Israel’s Nuclear Power: A graver issue than Iran’s nuclear potential

As Israeli ‘Agent 83’ hogs for a million dollar applause after predicting the intricate details of Iranian nuclear bomb, it seems quite reasonable to smirk at the imbalance in Middle Eastern politics. While Iran is being criticized by IAEA Chief Yukiya Amano for not being transparent enough about its nuclear programme, no one is questioning Israel for its ‘Policy of Nuclear ambiguity’. Right from 1948, this nuclear opacity, that has been intelligently social engineered by Israel. It provides political investments, existential deterrence benefits, immunity and monetary advantages to Israel to secure more modernised nuclear arsenals.

‘If Arabs have oil, we have the matches.’

When Mordechai Vanunu, a technician who worked at the Dimona Nuclear Facility disclosed the details of Israel’s nuclear capacity on 5th October 1986 to London Sunday Times, he mentioned that at that particular time, Israel already had 200 bombs, F-16 deliverable warheads, Jericho warheads, neutron bombs and boosted devices. Over the past years, Israel has developed low yield Neutron bombs which would destroy troops with minimal destruction caused to nearby property. They also have ‘tiny-nukes’ and ‘micro-nukes’ for attacking point targets. Their sea launch capability is secured through submarine launched nuclear missiles which operate in 350 km range. Oman, with its past record of unofficial relationship with Israel is the perfect option for carrying out second strikes of ‘Nuclear missile capable submarines‘ against Iran. Also, the 1994 Accord with Jordan grants limited Israeli military presence in the country. Taking into consideration Ariel Sharon, perhaps rightly said ‘If Arabs have oil, we have the matches.’

‘Nuclear power: Crusade Against Holocaust’

Israel’s struggle for nuclear capability started right from 1948. Ben Guiron believed that ‘Science would compensate Israel for what nature had denied‘, referring to the Holocaust and massive manslaughter of Jews by the Nazi regime. He was helped by his two close associates, namely, Professor Ernst Bergmann and Simon Peres. Professor Bergman founded the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission and as a scientific advisor, had close relations with Francis Perrin, who himself was a member of French Atomic Energy Commission. Israel would gather French support in terms of nuclear reactors and repossessing plant. Simon Peres played an integral role in strengthening the French-Israeli Nuclear deal as the young director General of Ministry of Defense. This deal had initiated even before the 1956 Suez Canal campaign started. In fact, it was secretly signed on 3rd October 1957.

‘Strengthening of the French Connection’

Well both, Israel and France had their own selfish reasons for developing their embryonic relationship. The nuclear research capability to France had been limited after Second World War. It found itself behind US, USSR, UK and even Canada. When President Nasser of Egypt had closed the Straits of Tiran, Ben Gurion got worried and ordered the development of nuclear and chemical weapons. Gurion had started growing skeptical of Czech-Egyptian arms agreement of 1955.  So, Israel needed a political/economic saviour and France readily became one. After all, France wanted to use Israel as its asset against its fight in Algeria. Though, in 1958, when French President de Gaulle came to power, he terminated the French participation in Israel’s nuclear empowerment.

After the sudden stoppage of French supply, Israel had to import Uranium oxide from Belgium. It utilised the West German Front Company for this purpose under the ‘Operation Plumbat‘. This covert operation undertaken by Mossad violated the Euratom control of nuclear materials. Norway, later, sold 20 tons of heavy water to Israel in 1959.

‘Assasination of Kennedy: End of Questioning Israel’

It was on 23rd December 1960, under US pressure, when Ben Gurion was forced to reveal to the Israeli Parliament (Knesset) that 24 megawatt research reactor that it used was meant for peaceful purpose. It was perhaps the last time an official statement regarding Israel’s nuclear capability was made.

May 1961, President Kennedy had started threatening Israel for not being more transparent and that he would be sending US Scientists to Israel.  But his assassination proved to be the last honest attempt of US against Israel. President Johnson was pro-Zionist, had suffered bitter memories of the holocaust himself during the second world war and did not really care about Israel’s nuclear power. It was later in 1968 when the Nuclear Non proliferation treaty was formed with the co-sponsorship of US.

Initially, Israel was pressurized to sign up for NPT and only then it would receive Phantom aircraft from America. Later, this mandatory demand was wiped out. In return, on 11th March 1965, a cable was sent from the US embassy in Tel Aviv to Washington stating that PM Levi Eshkol has declared that ‘Israel would not the the first to introduce nuclear power in the Middle East’. This declaration has become like a mantra, repeated on and on by Israeli Prime Ministers, the latest being PM Netanyahu.

The secret meeting of Israeli PM Golda Meir with US president Nixon in 1969 further made sure that world politics obliterated the evidence of Israel’s nuclear power. In Middle East, it was Egypt that first initiated this process. When the David Camp Accords were signed on 17th September 1978, President Sadat never questioned Israel’s nuclear capability in those 13 days of negotiation.

Conclusion

The entire fallacy becomes evident when Israel can develop its nuclear power under ‘activist defense policy‘ but Iran can not. This political tendency supports the realists and their ravenousness for power rather than security or trade. Over the years, AIPAC has grown as strong as the loopholes in Israel’s nuclear ambiguity, hence, dodging Israel away from sanctions, isolation or political containment.

Also, it is unfair that spy satellites are being used to keep an eye on Iranian military facility and they are being suspected of cleaning up radioactive evidence. But the world forgot about 22nd September 1979 when Israel carried out a testing of neutron bomb in the South Indian Ocean.

In the end, there is no guarantee that Israel, that has threatened for a war against Iran, will not use its nuclear power. Already during the Yom Kippur War in 1973, Defense Minister Moshe Dayan had put Jericho Missiles on high alert, so that they could be used as a last resort against Egypt and Syria. Then, Golda Meir declined its usage. But would Benjamin Netanyahu do the same? Well, the answer remains abstract and uncontrolled.

Netanyahu and Obama’s stand on Iran; release of an Israeli spy still ignored.

For the past 27 years, Israel has been trying to free Jonathan Pollard, a civilian American Naval intelligence Analyst.  Both US and Israel have kept him under a plea agreement. Years back, Jonathan found out about an undeclared intelligence embargo continuing in US under which Israel was not provided information regarding vital details about Syrian, Iraqi, Libyan and Iranian nuclear weapons/ capabilities. Under his ideological sense, Jonathan felt it was his prime duty to deliver these vital informations to Israel that granted him citizenship later in 1995. But he had to pay a huge price for it. He still suffers life sentence as has become another abstract and unheard demand for Israeli PM Netanyahu.

Benjamin Netanyahu, who still awaits a response from Obama administration, however understands that US can not be considered ‘ignorant’ or pressurized by Israel. For the past several months, both these political leaders have been going through a bind. The tension between them became clearer when US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta disclosed the nascent plans of Israel regarding an attack on Iran in April. In a quite intelligent manner, Netanyahu has shifted the entire focus of Israel’s concern from Palestine to Iran. He wants US to start the war as America leads in terms of weapons, ballistic missiles, grenades and of course, nuclear power. That is exactly why Netanyahu is more concerned of destroying Iran’s nuclear ‘capability’ rather than its ‘intentions‘. Israeli leaders want to operate a unilateral military action against Iran, which perhaps would not include alarming US before they do attack.

“Iran and IAEA’

Currently, Iran, like other countries, eg- Brazil, Japan, Argentina does have a right to enrich uranium as the NPT signatory. Under the IAEA scrutiny, Tehran needs to be transparent about its experiments and once it satisfies IAEA, it can enrich uranium and follow the peaceful fuel cycle nuclear energy programme. In spite of knowing all of this, Israel is threatened that Iran aims to wipe it out from the world’s map, as Iranian President had once confessed. President Ahmedanijad does not even accept that Holocaust under Hitler ever happened in world’s history and literally loathes the entire ‘Zionist identity’. Though, Ayatollah Khameini, the Supreme Leader continues to state that having nuclear power is a sin and non-Islamic, at the end of the day, he has the power to operate them.

‘Parliamentary elections in Iran’

In the meanwhile, 9th Majlis (Parliamentary elections) took place last Friday in Iran. US and Israel had believed that the ‘crippling sanctions’ would frustrate the Iranian citizens against thire government and the elections would not be able to preserve its sanctity. Interestingly, 65% of the 48 million people came to cast their vote. Hence, it definitely comes as a slap for the Zionist controlled governments (ZGOs) who are suspected to cause  protests against the President in 2009 Green Revolution. Iran also suffers from fractured political presentation. Firstly, it does not have political parties and secondly, the distance between President Ahmedanijad and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khameini is increasing day by day, as they both see each other with mutual distrust and suspicion. But that does not pose a lot of threat because the values of kinship in Middle East are different. The famous saying , ‘ Me against my brother, me and my brother against my cousin, me and my brother and my cousin against the outsider.’

‘Obama’s dilemma’

In any case, when President Obama addressed the AIPAC annual convention yesterday, he said exactly what any diplomatic leader would utter. He talked about ‘loose talk of war’,  did not define the ‘red lines‘ and declared that US would not follow the policy of ‘containment.’ Before the entire political drama was unfolding, it was definitely expected that whatever Obama would say, might make a point, a difference. Unfortunately, it did not. Everything from praising Israeli President Simon Peres and his Jewish identity to claiming that ‘Israel’s security is sacrosanct and non-negotiable’, felt like a well mugged speech. In fact, President Obama called President Peres for receiving the ‘Presidential Medal of Freedom’ which is the highest Civilian honour by the White House.

Undoubtedly, President Obama is acting as a ‘duck President‘ right now. The reason is, he wants to secure his second term. In 2008, he won by 78% of Jewish votes. Thus, this year, he is trying his level best to secure votes from Jewish populations in Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Nevada. Though, as the US president and Commander in Chief of the army, he is the strongest man, in fact, a dictator in his own merit. But he cannot take a nasty stand with AIPAC, the pro Israel lobby in America. Well, not only would his presidency be threatened, he can even be assassinated.

Thus, as President Obama still states that any war on Iran would be a mere distraction and exploit the peace, Israel definitely has other plans. But it needs to remember that its not Syria or Iraq that are developing nuclear power and hence, it can easily destroy it. Its Iran and definitely, whatever might be the pattern of bombardment used, a huge price would have to be paid by both these three countries.

Thomas Friedman reveals the Detestable self through ‘There be Dragons’

When Samuel Huntington wrote the ‘Clash of Civilisations’ after the disintegration of USSR, he funneled the odious orientalism of Middle East, Africa and Asia. For him, it was just US and Japan that deserved to dominate. Ten years later, after the September 2001 attacks, Edward Said answered him back with his ‘Clash of Ignorance.’. The title promises the satire at Huntington who was now being judged by an occidentalist.

In 2012, Thomas Friedman, the world renowned Pulitzer award winning New York Times columnist wrote ‘There be Dragons‘. Perhaps his zionist side has added to his complacency when he describes Middle East being the area of ‘dangerous and uncharted locations.’ He states that ‘ In medieval times, areas known to be dangerous or uncharted were often labeled on maps with the warning: “Beware, here be dragons.” That is surely how mapmakers would be labeling the whole Middle East today.’

Without wasting ten more years in this process, I want to answer him immediately for the delusions he carries in his tirade against North Africa, Middle East and West Asia.

1. He states ‘We also tend to believe that inside every autocracy is a democracy dying to get out, but that might not be true in the Middle East.‘

We cannot criticise Lenin, Stalin or Mao for what communism eventually became during their regime because they always lacked the intellectual honesty of Karl Marx. Communism failed. Disastrously. But worse that that is the transformation of democracy into ‘dictatorship of the government.’ Friedman does not mention that when countries like Iran gained their democracy in the early 1950s, it was CIA and America that executed the coup and snatched it away. He does not understand the significance when Ayatollah Khameini stated ‘We believe in democracy and we also believe in freedom, but we do not believe in liberal democracy.’ Perhaps, he considers Saudi Arabia that functions without even a constitution, more competent than other Middle Eastern countries. Also, if democracy is so important, why is Turkey, that has revamped itself for getting a membership in the EU for the past one decade, not respected and used as a snitch? Perhaps, George Bush thought he would make ‘democracy halaal’ in Iraq by invading it. But we all know, it added to the civil war. So, Friedman does not mention the incompetency of western powers to even establish what they believe in. And we do not even need to go to Palestine and how Israel created the Second Holocaust, worse than what Hitler did, to throw Muslims and Christians out of their own homeland. If Friedman craves to see Middle East democratic, he should understand that US had played the role of a ‘devil’s advocate’ in using this entire region as a chess board where his opponents just lost.

2. He states ‘When the iron lid of autocracy comes off, Middle east falls back, not on liberalism, but Islamism, sectarianism, tribalism or military rule.‘

Hardly before 1989 when Salman Rushdie’s book ‘Satanic Verses’ was released, no one knew or talked about Islamism. Later, the 9/11 attacks added to the Islamophobia. Today, the western powers think that ‘Shariah Law’ and ‘Islam’ is connected with ‘terrorism’ or ‘jihad’. In reality, this is not the case. Its not justice to blame Islam when Christianity also has its own loopholes. No one criticizes the Church in Greece or even orders an investigation into the millions of euros that are stored. If they did, Greece, I promise, would not have been in debt. To the outside ignorant public, it is stated that countries like Greece, Italy, Ireland, etc are facing recession because they were ‘welfare states’. If one investigates their economy, what they are facing right now is the result of ‘fiscal irresponsibility’. Anyways, coming back to the point, the ‘Church’ is not questioned. So, if that kind of pattern is followed for Western countries, why can’t the government by mosque or even its sovereignty be such a problem? Friedman does not mention that Muslim Brotherhood, for the past several decades have been carrying out grassroots changes in Egypt, Jordan, Yemen and to a certain extent in Syria.  As far as Salafists are concerned, even the people of Egypt know that they do not want them to rule.

As far as sectarianism is concerned, Friedman forgets that western powers, themselves, have been using this major issue to cause further chaos. He does not talk about Lebanon where the Maronite Christians have been used as an instrument by Roman and French powers to hate Sunnis, Shias, Druze and Kurds. I can not debate about tribalism because Friedman perhaps might find everyone a ‘tribal’ if he is not from US or Israel. And as far as military rule is concerned, he perhaps once again forgot that its US which has been actually strengthening the military of countries like Egypt, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan by giving them aids and arms.

3.  He states ‘Almost four years ago, we elected a black man, whose name was Barack, whose grandfather was a Muslim, to lead us out of our worst economic crisis in a century.’

Well, when it comes to Barack Obama, his first identity is not the “president’ but a ‘black man’. Friedman thinks that after 200 years and a civil crisis, America could ‘Make it happen.’ But he doesnot mention that ‘Right now, we are forcing the same black man to go on war with Iran’, or he does not mention that ‘ we are trying to make this man whose grandfather was a Muslim force for military intervention in Syria’. You know, what the funny part here is? If Obama does it, he would be called nothing but a stooge like George Bush. If he doesnot, his competitors like Mitt Romney and Ron Paul would call him a coward. Friedman thinks that the civil war in America is over because people are not dying anymore. But what about Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq, where they are being killed?

4. He states ‘You see in Syria how quickly the regime turned the democracy push there into a sectarian war.’

Western powers should not touch the subject of Syria which has become a case of international conspiracy than that of civil war. The western media’s propaganda does not talk about how Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Israel are funding the Free Syrian army by giving them arms. One does not need to think twice for knowing how is behind these proxies. Bashar al Assad has been easily caused the ‘Tyrant’, ‘ The replica of Hafez who caused the massacre in Hamas 30 years back.’. No one knows the reality but everyone judges them. Al Jazeera has been as zionist as ever, in its broadcast, often manufacturing news rather than reporting it. And also, what happened in Libya? There was ‘No Fly Zone’ and the cunning twist of UN’s resolution to causie regime change. Colonel Gadaffi was killed. What happened next? The Libyan Transitional Council is still not able to contain the militancy. But who cares? If Libya could not succeed, its Libya’s problem. No one should question the impeccability of US, Britain and France.

5. He states ‘U.S. troops accidentally burned some Korans, and President Obama apologized. Afghans nevertheless went on a weeklong rampage, killing innocent Americans in response — and no Afghan leader, even our allies, dared to stand up and say: “Wait, this is wrong. Every week in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq, Muslim suicide bombers kill other Muslims — holy people created in the image of God — and there’s barely a peep. Yet the accidental burning of holy books by Americans sparks outbursts and killings. What does our reaction say about us?

Firstly, there is a propaganda by media to just state news that contains suicide bombers killing people in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq. They want to create this public opinion that these countries are unsafe, froth with turmoil and terrorists- and eventually, should be dominated. Its all psychological how this grooming is done. I must ask Friedman how he would react if Afghanis burnt his ‘Old Testament’ or the ‘Bible of Jews’? Jews still consider themselves as victims to what happened decades back. So, why should the natives of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq forget so soon? They too have faced deaths.

And what difference does it make if Obama did apologize? Friedman criticises Taliban and Al-Qaeda without actually naming them. But then, who created Taliban? Who created Al-Qaeda? He forgets that drone attacks still continue in Pakistan (recently, have started in Syria). He does not go into the depth of why Muslims kill other Muslims. He does not frame them into Pathans or the tribals in Waziristan or the Muhajirs in Karachi.For him, they are one and the same. Muslims killing each other would have been an issue in 1979 when USSR had conquered Afghanistan, now it does not matter. US is in a uni-polar world, an excellent example of social darwinism.

Morals and ethics have no place in real politik. But justice has. Friedman should know that when he points one finger at others, three fingers are pointing at him. Its ignorance and unfortunate use of racism by Friedman to write this article, creating further perceptions for a common American who does not actually know what is happening.

If dragons have to be there, they aren’t in locations but inside of people.

US Drones in Syria, Turkey accepts Mossad’s cooperation

‘If a dog fell into your well, would you remove the dog or empty the well? Once a red dog fell into Afghan well, the International community helped to get it out. Now, a white dog has fallen, what are they doing? They are emptying the well, one bucket at a time.’

By the time the reader fully understands the meaning of every word mentioned above, a melancholy spirit of distaste and pain is generated from within.

The story of Afghanistan after 1989 invasion of Soviet Union followed by American occupation can be rightly explained through the above words.

Interestingly, the same narration travels to Syria now.’The white dog has fallen into Syria’s well. What they are doing now, interestingly, is to increase the size of this well’

‘US drones in Syria: Legal or Illegal?’

The conspiracies and murky bets are turning true. America accepted that there are US drones flying over Syria. After the Iraq war by Bush Administration that worked on the principle of ‘ Either you are with us, or against us’, US is revealing its new colours. How can, one country, inspite of it being a super power, ever have the rightful access to another country’s air space?

Its amazing how the propaganda can be used. US states that its urgent to send drone attacks to Syria so that the real picture can be narrated to the international audience and hence, a stronger international response can be attained.In the terms of international diplomacy, US tends to find ‘intercepts of Syrian government and military communications.’ Well, who will take the blame/ or credit, if President Assad is assassinated in this attempt?

‘The failure of UN, again’

If that has to be the eventual end, I believe there is not point in having meetings of the UN security councils and even the vetoes. It turns out that all these highly acclaimed meetings are nothing but presentations put by paper tigers with no meaning, essence or even motif of sustenance.

‘Syria is not Pakistan’

Syria is not Pakistan that has sold itself under President Musharaff to US. It does not deserve the unmanned drone attacks. In fact, its Russia which has military base in Syria, unlike American bases in Pakistan.Osama bin Laden did not go to hiding in Syria after leaving Sudan. Al-Qaeda and Pathan Taleban are not in Syria. Hence, US knows that it can not use the usual message of ‘War on Terror’.

‘Stalin Versus Obama’

But to carry out the same odious execution, the name will be changed, wile the operation remains the same.

I wonder, whats the difference between US ( as a complete entity) and Stalin? They both are carrying out massive executions and using conspiracies to defend themselves.

‘Turkey’s role in Syria‘

Also, it has been revealed that the Turkey had been training the Free Syrian Army. 40 Turkish intelligence officials have been captured working along with the Syrian opposition. They also confessed that Mossad (The Israeli Intelligence) has been working with them. In fact, Mossad has also been working with the Al-qaeda operative in Jordan to slash out Syria.

One can find one common trail, or a pattern. In the case of Libya, US had relied on Al-Qaeda fighters who belonged to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) to out Gadaffi. Undoubtedly, in the case of Syria, it is the Free Syrian Army that is being used in the similar manner.

‘Have revolutions failed?’

Perhaps Edmund Burke was right when he smirked at the French Revolution and stated that such occurrences are nothing but a facade. One can see the dwindling path of the uprising in Syria.

Well, someone rightly said, Reason and ignorance, opposites of each other, influence bulk of mankind. If either of these can be rendered sufficiently extensive in a country, the machinery of the government goes on.

But no one said, what happens, if both Assad and US start using the ‘ignorance’ and no reasoning, ever follows.

Why Iran can not be attacked by Israel and US?

After its humiliating attempt to contain the ‘nuclear power’ progress of Iran, Israel embarked to embrace the potent weapon of ‘intervention and war.’ Everything from political pressure, sanctions, sabotage, counter-proliferation measures and attempt for regime changes, have failed in Iran.

Few are even calling Iranian President Ahmadinejad as Adolf Hitler, all set to wipe out the Jewish identity from the world.  Interestingly, this is not 1935 and even Israel is not a naive participant in utterly innocent international diplomacy.

America’s ambiguous strategy

Barack Obama has stated that there is no evidence that Iran has the ‘intentions or capabilities’ to wage a war on US soil. Well, it was only last October when Iranians have been accussed by Americans for planning the assasination of a Saudi Arabian ambassador on this very American soil.

Also, US after the 1979 hostage crisis that followed after the 1953 coup in which CIA has dismantled the Iranian government, America cannot predict whats on Iran’s mind. Though, US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta seems more worried about the Israel-Iran attack rather than withdrawing US army from Afghanistan or even calculating their defence budget.

Republican Candidate Mitt Romney, the topmost contender for the Presidential position, has already stated that he would be more pro-Israel than Obama and he would back up the American diplomacy with very credible military option.

‘If Iran makes the first move’

Iranian Rafah News Website which is identified with President Ahmadinejad has already threatened Israel, last month. Iran is already known for blowing up Israeli embassy and Jewish communities in Buenos Aires in 1992.

If Iran, once again, targets soft power of Israeli foundation, it might act as a vitriolic catalyst to give a reason for Israel and US to attack Iran. Under Article 51 of UN Security Council’s Charter, US does not need the permission to launch military intervention. This Charter preserves the right of the member nations to respond to any armed attack.

‘Few Ignorant analysis of Iran’

Ignorant US analysts believe that since Syria, the major supporter of Iran is being shattered in the Arab Uprising, Iran might become weak. They also have a weaker perception of Hamas and Hezbollah who have been heavily financed by Syria and Iran.

Few believe that President Ahmedinjead does not have the power to call a nuclear war and the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khameini, already 72, is too old for such an operation.

Few only believe that Israel can once again operate Operation Opera in which it destroyed a nuclear reactor under construction in Baghdad on 7th June, 1981.

Well, once again, Iran is not Iraq that can be mercilessly crushed by foreign intervention.

‘Why Israel can not attack Iran’

1. It is defended by substantial ground forces, fighter aircrafts and SAM sites. Unlike Iraq, Iran has not accumulated its power plants at one location. They are scattered and are well protected.

2. Israel is far from Iran. So, in case, Israel plans to bombard the Iranian soils, it would need modified aircrafts and extra tanks for refueling. Saudi Arabia might allow Israel to land for refueling, but then again, Israel will have to calculate every move with precision.

3. Iran’s Vice president Mohammad Reza Rahimi has declared on 27th December that ‘not a drop of oil will pass through Strait of Hormuz’. Iran, suffering the worst of sanctions on its central banks and oil exports, would take the revenge by closing this strait from where 20% of world’s oil passes out.

4. Iran has already started the activation of Fordow Facility for the underground Uranium enrichment plant near Qom. It is well protected under a bomb proof tunnel or  under a mountain near the military. Also, both US and Israel do not have bunker buster bombs that can penetrate these mountains and explode the power plants.

5. It has hundreds of flawless Shabab missiles that are capable of striking Israel.

‘Israel’s covert nuclear involvement’

Turning to Israel, one does not readily mention that it is also clandestinely developing large and well sophisticated nuclear weapons. Mordecai Vanunu, who defected Israel’s nuclear programme and the Wisconsin Project have revealed that Israel is building thermo-nuclear and neutron war heads. It is injustice to target Iran just became it has oil reserves.

‘Deaths of Iranian nuclear scientists’

Also, what about the Stuxnet computer virus which hit Iran last year and caused Uranium enriching centrifuges at Natanz to spin out of control and explode?

Also, the rampant and mysterious death of Iranian nuclear scientists is another clue of Mossad’s intelligence and how Israel is inculcating fear in Iranians to cause them to defect. Interestingly, all of these bomb explosions ( 5 since 2007) carry the same hallmark.

There is a motorcycle that targets the victim’s car, flashes the ‘sticky bomb’ or magnetic explosive and elopes. Eventually, only the target dies and nothing else is disrupted apart from the car. It is also believed that Israel has been buying off few Iranian citizens and paying them fat salaries to work as spies.

Conclusion

In the end, it is not important when the attack would happen, if it does but what would happen after it does. Would Iran become another Iraq or Afghanistan or is 2012 when America surrenders and Iran becomes the super power?

Russia and China against UN’s draft resolution for Syria

As Syria is replacing Iran’s title of ‘North Korea in the Mediterranean’, the country witnesses 11 month crackdown with the death of 5400 civilians. The highly awaited meeting of UN’s Security Council in New York went as expected. Both China and Russia stated that they would veto against the Moroccan authored draft resolution, if accepted by the Security Council. Nabil Elaraby, the Secretary General of Arab League along with Sheikh Thani, the PM of Qatar have been quite vocal against Syria.

The current resolution gives 15 days to Assad for handing over the power to his deputy Farouk al Shaara, who is currently the vice president of the country. He has served as a Syrian Foreign Minister from 1984-2006. He is known for playing an important role in maintaining Syria’s relationship with Lebanon and Israel. Last July, Farouk held government meetings, speaking about the transition to a truly pluralistic democratic state.

Meanwhile, an Israeli newspaper Maariv has stated that farouk arrived in Moscow in December to discuss the possibility of providing political asylum to Bashar al- Assad and his family.

Arab League’s smart act

In a quite smart and diplomatic act, Arab League sent a 165 member mission to Syria. These international monitors revealed that 400 people have died since their deployment. These numbers created further chaos and blemished the image of Assad. The League still has 100 members in Syria, as an act to show the western world how they do care for the civilians in Syria but sadly, can not play an integral role in stopping the deaths. Hence, nothing is going to work apart from the draft resolution of the Security Council.

But is this a cunning step to turn Syria into another LIbya. The ‘Right to Protect’ Act was twisted by NATO in the Resolution 1973 which was passed by UN last year. The resolution was meant to protect the civilians and not to cause regime change, which eventually, it did. Both Russia and China, who had not been very vocal during the time of Libya, regretted their cowardice. They not only faced heavy economical losses but even the wide perception that their foreign policies and opinions do not matter in the western hegemony.

Russia and China’s support

Its not only communism which is common in both the countries. One must remember Stalin and how he butchered his own men before the Second World War. Also, one must not forget the Tianmen Protests in China in 1989, killing hundreds of protestors.

The same lineage can be scrutinised in Hama Massacre that took place in Syria when the then President Hafez killed thousands of Sunni Muslim protestors against his regime.

Perhaps, the Syrian tyranny gives power to both Russia and China.

The paranoia and sense of madness continues. Especially, if its the deciding point of elections. Both Russia and China are going to have elections this year. Vladimir Puntin, running for the Presidential elections has been criticising Medvedev for being a neutral spectator during Libya.

Also, Russia has its naval base at the port city of Tartus. Its the only passage for Russia to the Mediterranean. The Russian- Syrian trade relations value $4 billion dollars while the Chinese Syrian trade amounts to more than $1.8 dollars.

Russia has been selling fighter jets, anti-ship cruise missiles and fighters to Syria right from the start of Cold War.

China started its diplomatic relations with Syria from 1956 and continues to maintain it.

All of this can be seen as a subtle polarizing of the world into two political power associations.

Anti-Imperialism or For Sovereignity

The entire Arab uprising, creating chaotic dominoes effect, has become a struggle between foreign intervention and protection of a country’s own sovereignty. America continues with a soft power approach but ultimately its strong on ‘You are with us or against us’ principle.

One must know that Syria is also different from Libya from  a very interesting angle. In Libya, it was Gadaffi and the rebels. While, in Syria, it is Bashar al Assad, the rebels and a catalysing population of religious extremists and terrorists who are also involved in killing innocent civilians. Its difficult to say who trains them. There are rumours that western countries are training them, especially France in Lebanon and Turkey so that they can revolt against the government.

Hence, its a million dollar question if Assad would actually resign or might become another Gadaffi for Syria.

Obama’s Ghost: withering Middle East economy and ambiguity

When Barack Obama talks about how his entire life, he was just wrestling with the ghost of ‘The Old Man’ (his first father), the pertinent fact remains- even though, his father is dead now, he, himself has become the first Black American President, unfortunately, the psychological fight has not terminated. He still thinks, he still fights.

It is difficult, to know a man, of his caliber, mettle and intellect to play a diplomatic mission in the Middle East. Yes, America does not want another Afghanistan. Yes, America did not even reveal how Osama was slaughtered. But here, in Middle East, it needs to. His administration can not keep playing imposing sanctions on Syria, or have secret talks with General Tantawi in Egypt or just write a letter in the New York Times with Cameron and Sarkozy for Libya.

‘No straight point with the MB’

No matter, how much America does discredit the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) for being originated from Al-Qaeda- these two are totally different institutions. Its another fact that several symbiotic revolutionaries from the Muslim Brotherhood have eventually caused terrorism but the organisation does not focus on just massive butchery like Al-Qaeda does. It does not focus on how Islam is portrayed by the West but how the Arabs can flawlessly adhere to what it means for them. Now, with very visible criticism against America in Iraq, the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria, Egypt and Jordan have actually stated that they donot appreciate western capitalism. So, what does Obama gain by those secret influential talks? His own identity of being a Muslim and yet a Christian causes a certain strange equilibrium to adhere to. So, the safest bet, I think, it to let the legislative elections start today and at the same time, fear. Fear of what would happen to American foreign policy and trade if NDP or even the Freedom and Justice Party comes into the parliament with majority. Though, the NDP offshoots might cling to America, the others, will not.

‘Gadaffi: Gone with the wind’

In Libya, the US policy was far too diplomatic. Just like Saddam, they created Gadaffi and now they banished him on the world stage, with not even the ending scripts having the western superpower’s name. Intelligent trick. Hillary Clinton stated no boots on the ground, a decision which was followed. To what degree did it save the millions invested by the EU and France on the ‘No-Fly-Zone’ remains unaccountable. For that matter, how many lives were saved. It was the finest subtle victory.

‘Syrian economy: not breathing’

With Syria, sanctions are being imposed. Obama administration are re-evoking all the sanctions on the Central Bank, the trade, travel of Assad and his colleagues, etc. The ‘crisis economy’ would shrink again, this time, with 6%, this year. But then, Syria has Lebanon and Iraq to support. For how long, no one knows. But does the Obama administration really think that such diplomatic measures would not affect the common population? Its the common man out in the streets of Damascus facing the music. If the dominoes affect started, it would be him to be brutally assaulted by it. Not Assad, not Obama.

My entire fear is that, Obama, with the enormous respect he demands, is creating several new ‘Old Men’ for him. He is creating new ghosts to fight, new regrets and nascent unkept promises that would haunt him. For if, he was just another Capitalist, he would never have had the first life long wrestle, in the very first place.

P.S: It is a must read ‘Obama’s autobiography- Dreams from My Father’. Creates the similar frustation that Arvind Adiga did in ‘The White Tiger’

Why no one would win Egypt?

With the cries of ‘national salvation’ mushrooming in around 20,000 people, quite vehemently, at Tahrir Sqaure right now, it speaks that the Arab revolution has still not seen the termination. Unfortunately, as 28th November approaches quickly, the compulsive fact that Egypt would still not be won, stands audacious.

Amr Hamzawy, the liberal parliamentary candidate has stated that it is not the outcome that matters but the entire symbolism that the elections took place. Though, the elected parliament would be transitory but it does not undermine its influence in drafting the constitution of one of the most populous Arab countries that demands democracy and a representative parliament. Though, is it a safe bet then? To have people killed and injured for a mere disguise of victory for the opportunistic capitalism.

‘Muslim Brotherhood: the Bogeyman’

To start with, the Muslim Brotherhood with its Freedom and Justice Party has major chances of victory. One can see what happened in Tunisia. The main Islamist party ‘Ennahada’ won. But this fact has troubled several Republicans in US administration. Muslim Brotherhood, has always been witnessed as a bogeyman by America, like an embodiment of terror without actual mass and flesh. With Coptic Christians being killed in sectarian violence in Egypt, no doubt, Obama administration has been accused of doing exactly what is wrong in the entire Arab uprising. Though, Obama and Clinton are asking the Military council to loosen their grip over the protestors, they do not want to be seen publicly, as making decisions or even influencing the scenario. Or, for the matter, even blunt communication. The Egyptians will not like it. So, once again, America is in a lurch. What to support then? Their own vested interests in their foreign policy or their advertised support to democracy? They already dread that the Muslim brotherhood, often called as the Godfather of Al-Qaeda by Americans, would support their interests if elected?

‘Cracks in the  Military Council’

Now, every government, what so ever, has always witnessed a widening gap between the soldiers and the police. Though, the same happening in an interim government trying to crush down demonstrations is another interesting point. The Central Security Force, ie, the riot control police force has been always seen as low class and less intelligent when compared to the SCAF. (Supreme Council of Armed Forces).In fact, they have been summoned as ‘knuckle-draggers’. Adding to the mayhem, the riot police also holds a grudge against the SCAF as during the intitial January 25 revolutions, they were asked to winthdraw from Tahrir as they could not contain the uprising and hence, the soldiers were appointed. Now, SCAF plays a very intelligent role in the entire process. They do not publicly appear on the streets but they are secretly supplying equipments and vehicles to the riot control police. No doubt, they hold the ultimate executive powers in Egypt. Sadly, the military council is turning into nothing but a black box, with its own cracks appearing, slowly.

‘Fiasco of voters and parties’

Now turning to, who would come to vote? Around 20-30% of the voters would vote for  Muslim Brotherhood. The next 20% would vote for the elite Copt community while the rest of the 50% voters of the 50 million population are in the ‘cant say category’. And to vote for whom? Suddenly, there are tens of parties surfacing in the election scenario. Few strict Islamists, others liberal. Defection from Muslim Brotherhood, inter party conflicts for higher political hierarchy, aims and objectives-everything is a lot of information to gulp down in a  go. The youth who carried on the revolution has to face financial constraints of their own in marketing themselves into a legal party. Few of them, like the April 6 Movement and Coalition for Revolution Change have just become fading names, carrying  a symbiosis with established coalitions.

The slogans have changed. Rather than Mubarak, it is ‘Tantawi, go back’. Did Egyptians fight for what is currently happening? Well, the transition from military dictatorship  to  a civil government will never happen smoothly in the current world, but at what cost do we lose Egypt then?

P.S: Image from Palestine Chronicle.

The value of 4th of July- America’s struggle for Independence

Questioning on ‘Why Americans should still celebrate 4th of July’, Daniel Greenfield, an Israel based columnist writes ‘Every year the firework gets bigger and we lose more freedom.’

Even Telegraph’s US editor Toby Harnden writes that the mood in US is a little bleak at the moment. American citizens are caught in the limbo of questioning whether the ‘American Dream is still alive’ or it is better to just celebrate the awaited fireworks at ‘July 4th American Holiday’ and carry on with ‘who cares’ attitude.

Several people question what American gained after the legal separation from Great Britain took place in 1776?  Many conservatives still doubt the role of massive bureaucracy, suspension of legislatures and mockery of the constitutional liberties which they believe is going on in the country.

‘The American dream’

To delve deeper into these doubts, one needs to know what the American dream means.

Well, James Truslow Adams, the American author who coined the term ‘American Dream’ explained it as a ‘life which is better, richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to their achievement.’

Since the Declaration of Independence, America has been adapting to the changes. The influx of multicultural society, financial conundrums, unemployment issues, terrorism, federal policies and most importantly, the bolstered image of ‘Yes We Can.’

But rather than questioning if this 4th July holds special significance or not, Americans should scrutinise the indelible achievements reached this year. The encounter of Osama bin Laden after a decade is definitely the right answer.

‘Against all odds’

Undoubtedly, this sought after laurel does not solve the job crisis or collapse of economy but no country in this world has the strength to rebound after such a phenomenal loss in just a year or two.

The fact that the American dream is still alive can be seen that irrespective of its failures, the economy is ready to provide aids to African countries for development, invest in the market growth of Middle Eastern countries like Egypt and Tunisia who demand it, withdraw forces from the Afghanistan border and still work for the ‘inclusive growth’ of the citizens.

Also, rather than getting lost in the abstract maze of how the politicians and diplomats perceive the 4th of July, it is also essential to listen to the common man.

Interestingly, the common man in America believes in the ‘life, liberty and pursuit of happiness’.

Many believe that 4th of July means a day to choose the right to live, to exercise freedom, spread God’s love and survive in the country. Interestingly, people do surive in America irrespective of the horror stories that often hit more headlines.

The recent confession of Jose Antonio Vargas, a Filipino journalist on ‘The New York Times’ for being an ‘undocument illegal immigrant’ in America, speaks about the ‘American freedom’.

It would have been impossible to take such a bold step in any country. In fact, there are even examples of such braveness in any other society, irrespective of how liberal it calls itself.

The formal legal permission for gay marriages becoming legal in New York give another hope for Americans. In the larger society, inclusive growth is guaranteed through the respect given to what people value and crave for. This law definitely bestows this basic necessity which several other countries in the world are still debating on.

In a nutshell, the greater hope revolves around utilitarianism and greater good for greater number of people. Thus, the 4th of July continues to be more than just fireworks because the execrise of freedom is also a choice. And fortunately, Americans still have the power of choice.

Withdrawal of US troops in Afghanistan: A bird of ill Omen for India

After a decade, on 22nd June 2011, the current US President Barack Obama has announced the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan.

A lot of speculation is being done about the various motives and outcomes of the withdrawal. And perhaps all this chaos, is not good news for India.

To start with, David Ignatius , the famous American journalist states, ‘The quick departure is a guarantee of failure. It risks repeating the mistake the United States made in the 1980s when, after pumping money and guns into Afghanistan to defeat the Soviet Union, America walked away — creating a power vacuum that was exploited by warlords and their regional patrons.’

This time, the power vacuum is being created for India. She would soon be exposed to a vulnerable spot by a Pakistan dominated neighbourhood and unfettered militancy. The precipitous withdrawal of the international forces rewinds the time back to Afghanistan of 1990s. It might turn worse this time. Especially when Al-Qaeda is all set to establish its existence after the death of Osama bin Laden and is engrossed in hunting for havens for executing jeopardising explosions.

Though, the deployment did not ensure that the instability in South Asia would be dealt with. But yes, the withdrawal certainly sounds like a modus operandi.

Harsh V Pant of Defence Studies Department from King’s College, London, states ‘New Delhi has been contemplating the impact of US withdrawal from Afghanistan. If the US left lock, stocks and barrel, India would be left to pick the pieces.’

In an attempt to mend ties with the post America Afghanistan, Indian PM Mr. Manmohan Singh also  pledged $500m in aid to Afghanistan, which comes on top of $1.5bn already promised to the war-torn country. Though, India is still the biggest regional donor to Afghanistan, a position which is highly appreciated by the Western superpowers, its high time when Mr. Singh should realise that aids and funding might not be the best way to combat extremism and terrorism.

‘Indian troops in Afghanistan’

Interestingly, there are around 1000 Indian paramilitary soldiers in Afghanistan. These forces belong to ‘Border Roads Organisation’ and ‘Indo-Tibetan Border Police‘. They play a vital role in safeguarding the large Indian consulates in Afghanistan. In fact, in 2010 itself, Home Minister P. Chidambaram had announced ‘India to send more troops to Afghanistan’.

Retired Indian Major General Ashok K. Mehta states in his Wall Street Journal ‘Pakistanis believe that Indians and Afghans, who share excellent relations, have a mutual interest against them and see India’s presence in Afghanistan as a threat.’

2006 onwards Pakistan has been frequently asking US to restrain the Indian presence in Afghanistan. So, the pull out of troops might prove to be an easy opportunity to finally cash upon the chance.

Unfortunately, the safety of Indian troops in Afghanistan is never talked about.

‘India’s future‘

No doubt, there is nothing heroic in stuffing pockets of enemies and reaching out for a global diplomatic stand. At the same time, there is no point in waiting for another attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul.

But perhaps, its would be wiser to realise who the real enemy is? Is it Taliban in Afghanistan or Pakistan? The answers wont come in a day or two. Till then, India should ‘wait and watch.’