A real mess
Reader comment on item: Better Dictators than Elected Islamists
Submitted by Alexandros (United Kingdom), Dec 12, 2012 at 21:40
Apparently chaos has emerged from the so called "Arab Spring" whether this is going according to plan remains to be seen. In my opinion and as i have written before in other threads, the plan is just wrong, so even if the plan makers feel that this is going well, the results are not going to be good.
The last few days i have read some really interesting articles for the most recent events in the Middle East, articles which could give a kind of different perspective or anyway they could enrich my existing perspective.
I am going to make some assumptions here trying to scratch the surface of what i call the bigger plan. Try to bear with me because it is going to seem like i am going far from the topic, but actually i am trying to build a case
Assumption 1st The dogma of the real politik dictates that the lesser evil is preferable than the bigger one.
Assumption 2nd The bigger evil is considered to be China and Russia and especially a possible axis of them, even though this seems unlikely to happen in the near future at least.
Assumption 3rd Even though the dictators in the Arabic world were co-operating with the US, the US didn't trust them to let them co-operate with each other.
Assumption 4th The possibility of Islamic "democracies" was adopted as a solution with the risk of creating a lesser evil.
If i try to put it together the story goes like this, the US want to control the Rimland and at the same time they want to isolate Russia and China from it as much as possible, especially now that the arctic sea is becoming a usable waterway for longer periods. At the same time wants to surround Russia and isolate it from Europe, India and the coastal Asiatic countries, this can be seen by the anti-missile shield built in Europe and Turkey, supposedly against a possible Iranian threat, but this is at least naive to believe in my opinion, the real target is obvious. Of course this could not be done in the Islamic countries, the US would never trust such weapons in Islamic countries like Pakistan or Egypt because these weapons could be used against Israel, of course Syria and Libya were out of the question, Libya was modestly co-operating with Russia and Syria much more actively, hosting also the most important Russian naval Base far from Russia.
Bringing down these regimes also meant that Hezbollah would be weakened vastly if not destroyed and also Iran would lose all it's allies at the same time. For this reason Israeli leadership agreed to follow the plan, i mean the obvious enemies would be eliminated and perhaps the new order could be more moderate against Israel since the US would have helped take power right? At the same time these revolutions would end with Islamic Democracies, which in my opinion is the big fallacy of the plan, because democracy and Islam are not compatible, is like saying that dictatorship and democracy can go together, with leaderships friendly towards the US, with governments that would serve the American interests just like one of the the master planners has guaranteed (Turkish Islamic leadership). In addition these revolutions could be an inspiration for the Caucasian region and the Uyghurs in China, not many people have noticed that the Turk ambassador who organised and supported the uprising of Bosnians and then was transferred to Greece, has already been transferred in China.
Also all this mess could have and immediate financial profits, definitely for the weapon lobby anyway, but in general as the goal is to preserve the current status quo. Even though i have the opinion that the current economic status quo is impossible to remain, it seems that not many bankers in the Western world believe so, but history has proven that bankers are narrow minded planning for just 5 years ahead maximum and that is why they are the cause of all these financial crises and breakdowns like the one in 2008.
The problem is that the US trusted those people and Israel trusted the US, so Israel trusted it's future in the most fanatic islamic hands. The obvious is why would the Islamic movements work for the American interests once they gain so much power in the most neuralgic part of the world, when US is financially very weak so to threat them with war, Turkey and Saudi Arabia have huge influence in the US government so to delay the US in any possible action against them, Israel is strong, but eventually will be alone among really allied Islamic countries with fanatic Islamic governments as it turns out, for the first time, because this time it will not be only Egypt Syria and Jordan, but also Saudi Arabia and Turkey and fighters from all over the Islamic world, right now in Syria there are people from all over the world fighting against Assad, who says they would leave? If the US leadership believes that they would do so because they would owe them, then not only they are naive, but they should also study a bit of history!
So the problem is that instead of winning against a bigger evil, maybe this plan is creating not a lesser evil, but an even bigger one.
I am not referring to European politicians, because in my mind they are not worthy to mention and are incapable of taking action and even more of mapping out a kind of a strategy, their incompetence is exquisite, they just do as they are told, by a god knows who.......
Anyway, maybe this all sounds like going to far, but it is just an opinion and as a conclusion, i think that Morsi's actions reveal what the Islamists really want to do and not only this of course, the cleaning of all minorities and the Turkish actions in the region also reveal the real movements of the "Arab Spring" or the Islamic Darkness as i prefer to say.
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Reader comments (72) on this item
Comment on this item
Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes