There is no obvious reason why the Western powers should care whether it was the friends or the family of Mohammed which took over the leadership of his movement upon his death. However there is plainly an agenda led by the USA to support the Sunnis in their spiralling regional conflict with the Shia.
This is not hard to rationalise. The ultra wealthy members of the Gulf regimes continue to act as the West’s proxies in the region and provide harbour to its neo-imperialist armed forces, while at the same time maintaining themselves a obscurantist version of Islam which would have horrified Mohammed and breaks virtually every precept of the Koran, particularly as regards treatment of women and of minority religions within their territory.
In Bahrain the large Shia majority is brutally repressed with active western collusion; in Saudi Arabia the Shia minority in the East is degraded. Iran is the great Shia bogey, and the West is so determined to maintain it as “the enemy” that they refuse the most basic diplomatic openings. The UK turned down an invitation to be represented at the inauguration of a new more moderate President and hold initial conversations. Meanwhile, Shia groups have mustered the only effective military resistance to Israeli aggression, and in Syria a Shia friendly regime is under intense pressure from the West and its Gulf allies. Peculiarly, in Iraq Western invasion resulted in the installation of a Shia regime, but that was only one of the entirely unforeseen consequences of that most stupid of invasions, and the Western response is to try to split up the country and fuel multiple insurgencies.
Meantime the CIA have now got a controlled and pro-Israeli military dictatorship back in power in Egypt, while the extraordinary complicity of the mainstream media and entire political class in the United States has never been more evident than in the acceptance that the military coup will not be designated a military coup. The manipulation of Western public opinion in the Syrian chemical weapons episode has, rarely, been too blatant to work. But events in Turkey and Egypt have shown that western public opinion is easily manipulated by the “secularist” angle. No matter how ugly political forces are – and in Turkey the Kemalists are very ugly – call them “secularist” and hide the rest, and you can attempt to topple elected governments in their favour with the full throated support of the media cheerleaders.
Last night’s vote in the Commons is welcome, but a blip. It owes more to political tribalism than to principle. Miliband and New Labour did not oppose military action, they merely wanted to be seen to be dictating the terms. As neither Tories nor Labour were prepared to accept the other’s terms for military action, the anti war minority could combine with the tribalists of each to make sure everything got defeated. Good but fortuitous.
The media are still in full war cry. Ashdown has never been so ashamed, apparently. He is not ashamed by extraordinary rendition and our torturing people. He is not ashamed of our responsibility for the death of hundreds of thousands in Iraq, with 2,000 people a day still meeting terrible deaths. He is ashamed that we don’t respond to the deaths of children by chemical weapons, we don’t really know at whose hands, by blasting to pieces a lot more children. Well, Paddy, you are a merciless fool who thinks a spiral of death is the answer, and I have never been more ashamed that I was for most of my adult life a member of the Liberal Democrats.
Ashdown did say bitterly that there was now no point in having such large armed forces. Hallelujah! The danger to the establishment that people might realise that spending more on weapons systems than on hospitals is a poor choice, is one reason this is not over. Much is at stake for the security state. Expect a mounting barrage of propaganda on the need for action in Syria. This is just the start.
Morsi promised to open the Gaza border. He opened it for two days, then permanently closed it.
Morsi promised judicial review of all presidential laws. He scrapped that plan within weeks amid great protest from lawyers of all political stripes (hint: because it was clear he was assuming dictatorial powers).
Morsi openly supported the Rebels who were trying to establish an undemocratic Islamic state in Syria.
Morsi ordered the Egyptian military to use force to break up demonstrations, the very same crime that Mubarak is/was on trial for.
These are verifable facts Craig, the Egyptians are probably just a bit more naive about ‘democracy’ than we are. They couldn’t swallow down their dissapointment and feeling of being conned like we do every few years because they simply aint used to it like us.
@Donald. 10 04 am
“Politics is a murky old world best left to the grown ups.”
WTF???
Where are the bloody grown-ups when the world needs them?
Well, thank goodness, at least there’s uncle Craig pointing at the Emperor’s new suit. Many thanks.
What is occuring with Egypt today is an example of how similar the Arab Spring was to that other great engineered project of rolling-out ‘democracy’ – the Coloured Revolutions of the 90’s. Tunisan, Egyptian, Libyan and Syrian uprisings were not spontaneous, they were planned.
These ‘revolutions’ are greeted as amazing societal transformations initially, then people gradually see what they are and then the country reverts back to it’s natural geopolitical position in the world. Where are those potential new EU members in the East like Georgia, Ukraine etc. now? Yep, getting back in bed with the Russians.
This might be worth further scrutiny. Al Jazeera and Reuters apparently uploaded photographs of the Damascus massacre the day (20 August) before the event actually took place (21 August) if this report is right.
http://www.islamicinvitationturkey.com/2013/08/22/photo-al-jazzera-reuter-published-the-news-of-massacre-in-east-ghouta-damascus-one-day-before-the-massacre-happened-by-assad/
God, so glad to read some sense again about international politics … keep posting, Craig!
Question … I may be wrong but I always got the impression during the lengthy electoral process in Egypt that the military were loading the dice with regard to selection of candidates. How many candidates were deselected by the courts before polling leaving a choice largely between Morsi and Shafik – the two apparent extremes of Egyptian politics. Shafik wasn’t deselected but re-instated on appeal – the rules applied to other candidates apparently didn’t apply to him. It didn’t really matter much to the military that Shafik wasn’t elected … they just waited until they could claim that Morsi had overstepped the mark.
What they had planned to do all along. Or not?
“I did not intend to imply any preference between Sunni and Shia. I have none. I just am puzzled that Western governments appear to.” Craig, at 9:45am, today.
It’s just a convenient mechanism through which to exert divide-and-rule. We never really heard about it geopolitically, in modern times, until the Iranian Revolution in 1979 and the creation and turbo-charging of (‘Sunni’) Jihadism by the CIA and Pakistan’s military-intelligence apparatus from the late 1970s, onwards.
I fear now that there may be an ‘attack’ on a British base in Cyprus which will be ascribed to… whoever. I also fear that there will be another big chemical weapons usage in Syria.
Speaking of which… where is Prince Bandar? Does anyone have his number?
[Taped conversation from the office of Daud Kamran]
DK: “O Vizier! We have failed to convince the masses. Canst thou believe that with all that Tory spin plus my consort Shamkam carrying the latest accessories (what an expense), Parliament voted against me. I can’t believe it!”
Vizier: “O DK! Here is the solution. Make thou a speech emphasizing the sovereignty of Cabinet. That would of course emphasize thine own sovereignty.”
DK: “A thousand thanks! What a wonderful solution. A thousand freshly-minted Saudi silver riyals for thee. We shall implement the solution once our friend Yan Qi tells us that of a surety he shall strike the users of poisonous weapons.”
Vizier: “Your Excellency is most kind.”
So let’s await a speech about Sovereignty of Cabinet 🙂
“I am confident that some form of democracy will emerge in Egypt purely becuase Morsi has been rejected.” Donald, at 11:23am, today.
I wish I could share your confidence, Donald. But I don’t. I do not agree with the military coup in Egypt. I do agree with Ruth and you that the Muslim Brotherhood was abusing its democratic mandate in order to assume a highly authoritarian degree of power over the state; this is what Islamist political movements – Sunni and Shia – do when they assume the reins of government, it is their core agenda. And Ruth is correct about Libya, too. But the Muslim Brotherhood government should have been challenged (apart from on the streets) by civil disobedience and by constitutional, non-military means. And then there could have been fresh elections. The military should not have taken over the government and arrested the elected politicians.
Yup, don’t celebrate. You cynical correspondent, however, has had a brief moment of hope. It springs from unlikely sources. In this case, Ed Millipede. It took, I suspect, some spine to oppose war, and I pray he doesn’t pay. But he showed more spine in one decision that Blair ever has in his life, and that isn’t nothing.
Just a little, I feel vaguely proud of the Labour Party. I haven’t done so since Blair sociopathe’d his way to disgrace.
OT.
Craig, saw this and thought you might like to read it ?.
“Polls consistently show that the answer will be No, but the polls have been wrong before and informed opinion in Scotland is that it will be closer, perhaps a great deal closer, than the polls currently suggest.”
http://www.firmmagazine.com/whats-happening-british-constitution-overdue-update/
Well, well, well. I am still shocked by how amazed I am that our parliament actually represented the people, but whatever, so much better this way than any other and well done to it for doing what it’s paid to do. Caveats accepted, noted and included, however.
Brendan 30 Aug, 2013 – 12:57 pm
“I feel vaguely proud of the Labour Party.”
That’s a tad partisan. The vote was also the result of tory and liberal rebels.
It is very good to see you back blogging Craig. It is always very interesting to read your views on international affairs.
Suhayl Saadi 30 Aug, 2013 – 12:43 pm
“…Prince Bandar? Does anyone have his number?”
Yes he is evil. Or are you after his telephone number?
John Goss 30 Aug, 2013 – 12:33 pm
“This might be worth further scrutiny.”
A comment on the youtube video suggests this is down to time difference between syria and usa.
“Well, well, well. I am still shocked by how amazed I am that our parliament actually represented the people,”
technicolour,
Its all a big chess game. Edward Samuel Miliband is looking to safeguard his position as leader of NuLab, that was coming under pressure, makes his position as leader look a bit safer now!. Also, will gain NuLab a few more votes at (if) we have another election, events may overtake us all on that one ?. I think there are some very powerful people around the world that are willing to sacrifice UK involvement in attacking Syria to keep Edward Samuel Miliband as leader of NuLab. Just my thoughts on it all.
I think that I’ve more respect for both Miliband and Cameron after last night. Miliband at least showed that he can do something, even if his reasons might not be correct, and Cameron had the grace to accept the result of the vote.
I’m not sure that dear old Dave was that bothered by the negative vote. His admission earlier that they weren’t 100% sure who had used the chemical weapons gave his rebels wriggle room. The change of nature of the vote in the first place appears to have signalled that he wasn’t as sure of the action after receiving additional intelligence. The vote satisfied his hawks, and gives him a good reason not to commit UK armed forces to another conflict.
It’s odd that the West, and UK’s parliament and media in particular, are suddenly outraged over chemical weapons, as though the previous (non-chemical) atrocities in Syria and elsewhere were not already something to object to. Whether it is 14 old boys floating in rivers having been hand-tied and shot by “the Syrian opposition”, or people having their legs blown off by shelling, or bombing, or air strikes, or being poisoned, it all results in suffering, death and brutality.
Let me be clear that chemical weapons are appalling, but so too are any other forms of military, tribal or faction-led violence, yet the West was content to stand back and watch all that happen before without the current clamour for action.
Medialens – Massacres That Matter Part 2
http://medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/alerts-2013/740-massacres-that-matter-part-2.html
Last night on newsnight hammond said that chemical weapons had not be used for 100 years. Paxman replied thats an exaggeration what about saddam. Hammond said yes saddam did use them once at halabja. And that was that discussed.
They didn’t mention the tens of thousands of iranians killed by saddam using us intelligence. Nor the use of napalm by the us in vietnam and iraq. Nor the white phosphorus(? sorry k) stuff that israel uses.
Reviewing his performance the independent only finds hammond in error when he mistakenly mixed saddam and assad in a sentence.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/syria-philip-hammond-confuses-saddam-hussein-with-bashar-alassad-on-newsnight-8790892.html
Mick S 1.46pm,
Yes very good points.
Phil Hammond’s not very bright, and he’s yet another career politician with an Oxford PPE. After the Liam Fox debacle, they needed someone without any kind of flair.
There’s a better Phil Hammond here…
http://drphilhammond.com/
When is a democracy not a democracy? When it is merely elections. Sorry to bring Adolf into this again, but shouldn’t he have been booted out at the next election, too?
When will you understand – elections do not a democracy make.
Glad to see you back Craig.
I’m slightly less cynical than you about this being a blip – only slightly, but still. The neo-con establishment would usually get the result it wants in situations like this, and it didn’t… I think in part because the Iraq debacle is still fresh enough in people’s minds, and the lack of clarity on what a military commitment would involve made a numbers of MPs pause. Robin Cook’s most famous speech I think resonates, and this is a not insignificant setback for the neo-cons.
Anyway, the media narrative today is what I find more puzzling. It seems every mainstream outlet is running an “Obama plans in disarray” themed lead. I don’t understand this. I suppose if you had bought into the idea that intervention was inevitable, and now you think it’s not, this would put your thinking into disarray.
But for the Obama people, who have been signalling they are prepared to launch military action against Assad, while making it very clear that any such a decision had not yet been made, how does the UK vote change much of anything? It seems like a slight inconvenience at worst.
I still think ultimately that the way the West gets more involved in Syria is through NATO via a threat posed to Turkey. And frankly if the Obama team was already fully invested in an intervention, they’d have been pushing this theme more forcefully.
We should be proud of the British public at least. They have been bombarded with propaganda by the BBC, all the liberal press and the right wing press has been bombarding the propaganda, and the British public have not been fooled.
Has the British public ever before shown such resistance to propaganda?
“President Mohamed Morsi issued a decree on Thursday granting himself broad powers above any court as the guardian of Egypt’s revolution, and used his new authority to order the retrial of Hosni Mubarak.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/23/world/middleeast/egypts-president-morsi-gives-himself-new-powers.html?_r=0
“One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes a revolution in order to establish a dictatorship.” – George Orwell.
Writes the better Phil Hammond:
“… our nation’s greatest asset and our only major post-war contribution to civilisation (apart from The Beatles and Mo Farah)…”
*groan*
Michael Stephenson at 2:51 pm.
And we should be proud, too, of the Daily Mail, the Express, and their readers, Peter Hitchens and Max Hastings, Peter Oborne, Nigel Farage and the Ukip, and small-minded, little Englander isolationist swivel-eyed loons everywhere, described by Polly Toynbee thusly:
“There is nothing appealing about the new little England isolationism on the right: let the world go hang, so long as we’re alright. It comes with an unpleasant undertow: why fight in Muslim countries for the rights of a lot of Muslims anyway?”
Racist if you bomb them, racist if you don’t.
“Each national experience was distinct, yet there were also common features. First, the colour revolutions followed fraudulent elections by semi-autocratic regimes, with a prominent role being played by organised groups of young people adept at combining clever slogans with creative non-violent action to spread their message. Otpor (“resistance”) in Serbia, Kmara (“enough”) in Georgia, and Pora (“It’s time”) in Ukraine were the most visible part of these countries’ anti-authoritarian rebellions. The Kefaya (“enough”) movement founded in Egypt in 2004 with the purpose of mobilising for change against the Hosni Mubarak regime was directly influenced by these predecessors.”
http://www.opendemocracy.net/vicken-cheterian/arab-revolt-and-colour-revolutions
I should add that all the above have been quoted approvingly here, albeit with the usual caveats (eg, “Saw this in the Daily Mail (I know), but…”).