September 11, catalyst of aggression policy

Back in February 1997 President Bill Clinton said in his address that in order to prepare America to enter the 21st century, we must learn to manage the forces that predetermine the changes in the world, and we must provide firmness and reliability of America's leading role for a long time.

It has been a year since the day when the twin towers were hit by the planes and collapsed. I can imagine the joy that the US political circles that direct the US foreign policy had during those September days. There has never been such thing as morals for the United States, let alone morals in foreign policy, where goals have always had more priority over the means to attain them. Those two September planes crashed on rulers of America just like manna for the Hebrews. It has been exactly ten years since the moment the USSR collapsed, making the US the only superpower, and here is another gift of fate. It is the largest superpower that has the military budget equal to 15 countries that follow it in the amounts of military expenses. California’s economic potential alone is in the fifth place in the world registry. This Goliath believed in its immovability and decided to use the chance that it received on the September 11 to establish direct military control over the world’s energy resources and to conquer geo-strategic bases for its next expansions.

Central Asia. This zone is located in the heart of Eurasia, in the center of neighboring countries like Russia, Iran, China, India and Pakistan. These are vast resources of oil and natural gas. Kazakhstan alone, according to the US Department of Energy, has 95 million barrels of oil, which is 4 times as much compared to all surveyed reserves of Mexico. By the year 2015 Kazakhstan and all its Caspian neighbors will become one of the main suppliers of oil in the world. To control this zone means to control the entire Eurasia. The deployment of military bases that has started here is the creation of the base that will provide the possibility for the US to continue military expansion in any direction in the near future. In addition to that, in response to the hospitality of the «owners» who received them, the US are stating with blatant cynicism about the necessity to change the ruling regimes to more controllable ones.

US Department of State Foreign Service officer B. Lynn Pasco explained the US goals in Central Asia like this: push the countries of Central Asia towards free markets and democratic politics. Without political or economic reforms they will never be able to survive as modern states. Lorne W. Craner, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, was testifying in front of the Congress that the situation in five countries of Central Asia was very bad, bad or exclusively bad. Cathleen Collins, professor from Notre Dame University recently wrote that these five countries are not following democracy, but instead they are following the political and economic trajectory that can only be called negative.

And finally General Tommy Franks, Commander of the Central Command of the US Armed Forces, whose area of responsibilities includes Afghanistan and all countries of Central Asia, confirmed the US intentions to settle in this region «for a long long time». While describing the situation in Afghanistan, Mr. Franks compared it to the situation in South Korea, where the US troops have been stationed for over a half a century already. According to him, all five countries of Central Asia ' Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, just like Afghanistan, need serious measures on building these nations.
Earlier the building of nations was not the business of the US, but it became such since last fall. On this background the statement made by Prime Minister of Kyrgyzstan Djoomart Otorbaev is just touching: «We still have too many Soviet things left in us' and unlike Moses, we did not have the opportunity to take everybody to the desert for 40 years in order to get rid of slavish mentality». Are these new «masters of life», who imagine themselves to be Moseses and who despise their own people so much, hoping to stay at the sinecure by selling their countries to the US? I am far from the thought that Otorbaev is Jewish or a Russian Orthodox; most likely he is a Moslem, but it’s doubtful though. He still should read the Koran a little, just like he used to read the classics of Marxism-Leninism: «[2.54] And when Musa said to his people: O my people! You have surely been unjust to yourselves by taking the calf (for a god), therefore turn to your Creator (penitently), so kill your people [sinners amongst you], that is best for you with your Creator: so He turned to you (mercifully), for surely He is the Oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful». (Koran, Sura 2 'The Cow').

Caucasus is just as important strategic region. Caucasus means Caspian oil. Caucasus is the transportation link between Europe and Central Asia. Caucasus is the handle of the sword, whose blade is the US military bases in Central Asia. Possessing Caucasus means cutting Russia off any potential allies in the Middle East. I am talking about Russia itself, and not about anti-Russian Putin’s government, whose interests are lying totally in the channel of the US policies. And in vain are Georgian and Azerbaijani politicians hoping for the American mercy towards them. America needs stability, predictability and total control of the governments of these territories. And however many efforts the current governments make, they are unable to comply with the first two conditions. Therefore the same tricks will be used as in Central Asia – under the guise of helping to «build the nation», helping to form the Armed Forces, i.e. taking control of them; helping in the development of independent mass media and social associations, or in other words, in promoting American values; and finally in conclusion, organization and control of «democratic» elections. For Russia the circle has locked in.

Southwest Asia. Middle East. The most important oil-bearing region. Oil is blood in the veins of the economy and hence it is the living standard for a «gold» billion. The US «got tired» of blackmail from OPEC, and there is nothing that can satisfy them but total control of the oil fields of the Arabian Peninsula and Persian Gulf. And just a carrot would not be enough here; according to the US chiefs, they need a stick to demonstratively whip all Arab countries. Good thing there is a candidate. It’s not the point whether Saddam Hussein has or does not have nuclear, chemical or any other weapons. Saddam’s guilt is that according to Ehud Barak, Prime Minister of Israel in 1999-2001, Saddam Hussein gave an example of defiant behavior, especially towards President Bush, Sr., the example that other Arab leaders should not and must not follow. Ehud Barak also said that the Arab World without Saddam Hussein would allow many of the leaders of the new generation to head towards gradual democratic transformations. You can't be any more open about it. He that is not with us is against us, which means that he must be eliminated.
George W. Bush once said that it is not his job to dig into details. He said, «My job is to say what I think. I believe that moral clarity is important». And in order to eliminate your doubts regarding moral clarity, it was explained by the US Secretary of Defense in his statement about the captured Taliban soldiers who are detained at the naval base in Guantanamo, Cuba. He said that they would never be released, even if they will be tried and acquitted. That was concerning the issue of human rights, American democratic values and other similar verbal husk that the US bosses resort to in order to «cover» their expansion around the world.

Although, as the history recounts, Goliath came to a bad end.

Sergei Alekseev,
for Kavkaz-Center
2002-09-13 01:06:37