt and then spilling over into Sudan, Libya, and the rest of the region. What is not shown on the map is a division of Libya into three parts. As of 2016, that plan will go into action.

What is left of North Africa is Algeria. There have already been rumblings in the military and security establishments in Algeria, starting in June 2015. Algeria is going to face some serious internal turmoil in 2020 on.

 So, let’s recap:

1982 – The Yinon Plan;

1996     The Clean Break policy paper;

1997    the Grand Chessboard;

 2006     the Ralph Peters map.

 All of this was supposed to be put into action with the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 2006. But, it did not turn out the way the West wanted.

 Fast forward to 2006. Israel attacked Lebanon with the aim of destroying Hezbollah. And Israel was defeated. It came as a shock to London and New York. A guerilla army managed to defeat a well-oiled military machine that employed 35,000 troops, tanks, fighter jets, and warships, were unable to achieve their objective. Israel suffered around 500 casualties for a loss of 100 on the Hezbollah side.

There were several objectives:

1. Crush the Hezbollah in order for a pipeline to run north through Lebanon;

2. Push the Syrians out of Lebanon – using the Mossad assassination of Lebanon’s Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005 and blaming it on Syria as an excuse;

3. Securing the Eastern Mediterranean for NATO, and

4. Lastly to gain control of the enormous gas reserves on the entire coast line running from Syria down to Gaza.

 At the same time in Iraq, the US military machine was being devastated by the relentless insurgency of Iraqis – especially the Sunni Iraqis. And don’t forget the covert war being waged on the Saudi government and its security forces by the CIA. From 1999 to 2006, there was an anti-_Sunni, pro-Shia tilt from Washington.

 A new re-alignment came into being. A tilt towards the Sunni Arab world was now encouraged. The entire Shia crescent, from Iran to Syria to the Lebanon of Hezbollah became the new target

Washington’s use of Israel as a strategic asset failed.

A deal followed with Saudi Arabia. A truce came into play between Riyadh and New York; And Riyadh was requested to tell the Sunnis to stop fighting   the American troops in Iraq, and to now target the Shia military forces within Iraq. A lot of money was paid to the Sunni fighting groups and tribal chiefs in Iraq.

 Then Washington put into play a change in objective. Confirmation of this has come from investigative journalist, Seymour Hersh. In an article in 2007, called “The Redirection”, this is what he had to say:” To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shia, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has cooperated with Saudi Arabia in covert operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shia organization backed by Iran. The US has also taken part in covert operations aimed at Iran and Syria. A by-product of these activities has been bolstering of the Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant version of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda. “

And, “Saudi Arabia’s Prince Bandar has assured the White House that ‘they will keep a very close eye on the religious fundamentalists’. Their message to us was “we’ve created this movement, and we can control it.’ It’s not that we don’t want the Salafists to throw bombs; it’s who they throw them at. – Hezbollah, Moqtada al Sadr, Iran and Syria “.

 A note on this point; when it came time for Washington to openly work with the jihadist groups, a problem remained: What would the world say if we are working with Al Qaeeda while the issue of Osama bin Laden is not resolved? The answer was simple.  Kill Osama bin Laden. The only problem was, how do you kill someone who has already died of natural causes many years earlier?

 And so Washington staged a big glorious circus, and showed the world that US Special Forces went into a Pakistani city, Abbotabad, and “killed” bin Laden. But they did not show the world bin Laden’s body, claiming to have buried it at sea. Washington has taken the entire world to be idiots! Yes. You, me, and 7 billion human beings in the world, are IDIOTS! Dear folks, “SNOW IS NOT BLACK”. The way was now clear to use the jihadist forces to do the dirty work on the ground.

 We now come to the issue of Egypt. Mubarak refused to play ball with Washington. He got dumped in 2011, during the Tahrir Square ‘color revolution’. Egypt demonstrates an effective use of ‘civilian-based power’, while Libya provides one of the most open displays of the two families ruthless stewardship of the Arab Spring to smash an independent Arab state.

The lack of modern political legitimacy, coupled with decades of political repression, economic crisis, and unresolved grievances, such as the Palestinian issue creates potential for massive political awakening. This dynamic was particularly pronounced because of the region’s marked demographic “youth bulge”. Historically, youth cohorts are receptive to new ideas, eager to challenge the status quo, and active in times of political crisis. It was the youth who spearheaded the MENA (Middle East and North Africa) mass protests. Using what is referred to as “civilian-based power”, Western powers exploited and guided this massive potential for political awakening to advance Western objectives. These eruptions were followed closely by covert and overt military intervention.

 The US-funded, Serbian-based NGO, CANVAS, is coordinating protest movements around the world according to US geopolitical interests. NGO leader Popovic openly admits to this antics and confirms the iconic   “Otpori! Fist” used by his organization during the Serbian protest movement in 2000 that ousted Slobodan Milosevic was deliberately replicated in copy-cat color revolutions in various parts of the world, including Cairo(2010/1), Kiev (2014), among other places. And so was the manual handed out to the youth leaders. Word for word – although translated into the language of the country where it was being put to use.

There are two principal American entities that spearheaded all these color revolutions; Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy. Both are funded by the US Congress. According to one of its founders, Alan Weinstein, : “ A lot of what we (NED) do was done 25 years ago covertly by the CIA”.

 Mohammed El Baradei – Washington’s “con-man in chief”, while feigning opposition to the US and Israel, was actually working for them! He sits on the board of trustees of the International Crisis Group (ICG), a corporate-funded institution alongside George Soros, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Richard Armitage, Larry Summers, Shimon Peres, Shlomo Ben Ami, and Stanley Fischer.

 El Baradei led the National Front for Change, which included the CANVAS-trained US State Department-funded April 6 Movement, and several other opposition parties. The April 6 movement took part in the US State Department-funded conference in December 2008, after which they travelled to Serbia to receive training from CANVAS. In late 2009, they entered Egypt. Counter-revolutions would define Egypt after January 2011 with El Bardei ousted by his own movement.

 After that the Muslim Brotherhood was installed into power per western objectives.  The Muslim Brotherhood has been working for Washington since 1957.

In July 2013, sanity returned to Egypt with the Saudi-backed ouster of Mohammed Morsi – Washington’s man in Cairo.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Posts by Month