Above the President

The relevance of much of what happens in the world today escapes public scrutiny, compliments of the corrupt corporate media. This site aims to help change that. Topics include the UN, oil pipelines, monetary policy and the fate of empires.

Saturday, July 23, 2005

Brzezinski's "Islamic" Card

Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.
-- Ephesians 5:11

The Arc of Crisis

Continuing on with our review of Robert Dreyfuss' Hostage to Khomeini, we left off with U.S. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski waxing intellectual about how Muslim fundamentalists are preferable for the U.S. to deal with since at least they are not "godless athiests" like the Soviet Communists are.


Masjid al-Nabawi, in Medina, is the second holiest shrine in Islam.

Brzezinski's support for Islamic fundamentalism soon became the dominant theme of U.S. foreign policy towards the entire Mideast. As is usual for those in Establishment circles, Brzezinski drew authority for his policy decisions by citing the need to react to a range of artificially engineered "crises" (see my earlier post concerning Lawmaking by Fiat, or the excellent study Executive Orders and National Emergencies produced by the Cato Institute). To this end, Brzezinski coined the term Arc of Crisis to describe the geographic region stretching from North and East Africa through the Middle East, Turkey, Iran and Pakistan. Brzezinski charged that the Sovet Union was making a power play for control of the oil in this region of the world, and that the U.S. must react lest the fate of civilization fall into the hands of the Soviets.

It's highly unlikely that the Soviets ever had any such serious ambitions, although (somewhat "coincidently") the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 gave Brzezinski precisely the fuel he needed to substantiate his claims to this effect. More on this later...

As a sidenote, it's interesting to note that the term "Arc of Crisis" has stuck, and is used to this day in media sources such as:

Much of the "imprint" on the American public conscience that was left by this statement is probably due to a 1979 article in Foreign Affairs endorsing Brzezinski's policy.

Talk about "manufacturing consent" ...

Brzezinski's salient points concerning the Arc of Crisis were as follows:

  • The "Arc" is the last major stronghold against Soviet advancement in the Free World
  • Roughly 75% of the world's oil reserves lay in the "Arc" (these are Brzezinski's numbers, dated 1979)
  • The "Arc" is the scene of the world's most bitter ongoing conflict, the one between Zionists and Arab nationalists
Some other, more minor points of his were that this region is the birthplace of the major, monotheistic religions of the world, including Islam, Christianity and Judaism, and that it's the scene of an intense struggle between two ideologies of how to economically modernize: the Western model and the Soviet model.


President Truman announced a Communist
"Containment" Strategy in 1947

Brzezinski's "Arc of Crisis" model continued a long-standing U.S. strategy of expanding its power and influence under the guise of "containing Communism." The first such public docrtine was enunciated by President Truman in 1947 in the so-called Truman Doctrine. Presidents Eisenhower and Nixon each followed with their own Communist Containment strategies in 1957 and 1969, respectively. Although each such "doctrine" (including Brzezinski's) paid lip service to "containing" the Soviet boogyman, the results of these policies was the inevitable expansion of U.S. military and economic power across the globe.

Mideast Treaty Organization (METO)

Nobody really (seriously) believed that the Moscow was supporting Khomeini against the Shah, but most analysis believed that Moscow would have preferred that the Shah remain in power. Brzezinski used the image of a Soviet bear pressing down toward the Indian Ocean to propose the creation of METO, similar to NATO or SEATO, but tailored to the Mideast Region (see my post about the UN War Document to learn more about who really controls NATO and SEATO).

The idea was not new. In fact, the original name of CENTO (the Central Treaty Organization) was METO (CENTO was also known as the Baghdad Pact). CENTO was adopted in 1955 by Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan, Iran and (ironically?) Britain. Pressure from the United States was key in forming the alliance in the first place, although the U.S. did not formally join the pact until 1958. The organization's headquarters was in Baghdad Iraq. CENTO is generally regarded as one of the least successful of all Cold War alliances, and the alliance more or less fell apart in 1974 after Turkey invaded Cyprus.

In 1978, the Zionist Edgar Bronfman (chairman of the Seagram's Corporation) wrote an op-ed piece in the New York Times where he too demanded consideration of a "METO" organization. Bronfman claimed that he had discussed the idea with New York Senator Jacob Javits and with Vice President Walter Mondale, who then suggested to Brzezinski that the idea be pursued by the administration. The "formal" idea of a METO was put together at a summit at Camp David in September 1978.


Eilat-Ashkelon Pipeline - Iranian tankers unloaded crude
oil at the Israeli Red Sea port of Eilat until the Shah fell in 1979

Why were Zionists like Bronfman so interested in protecting the status quo in Iran? Most likely it had something to do with the Eilat-Ashkelon pipeline, which runs from the Red Sea port of Eilat, Israel up to the Mediterrean coast near Ashkelon. The use of this pipeline can save considerable time and money over shipping oil through the nearby Suez Canal, and it represents a major source of income for the state of Israel. The pipeline was used regularly by Iranian tankers shipping Persian crude until the Shah's regime fell in 1979.

More on this later..

At any rate, the idea was gradually formulated to resurrect METO as an expansion of NATO into the Middle East. Egypt and Israel were expected to be the first countries to accept membership into the expanded NATO alliance, followed by Iran. Brzezinski regarded the Muslim Brotherhood as the common factor that could bring together all the disparate regimes in the "Arc of Crisis."

The Mujahadeens of Afghanistan

The culmination of Brzezinski's Islamic strategy was the covert American and open Chinese support for the Afghanistan guerillas operating out of Pakistan and Iran.


Afghanistan shares long borders with Iran and Pakistan

With the victory of an Islamic Revolution in Iran to inspire them, the fundamentalist guerillas began to attack the pro-Soviet government in Kabul with impunity. The guerillas were rewarded handsomely with American aid for doing so. Brzezinski's NSC was spoon fed glowing reports of alleged victories by the Muslim Brotherhood against the Afghan government of Prime Minister Amin. Brzezinski and his Peking allies pressed on with their "jihad" in Afghanistan.

The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was secretly welcomed by Brzezinski. Washington now had the opportunity to mobilize Iran and the rest of the Muslim world against the Soviets, who were consistently portrayed in Washington statements as Islam's chief enemy. No matter that these same Muslim "allies" had seized the American embassy in Tehran, held its diplomats hostage and burned down American embassies in Pakistan and Libya.

5 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home