The March to War: Détente in the Middle East or "Calm before the Storm?"
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Centre for
Research on Globalization
think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a
the discussions of détente in the Middle
East, the peril of war is still a real menace that threatens to
proliferate globally. The dialogue taking place between the U.S., the E.U., Russia, Syria, and Iran seems to be merely a transient point in the
timeline of the Middle East and Central Asia.
The ongoing international discussions focused on the Middle
East are part of an instant in time and history that will come to
pass. Attached to these discussions are the fate of the Middle East, or so it may seem. With certainty, only time
will tell what will unfold in the Middle East
and become recorded in the annals of history.
look must be taken at the evolving domestic conditions within the "American
Homeland" and at the wave of events that are unfolding in the Palestinian Territories, Israel, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, the Persian Gulf, the former Soviet
Union, and Iran.
been reports and chatter about war between Israel and Syria and a "Summer War"
that could breakout in the Levant with the initiation of Israeli strikes in the
Palestinian Territories and Lebanon. The summer-months of 2007 may see
international tensions rise, but witness no regional war that could potentially
spread in the Middle East and
Engaging Iran and Syria?
in Iraq also requires
defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region [meaning the
Middle East] in the face of extremist
challenges. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria."
Bush Jr., 43rd President of the United States
(January 10, 2007 Speech on
"New Iraq Policy")
It can be
argued that the U.S. and
Britain, the Anglo-American
alliance, have had their hands tied up in the quagmires of Iraq and Afghanistan. France and Germany, the Franco-German entente,
have also become further involved, as active partners, in Anglo-American foreign
policy objectives. The White House has now reversed its policy of trying to
isolate Iran and Syria
and is trying to publicly engage both. Or so it seems at first glance. Is there
substance behind these international developments or are these events merely
part of the diplomatic waltz before a potential hail storm starts?
Solana, the Foreign Policy and Security Chief of the E.U., has called on the
U.S. to open a direct "channel of communication" with Tehran for negotiations
after discussions with Dr. Ali Larijani, the Secretary-General of the Supreme
Security Council of Iran. It was after the late-April 2007 discussions held in
Ankara between the two individuals that Javier
Solana publicly called on the White House to engage Tehran.  White House National Security Spokesman Gordon
Johndroe responded directly to Javier Solana's call by indicating that the
U.S. government was ready to
hold talks with Iran.  The White House also made it clear that
U.S. officials were willing
to engage in high-level talks with Iran and Syria during the international conference on
Iraq in Sharm el-Sheikh,
Egypt. Condoleezza Rice, the Syrian
Foreign Minister, and the Iranian Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, all
attended the international summit discussing Iraq.
officials also highlighted that without the attendance of Iran at the International Compact for
Iraq or Sharm el-Sheikh
Summit that the U.S. government would not be able to rescue
itself from the quagmire and bloodbath it has created in Iraq.
 Syrian officials have likewise highlighted the
significance of Syria in
regards to Iraq,
Lebanon, and Palestine.
subsequent to the meetings in Egypt a whole set of notable and closed door
discussions have taken place across the Middle East and beyond involving energy,
security, geo-political, and defensive precautions. The winds of war are blowing
and the thought of war is constantly reeking in the air. Alliances are being
broken, made, and formed as the whole Middle
East is shifting and waiting to see if some form of a conflict or
another will brake out. Lines are being drawn and redrawn in the sand across the
has started consultations with Ankara and Baku
Syria has been
the object of American and E.U. diplomatic pressure and visits.  Aside from the visits of E.U. and
U.S. officials to
Syria, the most notable
visits to Damascus have come from
Turkey and the Republic of Azerbaijan in the first half of 2007.
Turkish Prime Minister visited Damascus in April
of 2007 where he discussed bilateral relations on trade, security, economics,
and energy with Syria. Prior to the Turkish Prime
Minister's visit, military cooperation was also discussed between the Syrian
Defence Minister and the Commander of the Turkish Air Force. 
Foreign Minister of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Elmar Mammadyarov, also met
with Syrian officials, including the Syrian President in April of 2007.
Baku and Damascus have been discussing economic
cooperation and joint projects.  Energy has been part of the discussions between Damascus and Baku. The Republic of Azerbaijan also announced during the visit of Elmar
Mammadyarov to Syria in April
of 2007 that Baku subsequently intended to establish an
embassy in the Syrian capital. 
The Republic of Azerbaijan is establishing an embassy in
Syria as a direct result of
the economic cooperation and joint projects that have been discussed between
Damascus and Baku.
the meeting of Condoleezza Rice and the Syrian Foreign Minister in
Egypt, U.S. officials and military commanders, including
General David Petraeus, stated that there were "indications that
Syria may be acting to
restrict the ability of foreign fighters to cross [the Syrian] border into
Iraq."  It should be noted that such statements by General
Petraeus and U.S. officials
were made after the initiation of negotiations between Damascus, Ankara, and
Baku. On one
level, it could have been these negotiations that opened the door for further
discussions between the U.S.
and Syrian governments and the easing of U.S. accusations against Syria.
Consultations between Damascus and Baku have included Lebanon
Foreign Minister of the Republic of
Azerbaijan was also in Lebanon
for meetings with all the representatives of the Lebanese political
establishment. Baku also signed economic
agreements with Lebanon, in
addition to the economic agreements signed with Syria.
 The agreements with
Lebanon are supplementary to
those with Syria.
Republic of Azerbaijan's Special Envoy to Syria and Lebanon
and Foreign Minister Mammadyarov both held talks with Lebanese leaders from both
the governing and opposing camps of the Lebanese political environment. The
Lebanese President, the Lebanese Prime Minister, and the Lebanese Speaker of
Parliament were all consulted by Baku. Directly or indirectly Amal, Hezbollah,
the Hariri-led Future Movement, the Free Patriotic Movement, and other Lebanese
political parties were all consulted by Baku. In most cases, no major decisions can be
made and fully implemented in Lebanon without the approval of both the
governing and opposing political parties in Lebanon.
agreements between Baku, Damascus, Ankara, and
Beirut could mean is that Syria and Lebanon
are conceivably allowing the establishment of an energy corridor on their
borders. This energy corridor could link and operate between Israel, Turkey and the entire Eastern Mediterranean in some form of an energy grid and
Factor: Establishment of a "Levantine Energy Corridor?"
and Syria are both involved
in a project that is supposed to bring Egyptian natural gas to
Turkey, which could
potentially involve cooperation with Israel and the establishment of an energy
corridor on the coastline of the Eastern
to the public layout of the official plan, the gas pipeline is to bypass
Israel through Jordan.
There seems to be a premeditated argument between the Hashemite Kingdom of
Jordan and Egypt over the gas project that has
resulted in an examination of having several pipelines and routes.
is heavily involved in Egyptian natural gas projects. On June 30,
2005, Egypt and Israel signed a preliminary joint agreement in
Cairo that was valued at $2.5 billion (U.S.).
The gas deal was signed and called for a 15-year allocation of gas to be sent to
Israel from Egypt.
The Israeli-Egyptian gas deal went unnoticed and was barely reported in the
state-controlled Egyptian media.  The Israeli-Egyptian natural gas deal was initially set
to ensure the delivery of Egyptian natural gas to the Israeli port of Ashkelon via undersea pipelines. 
apparent that infrastructure is being developed to connect the whole Eastern Mediterranean within a single energy arc or some
form of energy corridor. Israel could easily integrate itself in this
network and even seems like it could be the focal point of the energy projects
in the Levant and the Eastern Mediterranean. A
parallel branch of the Egyptian gas pipeline will also go through
Lebanon vis-à-vis Syria
and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.  Turkey could easily directly enter the project,
should Ankara wish to enter the energy project
and move away from its dependency on Iranian gas reserves or any energy
dependency on Russia.
Syria the Linchpin of an
Energy Arc in the Eastern Mediterranean involving Israel?
diversions are at play in the Levant and the entire Middle
East. In tandem, it also seems that Israeli-Syrian negations were
throbbing to be restarted during the same timeline as energy discussions with
Ankara, Baku, and
the E.U. and U.S.
representatives that visited Damascus also represented Israeli interests
and energy interests.  Israel
is taking a two-pronged approach in regards to Syria;
the Israeli government is talking about both war and peace in
Iran has also
been playing an elusive role through backdoor negations in the ongoing
developments in the Eastern Mediterranean.
During the same timeline as the talks between Damascus, Ankara, and
Baku, the Iranian Foreign Minister made an
unannounced visit to Syria
and another to Turkey.  Turkey is dependent on Iran
for a great deal of its economic and energy needs.
Russia is also
involved in the geo-strategically important projects and developments in the
Eastern Mediterranean. In Syria
alone the Russians are involved in three energy projects. Syria and Russia
have also signed a gas deal worth 160 million euros.  One of these projects is the construction of the Syrian
segment of the Egypt-Jordan-Syria gas pipeline.  The Syria Gas Company (SGC) and Stroytransgaz (a subsidiary of
Russia's Gazprom) will also
jointly work on developing Syrian gas reserves discovered in the fields of the
governorate of Homs. 
Syria is a
vital piece towards creating an energy arc or corridor in the Eastern Mediterranean. Whereas the integration of
Lebanon is optional in the
creation of an Eastern Mediterranean energy corridor, Syria
is a required segment of the energy arc or corridor. Without Syria the Eastern
Mediterranean cannot be linked together. It also seems that the area
around Tripoli, Lebanon has been considered as the location of a
future American or NATO military base to guard an Eastern
Mediterranean energy arc. The integration of Jordan into the corridor also seems optional,
unless Jordan is meant to be
part of a route connecting Iraqi and Persian Gulf oil to Israel and the Eastern
Syria there can be no
north-south link between Turkey in the northern Eastern Mediterranean and
Egypt in the southern
Eastern Mediterranean. Caucasian and Caspian
oil can be delivered to Israel and the southern areas in question from
Turkey if the north-south link is
made. Egyptian gas can also be delivered to Turkey
from the southern area in question if the north-south link is made. In
this scheme Israel seems to
be positioned as the vanguard of this energy arc, but Syria
seems to be the remaining piece necessary to making the north-south link.
for Negotiations between Syria and Israel
Suleiman (Solomon) an American citizen of Syrian background has spoken visibly
to the Israeli Knesset (Parliament) maintaining that he at one time represented
Damascus in "secret negotiations" with Israel.
In Tel Aviv he has declared that Syria is ready for peace with Israel.
Syria immediately distanced itself
from him. Syrians have stated that Israel and the U.S. are merely trying to dissociate
Iran and Russia by portraying Syria
as having negotiations without the knowledge of its allies. The Syrian
Information Minister, in a televised address to the Syrian people and the Arab
public, said that Abraham Suleiman expresses "his personal point of view, and
Syria has nothing to do with
this visit [to Israel] or statements [to Israeli
Syria has been
calling for open discussions with Israel, with the knowledge of Tehran. Several overtures
have been made by official channels from Damascus
to Israel for several years, even with
the involvement of the Clinton Administration and the U.N. in the past.
call for a renewal of the peace process is genuine," Ilan Mizrahi, the Chairman
of the Israel National Security Council, has also told Israeli parliamentarians
and officials.  In reality,
Syria has been reaching out
for peace talks and demanding the return of the Golan Heights (called the
"Syrian Heights" by Israel in the past) since the late
1990s. La Repubblica, one of Italy's major newspapers, in February of
2005 asked the Syrian President in an interview what he had to say about Arial
Sharon's statements that Syria was insincere about peace with Israel.
The response the Syrian President gave to the Italian paper was that Arial
Sharon and Israel should
evaluate Syria's sincerity
through talks that would cost Israel nothing. 
International Compact for Iraq:
Bargaining over the fate of the Iraqi People?
ridiculous to believe that anyone can decide the fate of the Iraqi people other
than the Iraqi people themselves. The nature of the talks unfolding between the
U.S., the E.U.,
Russia, Iran, and Syria are tied to Iraq,
but are not based merely on the unadulterated interests of the Iraqi people.
Many facets are involved in these discussions, including the strategic global
balance of international relations.
el-Sheikh Summit, formally called the
International Compact for Iraq, was held from May 3 to May 4, 2007 and involved the
U.S., Britain, Russia, Japan, China, France, the Arab League, Iran, Syria, the E.U., Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Germany, Canada, the U.N., and the
Organization of the Islamic Conference (O.I.C.).
At the end
of the Sharm el-Sheikh Summit in
Egypt, Iran and the U.S.
did not "visibly meet," but low-key talks took place between the two countries.
The American Ambassador to Iraq held talks with the Iranian
Deputy Foreign Minister, Dr. Abbas Araghchi.  The U.S State Department's Iraq coordinator, David Satterfield, was also
present at the talks that were played down and described by the American
Ambassador to Iraq as only being "three minutes
long."  It was possibility
through these contacts that talks in Baghdad were
arranged between the Iranian and American embassies in Iraq.
Sharm el-Shiekh Summit it was publicly made known that the
Syrian Foreign Minister and Dr. Rice, the U.S. Secretary of State, had a
half-hour meeting. The Times (U.K.) called the talks a "diplomatic shift" that
was prepared for by U.S.
officials who were offering "rare praise for Syria," before the meeting in Egypt.
 In reality the talks in
Sharm el-Sheikh were mostly cosmetic. Genuine talks and negotiations were mostly
undisclosed in nature and through different backdoor channels.
opening day of the Sharm el-Sheikh Summit in
Egypt, saw the Iraqi
government get pledges of $30 billion (U.S.) in debt relief.  Amongst the countries that nullified part of the Iraqi
debt was Saudi Arabia which
refused to do so during the period of humanitarian catastrophe in Iraq
caused by U.N. sanctions. Debt relief to Iraq
should be scrutinized. The debt relief amounts to less than a substitute to the
billions of dollars (U.S.) that are being appropriated from Iraq because of the
privatization of Iraqi oil and other national assets by the U.S. and British
governments. Whatever is left of the Iraqi debt will also prove to be profitable
to the creditor nations. Iraqi national assets may also be handed over to
creditor nations in place of Iraqi debts.
Consequences: Secret U.S.
Offers to Iran and Syria
Sharm el-Skeikh Summit it was reported by the
Agence France-Presse (AFP)
that the Iranian Foreign Minister called U.S. troops "terrorists," while denouncing the
Anglo-American occupation of Iraq. After the international event
in Egypt was over Iranian
officials started declaring that the U.S. had lost its international influence and
that this was the beginning of an endgame for the United
States. Iranian officials also declared that
war was no longer a viable option for the U.S.
and the age of international wars was coming to an end. These statements caused
great alarm in Washington D.C. and London.
that U.S. clients in the
Middle East were watching closely and expecting Iran, followed by Syria, to accept some sort of secret compromise
that has been refused or partially refused by Tehran. There are genuine fears in London and Washington D.C. that their Arab allies may slowly leave
their sides if they perceive any signs of Anglo-American weakness. The capture
of British servicemen in the Persian Gulf by Iran
has also helped render the Anglo-American alliance as declining in strength.
British and American fears may be used to partially explain the chaos that the
Anglo-American alliance is fomenting in the Middle
East and Arab World. It has been repeatedly charged that the
U.S. and Britain are arming Kurdish fighters against
Turkey and even planning a
coup in Saudi
Arabia. The aspirations of the spewing of such
chaos and instability can be said to force Middle Eastern and Arab regimes and
governments to depend on the support of the U.S. and Britain.
British and American fears may also be used to partially explain Iranian claims
that the U.S. Navy did not launch any war games in March of 2007. Based on the
naval surveillance and observation posts of the Revolutionary Guard in the
Persian Gulf the U.S. Navy did not launch any
war games showing an "unprecedented use of force" or exhibit any remarkable
activities that were out of the ordinary.  The Iranians claim that the U.S. claims were made only to project an image of
American supremacy by the illusion that the U.S.
was able to go to war whenever it willed. The Persian Gulf war games were meant
to keep the allies of America
and Britain in line. These psychological
tactics can be used to keep both foes and allies in line.
talks with Damascus and Tehran seem to also have
both the characteristics of overtures of peace and threats of war. It should be
noted that while talks were being initiated by the U.S. and E.U. with Iran and Syria that Russia made significant geo-strategic gains in
Central Asia. Moscow's global influence continues to grow.
There is a direct bearing between the rising tensions between
Russia and the so-called
"West" and the dialogue being initiated with Syria and Iran.
the Past: Lebanon and
Syria were Targets since
continually stated publicly that it wants peace with Israel.
It is apparent that the Israeli leadership is not interested in genuine peace
with Syria, but is merely flirting and
passing away the time until the moment for military action arrives. It is now
known that the Bush Jr. Administration and Tony Blair intended to invade and
occupy Iraq since 2001. In this respect,
control over Syria and
Lebanon is no different and was
envisioned in 2001.
Syria has been
in the sights of the Pentagon since the advent of the "Global War on Terror." In
fact, attacks on both Lebanon
and Syria have long been expected as a
phase in the American-led war march unfolding in the wake of the tragic
events of September 11, 2001. The White House itself has clarified
that it was considering invading Syria after the fall of Baghdad in 2003. 
fall of Baghdad, Iranian, Syrian, and Lebanese
leaders warned that the White House and 10 Downing Street would attempt to create a
"New Crisis" in Lebanon and
Syria either directly through
invasion or through Israel or through creating internal
instability. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) reported in May of 2003 that Mohammed Khatami,
the former president of Iran,
while in Beirut warned that both
Syria were jointly in the
sights of the Anglo-American alliance as part of the next phase of the military
roadmap in the Middle East. 
predicted in 2003 in Lebanon,
Iran has slowly unfolded;
Syrian troops have been forced to leave Lebanon, Lebanon is internally divided,
Israel has attacked
Lebanon, and Syria
is under threat from Israeli attacks. 
Ruling Establishment rejects Peace with the Syrians: Why?
become war and war has become peace. In a state of disturbing irony, the Chief
of Mossad has made statements that reject peace talks with Syria
for the sake of peace. Meir Dagan, the head of Mossad, has stated that peace
negotiations with Syria will equate to war. The Chief
of Mossad has stated "if negotiations between Israel and Syria fell through, this could lead to war, and
therefore Israel should seek to maintain the
status quo." 
Israel has said
that Syria must stop supporting
Palestinian and Lebanese groups opposed to Israeli occupation of their lands,
amongst several other preconditions for peace talks. Syria has also given notice that no relationship
will be established between Israel and Syria until Israeli troops end their occupation
of Syrian territory, meaning the Golan Heights.
The Golan Heights have been occupied by Israel since 1967.
the visit of Nancy Pelosi, the U.S. House
Speaker, to Syria the issue of peace between
Syria was brought up in
the American side and the Syrians. There was an almost immediate rebuttal from
the office of the Israeli Prime Minister against the initiative. A press
statement on behalf of the Israeli Prime Minister stated that "although
Israel is interested in peace
with Syria, that country
[meaning Syria] continues to
be part of the Axis of Evil and a force that encourages terror in the entire
Middle East." 
for the Possibility of War and Israeli Invasion
Syria is being
steadily armed defensively by Iran and Russia. Russia has renewing its
weapons deliveries to Syria
after the interruption caused by the Israeli 2006 war on Lebanon. It has been reported by
Russian sources, but denied by Kremlin officials, that Russia has initiated the delivery of five MiG-31E
fighter-interceptors to Syria. This could only be the tip of
a major Russian newspaper, has reported in regards to the transfer of Russian
jets to Syria that
"Iran may be the big winner from the
[Russian-Syrian] deal" because of the Syrian-Iranian mutual defence
enough, Tehran has been reportedly financing
Syrian weapon upgrades and military purchases from Russia, Ukraine, and China.
In the event of confrontation between Iran and the U.S. it is apparent that Israel
will play a direct role. The strengthening of Syria will keep Israel at bay in the event of a possible conflict
between the United States and
according to an Italian source a U.N. official in Lebanon
has revealed that the Iranian military has been moving Iranian missiles and
equipment to Syrian territory and has sent Iranian military engineers to train
the Syrians with use of Iranian hardware and technology.
sources have made similar statements in the past. If accurate, this is
undoubtedly part of the defensive arrangements being made by Syria and Iran to protect Syria
from an Israeli invasion or air strikes.
for War: Special "Israeli War Cabinet" formed
to Israeli sources, at the start of June of 2007 Israel held mock invasion exercises that
simulated an Israeli invasion of Syria.  The Israeli exercise was offensive by definition and
nature. Invasions are not defensive. Syrian model villages were also used for
the simulated Israeli invasion of Syria.  Israel also held large-scale military operations
and exercises on the Syrian border and in the Golan
sources have been repeatedly talking about the Middle
East through a war-like perspective.  They speak of Gaza,
Lebanon, the West Bank, and
Syria as fronts in an ongoing
Israeli war and portray Israel under a continuous state of siege that is
masterminded by Tehran and its associates. Israeli media
operatives have also been training for public relations operations and media
exercises that would aim to gain the sympathy of the global public upon the
commencement of hostilities with Lebanon, Syria, and Iran.
it is rarely mentioned in public, Israel has also admitted that the only reason
that a large-scale Israeli operation has not occurred in Gaza is because of Israeli war preparations against
Syria.  Other developments have also taken place in Israel
that point to an Israeli role in an attack against the Iranians. Ephraim Sneh,
the Deputy Defence Minister of Israel, who has stepped down from his cabinet
post, has protested that Israel is not prepared to manage military
operations against Iran alone. This implies that an
attack against Iran will be a joint Israeli-U.S.
Aviv, as of June 6,
2007 a special "war cabinet" has been formed.  According to Israeli
sources this inner circle within the Israeli government has been notified by
Israeli intelligence sources that Syria is not planning any attack on Israel,
but is preparing for an Israeli invasion.  In some ways the Israeli war cabinet is the Israeli
alternative to the active war theatre posts being created by the White House for
an expanded Middle Eastern war, which includes the American "war czar" post.  Israel and the U.S. have also created the "Joint Political
Military Group" which is a working and planning group that encompasses joint war
and planning preparations against Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and the Palestinian Territories.
Israeli war cabinet compromises the notion that Israel
is in a state of war preparations for an offensive war. Amongst the special
war cabinets tasks are studies of the Iranian reaction of an Israeli attack and
invasion of Syria. 
has also said that "[Israel]
must once again restore
the Israeli army's deterrence, because there is no other way [for
Israel]," which means that
Israel must demonstrate its military
might.  Aside from the Palestinian people, such a
show of force can only be demonstrated against Lebanon and/or Syria.
Geo-Strategic Defeat for the U.S. and E.U. in Central
Turkmenistan has tried
to stay neutral in the tensions between Russia, Iran, and China
on one side and the Anglo-American alliance and its NATO partners on the other
side. In the last few months it has also turned out that Turkmenistan is beginning to shift
from its neutral position. With the death of President Niyazov (Turkmenbashi),
the dictator of Turkmenistan,
the Central Asian republic has started to slowly align itself with Tehran, Moscow, and
Beijing. The new
leader of Turkmenistan,
Gurbanguly Berdimuhammedow, has made visits to Moscow and Tehran which have
resulted in closer cooperation between Turkmenistan, the Russians, and the
Iranians. Turkmenistan is also moving towards
joining or working with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization
U.S. and E.U. have been
trying to make sure that the Russian
Federation, like Iran, would be bypassed by oil and gas pipelines,
thus eliminating the control Russia would have on international
energy supplies.  On
12 May, 2007
the Russian President and his Turkmen and Kazakh counterparts signed an
agreement that confirmed a geo-strategic defeat for the U.S.
and is partners. According to the agreement the energy exports of
Turkmenistan would go through
Russian territory and not alternative routes that would avoid Russia.
Note: The following map was
prepared by Kommersant after a
trilateral summit between Kazakhstan, Russia, and Turkmenistan in the Caspian Sea port of Turkmenbashi (May 12, 2007). The Turkmenbashi
Summit resulted was attended by President Vladimir Putin of
Nursultan Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan, and President Gurbanguly
Berdimuhammedow of Turkmenistan.
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) Pipeline that runs through the Republic of Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey is not shown in this
end of 2006, the Turkmen President and the Iranian President have intensified
cooperation and have reciprocally hosted one another in Tehran and Ashgabat
(Ashkhabad). Most of the gas collected from the western fields of
Turkmenistan is also being
exported through Iran.  Days apart
from the developments in Central Asia, Iran and China also finalized energy negotiations and
concluded an agreement on the development of the North Pars gas field in the
Persian Gulf on May 18, 2007. 
Russia is also
involved in the Iran-Pakistan-India oil pipeline and energy projects in
Syria and the Eastern Mediterranean. The Russians are also establishing
a naval base in Syria to
protect their interests in the Eastern
Mediterranean. Greece, Bulgaria, and Russia have also signed a long-delayed energy
deal for the construction of the Burgas-Alexandroupoli(s) pipeline that would
carry oil from the Black Sea terminals of Russia
through Bulgarian and Greek territory. 
A Web of
Secret Meetings: Drawing the Lines in Iraq
apparent and undeniable that nothing is developing or unfolding in Iraq as
any party or side has planned. Prior to the Sharm el-Sheikh Summit, Dr. Ali Larijani, the Secretary-General of the
Supreme National Security Council of Iran, was in Baghdad and Najaf for discussions with the
Iraqi Prime Minister, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, and other Iraqi figures. 
in Baghdad were partially in essence discussions
between the U.S. government
and Iran and the talks in
Najaf with Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani must have had British influence because
of the private guarantees the British secretly gave the Grand Ayatollah in
regards to Iraq during 2004
negotiations in London. These secret negotiations took place in
2004 when the Grand Ayatollah abruptly flew from Iraq to London, where he stayed for several days to
receive treatment for his heart. 
Al-Dulaimi, the former Iraqi Defence Minister, was also in Iran
and held high-level talks that included Secretary-General Larijani. Ibrahim
(Abraham) Al-Jaafari, who is notable for having served as the prime minister of
Iraq in 2005, was also in
Iran to attend an international
conference.  While in
Iran he had high-level meetings that
included both Chairman Rafsanjani, a former Iranian president, and Dr. Larijani.
 Al-Jaafari was distinctly
broken down in his appearance throughout his stay in Tehran. It is worth
mentioning, that prior to his visit to Tehran,
that Al-Jaafari was reported as having had high-level talks in his home on
April 4, 2007 with
General David Petraeus, the Commander of Coalition and U.S. forces in Iraq.
Seventy other Iraqi government officials, parliamentarians, and military men
were also present for the talks with General Petraeus.  The Prime
Minister of the Kurdish Regional Government of Northern Iraq, Nechervan
Idris Barzani also visited Iran in the same timeframe as other politicians
and figures from Iraq. Messages have
undoubtedly been passed between the American and Iranian sides through these
Al-Hakim, the leader of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC) which was
formerly named the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI),
also visited both the U.S.
and Tehran in
May of 2007. These visits to the U.S. and Iran were reportedly on the basis of
medical incentives.  Jalal
Talabani, the Iraqi President, was also in the U.S. for "vacation" during the same time that
Abdul Aziz Al-Hakim was in Iran. Jalal Talabani was also in
Jordan and the U.S. for medical reasons prior and
during his vacation. 
Talabani later also visited Iran and held talks with Iranian
leaders.  Undoubtedly, both
individuals are also negotiating and relaying messages between the U.S.
and Iranian governments. Both individuals also have their own distinct agendas
within Iraq and are
suspected of being involved in a plan to partition Iraq.
Note: The following map was
prepared by Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters. It was published in the Armed
Forces Journal in June 2006, Peters is a retired colonel of the U.S.
National War Academy. (Map Copyright Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters
Although the map does not officially reflect Pentagon
doctrine, it has been used in a training program at NATO's Defense College for senior military
officers. This map, as well as other similar maps, has most probably been
used at the National War Academy as well as in military
Iraqi cleric, Moqtada Al-Sadr, whose group has also pledged to fight alongside
Syria and Iran in a united front against
U.S., and Britain in the event of a war, has criticised any
talks with the U.S. government.  Moqtada Al-Sadr and his
followers are also at odds with Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, Jalal Talabani, and
Abdul Aziz Al-Hakim.
Chalabi and Espionage Reports in Tehran
Chalabi, the leader of the Iraqi
National Congress and an informal spokesman for Washington D.C. and
London also visited Tehran for talks before the Sharm el-Sheikh Summit in Egypt. While in Tehran Ahmed Chalabi
had talks with Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the Chairman of the Iranian Expediency
Council. The Chairman of the Iranian Expediency Council is one of the
posts of power in Iran. Chairman
Rafsanjani, as the former president of Iran, is known to have been involved in secret
negations with the U.S. and
Israel, which came into the limelight
during the Iran-Contra affair. Rafsanjani is also a strong representative of
market forces in Iran that
has advocated for business ties with the U.S.
and for economic liberalism. 
intriguing of all a former top Iranian negotiator under the Khatami
Administration, Hossein Mousavian, with close links to Chairman Rafsanjani has
also been arrested on charges of suspected espionage; this could be linked to
talks between Chairman Rafsanjani and his allies with officials from
Iraq, Afghanistan, and the E.U. representing U.S.
Domestic Politics in Iran: Pragmatists, Ideologues,
Liberals, Revolutionaries, Reformers, and Conservatives
divided amongst several poles. The political leadership of Iran is
not monolithic, but it is presently unified against the Anglo-American threat
and war march.
complex political matrix of Iranian domestic politics and the many diverse
circles of power there seems to be several internal debate well underway.
debate is about Iran's
strategic direction in regards to the United States. This is a subject of
internal contention between the revolutionary ideologues and visionaries on one
side and the pragmatists and neo-liberals led by Chairman Rafsanjani one side
with several other circles stuck midway or shifting between these two
contention in Iranian circles between those who prefer independence and
self-reliance and see a vision of the Middle East without a U.S.
presence against Chairman Rafsanjani and his political allies. Chairman
Rafsanjani supports whatever is good for business interests and reticently
advocates collaboration with the U.S. globally and in the Middle East for mutual benefits.
in the U.S. there are circles
of power that want to avert a war and seek collaboration between the
U.S. and Iran
for mutual benefits. It is these fractions in the U.S. and Iran that are pushing for
negotiations, but primarily for self-serving reasons.
Defensive Presence in Tajikistan?
of diplomatic and bilateral meetings that are linked to alliance building or
defensive configuration have been taking place. Syria and Iran maintain a constant flow of officials
between Tehran and Damascus and continue to deepen their military
ties. Before the talks at the Sharm el-Sheikh Summit, the Iranian Defence Minister went to
Tajikistan to examine key
military facilities, adjacent NATO-garrisoned Afghanistan, and to expand military cooperation
between the forces of Tajikistan and Iran.
Tajikistan, like the
other republics of Central Asia, was once a part of Iran and the Persian language, like in
Iran, is the official
language of Tajikistan. Since the collapse of the
Soviet Union talks of some form of union
between the two republics have taken place. Like the rest of the Caucasus
and Central Asia, a war against Iran would not be very welcomed in Tajikistan. The Tajik President and
Iran have also started
high-level negotiations that may involve the deployment of Iranian military
personnel in Tajikistan.
Iranian defensive presence in Tajikistan were to materialize it would give
Iran a considerable advantage
in Afghanistan should a war break out.
If a war were to start between Iran and the U.S., along with NATO, the Northern Alliance and
the overwhelming majority of the population of Afghanistan would side with the
Iranians for numerous reasons. With every passing day the Afghan population
perceives U.S. and NATO troops as an occupation
force. An Iranian position in Tajikistan would allow Iran to protect the strongholds of the Northern
Alliance in Badakhshan,
Takhar, Kunduz, Baghlan, Nooristan (Nuristan),
Panjshir, and Samangan. An Iranian presence in Tajikistan would also keep open
a potential northern supply line that could include Chinese and Russian
contributions to Iranian allies in Afghanistan.
lit between the Iraqi Kurds and Turkey by Unseen Forces
Minister of the Kurdish Regional Government of Northern Iraq,
Idris Barzani was in Iran for high-level talks with
Iranian leaders during May of 2007. The Iranian Interior Minister and Chairman
Rafsanjani were just some of the leaders that the Iraqi Kurd leader held talks
with. In Tehran he made pledges that Iraqi
Kurdistan would not be used for any operations against Iran.
Idris Barzani is also the nephew of Mullah Barzani who has been involved in a
verbal row with the Turkish government. The talks between the Kurdish Regional
Government of Northern Iraq and Iranian officials could have been motivated
through the fears of Iraqi Kurds that the U.S. will use Turkish troops to secure
Iraq if it attacks
Iran and Syria.
same timeframe that the Iranian Defence Minister was in Tajikistan for military consultations and
exchanges, in Baku a U.S.
delegation, led by Congressman
Peter Hoekstra had arrived. It was immediately announced that
the visit would be complemented by a reciprocal visit to the White House by
President Aliyev and other officials from Baku for "security talks." 
it was also announced that the Iranian President intended to visit Baku during the same
timeframe as President Aliyev's White House visit.
Republic of Azerbaijan is an independent player in the frictions
between the U.S.,
Russia, and Iran.
policy is pragmatic and flexible. Nor has Baku entrenched itself in any camp, yet.
Baku is waiting
to see how the conditions in the international environment will develop before
it solidifies itself.
Lady America from your Slumber: The
Legislative & Organizational Frameworks for War are here!
who voluntarily put power into the hands of a tyrant or an enemy must not wonder
if it be at last turned against themselves."
judicial and organization fabrics of America have been perverted and
warped by a succession of presidential administrations. American law no longer
applies to the White House or its officials. The White House has been openly
contravening and ignoring U.S. and international law. Lewis
Libby, a member of the Bush Jr. Administration, has been spared a jail term for
deliberately violating American laws.  These extrajudicial activities on the part of the White
House are only the tip of the iceberg.
tragic events of September
11, 2001, the White House has centralized U.S.
intelligence and pushed for laws that are unconstitutional in nature. Under
orders from the White House, the Pentagon has also gone forward to set up a
special military planning group to synchronize the initiation of a war against
Iran, but this is not all that is
being anticipated and projected by the Bush Jr. Administration. 
Joseph Lieberman, the chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs, has stated that widely used surveillance cameras will be
stationed across the United
States.  Military enrolment regulations have been changed and the
White House has even granted itself immunity from war crimes.
Draft and the Recruitment of Non-Americans into the U.S.
has subtly been prepared. Inadvertently and advertently many American governors
have complained about the haemorrhaging of their National Guard manpower.
Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry has said that "the Pentagon has reinstated the
draft on the backs of the National Guard" as 13, 000 National Guardsmen were
projected to be sent to war zones.  The
Pentagon has been stealthily siphoning troops and military force to the Middle
East and NATO-garrisoned Afghanistan. Tours of duty have also
been extended for U.S. servicemen.
to the Pentagon there are currently about 25,000 non-Americans enlisted in the
U.S. military and 8,000 non-Americans
have been enlisting on an annual basis.  37,000 non-Americans were involved in the Anglo-American
invasion of Iraq as
U.S. servicemen.  These figures do not include foreigners who are
recruited into working for U.S. and foreign security firms contracted to the
U.S. military or U.S. State
Department in Iraq and
Afghanistan. Helping relatives gain
legal status in the U.S. has
also been a tool to draw immigrants into enrolling in the U.S.
military. In fact, U.S.
immigration officials have been swearing in non-American servicemen as American
citizens in Baghdad. In 2004 the U.S. government allowed non-Americans in the
U.S. military to be sworn in
as American citizens in Iraq
and the Persian Gulf.
House has also signed an order waiving the three-year waiting period for
active-duty servicemen to apply for American citizenships if they had joined
before September 11,
2001. In 2004 the White House also pushed forward legislation that
eliminated application fees for active-duty servicemen. 
House Exempts itself and U.S. Troops from charges of War
the U.S. started negotiations
to exempt U.S. forces from war crime charges
internationally.  In 2003,
Bosnia-Herzegovina stated that they and other Eastern European countries were
being forced into signing agreements with the Bush Jr. Administration that would
grant immunity to U.S. soldiers from war crimes.  The U.S. President has also
gone forward to pass laws that give him and his administration immunity from
being charged with war crimes themselves. This is a flagrant omission in itself
that the U.S. President and his officials has been party to war crimes.
ask: why are the legislative steps and precautions being taken to grant war
crime immunity? The simplest answer would be because war crimes and
internationally illegally wars have been unfolding.
Crimes Act gives immunity to U.S. officials from legal prosecution
and war crime charges.  It is
interesting to note that the motif of the War Crimes Act is the continuity of
the U.S. federal government in the case
of any major disaster that could include a global conflict. What would worry a
pessimist is that the U.S. President has had this legislation passed by the U.S.
Congress not because of past war crimes, but because of future war crimes that
will be beyond any imaginable levels. Such war crimes could include the use of
nuclear weapons, the total destruction of Iran, and a global strike against
Russia, China, Belarus, Venezuela, and other U.S.
opponents. Before 2001 these suggestions would have been viewed as ludicrous,
but global perception of U.S. actions has started to radically
Homeland Security: European Union to follow American steps?
is set to become a greater U.S. partner in the "Global War on
Terror." The E.U. is also discussing another treaty between all its member
states in the realms of justice, freedom, and security.  The governments of Britain, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands (Holland), Spain, and Denmark
are all discussing tighter security measures.
populations of the E.U. are also become galvanized with fears of terrorism and
views against foreign migration. In the U.S., one of the cornerstones of
homeland security conceptualization has been an end to a liberal North American
immigration regime. The E.U. has been starting to follow suit. Further
European Union-wide security procedures are now being drafted in Brussels. The homeland
security concept is now intensifying in the E.U. and one may suspect it has a
direct link to war preparations in the Middle East and growing tensions with
Russia and China.
Brass being Primed for War
highest ranks of the U.S. military are also being filled
with allies of the Bush Jr. Administration. Amongst them are the commanding
officer of United States Central Command (CENTCOM) and soon the position of the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for the United States Armed Forces. 
House has claimed that it is wary of an awkward reconfirmation hearing for
General Peter Pace, but this is merely a boldface lie. In reality General Pace
ruled out any nuclear attacks against Iran and his statements are viewed as a liability
in the event that a nuclear attack against Iran
Planning Group dismantled after the creation of the "War Czar"
Iran-Syria Planning Group has been dissolved. 
Additionally, the White House is planning on appointing a flag officer or
general to oversee both the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as one singular theatre and with the
authority to issue directions to the Pentagon, the U.S. State Department, and
other U.S. government bodies that could
include the CIA. 
Iran lies in
between Iraq and Afghanistan. The creation of a
position to oversee both war theatres in Iraq and Afghanistan could be the precursor to overseeing
a much larger war theatre that would include Iran.
The creation of the so-called "war czar" post in Washington D.C. may
perhaps be part of the groundwork for a war against Iran and Syria, which would almost immediately assimilate
the war theatres in Afghanistan and Iraq
into one war zone.
Iran-Syria planning Group was just what its name implies, a planning group,
whereas the new "war czar" post is a supervisory position that will put all war
planning into practice.
Minister legitimizes the use of Nuclear Weapons on civilians: Why?
Japan there have been massive
cries of anger and outrage because a Japanese politician and cabinet minister
had stated at Reitaku University that the use of nuclear weapons on Japanese
civilians by the U.S. during the Second World War was
Defence Minister Fumio Kyuma's comments created tremendous backlash in
Japan which forced the Japanese Prime
Minister to publicly contest and reject his own minister's comments.
Subsequently Yuriko Koike, replacing Fumio Kyuma, was appointed as the first
female Defence Minister of Japan. 
Japanese Defence Minister's statements are part of a calculated campaign to
legitimize and prepare the public for the use of nuclear weapons on civilian
also be noted that prior to the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japanese
civilians that Japan was trying to surrender and already in the process of
giving up- this is something that has now been acknowledged through documented
sources in the U.S. and Japan. In actuality the Cold War started during the
Second World War; President Harry S. Truman did not accept the Japanese
surrender because the U.S.
government wanted to demonstrate the powers of U.S. military might through the nuclear bomb to
the Soviet Union.
the Unthinkable: Nuclear Strikes on the Iranian People
speaking during a CNN debate, Rudy Giuliani has said that if he was elected into
the presidential office he would unleash a nuclear strike against Iran.
The Jerusalem Post has written that in a state of irony "[s]everal
Republican presidential candidates, among them front-runner Rudy Giuliani, said
Tuesday [June 5, 2007] night [that] they would consider using tactical nuclear
weapons to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons." 
unthinkable is no longer a taboo: the use of nuclear weapons once again by the
U.S. military. In essence this will
be the use of nuclear weapons against civilian populations. Any nuclear attack
on Iranian nuclear facilities and structures will contaminate far-reaching areas
that will go far beyond Iran.
international consensus has been well underway to legitimize and normalize any
nuclear strikes against Iran. This is why Fumio Kyuma tried
to legitimize the dropping of nuclear weapons on Japanese civilians by the
U.S. during his visit to
evident from the Israeli military build-up, the public relations project to
normalize the Israeli nuclear arsenal, and the American deployment of nuclear
weapons into the Middle East that there is a calculated intent to use nuclear
weapons against Iran.
so-called slip of the tongue that Israel has nuclear weapons by Israeli Prime
Minister Olmert has conveniently occurred after the December 2006 statements of
Secretary Robert Gates that Israel has a nuclear arsenal.
 Israel has been
putting together a public relations campaign to declare that it needs nuclear
weapons to be used on a pre-emptive basis in response to Iran
and its allies.
of the IAEA is being drowned out by U.S. and British
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Chief has said that going to war with
Iran would be utter madness. "You do
not want to give additional argument to new crazies who say 'let's go and bomb
Iran'" the IAEA Chief has
said in regards to the political manipulation and distortion of IAEA reports by
the U.S. and Britain. 
and international officials have already complained that U.S.
officials were outright lying about various IAEA findings and reports about the
Iranians.  This is a case of
déjà vu. What is reoccurring is a repeat of the weapons of mass destruction
(WMD) propaganda as a pretext for
waging war and invading a bleeding Iraq that had been suffering from years of
economic sanctions and aerial raids by British and U.S.
Palestinian Civil War and "The Three Nation Solution"
before the climax of fighting in the Gaza Strip, the Israeli Chief of Staff
stated on Israeli television, while observing a simulated Israeli invasion
exercise of a model Syrian village, that Israel was "ready for any deterioration
on the Gaza Strip front and the Syrian front." 
(U.K.) had headlines titled
Iran's long game
sets stage for war after the Gaza Strip was secured by Hamas and affiliated
Palestinian groups allied to Iran.  In reality the U.S., Israel, and their allies have
deliberately allowed Hamas to take total control of the Gaza Strip. This has
allowed strands of Fatah and other collaborationist Palestinians working with
the U.S. and Israel to form an unelected, parallel, proxy government in the West
Bank. Iran and
Syria are also being blamed
for the hostilities in the Gaza Strip even though it is documented that the
U.S. and Israel
encouraged the creation of Palestinian groups that were ordered to attack and
deliberately undermine the elected Hamas government.
Israel there is talk of a
"three nation solution," meaning the creation of two Palestines- one in
Gaza and one in the West
Bank. This would also effectively weaken the Palestinian demand for
making East Jerusalem the Palestinian
creation of two parallel Palestinian governments, the elected Hamas government
in Gaza and the unelected Fatah-controlled
government in the West Bank will allow Israel to partition the West
Bank further with the collaboration of Mahmoud Abbas and his
henchmen. The Gaza Strip is inconsequential to Israel, but the West
Bank is coveted. A Hamas government would have refused to play along
with the Israeli dismantlement of the West Bank, but now through the
establishment of a proxy government, Hamas is effectively cut off from most the
West Bank. Israel may proceed to divide the West Bank as it pleases.
The situation in
Gaza has also been internationalized like in
Lebanon and NATO may now
informally move into Gaza under a "peacekeeping
Sheikhdoms of the Persian Gulf: Sitting on the
leaders of the U.A.E., Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi
Arabia, Qatar, Oman, and the GCC as a whole have publicly stated
that they will not allow their territories to be used in any hostilities against
Iran. The Iraqi government has also
uttered similar statements, not that they can be valued highly.
Kyrgyzstan, in Central Asia,
has also stated that no American or foreign aircraft on its territory will be
allowed to attack Iran. The Secretary-General of the
Arab League has also declared that the Arab World is unanimously against any
American-led military adventure against Iran. 
of the rulers of the GCC are sitting on the fence and will side with who they
believe will come out on top in the Middle
East. If not neutral, they are expected to betray and distance
themselves from whomever they perceive will be the looser of a showdown between
the U.S. and Iran.
Kuwaiti leaders declared that their territory would not be used against
Iran they also sent envoys to
Iran and later Syria.
The Syrian President received the Crown Prince of Kuwait with a private message
from the rulers of Kuwait.  The message may be part of the continuous effort to
de-link Syria from Iran or
may have deeper implications. Kuwait, Bahrain, and the GCC as a whole, have already
taken publicly known measures to prepare themselves for war between the
U.S. and Iran.
leaders of the Arab Sheikhdoms of the Persian
Gulf have been known to say one thing, but to act differently. For
example the princes of Saudi
Arabia force their rigid views on their local
population and hide behind religion, but themselves are known to engage in all
sorts of legal breaches towards their own edicts. Saudi princes are involved in
all types of fractions from bribery to the sex trade and the personal use of
cocaine.  They stand as some
of the greatest hypocrites amongst the Desert Arabs.
U.S. is threatening both its Enemies and its own Allies alike in the Middle
GCC's statements of non-aggression towards Iran may only be made to calm the Arab public and
hide any role these respective sheikhdoms would play in any wars against
Iran and Syria.
The rulers of the GCC are conceivably keeping their options open and will throw
their lots with the U.S. or
Iran depending on what they
believe will be the outcome of a showdown between Washington D.C. and
their selection they are not fully trusted by either the Americans or the
the presence of the U.S. Navy was enlarged in the Persian
Gulf before the Iranian President's visit to the U.A.E.,
Vice-President Cheney was quoted as saying "With two
carrier strike groups in the [Persian] Gulf, we're sending clear messages to
friends and adversaries alike."  It should be pointed out that
U.S. officials such as the
American Vice-President and Robert Gates have threatened both their enemy
Iran and their own so-called
allies in the Persian Gulf, the rulers of the
Arab Sheikhdoms, due to the volatility of the strategic balance of power. They
have stated that the presence of U.S. military power in the region is a reminder
to both American foes and friends alike that the U.S. is not leaving the waters of the Persian Gulf.
capture of British servicemen in the Persian Gulf by Iran helped portray Britain and America
as declining powers. The U.S.
and Britain know that their
allies in the Middle East will abandon them if
they are seen as weak. This is why they have started threatening their own
allies of Washington D.C. and 10
Downing Street are being clearly courted by
has also called for the creation of a mutual defence pact amongst all the
nations of the Persian Gulf littoral and for the exclusion of all foreign or
alien forces from the Persian Gulf. 
U.S. has become nervous
because of the talks being held behind closed doors between Iran
and members of the GCC. In an uncharacteristic move by Iran and Saudi
Arabia, both Dr. Ali Larijani and the Iranian President
have successively visited Saudi Arabia and held talks with the
Saudi King.  Roger
Hardy, an analyst on the Middle East working for the British Broadcasting
Corporation (BBC), has also
suggested that there is some form of a political divide within the House of Saud
in regards to a confrontation between the U.S. and Iran.  The
Iranian President has also visited both the U.A.E. and the Sultanate of Oman to
draw them closer into the Iranian orbit.  While in
the U.A.E. the Iranian President also declared that Iran was also willing to restart full diplomatic
relations with Egypt. 
to an Al Jazeera interview with Naser Kandil of the Center for Modern Oriental
Studies and Media in Lebanon
the U.S. government with the
collaboration of Prince Bandar bin Sultan bin Abdul Aziz Al-Saud is planning a
coup or military takeover of Saudi
Arabia before it pulls out its troops from
Iraq.  Regardless of the accuracy of Naser Kandril's assertion,
it seems that the White House has contingency plans in regards to
Saudi Arabia and the GCC
should they split from America.
the Gates in the East
Tehran and Damascus there has been a feeling that the enemy, meaning
the U.S., Britain, and NATO is at the
gate. The entities that have animated and supported Israel, radical and violent cells, the Taliban,
and other enemies of Tehran and Damascus are now themselves directly settled on the borders
of both Iran and Syria.
The gates of Baghdad and Kabul have been entered and a political struggle is taking
place within Beirut to decide Lebanon's fate.
Moscow and Beijing are also aware that the enemy has
gathered at their gates. The sentiments on the part of these nation-states are
similar to that of Austria
when the Ottoman Turk armies marched towards the Habsburg capital, Vienna. In this posterior
period it is the U.S. and
NATO forces that are amassing on the borders of Iran, Syria, Russia, China, and the republics of the former Soviet Union.  To these
countries the enemy is now at the gate. These nations continue to be demonized
and demeaned as the anti-theses of peace. The Washington Times has even
China, and Iran
the "new Axis of Evil." 
U.S. and Britain intended to stay in Iraq
for the long-term since 2003
"It is the
[British] soldiers who have been telling me from the frontline [Iraq] that the
war they have been fighting is a hopeless war, that they cannot possibly win it
and the sooner we start talking politics and not military solutions, the sooner
they will come home and their lives will be preserved."
-General Sir Michael Rose, British Army
of war is very much alive and breathing and will continue to do so until
U.S. and British forces leave
the Middle East, specifically Iraq and the Persian
Gulf. General David Petraeus, the military commander in charge of
operations in Iraq, has told the Fox News Channel,
owned by media mogul Rupert Murdoch, that it will take approximately ten years
to defeat the Iraqi Resistance.
bases in Iraq could also help
enforce potential NATO bases in the Caucasus and Central
Asia. Fourteen gargantuan, mammoth-sized, super-bases have been
constructed in Iraq. These Anglo-American bases are
spread throughout Iraq and located near
geo-strategically important positions, Iraqi oil fields, and oil
May 30, 2007 the
White House declared that the American President and his officials have planned
a lengthy U.S. military
presence in Iraq like the one
Korea.  American forces have been in
Korea for well over half a century since the
end of the Korean War in 1953.
House's statements were later echoed by the Pentagon in what has been termed as
a "post-occupation" presence.  The term
"post-occupation" signified the fact that U.S. officials know very well that they are an
occupational force in Iraq
and can also mean a continuation of the occupation of Iraq.
The White House and Pentagon have only confirmed what has been observed since
2005 and that is that the U.S. and British governments wanted a permanent
presence in Iraq. Permanent military bases were
already being built in Iraq
and hefty contracts were already awarded to build these mammoth bases to
Anglo-American corporations at a cost of over a billion dollars (U.S.)
per year. 
Robert Gates has also stated that the U.S. government desired a "long and enduring
presence" in Iraq with the consent of the Iraqi
government.  This is
another instance where the double-standards of American foreign policy are
exposed. In the past the U.S.
government under the helms of the Bush Jr. Administration said that it did not
accept Syria's claims that
its troops were stationed in parts of Lebanon at the invitation of the
Lebanese government. The reason for this was that the U.S. claimed that the Lebanese government was
co-opted into Syria's clutches. What would make the
current Iraqi puppet government any different from the pre-2005 Lebanese
Controlling, Directing, and Arming Death Squads in Iraq
U.S., Britain, and Saudi Arabia have been deliberately inseminating unsuccessful
stories of a civil war in Iraq between Shiite Muslims and Sunni Muslims in an
attempt to blame the Iraqis for the ongoing violence in their occupied land and
to justify the continued presence of Anglo-American troops.
have allowed militias to form under their eyes and given them the power of
arbitrary arrest and ordered the Iraqi Army to supply them with ammunition.  Coalition forces claim that
this is an act of desperation. The Washington Post has quoted an unnamed
U.S. intelligence officer as saying
"we have made a deal with the devil." 
the U.S. is arming Iraqi
groups under the very noses of the so-called international community while
laying total blame on Syria,
Iran, and even Hezbollah of Lebanon.
 Many Iraqi eyewitnesses
have reported that it was Coalition troops that also allowed and watched the
raids of many low-profile military barracks during 2003 so that weapons could be
dispersed throughout Iraq. The U.S. has also jointly imported terrorist groups
into Iraq vis-à-vis
Arabia and with the help of Saudi Intelligence.
controls the Death Squads from the Iraqi Interior Ministry?
tenor of Ayad (Iyad) Allawi as the Anglo-American selected interim prime
minister of Iraq in 2004, the Interior Ministry
of Iraq was packed with former CIA
collaborators. Under the directive of the Coalition Authorities in Baghdad and the supervision
of the CIA a force of 5, 000
special police commandos was created within the Interior Ministry. A
former Baathist (or someone who is at least described as a former Baathist),
Major-General Adnan Thabit Al-Samarrai or simply Adnan Thabit, was given command
of the force. 
Major-General Adnan Thabit was given autonomy from the Interior Ministry and was
supervised by the CIA. The
Washington Post published an article by David Ignatius that has claimed that
the force consists of approximately 10, 000 men. 
Major-General Adnan Thabit participated in an unsuccessful coup organized by
Ayad Allawi and the CIA that
attempted to overthrow Saddam Hussein. As a result Major-General Thabit was
jailed and only released in 2003. It is also not coincidental that the
U.S. and Britain appointed Falah Al-Naqib, the son of a
prominent former Baathist official and the nephew of Major-General Thabit, as
the Interior Minister of Iraq.
Negroponte, who was the U.S.
ambassador to Iraq at the time of the creation of
the special police commandos, also supervised the training of the Interior
Ministry.  James Steele, a
retired U.S. colonel who was the commander of a U.S. military advisor group in
El Salvador from 1984 till 1986 became Major-General Adnan Thabit's American
handler.  It is believed
that James Steele was assigned to the Interior Ministry because John Negroponte
was the U.S. ambassador in Honduras while James Steele was in El Salvador and
both men have experience in crushing and repressing Latin American democratic
movements and revolutions. There should be little surprise when reports are made
of torture marks and techniques in Iraq that are similar to those of
Honduras and El
Government is a Sponsor of Terrorism in the Middle East
May 26, 2007 ABC
News reported that the White House has admitted to giving presidential
approval for covert operations against Iran, including acts of terrorism.  Although it is not fully
admitted similar tactics have been used in Iraq.
campaigns have been launched not just in Iraq, but across the Middle
East to destabilize resistance and opposition to the Anglo-American
alliance. The CIA has also
admitted that it has been targeting Hezbollah and any opponents to
U.S. foreign policy in
Lebanon. This is the key force behind
the destabilization of Lebanon. This is a subject that is
reported, but causally shrugged aside by both American and British mainstream
media.  The White House has
causally disclosed information that admits that the U.S. is
a state sponsor of terrorism directed against its opponents.
and Civil War in Iraq is an Anglo-American Objective
it is becoming more and more evident that the Anglo-American alliance, with the
assistance of Saudi Arabia and Israel, has been orchestrating ethnic, sectarian,
and religious conflict in Iraq. It has universally been proclaimed as such by
Kurd, Arab, Assyrian, and Turcoman alike in Iraq.
Christians, Shiite Muslims, Sunni Muslims, Yazdis, and Mandaeans in Iraq
are all under attack by secretive units, including the Coalition-controlled
forces of the Interior Ministry of Iraq.
evident that stability is unwanted in Iraq. This has been the objective all
along in Iraq. Only the stability of oil
infrastructure matters to the Anglo-American alliance. Instability allows the
U.S. and Britain to craft their excuses for their
long-term deployments in Iraq and to plunder Iraqi energy
most part, the truth of the matter is that the U.S. and Britain are deliberately fashioning a state of
chaos in Iraq and turning brother and sister
against brother and sister. Part of the Anglo-American objective is to divide
Iraq and to arm Shiite Muslims and
Sunni Muslims against one another and to disrupt all social order.  The U.S. and Britain have
also desperately tried to portray Sunni Muslim groups as being behind the murder
of leaders within the Sadrist Movement in Iraq.  This is rejected by the Sadrists, who are Shiite
Muslims. They know the strategy the U.S. and Britain are playing by trying to
blame Shiite Muslims for the murders of Sunni Muslim and by blaming Sunni
Muslims for the death of Shiite Muslims.
Iraqis blame the U.S. and Britain for the Golden Mosque Bombings
blamed the U.S. and
Britain for the attacks on
religious places of worship in Iraq. Although many are suspicious of
Iran, both independent Iraqi
Shiite Muslim and Sunni Muslim leaders who oppose the Iraqi government have also
pointed the finger at the U.S. and Britain. The Iranians have blamed
Coalition forces for the bombings of the Al-Askari Mosque in Samarra, Iraq.
press in North America and Western Europe has
distorted the Iranian statements that absolve Sunni Muslims. The press services
in North America and Western Europe have
instead attempted to incorporate Sunni Muslims as the perpetrators behind the
bombings of the mosques revered by Shiite Muslims.
being claimed that the bombings of Iraqi mosques and places of worship are being
performed by radical Shiite Muslim and Sunni Muslim groups, but this is
unfeasible.  This
claim seems almost undoubtedly false because mosques are not divided like
churches by sectarian denominations. Although a mosque maybe used predominantly
by either Shiite or Sunni Muslims, mosques are unitary places of worship for all
Muslims. It is certain that the bombings are being overseen covertly by the
U.S. and Britain.
validate this statement it should be noted that British soldiers belonging to
the SAS were caught red-handed in one of these covert operations in Basra. The SAS soldiers
were dressed in local dress and hiding explosives that they planned to
denominate amongst a religious congregation in Basra.  Their pictures, while in custody, the costumes they
wore, and the explosives they carried have been widely circulated in the Middle
East, but unfortunately not in Britain or North America.
Campaign to Exterminate Iraqi Christians
I try to avoid meeting them [meaning U.S. and British officials] as much
as possible. They [the Americans and the British] are the occupiers. The
occupied don't want to be occupied.
Archbishop of Baghdad and Patriarch of Babylon, Emmanuel
III (Emmanuel-Karem) Delly,
Chaldean Catholic Church
and pain recognize no religion. Iraqi Christians have been hard hit since the
2003 Anglo-American invasion of their country. Their churches were targeted and
badly damaged by the so-called precision weaponry of the U.S. and Britain and now their churches are being
deliberately attacked by unknown gunmen and explosives similar to those blowing
mosques up throughout Iraq. To many of the Iraqi
Christians it is obvious that the U.S. is trying to push them out of
their own country. The attacks on Iraqi Christians are part of a greater agenda
to erase the identity and history of Iraq.
Adding insult to
insult, U.S. troops have
forcefully appropriated one of Baghdad's largest monasteries and places of
Christian worship, where the Chaldean Catholic Church has had a seminary and
theology college. The Christian monastery has been turned into an army barrack
to the anger of Iraqi Christians.  Iraqi Christians see this as impertinent to their
religious beliefs. One of their places of worship has been turned into a
barrack. This is not an isolated incident, but part of a continued pattern
effecting Christians and Muslims alike in Iraq.
Intelligence: The Secret Partner in Iraq
initiation of the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq in 2003 many Arabs reported that in many
cases the cheering locales in Baghdad and
Iraq did not have Iraqi accents when
they spoke Arabic. This means that they were individuals who were brought in by
the U.S. and the British. Amongst those
who assert that non-Iraqi Arabs were brought into Iraq for public relations operations and
propaganda purposes is Samir Khader of Al Jazeera in Qatar.
 Samir Khader, an Iraqi and
a Senior Producer for Al Jazeera, like many other fellow Arabs realized that
non-Iraqis were brought into Iraq to play the role of cheering Iraqis during the
Anglo-American invasion. The natural vicinity that these individuals originated
from is deductively Saudi
Arabia and the Arab Sheikhdoms of the Persian Gulf.
intelligence apparatus of the Kingdom
of Saudi Arabia and Israel have both played key roles in creating
internal tension within Iraq in a deliberate effort to
dismantle the occupied republic. Many of the groups creating disorder and
attacking Iraqis have been facilitated into Iraq by Saudi Intelligence with the knowledge of
the U.S. and British governments. The
majority of foreign radical groups entering Iraq are originating from Saudi Arabia and the Arab Sheikdoms of the
Persian Gulf. 
Association of Muslims Scholars in Iraq (ASMI), a political coalition of Sunni Muslim clerics
and scholars, has stated that the bombings
of places of worship, the random attacks on crowded public areas, and the
routine assassination of Iraqis by death squads are intended to divide
Iraq. The Association of Muslims
Scholars in Iraq (ASMI) has also
stated that Saudi Arabia is a perpetrator in the violence in Iraq and has helped
create and train death squads and intelligence agents that are plaguing Iraq
with violence. 
of the South Lebanon Army have been relocated to Iraq by Israel
torture victims who have survived have also testified that their captors worked
with U.S. and British forces and possessed
Khaliji (Gulf) or Lebanese accents when they spoke Arabic. It is apparent that
the remnants of the collaborationist South Lebanon Army (SLA) which was under
the command of Israel are now
operating for Anglo-American and mercenary forces in Iraq.
Many members of the South Lebanon Army (SLA), including its leader General
Antoine Lahad, had fled into Israel when Israeli forces retreated and
Israel ended its occupation
of South Lebanon on May 25, 2000.
Lebanese Army (SLA) was infamous for its employment of Israeli torture
techniques on fellow Lebanese civilians. Al-Khiam, in South Lebanon, had a
notorious detention facility that was used for torture by Israel and its proxy force in Lebanon, the South Lebanon Army
(SLA). These torture techniques that have the signature markings of
Israel have also been
appearing in Iraq. Although it must be stated that
torture techniques are being exchanged and transferred between Anglo-American,
Saudi, and Israeli forces. It is a well known fact that Israeli instructors are
training certain U.S. units specializing in prisoner
detention, interrogation, and/or assassination missions. 
Remnants behind the Systematic Targeting of Palestinians in Iraq?
deduce that Israel and the
United States have
facilitated the arrival of former members of the South Lebanon Army (SLA) into
Iraq. Many are now working as
mercenaries for foreign security contractors in Iraq.
It can even be questioned if it is these remnants of the South Lebanon Army
(SLA), that are fiercely anti-Palestinian, that are behind the systematic
targeting and murder of the Palestinians refugees of Iraq.
reports that Iranian Forces have crossed into Iraq
continued Iranian arms shipments to Iraq and to the Taliban in NATO-garrisoned
Afghanistan continue to
British tabloid, has been the source behind a report that Iranian Revolutionary
Guard units have been spotted crossing into Iraq from the Iranian border near Basra.  The Sun has also
reported that senior British officers have confirmed that Iranian helicopters
have crossed into Iraq and has also quoted an unidentified British intelligence
source saying that Britain is at war with Iran. The Sun quotes the
unidentified intelligence source as saying "It is an extremely alarming
development and raises the stakes considerably," and "In effect, it means we are
in a full on war with Iran- but nobody has officially
declared it." 
instantly the reports were dismissed as blatant lies by the Iranian Armed Forces
and the Iranian government. Such claims that Iranian forces were crossing into
Iraq were being made as far back as March of 2006, over a year ago, by Donald
Brigades mobilizing near Iranian Borders
developments have taken place in the Caucasus, the land bridge between
Iran and Russia.
Although Russia and
Iran have no direct borders
any longer, both nations share the Caspian Sea
and have borders in close proximity to one another. Russia has commenced with the deployment of two
Russian mountain brigades into the North
Caucasus. The two Russian brigades would be based in the republics
of Daghestan and Karachayevo-Circassia. 
borders both Georgia and the
Republic of Azerbaijan and is Russia's closet point to Iran.
Karachayevo-Circassia is on the border with Georgia. Georgia is presently controlled by a government
that is openly collaborating with NATO against Russia, Iran, and Armenia. Unreported in Western Europe
or North America, the Georgian government has also been curving
back democratic liberties in Georgia with the tacit approval of
the White House and 10 Downing
Street. The case of Georgia, like Pakistan, exposes the fact that democracy is
not a genuine concern of either the U.S. or British governments.
Karachayevo-Circassia is also located above Abkhazia. Abkhazia is a well armed
breakaway republic that has seceded from Georgia
and is a Russian ally.
Russian mountain brigades will be completely positioned by December of 2007
according to the Russian military. Russia also plans to deploy a
motorized infantry battalion and reconnaissance contingents in the area during
the summer of 2007 (from July to August, 2007). The two mountain brigades are
scheduled to be completely equipped and armed by October of 2007.  This means that Russian
forces will be in position just before 2008- the year that Israeli sources have
cited as the possible year of an attack on Iran.
Russian Forces enter the Middle East to support Iran?
deployment of these two Russian brigades is no mere coincidence. Brigades are
large military organizations that are composed of several regiments or
battalions and themselves are the units that compile military divisions.
Divisions have tens of thousands of servicemen. The deployment of these two
Russian brigades, without the consideration of existing units and other units
being mobilized, are in essence the deployment of an incomplete division near
the border of not just Georgia, but also in close proximity to
Northern Iran. The added strength and military
force to Russia's Caucasian
flank is an alarming signal that Russia is fortifying its southern flank from a
real threat from NATO or possibility preparing for the extension of a war in the
Middle East. The fresh brigades would be added
to the Russian units that have already been position in Russia's Caucasian flank.
Russian and Iranian troops could neutralize any American-led military initiative
in Georgia or the Republic of Azerbaijan. Abkhazia, South Ossetia,
Armenia, and Nagorno-Karabakh would also fight alongside
Russia and Iran. It has already been
reported that Iran has
contingency plans in regards to opening a Caucasian front in a potential
American war involving Tbilisi and Baku. Russian troops
could also alternatively enter the Middle East from the Caucasus to assist
Iran against U.S.
and British forces. The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and
Russia have already both
termed an attack on Iran as "unacceptable."
Preparing for "War of Resistance" against America
"[Venezuela] must think and prepare for
the Resistance War everyday..."
Chavez, President of the Bolivarian
Republic of Venezuela
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has urged Venezuelans and other Latin Americans
to prepare for a "guerrilla-style war" and "resistance" against an American
invasion. The Venezuelan President has also added that the U.S. is
using psychological and economic warfare as part of an unconventional campaign
aimed at overthrowing the democratically elected Venezuelan government. 
It is also
not by chance that the Venezuelan President and other Venezuelan officials have
Belarus, and Iran
during the summer junction of 2007- a period when rumours of war have been
elevated.  A global alliance of
political, economic, security, social, and military characteristics is being
sculpted against the Anglo-American alliance and NATO.
Venezuelan President has also warned repeatedly that those in power in Washington D.C. will
eventually launch an invasion of Venezuela and other nations as part of a global
campaign, but are currently trying to overrun Venezuela, like Iran,
without resorting to physical combat. The U.S. government has engineered regime change
attempts against Venezuela in
the past and is currently orchestrating a media campaign, economic warfare, and
has been involved in attempts to nurture insurgency in Venezuela.
there be a U.S. Invasion of
World War was lost by Germany
and its allies in Stalingrad, when they failed to secure the oil resources of
the Soviet Union and were depleted gravely in a
life or death attempt to do so.
If a major
global conflict was launched, the U.S. and several of its allies would be unable to
access energy supplies from the Middle East, Central Asia, Russia, parts of Europe, and parts of Africa. Saudi, Iraqi, and Persian
Gulf oil exports would be halted. Oil access would either be
directly obstructed or inadvertently stopped because of military operations.
Canada, which is
one of the top exporters of oil to the U.S., exports its oil to the U.S.
while Canadians import Saudi Arabian and Middle Eastern oil. In the scenario of
a Middle Eastern war, Canada
would be forced to reduce its exports to the U.S. to
meet its own domestic energy needs with Canadian oil.
Venezuela is a
significant source of U.S. oil imports. If Venezuelan oil
were to stop reaching the U.S. it would also be a major blow.
There could be a major energy crisis in the U.S. should there be a global war
and Venezuela were to end its oil exports to the U.S. at the same time as an
obstruction of oil from the Middle East and other areas. The scenario would even
worsen if Ecuador, a
Venezuelan ally, were also to cut back or stop oil exports to the U.S.
under the orders of President Rafael Correa.
prices that oil would reach to all this and we may see U.S. officials do what Venezuela is claiming. Under such a
scenario the U.S. may be
strained to invade Venezuela
for U.S. oil needs and to continue its
'Havoc' and let slip the Dogs of War!"
Iranian Speaker of Parliament has stated during a press conference that it is
highly unlikely that the U.S.
would attack or attempt to invade Iran, but he has added that there are certain
officials within the White House who have already caused many problems in the
Middle East and who might embark on repeating
the same "unwise decisions."  In essence the Iranian Speaker of Parliament has not
ruled out a war between the U.S. and Iran. Iranian officials and military
commanders have repeatedly been saying that the U.S. would not dare attack Iran,
but yet they always say that they are ready for the possibility of war.
Logically it is evident that they have not ruled out a military attack against
have been trying to sow enmity amongst the American people and the people of
distant lands. War cries and fictional tales are being nurtured to the American
public. The media propaganda against Iran, Syria, Russia, China, and any nations outside the
Anglo-American or France-German orbits has been increasing.
Joseph Lieberman, who was ejected from the Democratic Party by his local party
constituents, said that "I think we've got to be prepared to take aggressive
military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in
Iraq," during an appearance on Face the Nation, a show on the CBS Television
Network. He was lectured about his threatening statements, by various American
politicians. The critical political statements against Senator Lieberman are
misleading and actually authenticate Joseph Lieberman's comments. All criticism
of Senator Lieberman by his critics essentially says that Lieberman is correct
that the Iranians are killing American troops indirectly, but half-heartedly
says the U.S. should still work on a
diplomatic track. This is merely part of the brinkmanship towards mobilizing
hostile feelings in the U.S.
in late-June of 2007, the main military spokesman for the Coalition in
Anglo-American occupied Iraq,
Brigadier-General Kevin Bergner, alleged that Iran is behind the mayhem in Iraq.
"There absolutely is evidence of Iranian operatives holding weapons, training
fighters, providing resources, helping plan operations, resourcing [sic]
secret cells that is destabilizing Iraq," claimed Brigadier-General Bergner
without provide one piece of irrefutable evidence.  This has been the unremitting modus operandi of
U.S. and British officials. The
conviction is if you claim it frequently enough and say it frequently enough
then the general public will start believing what you said as if it were a fact
and that it can be used as one of the multiple pretexts for war with Iran.
Crises in the Levant: Palestine and Lebanon
of the renegade Fatah gangs in Gaza by Hamas seems to have been the last resort
of the Hamas government of reigning in the renegade elements of Fatah that have
been deliberately trying to overthrow the Palestinian government through a coup.
The fighting in Gaza was orchestrated by the
U.S. and Israel, and U.N. documents confirm this, but
Iran is being blamed as the
instigator of the fighting in Gaza.
have also been fired into Israel, by an unknown group, under suspicious
circumstances that looks like an intelligence operation that is meant to open
the door for Israeli military operations into Lebanon, which could eventually spread into
Syria. Syria and Iran are also being blamed for the rocket fire
from Lebanon and the
instability and internal divisions being created throughout Lebanon. According to Reuters,
Javier Solana has also blamed Iran for the fighting in Gaza and the tensions in Lebanon in a show of unity with the
U.S. and Israel.
 Days later Cristina
Gallach, the spokesperson for Javier Solana, denied the statements attributed to
him by Reuters. 
to the accusations being charged against Iran and Syria in the Levant, the U.S. and E.U. are accusing Russia and China or arming and destabilizing
Sudan in East Africa.  It is ironic that the Sudanese government itself is
accusing the U.S. and E.U. of arming and training insurgents in Darfour and of
attempting to destabilize Sudan in an endeavour to control Sudanese oil
Muslims versus Sunni Muslims, Christians, and Druze?
Israeli analysts have also
warned that Lebanon could
explode with civil war between the American-backed governing political parties
and the opposition parties that are backed by Syria and Iran.
 Israeli and U.S. analysts have also painted an
utterly erroneous image that a Lebanese civil war would line up the Shiite
Muslims against the Sunni Muslims, Christians, and Druze of Lebanon. This is an
extension of the "Shiite
Crescent" concept popularly mentioned by Arab
dictators which stipulates that the Shiite Muslims are preparing to overrun the
In reality the largest Christian
political party in Lebanon,
the Free Patriotic Movement, with the largest representation in the Lebanese
Parliament has sided with Hezbollah since the Israeli attacks on Lebanon
in 2006. Other Christian parties in Lebanon that have sided with
Hezbollah include El Marada, the Skaff Bloc, and the Murr
The Lebanese Islamic Front, a Sunni
Muslim party, and several prominent Sunni Muslim figures have also sided with
Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic Movement. Substantial amounts of the Sunni
Muslim population of Lebanon have sided with Hezbollah
since the 2006 Israeli attacks. There is a
realization on their part that there is a deliberate American-led effort to
drive a wedge between the Lebanese.
The Lebanese Democratic Party, a
Druze party, and Wiam Wahhab have also sided with Hezbollah and the Free
Patriotic Movement. Minor fighting has also broken out in Druze areas
between Druze individuals who have sided with the American-backed political
parties and the Lebanese opposition parties. 
The Lebanese Communist Party and
several other political parties that include both Muslims and Christians have
also sided with Hezbollah and the opposition parties. Amal, a Shiite Muslim
political party, is also a strong Hezbollah ally. Together these groups compose
the Lebanese National Opposition.
The Western-backed political parties
that currently govern Lebanon are the Hariri-led Future
Movement, which is Sunni Muslim, Samir Geagea's Lebanese Forces, which is
Christian, and Walid Jumblatt's Progressive Socialist Party, which is Druze.
They also have allies amongst the Shiite Muslims and several Christian groups,
including the Kataeb Party. The Kataeb Party is better known as the Phalange,
which with Israel was involved in the massacre
of Palestinian refugees, including women and children, during the Lebanese Civil
Hearsay: Smoke in the Horizon of the Middle East War Theatre?
sorts of articles are sprouting on a daily basis reiterating the constant
message and motif that Iran
and Syria are the forces
behind the ensuing chaos in the Middle East and Afghanistan. These articles are also
laying out the case for war with Iran and Syria.
Yedioth Ahronoth, an Israeli news source, has
maintain that an unnamed Syrian official has threatened that if Israel does not
end its occupation of Syrian territory in the time between August to September
of 2007 that Syria will wage a massive war against Israel. 
Street Journal, a mouth
piece for the thoughts and interests of the upper echelons of power in the
U.S., has published
several editorials about an upcoming war against Iran and Syria. Amongst them is Norman Podhoretz's piece, The case for bombing
Iran, which seeks to further
justify a war against the Iranians and their allies.
Muravchik has written that "Several conflicts of various intensities are raging
in the Middle East. But a bigger war, involving
more states- Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, the Palestinian Authority and perhaps
the United States and others- is growing more likely every day, beckoned by the
sense that America and Israel are in retreat and that radical Islam is
ascending."  In reality
what Joshua Muravchik terms as "radical Islam" is any form of opposition of the
U.S. agenda in the Middle East, regardless of religious affinity. The rhetoric
in the U.S. press fails to
recognize that Syria is a secular nation that does
not embrace any religious dogma. Contrarily it is the U.S.
government that has always harnessed and cultivated deviant movements and
radical religious groups for its foreign policy objectives- Christian, Muslim,
and other. The Taliban, Osama bin Laden, and Fatah Al-Islam are just three
of War are blowing from Tel Aviv: The Israeli-U.S. Joint Political Military
A case for
war against Iran and
Syria is gradually been built
much like Iraq, but through
longer instalments of time and with the help of Israel.
Israel may be the agent that sparks
the next global conflict. Israel is a vessel of Anglo-American policy in
the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East.
Israeli officials have been steadily intensifying their war calls against
Syria and Iran.
Iranian Ambassador to the U.N., in New York City,
has made several official complaints for the record on the basis of
international law in regards to Israeli threats to clandestinely attack
Iran. Syrian officials have also
complained about the continuous threats directed against Syria
from Israeli officials. The Lebanese have also likewise made complaints to the
U.N. about Israel and the continual Israeli
violations of international law and Lebanese sovereignty.
will have a central role in any future American-led military campaign in the
Middle East. Iran has already warned that it will be from
Israel that the next war in
the Middle East will be launched and that it may start as an Israeli attack on
the Palestinian Territories or Lebanon
that could spread like fire throughout the region. 
in an interview with Israeli Transportation
Minister Shaul Mofaz, who is an Iranian Jew born in Shiraz, has acknowledged
that it is being said in Israeli circles of power that 2008 will be the year
that Iran will be attacked.  True
enough, while the Transportation Minister was holding strategic talks in
a lightly worded ultimatum was made by him on behalf of the Israeli government
and ruling establishment that U.N. sanctions have until the end of 2007 to work
against Iran. 
Israeli ultimatum also reflects the position of the White House. Condoleezza
Rica and Nicholas Burns were present as part of the Israeli-U.S. Joint Political
Military Group that has been created to tackle the issues of Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and the Palestinians.
Hunting words of NATO's Supreme Commander: Does a Timeline really exist for
timelines mentioned including the Israeli assertions that 2008 is the year for
action against Iran should be taken into
consideration. Israeli sources have also claimed Syria may attack Israel
within August to September of 2007. The Israeli military has also claimed that
if Iran wishes it will be able to
produce nuclear weapons in 2009. Additionally, the date that the Busher
Nuclear Power Plant is set to run should be taken into consideration. Iranian officials believe that Busher will be running by the end
of 2007 or early-2008, while Russian officials have given several dates falling
in 2008. It should also be noted that Russia's closest point with Iran
will be militarily strengthened by 2008.
timeline for Lebanese elections should also be kept in the back of ones mind as
well. Lebanese presidential elections are supposed to occur in November of 2007.
As a benchmark it should also be noted that the second presidential term of
George W. Bush Jr. ends in January of 2009.
important factor to add to this equation is the statements of General Wesley
Clark, the former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO in Europe. In an interview General Clark frankly stated that
the U.S. had planned on attacking Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Sudan, Libya, Somalia,
and Iran in 2001 as part of a multi-phased military roadmap that would start in
Afghanistan and Iraq and end with Iran.  All the listed nations have either been invaded or are
the subject of covert intelligence operations or have surrendered.
Iraq is under occupation;
Libya has surrendered and has
given major oil concessions to Anglo-American firms; Sudan is the subject of internal fighting;
Lebanon has been attacked and
is internally divided; Somalia has been invaded by both Ethiopian and
American forces; war threats loom over Syria; and Iran is
five-year period that General Clark has talked about began with the invasion of
Iraq in mid-2003 and, if he is correct, it should enter its closing stages in
approximately mid-2008 or the last war could be initiated by this point in time
ranging from approximately mid-2008 to 2009.
in Time: Resistance Whisking in the East
will tell if there will be war or not. The passing of a war is not etched in
stone and may not come to occur. The potentials for another global war, but only
this time nuclear, are high. A war involving Iran has the high potential of spreading from the
Middle East to other areas. By extension any
war or Israeli attack against Syria will involve Iran
because of the military pact between the two Middle Eastern
been unfolding in East Africa, the Middle East, the Balkans, and Central Asia since the end of the Cold War is the
positioning of the board for a global monopoly on resources and energy routes.
NATO expansion, the encirclement of Russia and China, and the wars in the Middle East are linked and part of a global project.
with Iran will decide the
fate of the Middle East and its energy
resources. Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Palestine, and of course both the Iranian
nuclear energy program and the "Global War on Terror" will all be in the
backdrop of a showdown between the U.S. and Iran.
leaders of Russia,
China, and Central Asia have
made it clear that an attack against Iran would jeopardize their security
and is unacceptable. It is not accidental that officials from the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization (SCO) have
gathered several times to discuss U.S. behaviour and that military officials of
the SCO assembled in Kyrgyzstan
during late-June of 2007, before an upcoming leaders summit that will include
Iran, to entrench and strengthen the Eurasian bloc's military ties. 
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is based in
Ottawa and is a
Research Associate at the Centre for Research on Globalization. The Centre for
Research on Globalization is based in Montréal, Québec.
Research Articles by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
 EU's Solana Calls On U.S. To Start Talks With Iran, Radio
Free Europe (RFE), April 28, 2007.
Mark Tran, US ready to talk with Iran, The Guardian (U.K.),
Iran's absence at
Sharm al-Sheikh to costs its defeat-Kharrazi, IRNA,
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, The March to War: Syria
Preparing for US-Israeli Attacks, Centre for Research on
Globalization (CRG), May 24,
Nawal and A.N. Idlebi, Syria-Turkey enhance Military Cooperation,
Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA), April 3, 2007.
Nawal and A.N. Idlebi, Shara Discusses with Azerbaijan Foreign Minister the
Latest Developments in the Mideast and Central Asia, Syrian Arab News
Agency (SANA), April 12, 2007.
Elmar Mammadyarov meets with Syrian
Foreign Minister, Azeri Press Agency (APA), April 11, 2007.
Azerbaijan says to open embassy in Syria, Xinhua News Agency, April 12,
 U.S. commander
says Syria might be helping stem flow of fighters into Iraq, Associated
Press, April 27,
Azerbaijan to conclude cooperation agreements with
Syria and Lebanon, Azeri Press Agency
(APA), April 10,
 Turkey, Syria Cement Cooperation,
The Journal of Turkish Weekly, April 4, 2007.
Israel sign 15-year natural gas
deal, International Herald Tribune, July 1, 2005.
Lysandra Ohrstrom, Siniora
inks deal for Egypt to start
gas exports to Lebanon by
mid-2008, The Daily Star (Lebanon), April 26,
Israeli-Syrian Negotiations, Reuters, April 10, 2007.
Laurie Copans, Pelosi Conveying Israel Message to Syria, Associated Press,
 Iran's foreign
minister arrives in Damascus for talks with Syrian officials, Associated
Press, April 17,
A.N. Idelbi, Three Cooperation Agreements with Russia signed, Syrian Arab News Agency
 Gazprom's unit
signs 160-mln-euro gas refinery deal with Syria, Russian
News and Information and Agency (RIA Novosti), April 26, 2007.
Ghossoun, Syria and Russia Ink Three Cooperation Agreements,
Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA), April 26, 2007.
Albert Aji, Syria Plays down Israel Peace Overture, Associated
Press, April 15,
wants talks security official says, Yedioth Ahronoth, May 7,
Alix Van Buren and Nicola Lombrdozzi, Assad: "Nel mirino degli Usa ma
avranno bisogno di noi," La Repubblica, February 28, 2005.
Sue Pleming, US-Iran diplomatic dance ends with ice cream chat,
Reuters, May 4,
Xuequan, U.S., Iran hold expert-level talks despite Tehran's harsh words against Washington, Xinhua
News Agency, May 5,
 Progress as Rice talks
to Syria and chats with
Iran, The Times
(U.K.), May 4, 2007.
White House upbeat despite Iraq talks rift, Agence France-Presse
(AFP), May 5, 2007.
 IRGC rejects
claims about US wargames in Persian Gulf, IRNA, March 28,
Julian Borger et al., Bush vetoes Syria War, The Guardian (U.K.),
Iran warns US against 'New
Crises,' British Broadcasting Service (BBC), May 13, 2003.
Claude Salhani, Rumors of Syria-Israel War, United Press
International (UPI), July
Itamar Eichner, Talks with Syria could lead to war, says Mossad
chief, Yedioth Ahronoth, May 14, 2007.
Herb Keinon, PMO denies peace message to Assad, Jerusalem Post,
Grigory Asmolov et al., MiGs Will Defend
Syria and Iran, Kommersant, June 19, 2007.
Iran moves missiles
to Syria, World Aeronautical
Press Agency (WAPA), June
Hana Levi Julian, Syria Continuing to
Mobilize for War, Arutz Sheva, June 8, 2007.
Israeli TV: Israeli army training in model Syrian villages in preparation for
a war this summer with Syria, Ma'an News Agency,
Yuval Azoulay, IDF carries out massive exercise on Golan, Haaretz,
Sheera Claire Frenkel and Yaakov Katz, IDF holds simulation of war with
Syria, The Jerusalem Post,
Amos Harel and Avi Issacharoff, The other war / Syria, not Gaza, Haaretz, June 2, 2007.
not planning offensive, security officials say, Yedioth Ahronoth,
Infra. note 78.
Barry Rubin, The Region: Getting serious about Syria, The Jerusalem Post,
Alexander Vershinin, Russia Strikes Natural Gas
Pipeline Deal, Associated Press, May 12, 2007.
Régis Genté, Du Caucase à l'Asie centrale, "grand
jeu " autour du pétrole et du gaz, Le Monde diplomatique, June
Western Turkmenistan gas mostly destined for Iran: report, Mehr News
Agency (Mehr News Agency), April 2,
Iran, China reach agreement on North Pars gas field development, Mehr
News Agency (Mehr News Agency), May
Russia, Bulgaria, Greece
sign Balkan pipeline deal, Russian News and Information Agency (RIA
Novosti), March 15,
Iranian envoy holds talks in Iraq, British Broadcasting
Corporation (BBC), May 1,
Iraqi cleric has UK heart surgery, British
Broadcasting Corporation (BBC),
Iran: Conference to Draw line between Terror and Resistance sat
Organizers, Adnkronos International, April 27, 2007.
Larijani: Iran's nuclear
program and Iraq are two different issues,
Iranian Student News Agency (ISNA), May 4, 2007.
Shiite cleric fires two senior followers for meeting U.S. officer,
Associated Press, April
Qassim Abdul-Zahra, Iraqi Shiite Leader Has Lung Cancer, Associated
Press, May 20,
Hakim Due in Tehran Today, Fars News Agency (FNA), May 21,
Robert Evans, Arab states "connive" against Baghdad -Iraq's Talabani, Reuters,
Sadr 'at the service' of Syria and Islamic Republic, The Daily
Star (Lebanon), February 7, 2006.
Rafsanjani Views Iraq's
Problem as Catastrophic Defeat for US, Fars News Agency (FNA), April 29, 2007.
Iran nuclear official
'detained,' Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), August 2, 2007.
Golnaz Esfandiari, Iran: Former Nuclear Negotiator Arrested On Security
Charges, Radio Free Europe (RFE),
Iran defense minister in Tajikistan, Press TV (Iran),
Azerbaijan, US may have security talks in late May, Azeri Press Agency
(APA), April 28,
Bush spares Libby from jail term, British Broadcasting Corporation
(BBC), July 3, 2007.
US body 'to plan attacks on Iran,' British Broadcasting
Corporation (BBC), February 26,
 Klaus Marre, Lieberman calls for
wider use of surveillance, The Hill (U.S.), June 1, 2007.
Justin Juozapavicius, 13,000 Guard troops prepare for Iraq, Associated Press,
 Molly Hennessy-Fiske, Taking
U.S. citizenship oaths in
Iraq, Los Angeles
Times, July 5,
Ian Traynor, US plays aid card to fix war crimes exemption, The
Guardian (U.K.), June 12, 2003.
The US is turning up the heat on the countries of the
Balkans and [E]astern Europe to secure war
crimes immunity deals for Americans and exemptions from the year-old
international criminal court.
The Bosnians signed reluctantly,
feeling they had no choice. Former Yugoslavia is particularly central to the
US campaign to exempt
Americans from the scope of the ICC because there are US troops in Bosnia
Washington is vehemently opposed to
the permanent international criminal court, arguing that US soldiers, officials
and citizens will be targeted for political reasons, an argument dismissed by
the court's supporters, who point out that safeguards have been built into the
rules governing the court's operations.
"While the United
States rightly insists that the former Yugoslav
republics must fully cooperate with the [Hague tribunal], it is turning the
screws on the very same states not to cooperate with the ICC," said Human Rights
Croatia is sitting on the fence, refusing to
accept what the prime minister [of Croatia], Ivica Racan, dubbed "an ultimatum," but
still hoping to reach a compromise with the US. The
American ambassador in Zagreb published a letter
in the Zagreb press last week warning that
Croatia would lose $19m in
US military aid if it did not
capitulate by July 1.
In Serbia, too, where the issue of war crimes is
explo sive[sic.], the US pressure is being attacked as a
ruthless display of double standards.
 See War Crimes Act (2006), United States of
Committee on National Legislation, President's Bill on Military Tribunals and
the War Crimes Act Heads to Congress, (Washington, District of Columbia, Friends
Committee on National Legislation, September 7, 2006).
He further argues that Congress
should pass a law that makes all federal government personnel, from entry level
young people to the most lofty policy makers immune from prosecution for
violating the most basic, common understandings among civilized nations about
how human beings treat each other [war crimes].
Note: The word "war crime" is
deceptively disguised as "for violating the most basic, common understandings
among civilized nations about how human beings treat each
Yan Liang, European Commission report confirms need for new EU treaty, Xinhua
News Agency, July 4,
Thomas E. Ricks and Josh White, Joint Chiefs Chair Will Bow Out: Pentagon
Wary of Thorny Reconfirmation Hearings, The Washington Post,
June 9, 2007, p.
Farah Stockman, U.S. disbands
unit created to pressure Iran
and Syria, The Boston Globe,
Peter Baker and Thomas E. Ricks, 3 Generals Spurn the Position of War 'Czar:' Bush
Seeks Overseer for Iraq, Afghanistan, The Washington Post,
April 11, 2007, p.
Chisaki Watanabe, Kyuma: Atomic Bombs Ended World War II, Associated
Press, June 30,
Christopher Hogg, Japan gets woman defence
minister, British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), July 4, 2007.
Hilary Leila Krieger, Giuliani:
Iran's nukes are
unacceptable, The Jerusalem Post, June 7, 2007.
Incoming U.S. Defense Secretary tells Senate panel Israel has nuclear
weapons, Associated Press, December 9, 2006.
IAEA chief warns of "crazies" seeking Iran
war, Reuters, June
Mark Heinrich, IAEA Protests "Erroneous" US Report on Iran, Reuters, September 14,
Israeli TV: Israeli army training, Op. cit.
Amr Mousa: Arab states unanimously against military action
on Iran, IRNA, June 17,
Thawra-Mazen, President al-Assad Receives Message from Prince of Kuwait on
Situation in Region and Bilateral Relations, Syrian Arab News Agency
(SANA), June 18,
 David Harrison,
did it their way, The Telegraph (U.K.),
Cheney warns Iran, assures allies on Gulf visit, Reuters,
Francis Matthew, US and Iran court Gulf states, Gulf News, May 17,
FM Calls on Persian Gulf States to Block Aliens' Intervention, Fars News Agency (FNA), July 2, 2007.
 Hassan M. Fattah, Saudi king
meets with Iranian president, International Herald Tribune, March 4,
Roger Hardy, Arab states watch Iraq with dread, British
Broadcasting Corporation (BBC),
Jim Krane, Iranian Leader Works to End US-Gulf Ties, Associated
Press, May 15,
 US, Bandar seeking to unseat
Abdullah?, Press TV (Iran), July 5,
 Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, The
Globalization of Military Power: NATO Expansion, Centre for Research on
Globalization (CRG), May 17,
Fredrick Stakelbeck, A ballistic missile triad, The Washington
Steve Holland, Bush
envisions U.S. presence in
Iraq like S.Korea,
Reuters, May 30, 2007.
Thomas E. Ricks, Military
Envisions Longer Stay in Iraq, The Washington Post,
June 10, 2007, p.
Patrick Seale, US is building bases in Iraq, Gulf News, June 4,
General tout long stay in Iraq, The Seattle Times, June 1,
Joshua Partlow, For
U.S. Unit in Baghdad, An Alliance of Last
Resort, The Washington Post, June 9, 2007, p. A01.
Implicates Iran in January Attack,
Associated Press, July
Peter Maass, The Way of the Commandos, The New York Times,
David Ignatius, 'Our
Guys Stayed and Fought,' The Washington Post, February 25, 2005,
Ali Al-Fadhily and Dahr Jamail, Government Death Squads Ravaging Baghdad, Inter
Press Service (IPS), October 19,
Peter Maass, The Way of the Commandos, Op.
Bush okayed 'soft revolution' in Iran , The Jerusalem Post,
Colin Freeman and William Lowther, US funds terror groups to sow chaos
in Iran, The Telegraph
(U.K.), February 25,
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Plans for Redrawing the Middle
East: The Project for a "New Middle
East," Centre for Research on Globalization
(CRG), November 18,
 Iraqi Sunni group says behind
Reuters, June 6,
Mariam Karouny, Minarets blown up at Iraq Shi'ite shrine,
Reuters, June 13,
Michael Keefer, Were
British Special Forces Soldiers Planting Bombs in Basra?, Centre for Research on
Globalization (CRA), September 25,
Adnan Abuzaid, Iraqi church leaders blame U.S. for their
parishioners' plight, Azzaman,
Control Room. DVD, dir.
Jehane Noujaim, (Jan. 2004; Park
City, Utah: Alliance Atlantis,
Report: Most Iraq Fighters From Gulf,
Associated Press, May
Ordered Assassinations, Sectarian Bomb Attacks Targeting Iraqi Civilians,
Association of Muslims Scholars in Iraq, May 12, 2007.
Julian Borger, Israel trains US assassination squads in Iraq, The
Guardian (U.K.), December 9,
Essam al-Sudani, Iranian forces crossed Iraqi border: report, Agence
France-Presse (AFP), June 26,
Iran forces 'infiltrating
Iraq,' British Broadcasting
Corporation (BBC), March 7,
Russia begins deployment of mountain brigades in North Caucasus,
Russian News and Information Agency (RIA Novosti), June 26, 2007.
Infra. note 140.
Christopher Toothaker, Venezuela Prepares
'Resistance' Soldiers, Associated Press, June 25, 2007.
US Invasion of Iran Unlikely, Fars News Agency (FNA), June 27, 2007.
Alister Bull, Iran helping to plan
attacks in Iraq - US, Reuters,
Solana suggests Iran behind Gaza, Lebanon attacks, Reuters,
Solana's spokesperson denies western news agency report on Iran,
IRNA, July 2,
China, Russia deny
weapons breach, British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), May 8, 2007.
Yaakov Lappin, Lebanon 'to erupt in 1 week,'
Yedioth Ahronoth, July
Rival Druze gunmen clash in Lebanon, Reuters, April 13, 2007.
Aaron Klein, Baath official warns of war, Yedioth Ahronoth,
Joshua Muravchik, Wind of War, The Wall Street Journal, June 25,
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, More Smoke on the Horizon in the Middle East War
Theater, Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), June 3, 2007.
Shaul Mofaz, Diplomacy: The aftermath of an attack on
Iran, interview Herb Keinon and
Yaakov Katz, The Jerusalem Post, June 8, 2007.
Hilary Leila Krieger, Mofaz warns sanctions on Iran must bite
by year's end, The
Jerusalem Post, June
General (ret.) Wesley Clark, 92 Street Y Exclusive Live Interview,
interview by Amy Goodman, Democracy Now, March 2, 2007.
Defense ministers gather for Bishkek summit, Russian News and
Information Agency (RIA Novosti), June 27, 2007.
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, GlobalResearch.ca,
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on
... Payvand News - 7/16/07 ... --