Uprooted Palestinians are at the heart of the conflict in the M.E Palestinians uprooted by force of arms. Yet faced immense difficulties have survived, kept alive their history and culture, passed keys of family homes in occupied Palestine from one generation to the next.
US trained and armed Afghan security forces are joining ISIS-K, which makes the US ‘withdrawal’ from Afghanistan look more like an American ‘repositioning’ to keep chaos humming
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Something quite extraordinary happened in early November in Kabul.
Taliban interim-Foreign MinisterAmir Khan Muttaqi and Turkmen Foreign Minister Rashid Meredov got together to discuss a range of political and economic issues. Most importantly, they resurrected the legendary soap opera which in the early 2000s I dubbed Pipelineistan: the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) gas pipeline.
Call it yet another remarkable, historical twist in the post-jihad Afghan saga, going back as far as the mid-1990s when the Taliban first took power in Kabul.
In 1997, the Taliban even visited Houston to discuss the pipeline, then known as TAP, as reported in Part 1 of my e-book Forever Wars.
During the second Clinton administration, a consortium led by Unocal – now part of Chevron – was about to embark on what would have been an extremely costly proposition (nearly $8 billion) to undercut Russia in the intersection of Central and South Asia; as well as to smash the competition: the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline.
The Taliban were duly courted – in Houston and in Kabul. A key go-between was the ubiquitous Zalmay Khalilzad, aka ‘Bush’s Afghan,’ in one of his earlier incarnations as Unocal lobbyist-cum-Taliban interlocutor. But then, low oil prices and non-stop haggling over transit fees stalled the project. That was the situation in the run-up to 9/11.
In early 2002, shortly after the Taliban were expelled from power by the American “bombing to democracy” ethos, an agreement to build what was then still billed as TAP (without India), was signed by Ashgabat, Kabul and Islamabad.
The Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) gas pipeline route
As years went by, it was clear that TAPI, which runs for roughly 800 km across Afghan lands and could yield as much as $400 million annually in transit revenue for Kabul’s coffers, would never be built while hostage to a guerrilla environment.
Still, five years ago, Kabul decided to revive TAPI and work started in 2018 – under massive security in Herat, Farah, Nimruz and Helmand provinces, already largely under Taliban control.
At the time, the Taliban said they would not attack TAPI and would even provide their own security. The gas pipeline was to be paired with fiber optic cables – as with the Karakoram Highway in Pakistan – and a railway line from Turkmenistan to Afghanistan.
History never stops playing tricks in the graveyard of empires. Believe it or not, we’re now back to the same situation on the ground as in 1996.
The spanner in the works
If we pay attention to the plot twists in this never-ending Pipelineistan saga, there’s no guarantee whatsoever that TAPI will finally be built. It’s certainly a quadruple win for all involved – including India – and a massive step towards Eurasia’s integration in its Central-South Asian node.Afghanistan Takes Center Stage in the New Great Game
Enter the spanner in the works: ISIS-Khorasan (ISIS-K), the subsidiary of Daesh in Afghanistan.
Russian intel has known for over a year that the usual suspects have been providing help to ISIS-K, at least indirectly.
Yet now there’s a new element, confirmed by Taliban sources, that quite a few US-trained soldiers of the previous Afghan National Army are incorporating themselves into ISIS-K to fight against the Taliban.
ISIS-K, which sports a global jihadi mindset, has typically viewed the Taliban as a group of dirty nationalists. Earlier jihadi members used to be recruited from the Pakistani Taliban and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU). Yet now, apart from former soldiers, they are mostly young, disaffected urban Afghans, westernized by trashy pop culture.
It’s been hard for ISIS-K to establish the narrative that the Taliban are western collaborators – considering that the NATO galaxy continues to antagonize and/or dismiss the new rulers of Kabul.
So the new ISIS-K spin is monomaniac: basically, a strategy of chaos to discredit the Taliban, with an emphasis on the latter being unable to provide security for average Afghans. That is what underlies the recent horrific attacks on Shia mosques and government infrastructure, including hospitals.
In parallel, US President Joe Biden’s “over the horizon” spin, meant to define the alleged American strategy to fight ISIS-K, has not convinced anyone, apart from NATO vassals.
Since its creation in 2015, ISIS-K continues to be financed by the same dodgy sources that fueled chaos in Syria and Iraq. The moniker itself is an attempt to misdirect, a divisive ploy straight out of the CIA’s playbook.
Historic ‘Khorasan’ comes from successive Persian empires, a vast area ranging from Persia and the Caspian all the way to northwest Afghanistan – and has nothing whatsoever to do with Salafi-jihadism and the Wahhabi lunatics who make up the terrorist group’s ranks. Furthermore, these ISIS-K jihadis are based in south-eastern Afghanistan, away from Iran’s borders, so the ‘Khorasan’ label makes zero sense.
Russian, Chinese and Iranian intel operate on the basis that the US ‘withdrawal’ from Afghanistan, as in Syria and Iraq, was not a withdrawal but a repositioning. What’s left is the trademark, undiluted American strategy of chaos executed via both direct (troops stealing Syrian oil) and indirect (ISIS-K) actors.
The scenario is self-evident when one considers that Afghanistan was the precious missing link of China’s New Silk Roads. After the US exit, Afghanistan is not only primed to fully engage with Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), but also to become a key node of Eurasia integration as a future full member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU).
To hedge against these positive developments, the routine practices of the Pentagon and its NATO subsidiary remain in wait in Afghanistan, ready to disrupt political, diplomatic, economic and security progress in the country. We may be now entering a new chapter in the US Hegemony playbook: Closet Forever Wars.
The closely connected SCO
Fifth columnists are tasked with carrying the new imperial message to the West. That’s the case of Rahmatullah Nabil, former head of Afghanistan’s National Directorate of Security (NDS), “the Afghan intelligence service with close ties to the CIA,” as described by Foreign Policy magazine..
In an interview presented with a series of trademark imperial lies – “law and order is disintegrating,” “Afghanistan has no friends in the international community,” “the Taliban have no diplomatic partners” – Nabil, at least, does not make a complete fool of himself.
He confirms that ISIS-K keeps recruiting, and adds that former Afghan defense/security ops are joining ISIS-K because “they see the Islamic State as a better platform for themselves.”
He’s also correct that the Taliban leadership in Kabul is “afraid the extreme and young generation of their fighters” may join ISIS-K, “which has a regional agenda.”
Russia “playing a double game” is just silly. In presidential envoy Zamir Kabulov, Moscow maintains a first-class interlocutor in constant touch with the Taliban, and would never allow the “resistance,” as in CIA assets, to be based in Tajikistan with an Afghan destabilization agenda.
On Pakistan, it’s correct that Islamabad is “trying to convince the Taliban to include pro-Pakistan technocrats in their system.” But that’s not “in return for lobbying for international recognition.” It’s a matter of responding to the Taliban’s own management needs.
The SCO is very closely connected on what they collectively expect from the Taliban. That includes an inclusive government and no influx of refugees. Uzbekistan, for instance, as the main gateway to Central Asia for Afghanistan, has committed to participating in the reconstruction business.
For its part, Tajikistan announced that China will build a $10 million military base in the geologically spectacular Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Region. Countering western hysteria, Dushanbe made sure that the base will essentially host a special rapid reaction unit of the Regional Department for Organized Crime Control, subordinated to Tajikistan’s Minister of Internal Affairs.
That will include around 500 servicemen, several light armored vehicles, and drones. The base is part of a deal between Tajikistan’s Interior Ministry and China’s Ministry of State Security.
The base is a necessary compromise. Tajik President Emomali Rahmon has a serious problem with the Taliban: he refuses to recognize them, and insists on better Tajik representation in a new government in Kabul.
Beijing, for its part, never deviates from its number one priority: preventing Uighurs from the East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM) by all means from crossing Tajik borders to wreak havoc in Xinjiang.
So all the major SCO players are acting in tandem towards a stable Afghanistan. As for US Think Tankland, predictably, they don’t have much of a strategy, apart from praying for chaos.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Pepe Escobar,born in Brazil, is a correspondent and editor-at-large at Asia Times and columnist for Consortium News and Strategic Culture in Moscow. Since the mid-1980s he’s lived and worked as a foreign correspondent in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Singapore, Bangkok. He has extensively covered Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia to China, Iran, Iraq and the wider Middle East. Pepe is the author of Globalistan – How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War; Red Zone Blues: A Snapshot of Baghdad during the Surge. He was contributing editor to The Empire and The Crescent and Tutto in Vendita in Italy. His last two books are Empire of Chaos and 2030. Pepe is also associated with the Paris-based European Academy of Geopolitics. When not on the road he lives between Paris and Bangkok.
Hundreds of thousands of Afghans working for the US government, directly or indirectly, have been evacuated, either by air or by road, direct to destinations’ or via transit from any third country. It was a massive migration operation. Yet, Many Afghans are trying to slip away to destinations in the Western developed world.
The US was ruling Afghanistan through such agents and they were informers and used for a special operation. They were working under the CIA directly or through various NGOs. The US has established a wide network of its loyal in Afghanistan and was operating through them. Now the US is helping them to leave Afghanistan. If such people exposed the US atrocities and brutalities in Afghanistan, the US may not be able to face world condemnation. The Jails, Torture Centers, Detention centers. And interrogation cells were the worst places of human rights violations.
There are still many Afghans, working for the US and may not find any way to leave Afghanistan. This is a threat to Afghan peace and stability. The defense contractors working in Afghanistan, some of them, preferred to stay in Afghanistan, creates a lot of doubts and fears of creating chaos in Afghanistan. The UD, by design, shifted ISIS-K to Afghanistan long ago and equipped them, trained them, and funded them, for fighting against the Taliban, moving toward civil war.
The US cannot forget its Two Trillion investment in Afghanistan and the sacrifices of thousands of its Servicemen and women. It was forced to leave Afghanistan, but, has not forgiven the humiliating defeat in Afghanistan. The US does not want a stable and prosperous Afghanistan, especially do not wish a smooth and stable Taliban rule. It has the potential to destabilize the country and planned to do so.
The recent bill in the US 117th Congress 1st Session is a comprehensive strategy to create chaos and destabilize the country. It is sanctioned as a tool to achieve such objectives. It is very much obvious from the language of the bill that the US is determined to take revenge.
Strange! Taliban is the son of the soil and true Afghans, rule by locals is not acceptable to the US? Americans were the invaders and destroyed the country, yet not happy? And still devising conspiracies, what a state of unfairness! The cruelty is the UN’s silence. Afghans want to rule their country according to their traditions, tribal customs, and local culture, why the US has objection? Imposed governments, installed governments, planted governments, puppet governments. And invaders, aggressors, failed to rule Afghanistan in history and will fail in the future too. Afghanistan is known as the graveyard of big empires. Has a long history of defeating outsiders, aggressors, invaders, the world should learn their history and then make any decision. If the people of Afghanistan have not accepted USSR-backed Dr. Najeeb, or Babrak Karmel, or Hafizullah Ameen, or Noor Muhammad Turkey, in the same manner, have not accepted US-backed Hamid Karzai or Ashraf Ghani, what’s wrong with it? It is their country, and they wanted to rule themselves, is it not their fundamental right? Why does the international community not allow them to exercise their fundamental right?
Taliban are popular in the country and have not faced any resistance while recapturing it. They fought against the foreign occupation for twenty years, they sacrificed the lives of close relatives and friends, faced jails, tortures, and all types of hardships. Finally, they won and forced the US to leave Afghanistan. Is it not in their right to rule their own country? Why do Americans oppose it?
Since the Taliban recaptured their country, the law and order situation has improved, people are happy and feel safe. Taliban has granted general amnesty to all, including those who have been fighting against them along with the US. They have not killed a single person, not arrested a single person, not harassed a single person. Society is calm and quiet. The bureaucracy is functioning in a routine manner. Women are working, as usual, girls are going to school as usual. Shops are opened, traffic is normal, everything is smooth, except, economy.
The US has frozen Afghan assets, and imposed sanctions, coercing them economically. A war-torn country, damaged by the foreign aggressor, has devastated the whole country, the economic situation is rather pathetic. There is an acute shortage of food and consumer products. Humanitarian assistance is needed urgently. If the international community may not respond immediately, 40 million Afghan’s lives are at stake. If due attention is not spared toward Afghanistan, a catastrophe is unavoidable. We foresee a major humanitarian disaster in the country. The people of Afghanistan are not the people of lesser God. Care for them, rescue them, extend humanitarian assistance on an emergency basis. All nations and individuals with human consciousness must try their best to save humankind. The UN and its organizations must extend assistant open-hearted and generously, without conditions.
Usually, the UN helps needy communities through NGOs, and the US implants their agents in such NGOs, who are not helping hands but conspirators and implementing the American agenda. They exploited destitute people and achieve their objectives. It has been witnessed that, in many vulnerable communities, many agents were implanted and undercover, they were engaged in the implementation of their agenda, instead of real service to humanity. The UN may take serious notice and avoid similar practices in Afghanistan. However, there are also some good NGOs, and working for the welfare of humanity, must be appreciated and applauded.
It is a rare opportunity that permanent peace and stability may be achieved in Afghanistan. It will help to promote stability and prosperity not only in this region but also globally. Afghanistan is on the major traditional trade route and connects East Asia, South Asia, Central Asia, China, Russia, and Eurasia, with Africa, Europe, and Middle-east through Pakistan (Arabian Ocean – Karachi and Gwadar). A stable Afghanistan is a prerequisite for trade and economic activities in this region and leading toward developments and prosperity.
Taliban, after passing through a tough war against superpowers has learned a bitter lesson from their experiences. They have become more mature and sensible. It is now reformed and refines the Taliban. They are wise, smart, and understand global implications. To date, their behaviors are much mature and sensible. They have honored the peace deal reached between the US and them on 29 February 2020, in Doha. They have implemented the deal in true letter and spirit. They have capture Kabul peacefully, without losing any human life. They controlled the country and brought the Government writ amicably, they have not taken any revenge from anyone and provided protection to all. They have allowed and facilitated all foreigners and Afghans to leave the country at their own wish. They have provided full rights to women according to their social norms and culture. They are trying to broaden the Government inclusive of all factions, ethnic groups, etc. However, the American demand for the inclusion of Hamid Karzai, or Ashraf Ghani, or their group is irrational. They should not share power with traitors, puppets, foreign agents, etc. It is their country, they should rule it according to domestic values and traditions. The world has seen and witnessed that the Taliban are wise, gentle, kind, smart, and capable people. They can rule the country very well, they have proved their capabilities since the take over on 15 August 2021. Any interference from outside or dictation should be rejected immediately.
The international community should extend heling hand instead of putting harsh conditions. The US should fulfill its part of the obligation reached under the Doha peace deal, recognize Taliban rule, remove them from the terrorist list, release their assets, and keep out of domestic politics. Let the Afghans decide their future.
Author: Prof. Engr. Zamir Ahmed Awan, Sinologist (ex-Diplomat), Editor, Analyst, Non-Resident Fellow of CCG (Center for China and Globalization), National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Islamabad, Pakistan. (E-mail: awanzamir@yahoo.com).
على الرغم من كلّ ما يتمّ تداوله حول الهزيمة الأميركية في أفغانستان، وما تبعها من الانسحاب العسكري، الفاضح والغير منظم، من هذا البلد الآسيوي، ذي الأهمية الاستراتيجية القصوى، سواء على الصعيد الاقتصادي او السياسي او العسكري، فإنّ التداعيات الاستراتيجية لهذه الهزيمة، الأميركية الاطلسية المزدوجة، لم تخضع لتحليل موضوعي علمي بعد، الامر الذي يستدعي البحث في الاسباب الحقيقية التي تقف خلف هذه الهزيمة أولاً، كتمهيد للانطلاق الى البحث في التداعيات الاستراتيجية لهذه الهزيمة.
ولا بدّ أولاً من تحديد الاسباب الرئيسية لهذه الاهمية الاستراتيجية لأفغانستان، البلد الفقير الذي يعتبره البعض لا يكتسي هذه الأهمية، ويحصر دوره واهتمام العالم به في ما أطلق عليه الاستعمار الغربي، وعلى رأسه الولايات المتحدة الأميركية، اسم «الإرهاب» ومكافحته وحماية الدول الغربية من هجمات محتملة، ضد تلك الدول او مصالحها في العالم، قد تنطلق من هذا البلد.
من هنا فإنّ الاسباب الحقيقيه، لهذه الاهمية الاستراتيجية، التي نتحدث عنها، تعود الى ما يلي:
١) السبب الاقتصادي، الذي يرجع الى الموقع الجغرافي الهام جداً لأفغانستان، التي تتوسط قارة آسيا وتعتبر بذلك المفصل الرئيسي في حركة التجارة الدولية، شرقاً وغرباً وشمالاً وجنوباً، ليس فقط داخل القارة الآسيوية وانما باتجاه جنوب شرق آسيا ودول الشرق الاوسط (غرب آسيا)، الى جانب روسيا الاتحادية ودوّل أوروبا الشرقية (عبر شمال غرب روسيا)، وصولاً الى الدول الأوروبية والقارة الأفريقية والقارتين الأميركيتين.
وهو الأمر الذي يجعل الاستقرار في هذا البد مفتاحاً مركزياً، لتوسيع وتسهيل تنفيذ مشروع طريق الحرير الصيني الجديد (الطريق والحزام)، الذي سيؤدي إنجاحه الى خلق نهضة اقتصادية عملاقة، في مختلف أنحاء العالم، تفوق بعشرات المرات تلك النهضة التي أحدثها ما أطلق عليه اسم مشروع مارشال الأميركي، بعد الحرب العالمية الثانية، الذي جلب (المشروع) استثمارات أميركية كبيره للاقتصاديات الأوروبية المدمّرة، وهي الاستثمارات التي فتحت الطريق للمحتل الأميركي لتحويل احتلاله العسكري الى احتلال اقتصادي في دول أوروبا الغربية. وقد وصلت ارقام الحيازة (السيطرة عبر الشراء) الأميركية للشركات الأوروبية، وبالتالي لاقتصاديات هذه الدول الى 42%، الامر الذي يفسر التبعية السياسية الأوروبية الحالية للسيد الأميركي.
ثانياً: السبب السياسي، والمتمثل في الاهمية الجيوسياسية لأفغانستان وأهمية ذلك، في الصراعات السياسية الدولية بين الدول العظمى، التي بلغت ذروتها في تحول الصراع الروسي البريطاني في المنطقة (وسط آسيا) الى حرب بريطانية ضد أفغانستان، حيث شنت سلطات الاحتلال البريطانية في الهند حملة عسكرية ضد أفغانستان، بدأت بتاريخ ١/١٠/١٨٣٨ واستمرت حتى ١/١/١٨٤٢. وما كانت نتيجتها هزيمة بريطانية نكراء اجبرت لندن على سحب قواتها، التي كانت محاصرة بالكامل.
اما الحملة العسكرية البريطانية الثانية، ضد أفغانستان، التي كانت تهدف دائماً للسيطرة على هذا البلد تمهيداً للسيطرة على بقية بلدان آسيا الوسطى، مثل اوزبكستان وطاجيكستان وتركمانستان وقرقيزستان…، على حساب المصالح الروسية في هذا الجزء من العالم، فقد استمرت من سنة ١٨٧٨ حتى سنة ١٨٨٠ وانتهت بانسحاب القوات البريطانية من أفغانستان ثانيةً سنة ١٨٨١.
وقد تنبّهت ألمانيا القيصرية للاهمية الجيوسياسية القصوى لأفغانستان، خاصة بعد اندلاع الحرب العالمية الاولى، حيث حاولت ألمانيا القيصرية اقامة تحالف سياسي عسكري، مع أمير أفغانستان آنذاك، أمير حبيب الله، فقام القيصر الألماني بإرسال بعثتين عسكريتين الى أفغانستان، الاولى برئاسة: أوسكار فون نيدَرْ مايَر Oskar von Niedermayer والثانية برئاسة: ڤيرنَر أوتو فون هيرتينغ Werner Otto von Herting وقد التقت البعثتان في طهران بتاريخ ١٦ /٦/ ١٩١٥ ووصلتا الى كابل يوم ٣٠/٩/١٩١٥، حيث عرضتا على الامير حبيب الله الدخول في حلف سياسي وعسكري، مع ألمانيا القيصرية، لمحاربة بريطانيا في الهند. وتعهدت البعثة الألمانية بتقديم المساعدة اللازمة للحكومة الهندية المؤقتة، المعادية للاحتلال البريطاني، ومقرها في كابول، بقيادة الشخصية الوطنيه الهندية: ماهيندرا بارتاب Mahendra Pratap.
ومن الجدير بالذكر انّ محاولات بريطانيا السيطرة على أفغانستان لم تنته عند انسحاب قواتها من هذا البلد سنة ١٨٨١ وانما عاودت الهجوم على أفغانستان، بعد انتهاء الحرب العالمية الاولى وهزيمة ألمانيا. وقد انتهت هذه الحملة العسكرية البريطانية بتوقيع اتفاق سلام، بين الحكومة البريطانية والامير عبدالله خان، بتاريخ ٨/٨/١٩١٩ في راولبندي، تم على اثره تشكيل حكومة مؤقتة في أفغانستان.
وهذا يعني انّ الصراع الدولي على أفغانستان ليس حديثاً، وان التأثير السياسي وبالتالي الاستقرار السياسي لأفغانستان، على محيطها هام للغاية وذو طبيعة استراتيجية لا يمكن لدول مثل روسيا وإيران الا ان تضعها على رأس سلم اولوياتها، لما لها من تأثير مباشر على مصالح الأمن القومي لهاتين الدولتين بشكل خاص. كما ان باكستان والصين أيضاً معنيتان بشكل اساسي بالاستقرار السياسي في هذا البلد، اضافة الى الهند التي تأثرت عبر التاريخ بما يجري في أفغانستان.
فلا بد لنا ان نتذكر الدور الذي كان يقوم الداعية الاسلامي الشهير جمال الدين الأفغاني (١٨٣٩-١٨٩٧ توفي بسرطان الفم) من جهود لتوحيد الهندوس والمسلمين في مواجهة الاحتلال البريطاني وما قام به من نشاط في العديد من الدول، بما فيها الأوروبية، لتوحيد جهود المسلمين في دولة اسلامية (آنذاك الامبراطورية العثمانية) بعيدة عن التزمت والصراعات المذهبية والعرقية.
ثالثاً: السبب العسكري. وهو سبب ينبع بشكل رئيسي من الموقع الجيوسياسي الهام لأفغانستان. هذا الموقع الذي حاولت دول الاستعمار الغربي السيطرة عليه عسكرياً، بهدف استخدامه كمنصة تنطلق منها الجيوش الاستعمارية لتهديد الدول المجاورة او احتلالها او التأثير على مصالحها القومية في وسط آسيا.
وقد اشرنا اعلاه الى الحروب البريطانية الثلاثة، التي شنتها بريطانيا على أفغانستان، في القرن التاسع عشر وهزمت فيها جميعاً. وهي الحروب التي ارادت بريطانيا من ورائها:
– تعزيز احتلالها للهند ومنع التواصل بين حركات التحرر الهندية مع انصارها في كل من أفغانستان وما يعرف اليوم بدولة باكستان.
– التصدي لما كانت تطلق عليه لندن «التوسع الروسي»، تماماً كما يدعون في عصرنا الحالي ضرورة التصدي «للتوسع الإيراني» في الشرق الاوسط. علماً ان الامبراطورية الروسية مارست، آنذاك، حقها في الدفاع عن النفس وعن أمنها القومي، الذي تعتبر دول آسيا الوسطى جزءاً منه.
وهو نفس الدور الذي تقوم به جمهورية روسيا الاتحادية، منذ انهيار الاتحاد السوفياتي، ليس فقط في وسط آسيا وانما في جمهوريات سوڤياتية سابقة، نورد بعضها على سبيل المثال لا الحصر:
١) محاولة واشنطن وحلف شمال الاطلسي فصل جمهورية الشيشان عن الاتحاد الروسي، سنة ١٩٩٤، ودفع آلاف المسلحين المتطرفين، من أفغانستان الى الشيشان، لمقاتلة الجيش الروسي الذي كان يعمل على افشال مخطط الانفصال.
٢) الازمة التي أشعلتها واشنطن وخلف شمال الاطلسي، بين روسيا وجورجيا، سنة ٢٠٠٨، وأدّت الى حرب بين الدولتين وما تقوم به جورجيا من أعمال تهدّد ليس فقط الأمن القومي الروسي وانما الأمن والسلام في العالم بأسره، وذلك من خلال تشغيل ما يزيد على ٢٤ مختبراً أميركياً سرياً على أراضيها، متخصّصاً في إنتاج الأسلحة البيولوجية. علماً ان القانون الأميركي يمنع تشغيل مثل هذه المختبرات على الاراضي الأميركية بسبب خطورتها على السلامة العامة.
٣) قيام الولايات المتحدة، وبإشراف مباشر من القيادة المركزية الأميركية، بنقل ثلاثين الف مسلم، من فلول داعش في العراق وسورية، وبطائرات عسكرية أميركية وقطرية، عبر الاردن وتركيا وشمال العراق، الى أفغانستان ونشر هذه المجموعات على حدود أفغانستان الشمالية، مع جمهوريات آسيا الوسطى، السوڤياتية سابقاً، وكذلك على جزء من الحدود الشمالية الشرقية لأفغانستان، المحاذية للصين، بطول ٧٥ كم، وذلك استعداداً لاستخدام هؤلاء المسلحين ضد الصين الشعبية ودوّل آسيا الوسطى وروسيا نفسها.
كما يجب التنويه الى انّ قسماً من هذه المجموعات قد تمّ نشره في جبال ولايتي: فرح ونيمروز، اي قبالة منطقة زاهدان / زابل / الإيرانيتين، وذلك تمهيداً للمناورة بهذه العصابات ضدّ المدنيين وقوى الامن في إيران.
وانطلاقاً مما تقدّم، فإننا نجزم ان ما سينجم عن هذه الهزيمة الأميركية، سيكون موازياً لحجمها، من ناحية الأهمية والتأثير، على صورة وقدرات الامبراطورية الأميركية وسرعة أفولها وانتهاء هيمنتها على العالم. حيث انّ بشائر تلك الهزيمة بدأت تظهر للعيان شيئاً فشيئاً، حتى قبل ان تغادر بقايا فلول الجيش الأميركي ومرتزقته أفغانستان، ولعلّ بعض التحركات السياسية، الاقليمية والدولية، خلال شهر آب ٢١، تؤكد رؤيتنا هذه، التي وصلت الى الاستنتاجات التالية:
أولاً: فقدان الولايات المتحدة وأذنابها من دول الاطلسي، وفي المقدمة منها تركيا أردوغان، لزمام المبادرة، على الصعيد الدولي الشامل، وليس في منطقة وسط آسيا فقط، وانتقال المبادرة الى كلّ من الصين وروسيا وإيران.
فها هي روسيا تعلن مواصلة تدريباتها العسكرية المشتركة، مع كلّ من تركمانستان وطاجيكستان واوزبكستان، وعلى الحدود الأفغانية مع هذه الدول، ما يعني في الحقيقة قيام روسيا بتعزيز حضورها العسكري في هذه الدول، منعاً لانتقال اي فوضى محتملة من أفغانستان الى داخل هذه الدول، ومن ثم الى داخل الاراضي الروسية المجاورة. الامر الذي يعني تقدماً استراتيجياً روسياً هائلاً، في منطقة وسط آسيا، وهو التقدم الذي يخدم، موضوعياً، الصين وإيران ايضاً، ويعزز الاستقرار السياسي في هذا الجزء من العالم، ما يفسح المجال لبدء مرحلة تنمية اقتصادية شاملة في تلك الدول، تعود بالفائدة على الجميع.
كما لا بد من الاشارة الى الاتصالات والمشاورات التي تجريها كل من الصين وإيران، مع القوى الحاكمة الجديدة في أفغانستان (طالبان) لضمان امن الحدود الصينية الأفغانية الممتدة على طول ٧٥ كم، وتلك الإيرانية الأفغانية التي يزيد طولها على الف كيلومتر، ولكل منهما اسبابه الخاصة.
اذ ان المنطلق الاساسي لجمهورية الصين الشعبية هو منطلق اقتصادي، يتركز اساسا على خلق استقرار سياسي مستدام في أفغانستان، مما يفتح الطريق امام الاستثمارات الصينية الضخمة في مشروع طريق الحرير الصيني، الذي سيمر غرباً عبر الاراضي الأفغانيه. كما ان امن الحدود الصينية الأفغانية، في ولاية بَدَخشان، يعتبر امراً حيوياً بالنسبة للصين، خاصة في ظل استغلال الغرب الاستعماري لأقلية الايغور المسلمة، التي تسكن في الجانب الصيني من الحدود، لتنفيذ مخططات انفصالية في غرب الصين، اضافة الى نقل عشرات الالآف منهم، مع عائلاتهم، للقتال ضد الدولة السورية على مدى السنوات العشر الماضية.
اما بالنسبة لإيران فبالاضافة الى الاسباب المعروفة للجميع، من جغرافيا وتاريخ وحضارة وثقافة مشتركة، فان التخلص من الاحتلال الاجنبي على حدود إيران الشرقية هو امر استراتيجي، يشكل انتصاراً كبيرا لإيران، ولاستراتيجيتها المطالبة باخراج القوات الأميركية من كل غرب آسيا، والتي تعتبرها الخطوة الاولى على انسحاب أميركي مشابه من كل دول الشرق الاوسط العربية، اضافة الى احتمالات كبيرة جداً الى ان تبدأ الدول الآسيوية المحتلة، مثل اليابان وكوريا الجنوبية، بالبدء بالمطالبة برحيل القوات الأميركية.
ثانياً: سقوط مشروع الاحتلال والتقسيم الأميركي، في الوطن العربي من طنجة وحتى عُمان، وكذلك مشاريعها في وسط آسيا، كما ذكرنا اعلاه.
فها هي إيران، وتلبية لنداء الشعب اللبناني، قد اتخذت اجراءً استراتيجياً، غاية في الاهمية، يهدف الى كسر الحصار الاقتصادي، الأميركي الأوروبي، عن ثلاث دول هي: إيران وسورية ولبنان، وذلك عبر قرارها بتوسيع دائرة الامداد بالنفط الإيراني ومشتقاته لتشمل لبنان ايضاً. ولم يكن تصريح الناطق باسم الخارجية الإيرانية، الذي جاء فيه ان تصدير النفط الإيراني هو موضوع سيادي إيراني لا يحق لاحد ان يتدخل فيه او حتى يعلق عليه، نقول ان هذا التصريح لم يكن الا تأكيداً جديداً، على انّ موازين قوى الميدان في المنطقة قد اختلفت تماماً، وانّ حلف المقاومة يمسك بزمام المبادرة، براً (جنوب لبنان وفلسطين المحتلة) وجواً (مدخل الخليج الفارسي وقاعدة العند وغيرها من اهداف العدو التي قصفت)، وبحراً، عبر ناقلات النفط الإيرانية التي تتحرك باتجاه الموانئ السورية واللبنانية، حاملة على متنها ما يحتاجه البلدان من مشتقات نفطية.
وهو ما يعني هزيمة مشروع الحرب الاقتصادية والمالية على سورية ولبنان بعد فشل مشروع الحرب العسكرية، التي شنت على سورية ولبنان، على مدى السنوات العشر الماضية.
٣) كما لا بد لنا ان نضيف مؤتمر «جوار العراق»، الذي انعقد في بغداد قبل ايام، بحضور وزير الخارجية الإيراني، وكذلك مؤتمر حوار ليبيا، المنعقد حالياً في الجزائر، لبحث الاوضاع في ليبيا (وكذلك ما يجري في تونس).
وخلافاً لما تخطط له واشنطن وتل ابيب، فإنّ مؤتمر «جوار العراق» لن يسفر قطعاً عن إقامة حلف عربي اسرائيلي لمحاربة إيران، وانما سيسفر عن تدافع بين «القادة العرب» لزيارة القصر الجمهوري السوري في حي المهاجرين بدمشق، بحثاً عن وسيلة لإنقاذ أنظمتهم من الزوال، بعد كلّ ما حققه محور المقاومة من انتصارات، والذي انعكس على تصرفاتهم في كواليس بغداد.
كما انّ مؤتمر حوار ليبيا، بمبادرة الجزائر، يعني قبراً للقيادة الأميركية في افريقيا AFRICOM، التي خططت لتحويل تونس الى قاعدة امداد لمسلحي الجماعات التكفيرية، التي نقلتهم القيادة المركزية الأميركية من العراق وسورية الى كل من ليبيا وتشاد ومالي وغيرها، وذلك لشن حرب تدميرية ضدّ الجزائر، التي تقف مع القضية الفلسطينية وترفض ايّ شكل من اشكال التطبيع مع العدو.
إذن فإنّ المبادرة الاستراتيجية قد هرجت من يد واشنطن، وعلى طول وعرض المنطقة الممتدة من سواحل المغرب الغربية وحتى وحدود الصين الغربية وما بعد بعد حدود الصين. الى اليابان وكوريا الجنوبية في آسيا والى القارة الأوروبية ايضا.، كما سنورد ادناه.
ثالثاً: لكن التداعيات الاستراتيجية، لهذه الهزيمة الأميركية الاطلسية المشتركة، لم تقف عند الحدود التي ذكرناها اعلاه، في كل من الشرق الاوسط ودوّل آسيا الوسطى، وانما هي امتدت لتزلزل اركان التحالف الاوروأميركي (الناتو) وتجعل من الولايات المتحدة الأميركية حليفاً غير اهل للثقة، حتى في نظر اذنابها الأوروبيين.
وخير دليل على ذلك هو الكلام الذي قاله، في تصريحات علنية، كاهن السياسه الأوروبيه دون منازع، مسؤول السياسة الخارجية في الاتحاد الأوروبي، جوزيب بورلي، وهو اشتراكي ديموقراطي اسباني، ينتمي إلى أهمّ المحافل الماسونية الأوروبية، ويتمتع من خلال ذلك بقدرة كبيرة جداً على التأثير في القرارات الأوروبية كتلك القدرة التي كان يتمتع بها الكاهن السياسي البريطاني السيّئ الذكر، انطوني بلير، في السابق.
فقد نشرت محطة دويتشه ڤيليه (الموجة الألمانية) اقوال بوريل، بتاريخ ١٧/٨/٢٠٢١، التي ادلى بها خلال اجتماع لوزراء خارجية الاتحاد الأوروبي، لمناقشة الأوضاع في أفغانستان، بعد يومين من سقوط كابل. حيث قال انّ الاهتمام المتزايد من قبل الدول الأوروبية، ومن اجل مستقبل تلك المنطقة (وسط آسيا)، بالدول المجاورة لأفغانستان كروسيا والصين والهند وباكستان وتركيا (لم يذكر إيران) سيكون من عواقب – تداعيات ما جرى (في أفغانستان). وأضاف قائلاً: سوف نستخدم كلّ طاقاتنا.
فماذا يعني هذا الكلام، عندما يصدر عن كاهن سياسي ماسوني أوروبي، في معرض حديثه عن حدث استراتيجي يكتسي أهمية كبرى، ويتعلق بموازين القوى الدولية؟
انطلاقاً من طبيعة الرجل وحنكته السياسية، فإننا نؤكد انه أراد إيصال رسالة واضحة لواشنطن، مفادها، انّ الاتحاد الأوروبي يرى مصلحته في احتمال الانضمام الى كلّ من روسيا والصين، في المستقبل، حفاظاً على مصالحه في آسيا (والشرق الاوسط)، بعد الهزيمة المدوية التي لحقت بواشنطن ومشاريعها، في احتلال وتفتيت دول العالم، وتكريس هيمنتها على خيرات ومقدرات شعوبها.
كذلك لا بدّ أن نرى مشاركة سمسار الشركات الصناعية الفرنسية، إيمانويل ماكرون، في مؤتمر بغداد، قبل أيام، خطوة من خطوات بحث الدول الأوروبية عن سبل لتحقيق مصالحها، بعيداً عن او دون مشاركة الولايات المتحدة في ذلك. علماً انّ ما نقوله لا يتناقض مع مقولة انّ ماكرون كان مكلفاً من قبل الإدارة الأميركية بمحاولة اظهار ان فرنسا والحلف الاطلسي لا زالا يقومان بدور يخدم المصالح الأوروبية الأميركية المشتركة. لكن زيارة ماكرون لمقام الامام الكاظمي في بغداد ولمدينة الموصل، واجتماعه مع عدد من رجال الدين المسيحيين والمسلمين، لم تؤديا الى تغيير الامر الواقع، الا وهو ان المجتمعيين لم يكونوا سوى مجموعة مهزومين، على رأسهم ماكرون نفسه.
اما المنتصرون، الذين مثلهم وزير الخارجية الإيراني عبد اللهيان، فقد عبّروا عن تميّزهم عن بقية الرهط عندما قفز عبد اللهيان الى الصف الأول وطار بعدها الى دمشق لمتابعة تنسيق النشاط الدبلوماسي الإيراني السوري، في إطار الاستعدادات العسكرية الجارية لتنفيذ الفصل الأخير من الهجوم الاستراتيجي لقوات حلف المقاومة، الذي سينتهي قطعاً بإزالة القاعدة العسكرية الصهيونية من على أرض فلسطين وتحرير القدس، تتويجاً للهزيمة الأميركية الاستراتيجية وإنهاء دورها كقوة امبريالية مهيمنة مرة والى الأبد.
The United States dragged Europe into the Graveyard of Empires and used it as a shield in the face of its own burial.
Europe, under the guise of providing the conditions for ‘long-term’ security and stability in Afghanistan, entered the country, and the rest is history. Havoc, destruction, death, and misery infested the Southern Asian country, placing it among the world’s poorest.
A New Age Crusade
Following the September 11 attacks, the United States developed an interest in “combatting terrorism,” prompting the country known for “exporting democracy” to the rest of the world to launch what was called the “War on Terror”—an international military campaign whose goal was to eradicate terrorism abroad,
not for the safety of the populace, but rather for that of US soil.
The US, a NATO ally and core member state, did what any benevolent ally would do and dragged NATO into a multi-generational war in Afghanistan—the organization’s first commitment outside European territories.
The whole debacle started a week after 9/11, when President George W. Bush signed a resolution authorizing the use of force against those behind the attacks, followed by an October 7 announcement that the US and the UK started launching airstrikes in Afghanistan against Al-Qaeda and Taliban sites when demands for the extradition of Osama bin Laden went unanswered.
After the US ‘retaliation’ act, the Taliban announced they are ready for “Jihad”; alas, it was a short-lived dream.
The “Jihad” lasted barely over two months, as the group was defeated and its rule in the country was declared over after heavy air bombardment from the US and UK, with ground support from its allies, which included the Northern Alliance and other anti-Taliban militias and groups.
Now, the US did not get the man they came after; bin Laden fled the country. However, they did accomplish what they are always after—influence and power. Afghanistan became ruled by the US-backed Hamid Karzai, whom the western power saw as best-fitting to rebuild the war-torn country.
So, the United States had everything laid out the way it wanted it to be:
The European hand was forced into Afghanistan
The burden was basically split in half with Europe reaping fewer benefits
The US was in control of a geopolitically significant country
The US intimidating its regional foes, namely Russia, China, and Iran
A Mandated European Venture
Now back to Europe; how and why did the old continent join the war in Afghanistan?
In 2001, the UNSC-mandated International Security Assistance Force, which had the mission of re-instating a central authority in the country that was ruled by militias and the Taliban at the time, in addition to working on enhancing the capabilities of the Afghan National Security Forces, was deployed in Afghanistan.
The mission was not led by a certain country, as its leadership was rotational between its nations—the most prominent of which were the US, the UK, Germany, Canada, and France.
On August 11, 2003, NATO assumed the ISAF’s leadership. The mission’s goals were still the same; however, when seeing the current state of Afghanistan, it’s safe to say the mission failed miserably.
The ISAF’s European nations accounted for more than half the soldiers in Afghanistan. The countries that had little to nothing to do with the conflict led the invasion of a country that never did any harm to them; the US convinced them to partake in the conflict by raising national security concerns. If anything, failure in Afghanistan would have had way more political and financial repercussions for Europe than the United States, for refugees and terrorists could reach Europe a lot easier than they could North America.
Europe: The United States’ Hadrian’s Wall
Europe has been the main bearer of consequences whenever there had been a US-related flop anywhere in the Eastern hemisphere. Take the Syrian refugee crisis, for example. A US-sparked war on a Middle Eastern country resulted in hundreds of thousands of refugees flocking toward Europe. And, of course, extremists were among those who got into the continent, leading to an increase in terror attacks and national security threats.
This, alongside many other crises, is a fine testament to the US strategy that uses Europe as a shield. In the ongoing crisis and anticipation of the incoming influx of Afghan refugees, Greece took to reinforcing the European borders by building a wall. What this means is that the Syrian scenario will be replayed, as hundreds of dead children will wash up on shore in a failed attempt to flee their country.
The Europeans had little to say regarding invading Afghanistan, for the continent’s nations lacked coordination and had many domestic political issues. Had they been united in the European Union, Europe would have been able to properly alter the coalition and advocate for a much better international approach to the situation in Afghanistan—that would’ve been the best-case scenario for Europe. Obviously, on the ground, it was completely different.
Even the majority of Europeans disagree with using military force to defend a NATO ally from a hypothetical attack by Russia, according to a Pew Research Center report.
All that Europe gained from Afghanistan was more refugees, more dead soldiers, and wasted taxpayer money. Altogether, Europe lost nearly a thousand soldiers, gained hundreds of thousands of Afghan refugees and asylum seekers, and spent tens of billions of dollars. The UK and Germany, the second-largest troop-contributors, spent an estimated $30 billion and $19 billion respectively, over the course of the two-decade-long war—a portion of what Europe in its entirety paid to keep the war’s flame ablaze.
At the peak of the invasion of Afghanistan in 2011, the year the US had finally achieved its dream of killing bin Laden, there were 90,000 US troops in the country and 41,300 troops from NATO and its allies. The US and its allies did not equally bear the responsibility, for, as we must not forget, this wasn’t a European issue per se. It only became one after the US forced its hand to invade Afghanistan, yet Europe was bearing nearly half the burden.
The situation was incredibly frustrating for Europe, it was stuck in a self (mostly US)-made pit. The choice was between pulling out from Afghanistan and putting the US-European relations at risk, as well as its security and economy following the influx of Afghan refugees from Afghanistan to Europe, (which was not an option altogether), or staying in Afghanistan and putting up with the financial losses and human casualties.
How Europe was the Stalin to the Munich Agreement
To add insult to injury, the United States decided to withdraw from Afghanistan in February of 2020. This was the then-President Donald Trump signed the 2020 Doha Agreement to “end the war in Afghanistan” without consulting European allies—it came as a shock to them. Europeans objected to the decision to withdraw from Afghanistan in such a short period of time but to no avail; there was no reversing the decision.
Furthermore, when the Biden Administration took the decision to completely withdraw from Afghanistan ahead of the agreed-upon date—which had been previously postponed from May 1st as set by the Trump administration—his decision received criticism from all US allies. NATO officials, from Germany, the United Kingdom, France, and Italy, slammed Biden over this decision that was taken without any consultation.
Leaders all across Europe were in disbelief following the decision, even those who long-supported Biden saw it as a mistake and a miscalculation. There wasn’t any direct criticism, for it is known that would harm diplomatic relations; instead, leaders voiced their criticism behind the scenes. However, the storm is yet to come, as no NATO summits have taken place following the failure, which will most definitely redefine the future of US-EU relations.
How will European leaders react to this whole ordeal? Will they be silent in the face of the US abuse? There could be a change in the way Europe manages its external affairs, moving away from the United States and aiming for autonomy; but nothing is certain. One thing that is though, is the fact that even the Israelis do not trust the Americans due to their abandonment of Afghanistan and their allies there, meaning the US is prone to abandoning Europe and other allies in such ‘dire’ circumstances, rendering it unreliable. After all, the US got its troops out of Kabul right around its fall while leaving Europe and the rest of its allies stuck in the mud.
Josep Borrell, the EU’s foreign policy chief, went as far as calling for an independent army for the European Union in light of the growing panic amongst the Europeans out of fear of not being able to complete their evacuations before the United States does.
Even prior to this whole fiasco, Europe was considering forming an autonomous army. In 2018, French President Emmanuel Macron had warned that Europeans could not be protected without a “true, European army,” (before declaring that NATO was experiencing “brain death“) – an idea backed by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and the person who could be Germany’s next Chancellor, Armin Laschet. The idea of a European army did not seem too appealing for the UK, for it could be something that equates to NATO. Instead, they prefer a joint force to defend Europe in a case relying on the US was out of the window.
During the Trump administration, the rift between the US and Europe was at its vastest since the establishment of diplomatic ties and alliances between the two powers, but it seems that the Biden administration will be the straw that broke the camel’s back in the US-EU relations.
Afghanistan reminds us why it’s called the Graveyard of Empires, as the future of diplomacy between the two behemoths could crumble over its invasion.
In October of last year I wrote a column entitled “When Exactly Did The AngloZionist Empire Collapse” in which I presented my thesis that the Empire died on 8 January 2020 when the Iranians attacked US bases with missiles and the US did absolutely nothing. Yes, this was the correct decision, but also one which, at least to me, marked the death of the Empire as we knew it.
In that article I made reference to a brilliant book by J.M. Greer’s “Twilight’s Last Gleaming” which I later reviewed here. The main plot of the book is that the US will collapse following a completely unpredictable external military defeat (read the book, it is very well written!).
So my question today is whether the debacle in Afghanistan (not only Kabul!) is such an event or not. Afghanistan is often called the graveyard of empires, but might it even become the graveyard of the last empire?
I will try to answer it below.
First, we are now all bombarded by information from, and about, Afghanistan. Issues like the failure of “country building” are mixed in with bodies falling off US transporters, US Marines sharing one (!) bottle of water with severely dehydrated kids with street whippings. None of that is analytically helpful and it conflates completely different issues. I want to offer a different set of questions which, I hope, might be more helpful:
Why has the US decided to leave Afghanistan?
Was that the correct decision?
Why did Kabul fall so fast?
Why did such a truly colossal failure in intelligence happen?
How was the evacuation of US forces actually executed?
These are just a few questions, there are many others, especially about what will happen to Afghanistan next, but that is one I think is too early to tackle and an entirely separate issue anyway.
Let’s take these questions one by one next.
Why has the US decided to leave Afghanistan?
I don’t know why or how this decision was taken. But my best guess is that it is due to combination of the following factors:
“Biden” came to power while waving the Woke/BLM/CRT/Homo/etc. agenda which I would sum up as the “Wakanda worldview” and not liberalism. But at least officially, Biden is a true, peace loving liberal. Since his policies all prove the exact opposite, he tried to “play nice” and do something “liberal”, at least in appearence (and, no, a woke-freak is not really a liberal at all! And neither is a Neocon “conservative” – these are all lies for the dull).
“Biden” also knew that a large part of the Trump base wanted to stop all the wars started by Obama and Co.
“Biden” probably thought that if the operation was a stunning success, he would get all the credit, and if it was an abject failure, he would dump it all on Trump (which is exactly what “Biden” did).
As for Biden himself, let’s just kindly assume that he has “the right political instincts” to maybe smell an opportunity here and bless what might have looked to him as a “good plan”.
Was the decision to leave correct?
Here, I will catch a lot of flak, but I believe that yes, it absolutely was. In his (actually very bad) speech about the withdrawal, Biden said one very true thing (quoting by memory, so don’t quote this) “those who say that 2 or 5 more years will bring us victory are lying to you” (or something pretty close). Here I agree with him 100% (as far as I can tell, only a real, hardcore Neocon ideologue would openly disagree with this; at least I hope so…).
Not only does the US (or any other country) not have any kind of mandate or responsibility to police the planet, the US is certainly the least competent imperial power ever, in spite of a lot of help from the Five Eyes and its EU lackeys. If you are bad at something, but very good at something else, why persist? The US is a true virtuoso in things like bribing, subverting, economically hurting, politically demonizing, killing undesirable leaders, etc… That is really how the Europeans eventually defeated the North American Native Indians.
[Sidebar: for those whom this thesis might throw into a patriotic rage, I highly recommend the book “The First Way of War: American War Making on the Frontier, 1607–1814” written by Dr. John Grenier. That book won him the Society for Military History’s Outstanding Book Award in American History in 2007; Grenier himself is a retired USAF Lieutenant-Colonel and a United States Air Force Academy, USAFA, CO, associate professor of history. His next book is announced as a “biography of Major Robert Rogers, the “Father of American Special Operations.” Hate me all you want, but read this book anyway!]
The US was founded by and for thugs. Calling them explorers, immigrants, robber-barons or founding fathers makes no difference to their true worldview, their ethos – the seizure of the North American continent was an act of international thuggery on every level. That is, of course, NOT to say good people did not exist then or did not live righteously or, even less so, that anybody in the modern USA has any kind of personal guilt over any of this. Only God can judge them! But unless we forget the true roots of the “American Dream”, we will end up with a “US Nightmare”.
Of course, some US immigrants at the same time did try to create a truly free society, protected from the kind of vicious abuses so prevalent in the Old World! The Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights (aka the “the Charters of Freedom“) are a monument to both the genius and the worldview of some of the founders of the United States. But good intentions and proclamations are only credible when everybody upholds them for everybody and in each case (not the kind “but this is different, we are democracies after all!” western politicians repeat every time they are accused of hypocrisy)
In the USA, generation after generation of the thugs strengthened their grip power while pushing decent people out of the way (even more so after JFK and 9/11 and other recent events). But that was just a show, a mob “going legal” if you wish.
Thugs have guns, of course, and they can beat the crap out of any civilian. But they can’t fight a military. That is why thugs have gangs, not battalion tactical groups in the first place. Furthermore, as soon as they grow in size, the gangs of thugs try to look more respectable (by purchasing PR campaigns about their “philanthropy” is typical) and less violent. Pretty soon they outsource the violence to others, expandable, lower, gangs.
Sound familiar?
If it does – it’s because it is!
All the US “country-building exercises”, “humanitarian interventions” and other “freedom of something [fill the blank here] defense” truly are: the acts of an international conspiracy of thugs to seize the resources of our entire planet or, failing that, at the very least, destroyingany country, nation, tribe or leader that would dare disobey the World Hegemon. (“We will destroy your country and bring it back to the stone age” is how Secretary Baker famously put it to Foreign Minister Aziz)
[Sidebar: as somebody who, for my sins, had a short stint in the field of “humanitarian operations” I can personally testify that the rank and file sincere humanitarians never know the true intentions, and even true affiliations(!) of their bosses. I know that for a fact. So I am not calling all US military personnel thugs. Only their bosses. Besides, I did not invent anything very new, I am just only paraphrasing (cached version) the most decorated Marine in U.S. history, Smedley Butler, wrote anyway.]
This entire invasion of Afghanistan has been one colossal drain on US resources, including human, intellectual, diplomatic and, definitely not least, financial ones (while the US taxpayers’ money flowed into Afghanistan. That money then always magically “disappeared”, for one reason or another, but some few locals got very rich. Go figure….). So, while I don’t have any pollyannaish illusions about how peace and freedom-loving the leaders of the USA really are, I think that they had enough streetsmarts (or cleverness? guile?) to figure out that getting out was necessary. Blaming any possible problems on Trump was, of course, the magic wand which, apparently, settled any discussions. (I am still assuming that at least some professional discussions took place; more accurately, I hope that they still do, and with at least some real specialists included; please don’t tell me all the real professionals have been “diversified-out” or otherwise “canceled”; that is a truly scary thought!).
Why did Kabul fall so fast?
First, what did the US actually do in Kabul? Paid some folks, trained others, gave them tons of weapons, etc. That is the usual stuff US Special Forces and a few others do a lot. While some politicians (in that category I include all officers above colonel rank) clearly saw Afghanistan as their next El Dorado, honest, if naive, servicemen probably believed that this kind of “assistance” will somehow give birth to a peaceful, happy, democratic (read “woke”), prosperous and grateful nation. Of course, it never does. As for the actual ratio of greedy “dogs of war”, assorted “intelligence operatives” or “sincere idealists” in Afghanistan, it has absolutely no military relevance to the outcome as these motives are all equally misguided, even if some are at least more naive/sincere/stupid than truly evil.
Remember the Georgian attack on Tskhinval in 08.08.08? Remember that kind of truly galactic nonsense “Analysis: Georgian Army May Be Tough Nut for Russia to Crack” posted by no less than Deutsche Welle (you know, “made for minds”!)? If not, please do read it; it will make you laugh to tears and wonder what “area specialist” wrote this “analysis” (a rebranded wet dream, really, yet somebody got paid, probably well, to do just that)! Truth is that this five-day war really lasted only three days. The Russians had plenty of problems, yet they obliterated the entire Georgian military in 3 days of actual combat. Three! This is all which the concept what “US/NATO-trained” means: a total, and always ineffective, scam.
That mentality, typical of the modern West, apparently believes that that kind of “assistance/training” can yield good results. The entire history of Latin America and all the US failures in Asia irrefutably prove the opposite, but nevermind that. An even worse mistake made by western decision-makers is that their opponents are basically and fundamentally “like all humans”, or “like everybody else”. The issue here is that these elites consider themselves as SO much superior to everybody else (narcissism is at the core of both British imperialism and Judaic exceptionalism; think Churchill or Epstein here and their real bosses!) that they only refer to those as corruptible, hypocritical, cowardly and terminally unprincipled like themselves. It’s a pure projection, of course.
In reality, US decision makers are utterly clueless about the supposed “others” who are “like everybody else” when they inadvertently tangle with any “true believers” of any kind, from saints to demons. Examples include:
All nations with a strong martial culture (Russia, Vietnam, Afghanistan, etc.)
Truly religious opponents (Iran, Hezbollah)
Truly sincere/determined political leaders (Vietnam, Cuba, Russia, China)
“Rabid dogs” – by that I mean the harcore, Interahamwe-like, nutcase terrorists which the US initially tries to use, only to eventually and inevitably “get bitten” back (neo-Deobandi and/or Takfiri groups, Ukie Nazis, Israeli Zionists).
In theory, of course, the US has always known that; hence, the British expression about “winning the hearts and minds”. But here is the difference: the Brits were always excellent (I did not say “ethical or kind”) diplomats, and superb intelligence officers (same caveat as before). Finally, you can call the Brits many things, but not “poor soldiers” either. In other words, the British Empire had the means of its foreign policies.
The US does not. No?
Then please tell me when was the last time that the US truly inspired somebody? West Europeans after WWII, and that was nothing but a more or less “friendly” takeover of the continent and the creation of a servile comprador ruling elite).
[Sidebar: those who would “cleverly” retort “Prague 68”, Tiananmen square, the Maidan, Poland or the Baltic pretend-states etc. should immediately stop reading at this point, dismiss all of the above as utter quackery (“Kremlin Propaganda” works too) and go watch some TV. Same advice for those saying “if the entire planet hates us, why do they all – including you – want to come here”? I apologize to the adults in the room]
NASA, Jazz, Rock, Hollywood, US writers, artists and simply kind and sincere US Americans did truly inspire millions worldwide. And the official values of the USA, the Charters of Freedom, truly did inspire millions worldwide. But I have to say that after decades of abominably incompetent Presidents (all after Bush Sr. imho) there is very little left from all this.
NASA? It turned into the current “private space” farce cum embezzlements of billions by smug billionaires getting billions from the state in a supposedly “private” venture.
Jazz and Rock have been effectively replaced by MTV and YT and their insipid woke-ideology (especially for the young – old guys like myself are mostly and happily “stuck” in the 70s and 80s or foreign, non-corporate music).
Hollywood? Peuh-leeeze! Anybody not blind (or brainwashed) already knows that this is just a crude propaganda machine which will put blacks (aka “minorities”) everywhere and anywhere. I think of it as the “Snow Black” mental disorder.
Writers? Okay, yes, there are still a lot of those around in the USA. This has probably something to do with the fact that the target audience of writers is composed of readers, not unblinking screen-gazers. But the problem here is most people read very little, and what they read is mostly worthless intellectual prolefeed anyway.
And in much of the rest of the planet, people are often too poor to read, in English or otherwise. So what I am saying is that while US writers may be very talented, they are either uncontroversial (authors like Stephen King or John Grisham) or they will only appeal to a rather small elite of, shall we say, “daring” people (authors like Stephen Cohen or Charles Murray). Thought-criminals, in Orwell’s brilliant lexicon.
Which leaves “sincere US Americans”. Do they exist? Absolutely, in the millions, all over the USA and all over the planet. The latter often go completely native and are loved by the locals. Also, millions of expats come home and see their own country in a totally different way
[Sidebar: during my college years in the USA – 1986-1991 – I observed something curious: US ex-expats preferred spending time with foreign students (officially called “legal” aliens) than from their non-travelling compatriots whom they often found quite “alien” to their own identity. That even included a few (admittedly not very many) US Americans whose only trip abroad was in uniform and to some US base! And while I initially defined my Zone A from Zone B geographically, I now think of it more as a difference in general awareness and worldview. In other words, something primarily mental]
But the problem is very simple: the US elites are doing a rather effective job silencing people, including US nationals. So what most people in Zone B experience is often very kind, friendly and otherwise great personal relations and even friendships with US Americans, but a belief that these wonderful US Americans either can’t do anything about it, or don’t really know what their leaders are really doing.
It is extremely difficult for any “not in my name” type of voices to be heard when the trans-national US propaganda machine is investing billions into silencing these voices!
Did the voices of Smedley Butler or Stephen Cohen make *any* difference to the US ruling classes other than convincing them to spend even more on imperialistic and messianc (the former always implies the latter) propaganda? This is why I have always maintained that the anti-imperialist struggle is not “just” a national liberation struggle for oppressed nations, but it is also a national liberation struggle for all the peoples (plural) of the USA.
And we all know that most of the people of the USA never had much say into what their so-called “leaders” did, no more than any other Middle-Ages’ serf. Every time they get to vote they get the opposite. I will leave it at that.
Now, coming back to our topic, in 2021 the US truly inspires nobody. Absolutely nobody. That is a sad, but undeniable fact. And that is the main reason why Kabul fell so fast: the “defenses” of Kabul were like the fists of a man with advanced osteoporosis – they lacked a crucial element: faith. No matter how good, effective or otherwise powerful those “fists” really were, or thought/pretended to be, it made no difference: one crucial element was missing and that decided it all.
Any force not moved by true/sincere faith always will end up having a “Saigon embassy” or “Berezina” or “Stalingrad” or “Kursk” moment. The preferred term or historical reference doesn’t really matter here.
As for the US armed forces, most of the (reading) public already knows the truth about why people sign up for the military: some truly go waving the flag and holding their breast, especially after the 9/11 false flag, but most simply want to survive. Yes, and while PMCs are typically motivated by pure greed, the regular US soldier only wants to survive at home and get a job (the other options are becoming a cop (less now!) prison guard or a criminal) or in the frontline trenches. And, as we all know, survival instincts go a long way and make it possible for people to do that which they thought was impossible. But there is a much stronger instinct out there, also forged over time by about 1000 of existential warfare: the spirit of self-sacrifice will always defeat any survival instinct, be it inside a warrior’s heart or on the battlefield.
[Sidebar: those US Americans who today wonder why the US could not win a war since WWII can thank General Patton and his truly silly “The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his”. When he declared that, he basically made sure that the US military would never win a war again. BTW – if Zhukov, or any other Soviet marshall general had dared to publicly say such a thing, he would have been immediately accused of sabotage, subversion, collusion with the enemy, treason and summarily executed. In fact, that is exactly what Stalin did with Marshal Tukhachevskii (for other, nonetheless, equally valid reasons). Ditto for Nazi Germany. Or Imperial Japan. No need to approve of these regimes to admit that they knew more about warfare than cigar-smoking megalomaniacs].
So, short answer: Kabul fell because belief always defeats unbelief.
Next, my tiny bit longer answer: Kabul fell because the Empire’s “fists” have crumbled.
Finally, my longer answer will be in the form of a freely translated Russian joke I recently heard (can anybody guess the context? begins with “C”): “People who learn from the mistakes of other are called “smart”; people who only learn by their own mistakes are called “dumb”; and people who do not learn from their own mistakes are called “(US) Americans”.
We can now look at the last two, comparatively simpler questions, together:
Why did such a truly colossal failure in intelligence happen and how was the operation executed?
The failure in intelligence is due to the fact that political conformity is now vital for the bloated US “intelligence community”. I can see that dialog happening everywhere inside and around the beltway:
Sir, I am so sorry, but we cannot do that, we simply can’t!!!!
What, are you a hidden Trump supporter?!?!?!?!
What the actual order was matters little. Demonizing the opposition is much more important. Hiring unskilled people solely for their ideological purity is also a top priority. Who cares about abilities, which we all know are “equal”, whatever that means, even down to the individual level? Procrustes in his most insane dreams could not have dreamt-up the woke-freaks and their CRT!
That is the kind of paranoia-induced witch-hunts which all actively collapsing regimes undergo. The current collective US insanity is very reminiscent of what, first, Trotskiysts and, later, Stalinists did to the Soviet Union or the Red Guards to China.
It is also true that the US intelligence community was inevitably infected with “Patton’s logic”, and is run by politicians with zero true patriotism.
Take away a country’s intelligence community and you just shot its brains out.
Take away a country’s armed forces, and you just cut off its arms.
And there you have it: the “evacuation” of Kabul/Afghanistan is the only kind of “evacuation” you can expect from a former superpower which has lost both its brains and fists.
By the way, there are strong signs that the US has also lost its “legs”, hence the chaos and the need to suddenly resort to the use of civilian airlines. To clarify – there is nothing wrong with civil augmentation of military assets at all, quite to the contrary! The key word here is “suddenly”, not “civilian”. One of two options is true:
The plan, whatever it was, failed
There was no plan
In theory, there is a third option: “this is the plan”, but theoretical options are only relevant when they are backed with at least some empirical evidence which in this case it is not. Also, some vaguely stated intention, however sincere, also does not qualify as “plan”. For comparison’s sake, it took the Soviets about 18 months (!) to prepare their withdrawal from Afghanistan. The difference in outcomes is now self-evident.
That is not to say that the Empire will necessarily totally lose all influence in Afghanistan, or anywhere else for that matter. Wrecking a place requires very little skills. Actually, re-building anything typically requires a lot of skills.
As Che Guevara once pointed out, “the true revolutionary is guided by strong feelings of love”. Alas, the word “revolutionary” has been terminally stained with blood; as for “love” and “truth”, they have long lost their true meanings ago (at least in the West). But let me rephrase that this way: “true change requires true, loving, faith”. Better?
The ugly truth is that as long as the United States and Europe are ruled by the current international gang of thugs, the Empire will retain a very significant capability to threaten and attack almost everybody else. And if you count their nukes, they can murder us all.
So yes, the Empire did die on January 8th 2020, and the US died almost an exact year later, on January 6th 2021. But there is plenty of momentum left in both of these two cadavers to keep deep nails inserted into the flesh of most nations out there. However, Not Russia. Not China, and not Iran. Not anymore. The US is also losing control of Central Asia and the Middle-East. That possibility is now even discussed with great concern in Israel and the CENTCOM-occupied countries of the Persian Gulf and Arabian Peninsula.
Now is the time for the US military to get its act together and seriously and carefully prepare more evacuation plans for the entire Middle-East, if not these “evacuation plans” will quickly turn into “extraction plans”, followed by more rooftop/runway nonsense the US is famous for. Does anybody still remember how the US forces left from, say, Somalia, or, maybe, Lebanon? These “evacuations” turned into a panicked “run for your dear life operations”.
Will somebody replace the USA? Please?!
It appears that just like “Biden” farmed-out the Ukraine to the Germans, “he” is now farming-out Afghanistan to the Brits. If so, this is a rather clever intention (the devil will be in the details, in this case, in the planning and execution.) Keep in mind that the Talibans do not control large parts of Afghanistan and that the traditional opposition to the Taliban rule in northern Afghanistan (Panjshir Valley) very much exists and is combat-capable (at least by local standards). As for the son of Ahmad Shah Masoud, just like his father, seems to have strong ties to Britain. Ahmad Masoud Jr. looks very much like his father and has some of his charisma. Does that not all sound familiar too?
In the meantime, a motley pack of rabid EU politicians with imperial phantom pains are also making some noises but can do nothing at all. Putin once referred to these noises as “oinking backing vocals”!
As for the AngloZionist legacy press, it is mostly wailing in despair and horror just at the mention of the possibility that Russia and/or China might actually have some influence, however tiny, in Afghanistan. (Remember “these ragheads/russkuies/goooks/niggers/sand-niggers/injuns/etc. live on OUR land and OUR resources!”). This is what “Manifest Destiny” really is. Or Germany’s “civilizational mission in the East” was. Or the “White Man’s burden”, or the French Mason’s “Universal Values” etc.. Ditto for the Papacy’s splitting of the planet in its now long forgotten (but not by its victims!) 1494 Treaty of Tordesillas) into separate control/exploitation/pillaging sectors, ad majorem Dei gloriam, of course. Modern ecologists, woke activists and militant homosexuals all very much share in that mindset.
The sad but undeniable truth is that the true roots of modern Europe are not in Rome, even less so Athens, but in the Latin Crusades and the subsequent Middle-Ages. The Reform and Renaissance changed nothing, or even made things worse. Neither did 1789 or WWII. The spiritual and philosophical roots of the West are neither Roman, nor Greek, but found amongst those who destroyed Rome and severed it off from the truly civilized world, not only in the Christian East, but worldwide: the Franks.
Imperialism originates in our heads, it is a worldview, a mindset, and that is where it must be eradicated for it to finally vanish.
The mind is where imperialism begins but also where it will end, just like any other human phenomenon. And while I do fear the inevitable chaos before some “future West” or “future Europe” can replace the current ones, I also do believe that, when shown the true cost of their mistakes, all nations will reject imperialism in all its forms.
By creating an instrument of total control (the Internet) the Empire also created the first global resistance to empire community in world history! Not only that, but the US ruling classes turned US schools and admired US academia into both an imbecile/serfs-producing machine and the laughingstock of much of the planet (even in Zone A!). But what the US ruling elites failed to do is to prevent regular, mainstream, US Americans from wanting to know, to learn, to explore and, eventually, to fight for justice. True, as political indoctrination goes, Uncle Shmuel can run circles around the Nazis or the Soviets, but no Uncle Shmuel will ever “fix” our fallen nature or the universe, so our resistance runs deep, even the US and Israel. Yes, it is mostly silenced, but in the depths, it is very much still there.
I don’t believe in any Grand Replacement plans, at least not one focused on “race”. But I do believe in a cultural/civilizational “grand replacement”, which I see as inevitable and already well under way, even in the USA and the EU!
Of course, I don’t know what the future collective West will be like, assuming there ever is one again. But I am confident that the type of imperialism which has its roots in the medieval Papacy (which even Hitler admitted with some admiration) is coming to an end.
Think of it: dreams about becoming the “next Mongol empire” must have been sexy. Or being the next East Roman (aka “Byzantine Empire”) too. And to my infinite regret, sadness and pain, (and location of my own place of birth) most of the rulers of imperial Russia fell for such temptations. And this is also the true, core, reason why the Russian monarch fell in February of 1917.
As for what actually followed this supposed “wonderful” and even supposedly “bloodless” revolution was the worst centuries of mass murder and atrocities in human history. Bravo and thank you, Kerensky (and his western masonic “sponsors”!). The Ukies did not invent their ridiculous “Maidan”! Kerensky and his supporters did. (Gene Sharp – you can see his pietistic quasi-hagiography here (Wikipedia on politics, as usual) – only systematized the study of this field). Thinking Russians can add up and realize that imperialism in any and all its forms, even call it “Capitalism with a human face” if you prefer, is a mortal danger to humanity itself.
In the Soviet times, Russians were promised “Communism” (aka the end of history and heaven on earth, “just” without God); then they were promised “democracy”. Had Russia better elites, all these delusions would not have been replaced with total horror. (Think of the monolog about true horror by Colonel Walter E. Kurtz in the brilliant allegorical movie Apocalypse Now!). The immense costs of WWII for both China and Russia truly brought the reality of imperialism to the Russians and the Chinese people, and they want none of it again. No matter how “pious” the latest pretext may be.
In other words, an overwhelming majority of Russians reject not just the execution but the very principle of imperialism (or the optional use of military force), even if Russia wins! The fact that other nations, experts, pundits either fail to realize this, or try hard to ignore this, has no bearing on that reality (at least amongst Zone B types in Russia, about 95% or more of the total). The “real reality” in 2021 is that actual imperialist delusions in Russia are only held by a small, aging and quickly shrinking group of ignoramuses and/or nutcases. This is not because Russians are somehow “better” than US Americans, Brits, Spaniards or any other imperialists. The difference is that Russians now know, personally, the true costs of Empire.
Awareness of the true costs of empire is a formidable empire-killer (as seen recently in Afghanistan between the clueless GIs and the Afghan warlords). This is why the Empire will do everything it can to deny, obfuscate or otherwise conceal these costs!
Furthermore, once the costs of empire become known by a critical mass of sincerely patriotic people (whatever the country or their political system), the core ideology needed by the empire to justify itself and simply operate becomes gravely endangered.
How bad does it get?
I have an example:
The Soviet “defeat” in Afghanistan: the USSR was never militarily or even economically defeated. Not in Afghanistan. Not by Reagan and his “freedom fighters” (currently declared “evil terrorists”, as opposed to the “good ones” from the Axis of Kindness). Not by SDI. The famous “we won” of the US CIA really should have been “they lost”. Big, big difference.
The USSR was defeated by the CPSU Party Nomenklatura who basically destroyed an entire country to rule over its many leftover chunks, almost none of which actually managed to become a viable state. Put it simply: the Soviet regime died because of its own lies, hypocrisy, inhumanity and, frankly, frequent sheer stupidity. Initially, many soldiers sincerely believed in their alleged “internationalist duty” to “fight US imperialism in Afghanistan” which was quite real. Some were not even informed that they were being sent abroad (the abbreviation “TurkVO2” was used. It meant “the “second” Turkestan military district suggesting a domestic extension/creation of a second TMD. Not a foreign military operation.
Eventually, over time, the painful truth began seeping into the Russian mind. That is how and why the Soviet forces had to be withdrawn. Not because of any particularly intrepid and CIA-run “freedom fighters” or the Stingers (devastating initially, but effective countermeasures were quickly developed and successfully practiced). Again, the US won nothing, the Soviets are the one who lost – they did it to themselves, really!
Again, does it sound familiar? It’s because it is! It just happened with the “Afghan democratic government”, as it will eventually happen to the “Ukrainian democratic government”.
To be unambiguously clear: I think that the Soviet decision to enter Afghanistan was both deeply misguided and inherently immoral (my personal interactions with Soviet officers and participating in a very interesting discussion between a representative of the Northern Alliance and Russian exiles, convinced me of that). The figure of dead, wounded, oppressed or exiled “civilians” is terrible. But the following facts are also undeniable:
The Soviets tried hard to stem the influence of those Takfirs which the USA had federated and the KSA paid for. In this battle, the Soviets were first.
The Soviets did build a lot of critical civilian infrastructure facilities, they also tried to develop the country economically and educate its people (in the Soviet mold, of course, but better than nothing at all).
Compared to what the US brought to Afghanistan, the Soviets look like both true warriors and true humanitarians. And, remember, we are talking mostly about conscripts here, many poorly trained, poorly supported and even poorly commanded. Yet they did so much better than the supposed “pros” of the “greatest military in history”.
As for what the Russians can do now, they should remember that Afghans will remember both the bad and the good (there is a large Afghan community in Russia) and they can promise to themselves that in the future all Russians will treat all the people of Afghanistan with true, informed respect and extend a sincere hand of friendship. Whether, or which, Afghans will accept that extended hand is their decision to make, nobody else’s (not even Kamala Harris!)
So all that nonsense peddled by Zbigniew Brzezinski (“Russia needs the Ukraine to be a superpower!”) and Hillary Clinton (“Putin wants to rebuild the USSR”) is solely and only an expression of the true phobia which the Western elites, especially in northern Europe, feel towards Putin, Russia, Russians and anything Russian. Makes perfect sense that the European invaders never succeeded in controlling Russia, imperial, Soviet, even “democratic” and least of all, modern Russia
As for the putatively invincible and “superior” western militaries (Sandhust! West Point! Saint-Cyr!), they completely lack the kind of experience Russians have learned for about 1000 years now: ten centuries of warfare, with no geographical boundaries, with expanses more reminiscent of the high seas than central Europe, and with no hope of mercy from their foes (most Russian attackers were hell-bent on exterminate the Russian nation, or culture or religion, mostly all three at the same time). Western ruling classes are terrified of the fact that they cannot defeat Russia militarily, so they pretend the “real Russia” doesn’t even exist.
Instead, there is a “resurgent” Russian-Soviet “Mordor” filled with noble and “diversity” loving “dissidents” who are slowly dying in “Putin’s Gulag!”, the Russian economy is ‘“in shambles” and Russia is just “a gas station masquerading as a country”. These Russkies can’t build shit and they drink vodka all day. Russians might even be an inferior race, since they are so evil and stupid! Most importantly, unless they are “contained” and “deterred” by the West (what a joke!), these Russians hell-bent on war and will invade us and the rest of the “civilized world”
This type of delusional coping mechanism is well known to modern psychology and is really quite common. It is really just a stage of grief, not an analysis of anything real.
The truth is that even the popular Putin had to work hard to defend his personal decision to engage a small, relatively weak military task force into Syria. Even a loyal Putinist like myself initially feared that this might be a huge mistake. It was not, and Putin and his generals were even smarter than I thought at the time (the entire operation is a masterpiece for future military textbooks!).
Had that operation failed, and it was both daring and very risky (in the early phases especially), there would have been hell to pay for Putin, Shoigu and all those who put their moral weight behind it. If somebody in the Kremlin ever thinks again of invading another country, he/she would be reprimanded and demoted, possibly fired or, failing that, “retired up”.
Of course, there are plenty of Russians condemning Putin for not moving forces into the Donbass (besides a few special forces, artillery spotters, forward air controllers and one very effective artillery strike across the border), but these people would have unanimously considered such a Russian military intervention, had it happened, as self-evidently purely defensive strategically (but not operationally or tactically, of course).
Frankly, the Balts and Poles look ridiculous in their narcissistic paranoia. On Russian TV, the western propaganda is immediately translated and aired, to the greatest laughter of the audience! As for the Ukronazis, they only inspire disgust and a firm determination to never allow another attack on Russia coming from the West, or elsewhere for that matter.
But there is no desire for war with any of these guys, even for a war Russia would win in a week or two. In fact, in its current shape, the Ukraine is potentially a deadly toxin for Russia, especially if the Russians ever put their guard down. The very last thing modern Russia needs is to get poisoned/infected by the many Ukrainian toxins…
Conclusions:
The Empire has been dead for a while
The USA as we have known it is dead too
The AngloZionists still have more than enough power to threaten or actually attack any country on earth (with the exception of Russia, China and Iran or/and without committing nuclear suicide; yes, Iran has no nukes, they banned them long ago, but they have a formidable military nonetheless.
For the very first time ever, the true costs of empire are slowly “seeping back” into the USA (Marx, Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr. would have been happy to see that) and that has already fundamentally changed the USA as a country.
Dead, the old USA is currently rotting in the mogue for all to smell. The old Soviet joke about “capitalism rotting” but the smell of that “rot” smelling “oh so sweet!” is finally proven true. It took longer than expected, but like everything inevitable, it eventually happened in 2021. Now that this stench is impossible to conceal and, boy, does it stink!
In spite of that, I fully expect the USA to survive and even prosper with time! Maybe the US will re-emerge as a de-facto confederacy, with a minimal central power and high degree of independence for the states? Pretty much what the Confederates wanted most, but adapted to modern times and their now universally accepted norms (well, except in Israel, of course).
No other power (or coalition of powers) will “replace” the USA globally. Why would they? Remember, Russians and Chinese are not only theologians or philosophers culturally, but their national ethos has been deeply affected/infected with Marxism and dialectics which, for all other criticisms of them, were at least taught in Communist schools, however poorly, basically and even wrongly! So, unlike the clueless leaders of the Empire, the Russians and the Chinese fully realize that the Empire was never really defeated, but rather that it defeated itself. Most importantly, the Russians and Chinese understand that if they “replace” the USA, they will end up like the USA. They are far more ambitious, in reality!
Regarding Afghanistan, there are numerous local powers already deeply embedded inside the Afghan society, including indigenous ones, which, while not “replacing” anybody will most likely act like they have always in the past (“the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior” and “the thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun” point to the same reality). That means violence, chaos, bigotry, cruelty, and other horrors will continue to take place, maybe not as much or as visibly as before.
Currently I see no combination of local or even foreign powers which can bring true, lasting, peace to Afghanistan. But a combo of Iran+Russia+China would be the most effective in providing aid and some measure of control.
Logically, this is both a major risk but also a huge opportunity for all the neighbors of Afghanistan which include at least four countries with deep ties with, and knowledge of, Afghanistan: Pakistan, Iran, Russia and China. Of course, unlike some “spokespersons” at DoS, I know that Russia has no border with Afghanistan. I even know that Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan do (even China does!). These countries even have some very good special units which are quite combat capable. But the “stans” all depend on Russia for their survival anyway, and they know it. I fully expect and hope that at least the Russians, Iranians and Chinese get as involved in Afghanistan as soon as possible, if only because of the formidable “cultural intelligence” of their sophisticated intelligence community including operatives and analysts (no, a few words of Pashto combined with a bundle of dollars does not qualify as “intelligence work” – that mindset is only good for bribing). As for the Turks, they have strong “cultural intel” too, enough money and guns to wave around, they are Muslims (albeit not of the Deobandi persuasion) and they will most definitely try hard. I predict that they will fail simply because they are too far geographically and culturally. Also, Turkey does not have the means for a serious, prolonged, operation in Afghanistan.
It sure looks to me that the Brits have figured this one first, at least the main elements. No real surprise here (they remain the most skilled intelligence officials in the EU!), hence their Foreign Secretary Raab having to extend a very humiliating (and wholly ineffective) “olive branch” to Russia and China (all while clamoring that Russia wants to invade Europe and China all of Asia). Russia made some noises back, and maybe the Chinese too, but these are simply good diplomatic manners. Neither country will ever accept AngloZionists as a relevant force in Afghanistan. And neither will the Afghans.
At this point in time, nobody can truly control, nevermind bring peace to Afghanistan. If the main actors at least stopped running the country on the ground and did absolutely nothing, this would be a great improvement: not doing harm would probably be the best anybody can do. Finally, just like the Ukrainians, let the Afghan choose if they even want a unified country and, if yes, of what type? How could the people of Afghanistan best express their opinion? Let them figure it out.
The so-called “Afghan problem” cannot be solved under the current international system and international law. Just like the Ukraine, Afghanistan is widely recognized as a totally artificial country. But how do you fix this? You can’t as long as those who created that international system still control it. A set of new institutions will have to come first before peace comes to Afghanistan. Tragic, revolting, but true.
Will that ever happen? Will Zone B nations be strong, wise and determined enough to create new international institutions? I don’t know.
But if it does not, then our planet is indeed lost until the Second Coming.
Missile finds patrons
-
“Iran War: Axios Reports US, Iran Agree to Ceasefire Within Ceasefire, Doha
Meeting on Strait of Hormuz as Iran Stands Up US on Technical Talks; Ship
Trans...
Hell Is Heaven For Jews
-
Hell Is Heaven For Jews June 23 2026 ___________________________________
More Vids! +BN Vids Archive! HERE! ___________________________________
Support The...
Is Rolex Quietly Retiring the GMT-Master II Pepsi?
-
Few Rolex rumors spread faster than whispers about the GMT-Master II
“Pepsi.” It happens almost every year. Someone claims production is ending,
Reddit lig...
Report on Beth Israel vigil 02-21-26
-
*Vigils continue, non-stop*
Just because we don’t get Vigil Reports out at the same rate as years'
past, we remind readers that we show up every Saturday ...
-
Hello all,
It is with great sadness that I share with you the passing of our beloved
sister, Mother, and Grandmother, the individual that you all knew ...
Best Horror Podcast
-
Best Horror Podcast Introduction: Horror podcasts […]
The post Best Horror Podcast appeared first on Copper Shock Horror Podcast.
Ikhras Endorses Muntadhar Al-Zaidi
-
“Oh parties of banditry and sectarianism and corruption, we have come and
our goal is to destroy you.” Ikhras formally endorses Muntadhar al-Zaidi,
Iraqi j...
Prince Charles: Foreign Jews behind bloodshed in ME
-
In May, 2017, British Crown Prince Charles declined an invitation from
Zionist entity’s president Reuven Rivlin‘s to attend the 100th anniversary
of the no...
Palestinian Women – One for All, All for One
-
Honouring All Palestinian Women by Honouring Three: Hanin Zoabi, Ahed
Tamimi, Samah Sabawi Vacy Vlazna “Palestinian women have always stood side
by side ...
US’s Saudi Oil Deal from Win-Win to Mega-Lose
-
By F. William Engdahl Who would’ve thought it would come to this? Certainly
not the Obama Administration, and their brilliant geo-political think-tank
neo-...
-
*Mordechai Vanunu wins human rights prize of Brazilian Press Association *
* http://www.alternativenews.org/english/index.php/features/updates/7038-mordechai...
Abdul Aziz Rantissi:
"My ultimate wish, my God, is to attain martyrdom,"...God granted him his wish on April 17, 2004, at the hands of Israeli assassins.
