Six questions about the war

8/10/01


Is there a link between U.S. involvement overseas and attacks on American targets?

Yes there is according to a 1997 U.S. Department of Defence study, which read:

"As part of its global power position, the United States is called upon frequently to respond to international causes and deploy forces around the world. America's position in the world invites attack simply because of its presence. Historical data show a strong correlation between U.S. involvement in international situations and an increase in terrorist attacks against the United States."
(Quoted in the CATO website http://www.cato.org/pubs/fpbriefs/fpb-050es.html)

On a related note, it is perhaps significant that the U.S. government had plans for war in Afghanistan prior to September 11th, and that the Taliban knew of these plans.

According to former Pakistani diplomat Niaz Naik, at a meeting in Berlin in July: "The Americans indicated to us that in case the Taliban does not behave and in case Pakistan also doesn't help us to influence the Taliban, then the United States would be left with no option but to take an overt action against Afghanistan," "I told the Pakistani government, who informed the Taliban via our foreign office and the Taliban ambassador here."
(quoted in the Guardian of September 22nd ) http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,556279,00.html

What is the corporate interest in the Middle East?

According to the Washington Post:

"Since the 1970s, Saudi Arabia has shifted from its role as a large oil supplier to becoming the principal U.S. ally and economic partner in the region. In the 1970s and 1980s, it bolstered the international banking system with its oil revenue. After the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the Iranian revolution the same year, Saudi Arabia turned to the United States for modern weapons, including F-15s, AWACS surveillance planes, helicopters, transport planes, tanks and air defense weapons, including Patriot and Hawk missiles. In 1991, it served as the main staging ground for U.S. forces that drove Iraq from Kuwait.

Since 1981, U.S. construction companies and arms suppliers have earned more than $50 billion in Saudi Arabia, according to the Congressional Research Service. More than 30,000 Americans are employed by Saudi companies or joint U.S.-Saudi ventures and U.S. investments in the country reached $4.8 billion in 2000, according to the Commerce Department. The U.S. oil giant Exxon Mobil Corp. recently was chosen by the Saudi government to lead two of three consortiums developing gas projects worth $20 billion to $26 billion." (Washington Post 21/9/01)

What is the corporate interest in Central Asia?

According to a United States Government website: (http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/afghan2.html)

"Afghanistan's significance from an energy standpoint stems from its geographical position as a potential transit route for oil and natural gas exports from Central Asia to the Arabian Sea. This potential includes the possible construction of oil and natural gas export pipelines through Afghanistan, which was under serious consideration in the mid-1990s. The idea has since been undermined by Afghanistan's instability."

"In January 1998, the Taliban signed an agreement that would allow a proposed 890-mile, $2-billion, 1.9-billion-cubic-feet-per-day natural gas pipeline project led by Unocal to proceed."

"Besides the gas pipeline, Unocal also had considered building a 1,000-mile, 1-million barrel-per-day (bbl/d) capacity oil pipeline that would link Chardzou, Turkmenistan to Pakistan's Arabian Sea Coast via Afghanistan."

Unocal being a Californian based energy corporation.

Will military action foil the "terrorist threat"?

Not according to Ronald Jacquard, an advisor to the United Nations Security Council, author of a book on Bin Laden and head of the French state's International Terrorism Observatory, :"The more that is done to destroy Bin Laden's organisation, the more they will try to carry out the plans they have already." "People in the mass-market consumer societies of the United States and Europe will have to live like countries such as Israel, under permanent threat." (Irish Times 3/10/01)

Likewise the British newspaper the Guardian, drawing on a report in the Washington Post, claims: "Intelligence officials have told Congress that they believe a second major terrorist attack on the United States is highly likely in the near future, and that once the anticipated assault on Afghanistan begins, retaliation is "100%" certain.." (Guardian 6/10/01)

Is this a "war against terrorism"?

Hardly. All of the powerful states lining up in the "coalition against terrorism" have inflicted the same bloody slaughter as the hijackers brought to New York. Consider the actions of the Russian State in Chechnya or the largely British and American inspired United Nations sanctions on Iraq. The latter has, according to figures produced by the Iraqi government and verified by U.N. agencies, killed almost one and a half million people between 1991 and 1998, and is continuing to kill at a rate of 7,000 people a month, and 4,000 of the monthly death toll are children under the age of five.

Who are NATO's allies the Northern Alliance?

A consortium of criminal warlords such as:

"Abdul Rashid Dustum, one of the most powerful Alliance gangsters, whose men looted and raped their way through the suburbs of Kabul in the Nineties. They chose girls for forced marriages, murdered their families,"

"Then there's Rasoul Sayaf, a Pashtun who originally ran the "Islamic Union for the Freedom of Afghanistan", but whose gunmen tortured Shia families and used their women as sex slaves in a series of human rights abuses between 1992 and 1996. Sure, he's just one of 15 leaders in the Alliance, but the terrified people of Kabul are chilled to the bone at the thought that these criminals are to be among America's new foot-soldiers." (From a Robert Fisk article in the London Independent http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?=97281)

According to a member of the Afghan feminist organisation, the Revolutionary Association of Afghan Women (www.rawa.org), they:

"condemn the cooperation of the United States with the Northern Alliance. This is another nightmare for our people &endash; the Northern Alliance are the second Taliban. The Northern Alliance are hypocrites: they say they stand for democracy and human rights, but we can't forget the black experiences we had with them. Seventy-year-old grandmothers were raped during their rule; thousands of girls were raped; thousands were killed and tortured. They are the first government that started this tragedy in Afghanistan". (Guardian 8/10/01)

[PDF file of Six questions about the War]


To the Free Earth web site