The Great Deception: the propaganda that we pay for (part 1)

“What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence”. (Bertrand Russell)

So it is with Messrs. Bush and Blair which have acted time and again on the flimsiest of evidence to reshape Middle East into what they desire it to be: a neo-colonial possession to supply oil while at the same time helping their rich to get richer. You may disagree with this statement, especially, if you have been listening to so much propaganda about spreading democracy in the Muslim world in general and Middle East in particular. So I ask you to look at the following arguments and then decide if the actions taken so far point to fighting terrorism, spreading democracy or hegemony.

The beginning

In 1996 the newly elected prime minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu commissioned a study group called ”Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000" to formulate a strategy for Israel in the coming decades. The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies’ which included Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser, created the Israel’s strategy paper titled: “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm”.

The paper contains six pages of recommendations for Benjamin Netanyahu and some of the more relevant suggestions are presented bellow:

1. Only the unconditional acceptance by Arabs of our rights, especially in their territorial dimension, "peace for peace," is a solid basis for the future.

2. An effective approach, and one with which American can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon.

3. Work closely with Turkey and Jordan to contain, destabilize, and roll-back some of its most dangerous threats. This implies clean break from the slogan, "comprehensive peace" to a traditional concept of strategy based on balance of power.

4. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right

In 1997 another set of Neo-Conservatives that included personalities such as Dick Cheney, Jeb Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz Elliott Abrams, Lewis Libby, Eliot A. Cohen and others, created a think-tank organisation by the name of “The Project for the New American Century”. They stated their vision of the new world in their “statement of Principles”. To their credit, they were very honest about their goals. They said:

“We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership. As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?”

The authors of the Clean Break, and the New American Century were friends, and fellow travellers. It is therefore not surprising to see that they soon recognised the complementary nature of these two strategies for the Middle East. Of course I leave the question of who influences whom to the reader; suffice to say that when it came to Israel and the Middle East, they both shared a common vision.

Immediately after the creation of the New American Century, the Neocons started their campaign for a change in American policy. Statement after statement called for a fundamental change, but the Clinton administration was not buying it. Of course with election of George Bush everything changed. One must not forget that a founding member and signatory to the “statement of Principles” was Jeb Bush, President’s brother, and another member Dick Cheney was the Vice President. It would not be far-fetched to assume that the Neocons, in 2000, still believed in the rightness of their strategy. Already by then the “Road Map to piece” and the Arab-Israeli negotiations was dead, and the new strategy of “Clean Break” was being implemented.

Now Israel was given the green light to go ahead and openly implement their vision of Peace-for-Peace instead of the Land-for-Peace.

Then came the golden opportunity: the infamous 9/11. Now the stage was set to begin to change the world and protect America’s “interest”. Now, what is it that the world needs most and of which 25% goes to America? Oil of course. Where is that Oil? Middle East. Who lives there? Muslims.