|
|

|
Behind the scenes of
the Iraq War
by Harun Yahya
The plan for the Iraq war, which has
erupted in the face of opposition from the entire world, was drawn up
at least decades ago, by Israeli strategists. In its attempt to
realize its strategy of destablizing or dividing the Middle Eastern
Arab states, Israel has Egypt, Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia on its
list of subsequent targets.
As these lines are being written, the
United States of America has begun striking at Iraq. Despite the fact that
most countries of the world, and even the majority of the USA’s allies,
opposed it, the US administration was determined for the strike to go
ahead. When we look behind the scenes of this insistence, it is Israel,
solely responsible for the bloodshed and suffering in the Middle East
since the beginning of the twentieth century, which emerges. The state of
Israel’s policy aimed at the fragmentation of Iraq has lengthy historical
roots…
Israel’s Plans to Divide Iraq
The report titled "A Strategy for Israel in
the Nineteen Eighties," by the Department of Information’s Hebrew-language
magazine Kivunim (Directions), aimed at making the whole of the
Middle East a living space for Israel. The report, drawn up by Oded Yinon
,
an Israeli journalist and formerly attached to the Foreign Ministry of
Israel, set out the scenario of the "division of Iraq" in these terms:
Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and
internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for
Israel's targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than
that of Syria… Iraq is, once again, no different in essence from its
neighbors, although its majority is Shi'ite and the ruling minority
Sunni. Sixty-five percent of the population has no say in politics, in
which an elite of 20 percent holds the power. In addition there is a
large Kurdish minority in the north, and if it weren't for the
strength of the ruling regime, the army and the oil revenues, Iraq's
future state would be no different than that of Lebanon in the past…
In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in
Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states
will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul,
and Shi'ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and
Kurdish north.
We believe there is little need to recall
how this scenario was partially implemented after the 1991 Gulf War, with
Iraq being effectively, if not officially, divided into three parts. The
fact that the US plan for the occupation of Iraq, which is on the agenda
at the time of writing, could again spark off such a division, is a
concrete threat.
Israel’s Role in the Gulf War
The implementation of the Israeli strategy
goes back to 1990. Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in a sudden attack on
August 1, 1990, giving rise to an international crisis. Israel headed the
list of those forces which encouraged that crisis. Israel was the fiercest
supporter of the attitude adopted by the United States in the wake of the
invasion of Kuwait. The Israelis even regarded the United States as
moderate, and wanted a harsher policy. To such an extent in fact that the
President of Israel Chaim Herzog recommended that the American use nuclear
weapons. On the other hand, the Israeli lobby in the United States was
working to bring about a wide-ranging attack on Iraq.
This whole situation encouraged the idea in
the United States that the attack against Iraq under consideration was
actually planned in Israel’s interests. The well-known commentator Pat
Buchanan summarised this idea in the words "There are only two groups that
are beating the drums for war in the Middle East – the Israeli Defense
Ministry and its amen corner in the United State."
Israel had also initiated a serious
propaganda campaign on the issue. Since this campaign was largely waged in
secret, Mossad also entered the equation. Former Mossad agent Victor
Ostrovsky provides important information on this subject. According to
Ostrovsky, Israel had wanted to wage war with the United States against
Saddam long before the Gulf crisis. So much so in fact, that Israel began
to implement the plan immediately after the Iran-Iraq war. Ostrovsky
reports that Mossad’s Psychological Warfare department (LAP – LohAma
Psicologit) set about an effective campaign using disinformation
techniques. This campaign was aimed at representing Saddam as a bloody
dictator and a threat to world peace. (Victor Ostrovsky,
"The
Other Side of Deception: A Rogue Agent Exposes the Mossad's Secret Agenda", pp. 252-254).
A Mossad Agent Describes the Gulf War
Ostrovsky describes how Mossad used agents
or sympathisers in various parts of the world in this campaign and how,
for example, Amnesty International or "volunteer Jewish helpers (sayanim)"
in the US Congress were brought in. Among the tools employed in the
campaign were the missiles launched against civilian targets in Iran
during the Iran-Iraq war. As Ostrovsky makes clear, Mossad’s later use of
these missiles as a propaganda tool was quite peculiar, since those
missiles had actually been directed towards their targets by Mossad, with
the help of information from US satellites. Having supported Saddam
throughout his war with Iran, Israel was now trying to portray him as a
monster. Ostrovsky writes:
The Mossad leaders know that if they
could make Saddam appear bad enough and a threat to the Gulf oil
supply, of which he'd been the protector up to that point, then the
United States and its allies would not let him get away with anything,
but would take measures that would all but eliminate his army and his
weapons potential, especially if they were led to believe that this
might just be their last chance before he went nuclear. (Victor
Ostrovsky, "The
Other Side of Deception: A Rogue Agent Exposes the Mossad's Secret Agenda", p. 254)
The Israelis were so determined on this
matter, and with regard to the United States, that on August 4, 1990,
Israeli Foreign Minister David Levy issued a diplomatically worded threat
to William Brown, the American ambassador to Israel, stating that Israel
"expects the U.S. will fulfill all of the goals it set for itself at the
beginning of the gulf crisis," in other words that it attack Iraq.
According to Levy, if the United States failed to do so, Israel would act
unilaterally.
It would be of enormous benefit to Israel
to have the United States engage in the war and for Israel to remain
entirely uninvolved: and that is indeed what happened.
Israel Forces the USA to War
However, the Israelis were actively
involved in the United States’ war plans. Some US staff officers involved
in planning Operation Desert Storm received fine tactical advice from the
Israelis that "the best way of wounding Saddam was to strike at his
family."
The Mossad-inspired propaganda campaign
reported by Ostrovsky set up the necessary public backing for the Gulf
War. It was again Mossad local assistants who lit the touchpaper for the
war. The Hill and Knowlton lobbying firm, run by Tom Lantos of the Israeli
lobby, prepared a dramatic scenario to convince members of Congress on the
subject of war against Saddam. Turan Yavuz, a noted Turkish journalist,
describes the incident:
October 9, 1990. The Hill and Knowlton
lobbying firm organises a sitting in Congress on the subject of
"Iraq’s Barbarities." A number of "eye witnesses" brought to the
session by the lobbying firm maintain that Iraqi troops killed
new-born babies in the hospital wards. One "eye witness" describes the
savagery in enormous detail, saying that Iraqi soldiers killed 300
new-born babies in one hospital alone. This information deeply
disturbs the members of Congress. This works to President Bush’s
advantage. However, it later emerges that the eye witness brought by
Hill and Knowlton to Congress is in fact the daughter of the Kuwaiti
ambassador to Washington. Nevertheless, the daughter’s account is
sufficient for members of Congress to give Saddam the nickname
"Hitler". (Turan Yavuz, ABD’nin Kürt Kartı (The US’ Kurdish
Card), p. 307)
This leads to just one conclusion: that
Israel played an important role in the United States’ to wage its first
war on Iraq. The second one is not much different.
The Pretext of "War Against Terrorism"
Contrary to popular belief, the plan to
attack Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein’s regime by force was prepared
and placed on Washington’s agenda long before the environment of the
"fight against terror," which emerged in the wake of September 11. The
first indication of this plan emerged in 1997. A group of pro-Israeli
strategists in Washington began to put forward the scenario of the
invasion of Iraq by manipulating the "neo-con" think-tank, called PNAC
(Project for The New American Century). The most notable names in the PNAC
were those of Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, who as defense secretary
and vice-president would be the most influential figures in the George W.
Bush administration.
An article titled "Invading Iraq Not a New
Idea for Bush Clique: 4 Years Before 9/11 Plan Was Set"
written by William
Brunch and published in the Philadelphia Daily News, sets out the
following facts:
But in reality, Rumsfeld, Vice
President Dick Cheney, and a small band of conservative ideologues had
begun making the case for an American invasion of Iraq as early as
1997 – nearly four years before the Sept. 11 attacks and three years
before President Bush took office.
An obscure, ominous-sounding right-wing
policy group called Project for the New American Century, or PNAC –
affiliated with Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rumsfeld's top deputy Paul Wolfowitz
and Bush's brother Jeb – even urged then-President Clinton to invade
Iraq back in January 1998. (William Bunch, Philadelphia Daily News,
Jan. 27, 2003)
Is Oil the Real Objective?
Why were the PNAC members so determined to
overthrow Saddam? The same article continues:
While oil is a backdrop to PNAC's
policy pronouncements on Iraq, it doesn't seem to be the driving
force. [Ian] Lustick, [a University of Pennsylvania political science
professor and Middle East expert,] while a critic of the Bush policy,
says oil is viewed by the war's proponents primarily as a way to pay
for the costly military operation.
"I'm from Texas, and every oil man that
I know is against military action in Iraq," said PNAC's Schmitt. "The
oil market doesn't need disruption."
Lustick believes that a more powerful
hidden motivator may be Israel. He said Bush administration hawks
believe that a show of force in Iraq would somehow convince
Palestinians to accept a peace plan on terms favorable to Israel…
(William Bunch, "Invading Iraq not a new idea for Bush clique"
Philadelphia Daily News, Jan. 27, 2003)
This, therefore, is the principal
motivation behind the plan to attack Iraq: to serve Israel’s Middle East
strategy.
This fact has also been identified by other
Middle East experts. Cengiz Çandar, a Turkish Middle East expert, for
instance, describes the real power behind the plan to attack Iraq thus:
.....Who is directing the attack on
Iraq? Vice-President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, National
Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice. These are the "senior level" backers
of the attack. Yet the rest of the iceberg is even richer and more
interesting. There are a number of "lobbies."
Heading these lobbies are the Jewish
Institute for Security Affairs team, pro-Likud and Israeli-right and
known for their close relations with US arms manufacturers. These have
close relations with the "arms lobby," Lockheed, Northrop, General
Dynamics and Israeli military industries ... JINSA’s fundamental
principle is this: America’s and Israel’s security are inseparable. In
other words, they are the same thing.
JINSA’s objective is not solely the
overthrow of the Saddam regime in Iraq: it also supports the overthrow
of the Saudi Arabian, Syrian, Egyptian and Iranian regimes with a
logic of "total war," and the subsequent importation of "democracy."
... In other words, a number of American Jews on the same wavelength
as the most extreme factions in Israel at the moment comprise the
hawks in Washington. (Cengiz Çandar, "Iraq and the ‘Friends of Turkey’
American Hawks", Yeni Şafak, September 3, 2002.)
Israel’s Project of "Secret World
Domination"
In short, there are those in Washington who
are encouraging a war aimed first at Iraq and then at Saudi Arabia, Syria,
Iran and Egypt. The most distinguishing feature of these is that they are
lined up alongside, and even equivalent to, the "Israeli lobby."
No matter how much they speak of "American
interests," these people are actually supporting Israeli interests. A
strategy of waging war against the whole of the Middle East and turning
all the peoples of the region against it cannot be to the United States’
advantage. The adoption of such a strategy can only be possible if the
United States is bound to Israel, by means of the Israeli lobby, which is
unbelievably influential in the country’s foreign policy.
It is for these reasons that behind the
strategy which began to be set in motion after September 11 and is aimed
at re-arranging the entire Islamic world, lies Israel’s secret plan for
"world domination." Ever since its foundation, Israel has aimed at
restructuring the Middle East, making it manageable and no threat to
itself. It has been using its influence in the United States for that
purpose in recent years, and to a large extent directs Washington’s Middle
East policy. The post-September 11 climate gave Israel the opportunity it
had been seeking. Pro-Israeli ideologues who for years had been
propounding the falsehood that Islam itself — not some militant radicals
who use Islam as a shelter — posed a threat to the West and the United
States, and who encouraged the mistaken concept of a "clash of
civilisations," have been trying to incite the United States against the
Islamic world in the wake of September 11. As early as 1995, Israel Shahak
of the Jerusalem Hebrew University wrote former Israeli Prime Minister
Rabin’s obsession with "the idea of an Israeli-led anti-Islamic crusade".
Nahum Barnea, a commentator from the Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot,
stated that same year that Israel was making progress "[to] become the
Western vanguard in the war against the Islamic enemy." (Israel Shahak,
"Downturn in Rabin’s Popularity Has Several Causes", Washington Report
on Middle East Affairs, March 1995.)
All that has happened in the years which
have followed is that Israel has made its intentions even clearer. The
political climate in the wake of September 11 prepared the ground for this
intention to be made a reality. The world is now witnessing the step by
step implementation of Israel’s policy of the fragmentation of Iraq,
planned decades ago.
The Only Way to World Peace: An Islamic
Union
The situation may be summarised as follows:
Israel’s aim is to restructure the Middle East in line with its own
strategic interests. In order to do this, in order to rule the Middle
East, one of the most sensitive regions in the world, it needs a "world
power." That power is the United States; and Israel, thanks to its
influence there, is trying to place a mortgage on that country’s Middle
East policy. Although Israel is a small state with a population of only
4.5 million, the plans drawn up by Israel and its backers in the West are
directing the whole world.
What needs to be done in the face of this?
-
"Counter lobby activities" need to be
adopted in the face of the Israeli lobby’s influence in the United
States in order to develop dialogue between the United States and the
Islamic world and to invite it to seek peaceful solutions to Iraq and
similar problems. A wide section of the United States wish to see their
country adopt a fairer Middle East policy. Many statesmen, strategists,
journalists and intellectuals have expressed this, and a "peace between
civilisations" movement must be carried forward in cooperation with
them.
The approach inviting the US
administration to peaceful solutions must be carried forward at
governmental and civil society organisation level.
Alongside all this, a deeper rooted
solution lies in a project which can resolve all the problems between the
Islamic world and the West and deal with the fragmentation, suffering and
poverty in the Islamic world and totally alter it: An Islamic Union.
Recent developments have shown that the
whole world, not just Islamic regions, stands in need of an "Islamic
Union." This Union should heal the radical elements in the Islamic World,
and establish good relations between Muslim countries and the West,
especially the United States. It should also help to find a solution to
the mother of all problems: The Arab-Israeli conflict. With Israel
retreating to its pre-67 borders and Arabs recognizing its right to exist,
there can be real peace in the Middle East. And Jews and Muslims — both
Children of Abraham and believers in one true God — may peacefully
co-exist in the Holy Land, as they have done during the past centuries.
Then, Israel would need no strategy to destabilize or divide the Arab
States. And it will not have to face the results of occupation in forms of
terrorism and constant fear of annihilation. Then, both the Israeli and
Iraqi (and Palestinian) children may grow up in peace and security. That
is a Middle East that any sane person should work to see.
Notes:
- by Oded Yinon,
Israel Shahak (Translator)
- Originally appeared in Hebrew in
KIVUNIM (Directions), A Journal for
Judaism and Zionism; Issue No, 14--Winter, 5742,
February 1982, Editor: Yoram Beck. Editorial Committee:
Eli Eyal, Yoram Beck, Amnon Hadari, Yohanan Manor,
Elieser Schweid. Published by the Department of
Publicity / The World Zionist Organization,
Jerusalem.
- (Translation Published by the Association of Arab-American
University Graduates, Inc., Belmont, Massachusetts, 1982
- Special Document No. 1 (ISBN 0-937694-56-8)
Rabble rouser for
the Reform party
by Beth Rowen
(This article was posted on September 29, 1999.)
Invading Iraq not a new idea for Bush clique"
4 years before 9/11, plan was set
by William Bunch
"Downturn in Rabin's
Popularity Has Several Causes"
by
Israel Shahak
March 1995, pgs. 11,
97-98
Harun Yahya
is a prominent Turkish intellectual.
Buy the
relevant / Harun
Yahya's book (s) now:
|