THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY is a compelling factual history of neoconservatism and its influence on US Foreign Policy in the Middle East during the first decade of the twenty-first century. Click on image above for details.

Sunday, February 27, 2011


The Foreign Policy Initiative, one of the heads from the now defunct neoconservative Hydra called the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), has written an open letter to President Obama calling for the US and their allies in NATO to take action against Gaddafi in Libya.

Most people throughout the world would agree that action does indeed need to taken to end the slaughter there; but would not the earnestness of genuine humanitarian sentiment have far more credibility if the call for action to stop the slaughter in Libya came from people other than the neocons suggesting what the American president should do? After all, this letter is signed by the same people who organised and pushed for the war against the Iraqi people; a war that killed hundreds of thousands if not over million Iraqi people and displaced millions more while at the same time all but destroying the infrastructure of an entire nation – and all just to get rid of Saddam Hussein. If those same neocons are pushing for action on Libya then you just know that they have some ulterior motive for doing so other than sincerely caring about the future of your average Libyan.

If I were a Libyan, the last bunch of people I’d want interfering with my struggle for self-determination against a tyrant would be the same bunch of neocons that have already been responsible for the destruction of at least one other Arab nation.

Friday, February 25, 2011


Just a very quick one today; it seems Gaddafi has sunk to the same lunatic levels that the neocons in the Bush administration and their allies sank prior to killing the peoples of Afghanistan and Iraq by invoking the spectre of bin Laden as the cause of all the problems.

You can’t blame Gaddafi for trying; after all, it worked for the US and the West! But how many have died in Afghanistan and Iraq as a result?


Rumours of Gaddafi having been shot have sent oil prices tumbling which has allowed those that started the rumour to buy up big on oil so that when Gaddafi next has a rant on the TV denying he's been shot they can make a big profit.

There's alaways someone willing to make a profit out of other peoples misery - and often they are the ones that have caused the misery in the first place!

Tuesday, February 22, 2011


It’s hard to imagine Gaddafi surviving the people’s revolt against his more than 40 year long rule. Certainly he’s made – and seems to continue making – every effort to cling to power but with his ambassadors to the UN and to various countries around the globe abandoning him, as well as the defections of two middle ranking air force pilots who flew their aircraft to Malta, all Gaddafi really has left are thugs and mercenaries out to heap revenge on those that rebelled against him.

Rumours abound that Gaddafi has already fled the country but no one seems really sure where he’s gone or even if he has left. One might assume that, if he has fled the country, then those that are supporting him would have no further reason to continue supporting him. However, while Gaddafi hasn’t been seen for a few days, his son seems to have taken command on his father’s behalf threatening civil war and to ‘fight to the last man’ and ‘the last bullet’.

Once a leader has fled his country it would be normal for either the governments servants, together with the armed forces, to simply serve the new government entity or to flee with their leader. Once the leader has fled then it’s usually all over and the nation can then begin to rebuild itself. However, because mercenaries are involved – and some reports indicate that, as well as African mercenaries being hired to fight with forces loyal to Gaddafi on the ground, Ukrainian pilots have also been hired to fly Libyan Air Force MiG aircraft – the situation in Libya is different. Most mercenaries have a loyalty to only one thing and that is money. While they are being paid they will continue their work. And, if they are being paid to continue their vengeful offensive against, in this case, Gaddafi’s enemies, then they are likely to continue doing so until they are either routed, killed, forced to flee for their own lives or stop getting paid – even if Gaddafi has already fled.

Already reports have suggested that 233 protesters have been indiscriminately killed by Gaddafi forces that have used tanks, heavy weapons, aircraft and helicopter gunships to violently quell the uprising. If the fierce fighting continues this figure will no doubt rise further. Then there are all the deaths that have likely occurred out of sight of the media and hospital counts and which will be attributed to Gaddafi’s supporters who are likely to have tortured a killed those protesters they have captured. There are even reports of Gaddafi security people executing their own men for refusing to turn their guns on the protesters.

Throughout history many of the bloodiest wars have been civil wars. Libya is not there yet and the only way that it can be avoided is for the rebel forces to quickly overwhelm the aggressors – and that can only be done if they have the full support of the peoples of the rest of the world and, just as importantly, if the aggressors know full well the intentions of the international community to prosecute them for their crimes no matter where they seek sanctuary.

Sunday, February 20, 2011


An Israeli government committee is to meet today to discuss putting the settlements built in the West Bank under Israeli law. Settlements in the West Bank are currently subject to military rule and jurisdiction.

While not actually formally annexing the settlements to Israel, the move is generally seen as a step closer to annexation. Once settlements are under Israeli law, any future settlements will automatically fall under the effective jurisdiction of Israel. It would then be only a matter of time, once there are enough settlements, for Israel to then formally annex entire swathes of the West Bank to Israel.

While the West Bank settlements remain under military jurisdiction they nonetheless are still on what is legally West Bank lands. Bringing the settlements under the umbrella of Israeli law, however, could well change both the settlements legal status under at least Israeli law and will also offer opportunities for expansion of the settlements areas since the actual borders that will define what exactly does come under Israeli law jurisdiction – as against military – could extend well beyond the actual settlements.

Of course, all this is pure supposition at the moment since it is still being discussed by the Israeli government but, all the same, one should be aware of the potential implications of these discussions.

Thursday, February 17, 2011


Just a quick observation today… Ultra right-wing Zionist, Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s aptly titled ‘Foreign’ Minister, reckons Iran sending a couple of warships up through the Suez Canal is a deliberately provocative act; indeed, he thinks it ‘proves the Iranians overconfidence is growing day by day’.

What nerve coming up through the Canal just like that. Gee, next thing you know the Iranians will be passing within sight of Israel’s shores as they head for Syria!

Of course, when the Israelis send a couple of their warships down through the Canal into the Red Sea and then to the Persian Gulf off Iran it’s not at all provocative.

Did someone mention hypocrisy?

Monday, February 14, 2011


When Mubarak stepped down he handed over power to the Egyptian military; he didn’t hand power over to a civilian transitional council as the protestors had hoped. Now, after eighteen days of protest, a military junta governs Egypt. It is not what the people wanted. Yesterday the military junta suspended the constitution, which was a key demand of the protestors, but also declared that they will rule by decree – which means, in terms of power available to them, they can actually be more dictatorial than Mubarak ever was if they so choose.

Already they have shown themselves to be contemptuous of the Egyptian people’s demands. The people demanded an immediate transfer of power to a civilian council who would organise elections as soon as possible. Instead the military junta has declared that it will rule by decree and that there will be elections maybe in six months – or so they say.

Even in these early days of military rule there has begun some resistance and some protestors have remained in Tahrir Square while others have returned to join them. So far the military police have been firm in their efforts to clear the square, which has become a symbol of the revolution, but have not used excessive force though there have been some accounts of the military beating protestors with sticks.

The junta’s promises are vague and so far devoid of any legitimacy. The protestors are wary of the military’s promises and want change now; not in six months time. So far there has been only a change of style within the regime but no real regime change.

It’s going to be a long six months.

Sunday, February 13, 2011


Two weeks ago, shortly after the protests in Egypt started, the Israelis allowed some 800 Egyptian soldiers into the Sinai. They went to Sharm el-Sheik down on the southern tip of the Sinai Peninsula on the Red Sea where the Israelis said they may be based. While the Israelis had allowed Egyptian police and security into the Sinai, this is the first time in thirty years that a contingent of the Egyptian army had been allowed in.

Two weeks later, Mubarak is ousted from power and he leaves Cairo and heads off, not overseas into exile as one might expect of a ruthless dictator ousted by popular revolution, but to Sharm el-Sheik – where the 800 Egyptian troops are now based.

While Mubarak has handed over power to the chiefs of the army ostensibly to oversee the transition to a democratic civilian government, one cannot blame the Egyptian people being more that bit wary of what is actually going on and maintaining their vigil in Tahrir Square.

The simple reality is this; apart from getting Mubarak to step down, nothing at all has really changed for the Egyptian people. They are no better off today in terms of having power for themselves than they were the before Mubarak left. All the people have are promises. Nothing else.

Before the protests, Mubarak the military man ran things. Now military men that worked for Mubarak – and are now, it seems, protecting him at his retreat at Sharm el-Sheik – are running things.

Given that Egyptian troops went to the Sinai right at the beginning of the protests and long before Mubarak left Cairo himself to go to the Sinai, one has to wonder if there was some collusion going on between the Israelis and the Egyptian government whereby the aging Mubarak at the first signs of serious discontent among the people would be eased out into comfortable retirement to live out his days at Sharm el-Sheik.

If that was the case, one then needs to ask; what were the contingency plans for the transition of power from the militarist president to the military and, far more importantly, what are the military’s plans for the future?

Friday, February 11, 2011


The neocons, the Zionists and their Western allies insist that if there is to be change in Egypt then a future Egyptian government adopts a secular system of democracy that is not dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood. Their insistence on a moderate democratic Egyptian government is borne out of one simple consideration; Israel.

An Egyptian government dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood is unlikely to allow the continued isolation of the Gaza Strip and would likely discard the treaties that Israel had agreed with the Sadat-led, and later Mubarak-led, Egyptian government which has been in place for more than thirty years. It is this that Israel and the West fear most.

However, in insisting on a moderate democratic Egyptian government they ignore several essential facts that will likely upset the West’s aspirations for a future democratic Egypt free of Islamic influence.

First off, the wishes of the neocons, the Zionists and their Western allies do not correspond with the wishes of the Egyptian people. After all, it has been the Zionists and their Western allies, especially the US, which has stifled the wishes of the Egyptian people by supporting the Sadat-Mubarak dictatorship and its accompanying suppression and violation of the human rights of the Egyptian people. While the neocons have screeched about ‘democracy’ as part of their rhetoric, they too have quietly hoped that real democracy never takes root in the Islamic nations of the Middle East.

The neocons, Zionists and their Western allies also have their head in the sand over one other obvious fact which will just not go away and that is that Egypt is a nation where some 90% of the Egyptian people that are currently calling for democracy are Muslims with the vast majority of them being Sunni Muslims. Furthermore, while the current Egyptian constitution bans religious political parties that have a religious agenda, that same constitution does insist that future legislation conforms to Islamic law. If, though, the revolution is successful, it would likely see that the constitution is changed to included religious parties. The revolution, as Mohamed ElBaradei, a potential leader of a new Egypt, has already indicated, may even discard the old constitution and rewrite a new one entirely.

The fact is, the Islamic world is far more devout about their religion than the Western Christian-Judeao world is. Islam influences every corner of all Muslim society and life. The only reason Islam is excluded from Egyptian politics is by virtue of the support the dictators have received from the US and their allies.

That, if the revolution gets its way, will change.

It will be impossible to have a truly democratic Egypt without the strong influence of Islam being a part of it. If Israel wants to continue peace with a new democratic Egypt heavily influenced by Islam, then it must reconsider its stance with the Palestinian people particularly those that live in the Gaza Strip.

The West needs to get used to the idea that Islam is an important aspect of government within Muslim nations. The only way to peace in the Middle East is through a resolution to the conflict between the Zionists and the Palestinian peoples.

The only solution, regardless of how impossible it may seem now, is for the Jewish and Arab people to live freely as equals in one egalitarian state. The alternative will be an endless war that the Israelis will never be able to win.

Wednesday, February 09, 2011


Some neocon writers are pondering the same question. Jonah Goldberg, a neocon correspondent with ‘The Atlantic’ writes:

The neoconservative (or liberal interventionist) wing of American Jewish political thought (not that all neocons are Jewish, God forbid anyone should think that!) is cheering on the revolution in Egypt, while the Israeli government, and much of Israel's pundit class, is seeing the apocalypse in Mubarak's apparent downfall.

The fact is, because the neoconservatives over the years – particularly during the period since 9/11 – have vigorously bandied around the concept of ‘democracy’ as part of their propaganda rhetoric to Westernise the Islamic world, especially in the Middle East, and boasted how Israel is the ‘only’ functioning democracy in the region, they are now stuck with it as an ideology. Short of exposing themselves as complete hypocrites, the neoconservatives now have little choice but to support democratisation in Egypt (and, indeed, anywhere else).

But don’t be fooled.

What the neoconservatives say and what they believe are very often two entirely different things. Indeed, being deliberately deceitful in order to influence public opinion to support a particular outcome is a carefully defined strategy evolved from the Straussian theory of the ‘noble lie’ and is a characteristic of neoconservative ideology. While neoconservatives publicly pronounce one policy, they are often feverishly working behind the scenes to ensure that the opposite will happen and then, when it doesn’t happen as they have pronounced, they’ll blame other players – real or imaginary – for its failure. Iraq is a classic example.

The present crisis in Egypt is no different. The neoconservative’s primary concern is the protection of the Zionist entity and its long term objectives of creating a Greater Israel surrounded by friendly Arab nations with Western-style democratic governments free of radical Islamic influence. For the neoconservatives, being seen to pursue democracy in Arab states that surround Israel is important to them inasmuch that it is part of their long-term objectives but, one can rest assured, that it will not be at all at the expense of Israel’s security against Palestinians and Arabs fighting to defend themselves against Israeli aggression as they attempt to realise their Greater Israel dreams.

Sunday, February 06, 2011


It must be fairly clear to every observer by now that, while the US was initially caught on the hop by the onset of the Egyptian revolution, it has now adopted a strategy whereby it will attempt to pull all the strings needed to control the course of Egyptian politics into the immediate future. It must also be fairly clear by now that it will be taking on this task in order to exclusively benefit the interests of Israel and Israel’s continued domination over the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

While Obama seemingly was expressing sympathy for the anti-Mubarak protestors and their demands for Mubarak to step aside and clear a path for democracy, Obama quickly realised that too quick a change might very easily allow the Muslim Brotherhood to dominate a new government. It was at this point that Obama decided that he and his administration should attempt to completely take over and micro-manage a transition that will ensure that Israel’s interest and current arrangements with Egypt remain intact.

Over the years, the usual method adopted by the US for gaining control of a situation in foreign lands is simply to fork out vast sums of cash to the people you want to keep on side. While there is no actual evidence to say that this has happened in the case of Egypt, past experience tells us that this is exactly the method the US will use to get crucial players on side such as, in this case, the senior and middle ranks of the Egyptian armed forces. While I have no proof whatsoever that this is happening, I can nonetheless guarantee that this is exactly what the administration through the offices of the CIA are doing right now as you read these words.

If ever the Egyptian armed forces were going to take the side of the protestors, they would have done so by now.

Obama still needs to tread very carefully; the revolution is still strong and determined. However, I suspect that the strategy now is for the US to maintain the rhetoric of support for the demand for democracy in order to appear to be sympathetic towards the protestors cause thus keeping them on side, while, at the same time, insisting that a transition of power should be overseen by the US through negotiation between vice-President Omar Suleiman, the opposition – including moderate elements of the Muslim Brotherhood – and US State Department officials. The US will ensure that the more radical elements of the Muslim Brotherhood will be manoeuvred out of the discussions and, at the same time, will ease Mubarak out of any effective power.

A lot hangs on how this revolution ends as to whether or not the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip will see the light of freedom at the end of their tunnels or merely the need to continue smuggling essential supplies through them in order to survive.

Saturday, February 05, 2011


Last Monday I asked ‘Will Israel invade the Egyptian Sinai?’ and I suggested that if the revolution in Egypt progressed such that the Israelis saw it as a threat from their point of view then they might consider invading and occupying at least the eastern Sinai to create a buffer zone between itself and Egypt and, in particular, between the Gaza Strip and Egypt.

Well, the situation certainly has deteriorated as far as the Israeli are concerned in the Sinai to the extent that Bedouin Arabs in the Sinai, who are sympathetic to the Palestinian cause in the Gaza Strip, have attacked the Egyptian security police in the Sinai in El Arish, a town close to the border with the Gaza Strip. This has left the Bedouin free to continue to smuggle arms into the Gaza Strip; a development the Israelis are unlikely to tolerate.

Rather than fight the Israelis in order to prevent invasion and occupation of the eastern Sinai, the Egyptian Mubarak government are, in the current set of circumstances, likely to welcome the Israelis in taking control of that part the Egyptian region having virtually lost control of it themselves. How the Egyptian army respond to an Israeli invasion and occupation of the eastern Sinai is not known. However, the anti-Mubarak revolutionaries are likely to protest loudly but would be able to do little about it in the short term.

As Mubarak himself slowly loses his grip on power, Omar Suleiman, Mubarak’s vice-President, seems favoured to take over government if Mubarak does go. Suleiman is fully supported by the US and Israel though is loathed and despised by the people of Egypt almost as much as Mubarak is so, even if Mubarak does go now, the Egyptian people are going to be in exactly the same situation when Suleiman takes over as they are now. Given that, the Israelis may consider an occupation of the eastern Sinai in order to create a buffer zone well worth the effort.

Thursday, February 03, 2011


In the light of recent events it is legitimate to now ask where the Egyptian army’s true allegiances are. While they have been reluctant to crackdown on the protestors and have even been seen to seemingly take sides with them, they have not taken any steps to help ensure that Mubarak steps down. The army’s call for the demonstrators to end their protests and to return to their ‘normal lives’ is also a significant indication that the Egyptian army is not ready to seek an end to Mubarak’s rule.

When one considers what is necessary to keep an army functioning, which the Egyptian army clearly is, one cannot help but wonder if the army’s seemingly friendly attitude toward the protestors is not some part of a strategy that the government, still headed by Mubarak, has devised to ultimately ride out the revolt.

The army requires food and clothing for its soldiers and, more importantly, fuel and ammunition for its tanks and troop carriers, all of which the government, still controlled by Mubarak, are continuing to supply. One should not forget also that the Egyptian hierarchical elite mostly are drawn from its military.

Yesterday the army stood by and watched the pro-Mubarak ‘demonstrators’, many of who seemed to be police in civilian gear, wade in to anti-Mubarak demonstrators with clubs and knives. While there were some instances where the army attempted to come between the two sides of demonstrators, there was no sign at all of the army actually helping the anti-Mubarak side.

The demonstrations have been going on for well over a week now and seemed to reach its peak on Wednesday when the world witnessed the biggest demonstrations yet seen in the current crisis. Yet Mubarak has offered little to placate the demonstrators that want him out except to promise that he will not run again at the next elections. His change of cabinet offered nothing but more of the same and appointing an intelligence chief who been responsible for the torture of thousands of Mubarak dissenters merely added fuel to the protestor’s fire.

While Obama has called for immediate change, it is only now that he has even suggested that Mubarak should step down but has not indicated who should replace him if he did though presumably it would be the recently appointed vice-President, Omar Suleiman.

Everything hinges on where the army’s allegiances really lie – and, so far, the indications are that they are still in line with the Mubarak bloc status quo even if they accept that Mubarak himself has to go.

If Mubarak does go and Suleiman does replace him without any cast iron guarantees of change then knowing where the army stands will become crucial to the future of Egypt – and the entire Middle East.

Tuesday, February 01, 2011


The Zionists of Israel and their neoconservative allies had always hoped that 9/11 would usher in an era that would see the Arab world and the Middle East transform itself into a series of Western-style democracies happily co-habiting with and friendly toward Israel and the US.

In September 2000, just a year before 9/11 occurred, the neoconservatives had spoken of the need for a Pearl Harbor-like event that could trigger such a transformation. By the time the Pearl Harbor-like event occurred neoconservatives were conveniently already in senior positions within the George W. Bush administration and on the very same day as the Towers fell they were putting their plan of ‘democratising’ the Arab and Islamic world into action.

The neocons were convinced the Iraqi people would welcome the Americans and their allies as liberators. They believed that, once the Arab and Islamic world could see how the Iraqi people embraced their new-found Western-style democracy, the peoples of all the other nations of the Middle East and North Africa would rise up against their respective authoritarian and dictatorial rulers, overthrow them and join the happy throng of Iraqis enjoying their new-found liberty and prosperity. And, of course, the Americans and their Western allies would be there to help them.

In 2003 two of neoconservatisms most fanatical warmongers and Islamophobic Zionists, David Frum and Richard Perle, published their book ‘An End to Evil: How to Win the War on Terror’ in which they advocated supporting insurrections throughout the Middle East and across North Africa and even the invasion of Iran and Saudi Arabia. They somehow envisioned that these strongly Muslim nations would take to be governed by secular democracies free of any Islamic influence and inspired by the freedoms and values of America.

Seven years later and not only have their dreams and aspirations stalled but now they are turning into nightmares.

Iraq is still struggling to come to terms with what the Americans and their allies have done to them and their country. Afghanistan still lives in fear and poverty as bombers remotely operated by the CIA in America rain rockets and missiles down on them as they stubbornly resist being turned into a pseudo-democratic puppet state. Despite domestic unrest in Iran, the people have rallied behind their President in support of his pursuit of nuclear generated power. Hezbollah in Lebanon are as powerful as ever and have more support today than ever before thanks largely to their resistance to the carnage meted out to them by the Israelis in 2006. Hamas in the Gaza Strip likewise are just as strong as ever despite Israel’s best efforts to destroy Hamas and the will of the Palestinian people in the Gaza during Israel’s attack on them in 2008/2009. And now, just to top it all off, it looks like Egypt is set to depose its pro-US president and replace his dictatorship not with a Western-style democracy but a democracy that reflects their own culture and heritage and is inclusive of Islam within government.

And, if events lately are setting a trend for the immediate future of other authoritarian and dictatorial governments in the region, then the nightmare is likely to get worse for the Zionists and their neocon allies, not better.

Interesting days ahead.