The apostle of chaos

Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Feb 24, 2013 at 15:42

Dear Peter Herz ,

Thank you very much for your kind input. I have never doubted that US foreign policy professionals are competent and reliable persons. The best, most objective analyses on Turkey I have ever read are probably the cables sent from the US Embassy in Ankara as revealed in Wikileaks. There is little moralizing, political correctness there and much high quality matter-of-fact information.

But bearing in mind the American government's actions on the ground my impression was that hardly anybody cared to ponder over these cables and that if they had to choose between what they competently said in confidential, secret and top secret reports and what they were expected to say superficially and misleadingly in public they'd choose the latter. On this latter option Dr. Pipes when asked by me about his former membership in the American-Turkish Council noted :

"More broadly, no membership limits me from speaking my mind, with the single exception of government positions, none of which I have had since the first days of 2005, or eight years ago."

So agreeing with you about that basic thing, let me say a few words of disagreement about other things.

You say :

> Ianus: As a former US Foreign Service Officer, I am a little sceptical about what they say about "Applied Chaos Theory". You seem to believe that my old shop is using it to hatch nefarious plots against a world that is basically peace-loving (and please forgive me if I have misread you); I have a different take.<

Well, if we remove all the nefarious plots by your government after 1945 (more than 50 attempted overthrows of governments; suppressing popular movements in 20 countries;grossly interfering in democratic elections in at least 30 countries;bombing more than 30 countries; 50 attempted assassinations of 50 foreign leaders since 1945), what we'll get will be an alternative history of the last 70 years.

It would be interesting though to learn why out of a sudden they should change their mind and leave untried such a useful tool as applied chaos theory ? To the best of my knowledge they have actively used chaos technologies during the so called 'colored revolutions' and the Arab Spring. It neatly explains what has happened there.

> The recent interest in chaos theory, I suspect, stems from people who've been working in international relations for some time coming to see chaos theory as a better explanation of how the world actually works --not as a tool to achieve world domination. The "application" is more reactive than proactive (as the Soviets rightly characterized us during the Cold War), in that it seeks to keep the USA from being burned to badly in a dangerous world that has caught fire, and will continue to be full of flammable material long after the current fire is put out.<

Since 1992 more than two decades have past so the story is not so recent and its author has made a splendid career as a US diplomat in the meantime. If you read his paper you will notice that his interest stemmed by no means from a desire to have a theoretical explanatory framework but to have another potent weapon in a modern warfare. He writes i.al.

"To change the conflict energy of peoples – to lessen it or direct it in ways favorable to our national goals we need to change the software. As hackers have shown the most aggressive way to alter software is with a "virus" and what is ideology but another name for a human software virus? With this ideological virus as our weapon, the United States should move to the ultimate biological warfare and decide , as its basic national security strategy, to infect target populations with ideologies of democratic pluralism and respect for individual human rights…With a strong American commitment …the virus will be self-replicating and will spread in nicely chaotic ways."

"The ultimate biological warfare", "basic national security strategy" and "target populations" are to you all neutral terms that indicate no desire to promote world domination? Why has chaos technology been never applied against US client states like Turkey,Saudi Arabia or Bahrein ? You don't need to infect them with your self-relicating virus of chaos, do you ? It's enough to call Erdogan and tell him that his eight bank accounts in Switzerland will be frozen if he is found guilty of any mischief towards the US , isn't it ? And if he is as cooperative as Gulen in his US spa, he will remain in power.

> Talk to any dozen American foreign policy wonks, and they will still want a tidy, orderly world and welcome stability when it is possible--even if they have come to recognize that our species isn't really all that pacific.<

They may talk that way but will they tell us the truth being under constraint as governmental employees?

When peace works on your behalf, then you're interested in perpetuating it. But there are times when peace is working against you. When each year that passes by makes you weaker, more impotent and more vulnerable whereas your rival becomes stronger and stronger, grows more prosperous, more self-reliant , then you will no longer see peace as something positive, worth having. Quite the contrary! This is exactly what is happening now in relations between China and the US. China's power is on the rise while the US due to its incurable internal defects and structural failures and its corrupt, inept and parasytic elites is declining.

In 2011 the IMF published an estimated forecast for future GDP showing that by 2017 China will have overtaken the US as the biggest world economy. At the end of the 19th century the US economy overtaking the British economy silently ushered in the era of the decline and fall of the British Empire.

Now can you tell me what your government is going to do about it ? If you suggest it will promote peace which is objectively working to its disadvantage , then I will kindly refuse to believe it. Thucydides says about the deep causes of the Peloponnesian war so :

"The real reason for the war is, in my opinion, most likely to be disguised by such an argument of trivial details of the disputes between Athens and Sparta. What made war inevitable was the growth of Athenian power and the fear which this caused in Sparta." (1.23)

It seems that the same combination of fear of losing power under peaceful conditions by the old empires caused WWI. The longer peace lasted in Europe, the stronger Germany became and the weaker her enemies grew.

> I've noticed your tiffs with Kepha Hor myself. Yet, having served in China during the 1990's, I beg to differ that support for an "independent Uighuristan" is part of our foreign policy. Foggy Bottom believes that the guns, money, and demogrpahics are on the side of Beijing, and while we are critical of the human rights record, we do not see one more impoverished Central Asian state as a viable option.<

I presume this is an open and honest conversation betwen us. So let me say honestly that when I hear Americans posing as defenders and arbiters of "human rights", then I find it really incredible and outrageous. Why no concerns for Saudi Arabia's "human rights record" or your mignion Islamic states in Europe - Kosovo and Bosnia? Why is it always so that it is an enemy to be destroyed that you choose to attack with weapons of "human rights" , never your vassals and clients ? When you try to paralyze and subdue somebody you invariably start punching him with "human rights", "democracy" and "freedom".

Steven Mann was more candid in this respect and he defined your version of "human rights" for what it is – a weapon to win wars. I tend to believe him and not you. He writes to repeat the quote "To change the conflict energy of peoples – to lessen it or direct it in ways favorable to our national goals we need to change the software. As hackers have shown the most aggressive way to alter software is with a "virus" and what is ideology but another name for a human software virus? With this ideological virus as our weapon, the United States should move to the ultimate biological warfare and decide , as its basic national security strategy, to infect target populations with ideologies of democratic pluralism and respect for individual human rights…With a strong American commitment …the virus will be self-replicating and will spread in nicely chaotic ways."

As to "we do not see one more impoverished Central Asian state as a viable option", it is all of your own creation, isn't it? Your economic hit men and jackals that follow the failed economic hitmen make sure the resources of the target countries get ino the hands of big US corporations and are exploited in their interests. How it worked in Latin America and South East Asia is described by a former economic hit man - John Perkins - in his "Confessions of an economic hit man". Enough has transpired on the activities of economic hitmen in Eastern Europe and the post-Soviet countries to assume that exactly the same method was used to ruin and impoverish those countries with "reforms". In 1998 the World Bank published an interesting study "Income, inequality, and poverty during the transition from Planned to Market Economy" by Branko Milanovic. It examines Socialist countries , including the USSR in terms of their economic performance as compared to the results of economic "reforms". The results are very interesting :

"The total estimated number of the poor in the eighteen countries has risen twelvefold from nearly 14 million before the transition or about 4 percent of the population, to 168 million in 1993-95, or approximately 45 percent of the population." (p. 67)

So first, you overthrow a system that creates 4% poverty and replace it a system that creates 45% poverty , and then tell us that ... you know ... " we do not see one more impoverished Central Asian state as a viable option" having looted the income that had belonged previously to 168 mln people! You are for "affluence" and "prosperity for all". Small wonder your so called "human rights" don't include a right to work or a right not to be not be robbed by the Fifth Column that you bring to wealth and power in every country you make happy with with your gospel of "democracy and freedom".

> However, to apply a little chaos theory, one does not impose government at gunpoint, engage in occasional massacre, force a Muslim people to raise pigs, and then expect them to remain grateful for a "liberation" which has decreased their numbers and impoverished them when your iron fist yields--either because of genuine liberalization or because it's getting a bit rusty with the vicissitudes of time (yes, I admit that I am skeptical of the Marxist claim to have found the means of predicting and controlling history).

I see you know the Uighur tale of how bad the Chinese were because they made these pious Moslems raise pigs and thus deprived them of the best pie in their Mahometan sky. But did they tell you the other side of their dark and bloody Islamic history ? The never ending jihad against the Chinese, desecrating and destroying Buddhist temples and Confucian shrines, their system of slavery and contempt for all things non-Islamic ? Honestly, for what the Uighurs and Hui had stood for, Mao was too merciful magnanimous to them.

Clearly, what you have done on the Balkans is disgusting and I will never ever forgive your evi crimes against all of us European Christians. The desecrated and ruined medieval churches in Kosovo and Northern Cyprus and proud new mosques there will always be telling a real story of what America actually stands for to posterity. And now you maybe want me to be happy because you're trying to repeat the same dirty trick on China? What it proves is that Islamization of the Balkans was no mistake at all but part of your grand stratregy. You are cultural nihilists and you badly need chaos to survive as the only superpower. Otherwise you won't be able to make sure that your 4% of the world's population consumes 40% of the world GDP. Under normal conditions of peace and stability you will never ever retain the power that allows you to behave the way you do terrorizing the world with your jihadist gangs that you unleashed on the world in the struggle for egoistic imperial ends and yet pretending to be doing all of that for mankind's sake.

> Indeed, when Xinjiang's problems fell like a t--d on my doorstep when I was in China, I and my colleagues got the sinking feeling that the Uighur had seen the Soviet collapse and concluded that the regime is mortal, not that they're better off in a growing Chinese economy. Also, in non-Uighur parts of Chinese Islam, there is also dissidence, albeit one that seeks increased religious liberties within the context of a Chinese state rather than separatism. In this, China's Hui Muslims are not unlike other religious believers. If they are also for political changes, it is probably because they see them as more conducive to their cultic concerns.<

In plain text , they are excellent material to try to concoct another CIA-sponsored colored revolution to break up China and create one or a few Islamic states that will totally depend on America and Saudi Arabia for its survival just like Kosovo and Bosnia do and will separate China proper from Central Asia's energy resources. The grand strategy is not so hard to grasp , is it? .

> And, looking at the wider Islamic world, it has long been notorious for poorly grounded institutions, lack of regime legitimacy, and a number of other problems (many of which Dr. Pipes is better qualified to comment on than I). It's likely to be an area of ferment for some time to come, whether outside powers tweak it or not; and American diplomats do not serve their country well if they do not take note of the problems.<

Well, US diplomats are highly professional people and as far as I can judge they can take note not only of the problems, but equally well they can create or ignore them according to a given strategic assignment. The Washington-based Government-in-Exile of East Turkestan Republic with its "constitution" that doesn't even mentions the Chinese as legal inhabitants of Xinjiang shows that they have prepared everything and are waiting for a right moment to implement their plan. From the preferential treatment of Uighur jihadists caught in Afghanistan I can infer a possibility that an Uighur version of UCK may be in the making. What we still miss is a classical false flag operation like the Sarajevo bombing or the "Albanian genocide" somewhere in Xinjiang and then NATO will step in not leaving their Moslem darlings alone in need.

Best regards,

Ianus

PS If you are in touch with or know somebody who is in touch with Steven Mann, give him warm greetings from me. I have somehow lost track of this brilliant gentleman, even though not of the chaos whose apostle he is. Last time I heard of him he was in Kirgistan in 2005 when he was organizing a "colored revolution" to overthrow Askar Akaiev who was impudend enough to suggest shutting down the US military base in Manas. I wonder what Mann is doing right now? Arming Tajik or Uzbek jihadists together with his royal Qatari friend Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem al-Thani and a group of dedicated US-trained Pan-Turkic Gulenists to put Russia's Islamic regions on fire and make Uzbekistan more responsive to the needs and concerns of Washington, Doha and Ankara and their Afghan heroin factory ?

---

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".