Internet Statement 2014-24



US-Imperialist pragmatism leads to absurd situations


Maria Weiß  August 27,.2014     


If today you read the interview with Syrian President Assad, which is reprinted in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung of 18 June 2013, then you will be amazed, what has been represented all there. A secularism throughout the Middle East! That should some reactionaries, not only there, absolutely not have fitted into the stuff (and fit)! Then you also understand where these unspeak-able hostility to Assad and Syria results in, for example by the United States imperialism. And you understand more. You understand why exactly this imperialism is behind ISIS and even this whole trend of extreme Islamism, and why it has promoted an extremely reactionary goal of establishing a caliphate. This is grown on no other crap but on this very imperialism itself.

But in the present situation, the whole thing is really interesting when these archaic forces were now able to spread, could conquer positions in various countries in the Middle East, not only in Syria but also in Iraq and other countries, mainly thanks to the strong support by just those above mentioned power, in addition to certain other regional potentates, who also fired into it, from their rival reactionary interests, what now seems at once to be in the way of their original mentors. And that is the main cause of the current outraged cry, sung by the international media. This leads to the following interesting constellation, namely that the United States imperialism, which failed last year in Syria in particular, despite intensive support of these forces, now threatens to invade Syria again, on this move, as they are now condemned precisely to combat the forces they have pro-moted and pursued in the last year against the "Assad regime", are now actually condemned to fight along with the Assad government. How to get out of just this predicament? That's the prob-lem, which currently makes difficulties for the Obama administration.

President Assad now has proposed to the United States a common approach to ISIS, which makes things even more embarrassing for the U.S. government, for now is this "nemesis" at once on the same side as themselves in the fight against the Islamists.

By the way, the article in the FAZ with the Assad interview reads: "The backyard of Europe be-comes terroristic". Under heading: "Syrian President Bashar al-Assad about weapons for the re-bels, the use of poison gas, the role of foreign powers, and the Geneva Conference" It's very inter-esting, a very interesting interview, which was conducted more than a year ago by a correspondent of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung called Rainer Herrmann.

It must be noted, then, that behind the promotion and financing of ISIS is no other one but differ-ent imperialist cliques, especially the United States-imperialist government, regardless of whether there is a reinforced cooperation by the conservatives, or whether it is the Obama administration itself. The former is probable because, for more than a year or more, these forces try to highlight the Obama administration in a bad light, and to lead them up the garden path. The latter is also clear, because this government is itself the responsible for its actions.

When you consider that just that threatens to arrive now for some time, and that it has already occurred in some places, what President Assad has described then, "The backyard of Europe be-comes terroristic", what upsets all the reactionary cliques in Europe, at least makes them ex-tremely worried, and lets them consider if they are to supply weapons to the enemy or not, then that's basically absurd: They have yet grown it themselves for no other reason than to undermine the progress in the Middle East and to undermine it there when it tries to break to orbit.

At bottom, the Europeans are now forced even to wage a multi-front war, because in the mean-time has yet developed a Ukraine crisis, which could not be predicted a year ago , and which also threatens to destabilize Europe.

Hence it is primarily necessary to smash this hypocrisy, as currently mainly driven by U.S. imperial-ist circles, but also Europeans. They themselves are the ones who have promoted these Islamism all the time via the so-called oil-producing countries, Saudi Arabia, via the Emirates, which have paid the money for it. They themselves are the ones who have used these archaic forces, now lead-ing to a situation that they not only cannot get rid of these spirits, but the whole thing threatens to be a boomerang as the result. Therefore, they can save their whining and stop trying to plan further crimes against the peoples of Arabia, which are characterized, as well as the European peoples, that they are chosen to suffer from these crimes.

Some representatives of the ISIS recently confirmed that they had accommodated so-called fight-ers from Chechnya and other Eastern European states among them. The whole condensed into a huge army of a pretext for both the United States imperialism and potentially other rival imperialist powers against the popular masses in the Middle East and Europe that will help them in attempt-ing to let some plans become reality that did not come to a breakthrough in the last year , now realizing them again.

One must understand the context in which Chuck Hagel chatters now, the so-called Defense minis-ter of the United States, when he says: " Fight against ISIS requires also attacks in Syria" Has he asked the Syrian government if they agree? Of course not. But that was also their goal last year already. And their problem is that in Syria Assad is still president, and now he is even on the same side as they themselves, namely in the fight against ISIS. Too bad however ! What an ironic turn of history. It will be interesting what happens now. First, in any event, the excuse seems to have back-fired, they have created themselves

If Obama now announces his recognition, in the face of the brutal act of beheading of an Ameri-can journalist by these forces, that this does not fit into the 21st century, then we must say that this comes to his mind plenty too late, because last year were installed and supported just these same forces with the very same practices against the, in the eyes of the United States and its press, "evil Assad regime which had to be eliminated"!
It is basically an ancient history repeating here: 1979, the United States also supported the Khomeini regime in Iran because they wanted to get rid of the Shah, because he threatened to lead the way into an, in their eyes, to self-developing Iran. And now it is quite similar. Syria as a secular state, in which, inter alia, the different religions live together as equals, what to them does not fit. It does not fit to them that the Syrian Government maintains secularism, at least on several key issues, and defends it. Something else had to be supported, however, wherein of course they would not admit themselves that they are behind these Islamists. But so it is, they finance them, via Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, which, of course, thus themselves seek to realize their own reactionary aims. Both combines the objective that in this region the progress, if any, may only develop so far as it is not too much contrary to their exploiter- interests, the interests of the U.S. capital and international finance capital, but better if possible is at their service. And European countries, provided they do not even share the same interests, they should, if possible it be ready for service, and possibly still be active as their stooges.

In contrast, European countries should consider whether they really appeal to this role that is ex-pected of them, or whether they should rather pursue a different policy. Let's take the issue of arms supply as an example. For example, instead of considering whether you should also supply weapons to other ethnic groups in the Middle East, which are now currently also threatened, as to certain parts of the Kurds, by the way just to those who give priority to their own separatist movements in these countries, which in turn would lay the seeds of new conflicts in the future, or if you better should, instead, completely make an end to arms sales to Saudi Arabia or Israel. This could perhaps achieve some positive effect, at least sometimes really make a statement that you can not support yourself and fuel all these conflicts with weapons. Although one must remark, however limiting that wars are ultimately eh not decided primarily by arms, but by the people and what they stand for.

Looking at several of our documents from the time of the change of millennium and thereafter, then we see that the current development does have its precursor, that to a certain extent "every-thing has already been there before" and has just in meantime differentiated in a very specific way. The claims to power on a global scale from the United States in connection with European states have then emerged in the context of the Bush administration. Then, in Russia no revolution has taken place, instead, since then something else has climbed to its feet again namely some neo-tsarist traits. One of the two will always just be the case. In Russia has established itself just on the opposite side, a form of consolidation with also some expansionist ambitions towards Europe. But there is always resistance, there too, and what we see now is a substantial tightening of rivalry that currently occurs mainly on the European continent by precisely these two different counterparties increasingly colliding here, while some European countries are once again to be the fools here.
This tightening is already showing consequences in different countries. In France, the government has resigned, which is not surprising. In Germany Merkel drives currently a rather daring and ideal-istic policy, which consists in releasing the country out of the other contexts. Even if it is not wanted, it is de facto the case, so that once again different countries are here in danger of being pitted against each other. The whole thing is paired with a completely freaky line of the CSU, which has been neglected in the coalition negotiations, and which it now wants to compensate in a rather absurd manner. A particularly absurd example of this is the insistence on the so-called car toll.

But you can not leave out here that the old European countries, and their governments are not free from blame for this absurd situation, however . There is also ample evidence that the fascist bandits known as ISIS have received support also from these rows. For example, is now known that ISIS mainly by selling petroleum and ancient cultural assets became rich. We see that there ap-pears to be a mafia structure, which allows those with a pseudo-religious guise and with not incon-siderable help not only of the USA, but also of certain small and big oil states, as well as several other a now going into the billion-dollar fortune for their so-called "Caliphate "to create. In Europe, particularly Britain stands out in this context, also France, but also some newly created states from the West Balkans as Kosovo or Bosnia, to mention just two examples, there also have their fingers in it.

All these countries, a large part of it, last year, for example, supported the oil boycott against Syria, allegedly to support the Syrian opposition. Well, damaging the Assad government in their efforts they have at the same time precisely supported the criminal Islamist forces of the so-called ISIS that emerge now with their criminal practices, at least indirectly.

Another example is the role of Turkey. As it is known, the Patriot missiles were stationed on the border, on urgent request by Erdogan allegedly to protect against attacks from Syria. Syrian rebels needed merely to shoot once over the frontier to install such a measure on the part of NATO. For the Syrian army, however, there was a significant danger to approach the Turkish border, on the hunt for ISIS and CO.

If you look once on the map, which areas are controlled in Syria by ISIS and its allies, that are largely desert areas. In the really densely populated areas, there still dominates the government in the greatest part. One has declared the elections a farce because Assad would not dominate the territory? But out of the population lives the greatest part in the area controlled by the govern-ment. So something hypocritical like the present warmongering here in terms of Syria had
to be brought about. The result, which is hatched from the egg there now, looks accordingly.

Recently the UN has once again tracked a poison gas action in a Syrian town, allegedly ordered by Assad. Once again there is talk of "sufficient evidence" of which they did last year never were able to present a single part.. Who is it, who especially can make use of such message this time! Best way to relieve the bastards of ISIS.