Das laute Schweigen über die getöteten UN-Mitarbeiter in Syrien
Die Nothilfekoordinatorin der Vereinten Nationen (UN), Valerie Amos, hat auf einer weitgehend unbemerkten Pressekonferenz am 6. September erklärt, dass elf UN-Mitarbeiter in Syrien getötet und weitere entführt worden seien. Die Tötung von Mitarbeitern der UN, die für gewöhnlich medienwirksam verurteilt wird, fand in diesem Fall kein öffentliches Gehör. Der Grund für dieses merkwürdige Verhalten der UN könnten die mutmaßlichen Täter sein.
Matthew Lee, ein Journalist von Inner City Press, brachte mit seinen vehementen Nachfragen auf der Pressekonferenz den Stein ins Rollen. Er fragte die UN-Nothilfekoordinatorin, die per Liveschalte Rede und Antwort stand, wie es um die Arbeit der UN-Mitarbeiter in den von den „Rebellen“ – die ein paar Hundert Kilometer weiter als Terroristen bezeichnet werden – besetzten Gebieten nahe Aleppo steht und was von den Morddrohungen gegen eben jenes UN-Personal sowie gegen Mitarbeiter von Hilfsorganisationen zu halten sei. Amos antwortete, dass eine nicht näher bezifferte Anzahl von Freiwilligen des Syrischen Roten Halbmonds getötet worden seien. Ferner seien auch UN-Mitarbeiter getötet und weitere entführt worden. Nun könnte man ja vermuten, dass die versammelte Presseschar nachhaken würde, wenn es derartige Informationen von einer ranghohen UN-Mitarbeitern wie der Nothilfekoordinatorin Amos gibt.
Tatsächlich schien sich mit Ausnahme von Matthew Lee niemand so recht für die getöteten UN-Mitarbeiter zu interessieren. Die anderen Journalisten, wenn man sie denn so bezeichnen möchte, wechselten auf der Pressekonferenz viel lieber schnell das Thema. Man muss sich dabei vor Augen führen, dass die Tötung eines UN-Mitarbeiters egal in welchem Land normalerweise für rotblinkende Breaking News sorgt. UN-Generalsekretär Ban Ki-moon lässt eilig eine Pressemitteilung versenden, in der er den Tod bedauert und gleichzeitig verurteilt. Warum das in diesem Fall nicht geschehen ist, könnte damit zu tun haben, wer sich für den Tod der UN-Mitarbeiter verantwortlich zeichnet.
Der Journalist von Inner City Press jedenfalls ließ nicht locker und bohrte nach. Wie viele UN-Mitarbeiter denn getötet worden seien, fragte er die UN-Nothilfekoordinatorin. Diese antwortete ihm, dass elf Mitarbeiter getötet wurden. Im Anschluss wurden nicht etwa weitere Nachfragen zugelassen, sondern die Pressekonferenz nahm ihren gewöhnlichen Lauf. Erneut fragte Matthew Lee nach, diesmal nicht an Amos gerichtet, sondern an Farhan Haq, einem Pressesprecher der Vereinten Nationen. Dieser bestätigte die Aussage von der UN-Nothilfekoordinatorin, dass elf UN-Mitarbeiter in Syrien getötet worden seien. Allerdings könne er noch keine Angaben darüber machen, wer für die Tötung verantwortlich ist. Er bestätigte aber, dass jene UN-Mitarbeiter, die nahe Aleppo nicht getötet, sondern entführt wurden, von bewaffneten Rebellengruppen gekidnappt wurden.
Natürlich, die Verantwortung der Rebellen für den Tod der UN-Mitarbeiter wurde nicht direkt bestätigt. Wohl aber wurde bestätigt, dass die UN-Mitarbeiter in der Region Aleppo getötet wurden, eine der Hochburgen der Rebellen im syrischen Bürgerkrieg. Zudem bestätigte der UN-Sprecher, dass es die Rebellen waren, die weitere Mitarbeiter der Vereinten Nationen entführten. Der mediale Blackout hinsichtlich dieses Themas ist doch sehr erstaunlich. Ob er damit zusammenhängt, dass es für die bisherige Meinungsunbildung in den westlichen Staaten nicht zuträglich wäre, wenn herauskäme, dass höchstwahrscheinlich die als syrische Freiheitskämpfer glorifizierten Rebellen UN-Mitarbeiter getötet und nach Aussage der Vereinten Nationen weitere entführt haben, sei der Fantasie der Leserschaft überlassen.
Eine minutiöse Analyse der Pressekonferenz findet ihr hier. Mit Blick auf den Giftgaseinsatz nahe Damaskus am 21. August sei euch gleichzeitig dieser Artikel vom Januar empfohlen.
10 Responses to Das laute Schweigen über die getöteten UN-Mitarbeiter in Syrien
Schreibe einen Kommentar
Du musst angemeldet sein, um einen Kommentar abzugeben.
Danke für die Info!
Passend dazu:
Syrien: USA Schachmatt
Unter dem Begriff Kanonenbootdiplomatie versteht man im Allgemeinen, dass jemand seine Interessen mit Waffengewalt durchsetzt.
Genau diese Art von Diplomatie wendet das US-Regime derzeit in der Syrienfrage an, indem es eine schiere Armada an Kriegsschiffen vor der syrischen Küste auffährt. Zwar hat Skull & Bones und Bilderberger John Kerry gestern abend – wohl aus versehen – eine Möglichkeit aufgezeigt, wie Syrien einer illegalen Flächenbombardierung entkommen kann, aber hat selbst diese Option im Schlusssatz gleich wieder als unmöglich bezeichnet. Kerry sagte hier wörtlich:
„Sicher. Er könnte in der nächsten Woche alle seine chemischen Waffen an die internationale Gemeinschaft übergeben. Alles ohne Verzögerung übergeben und eine genaue Aufstellung ermöglichen. Aber er wird das nicht zulassen und es wird nicht passieren.“
Anscheinend wurde Kerry im Moment, als er diese Möglichkeit ansprach, bewusst, dass er damit Syrien eine Option einräumte den illegalen Angriffskrieg zu verhindern. Und mit seinem letzten Satz versuchte er das in den Brunnen gefallene Kind irgendwie zu reden. Schließlich wollen die Kriegstreiber um Obama, Kerry und McCain – auch ohne UN-Mandat, ohne Unterstützung durch die eigene Bevölkerung, ohne Zustimmung eines Großteils der Völker – abgesehen von den US-Vasallen und Erfüllungsgehilfen um Frankreich, Australien, Deutschland usw. – und ohne auf das eigene Militär zu hören – diesen Krieg. Zu weit haben sich Obama und Co. in ihrer roten Linie verrannt als das ein Zurück ohne kompletten Gesichtsverlust noch möglich wäre.
Dummerweise hat auf das Kerry-Angebot der russische Außenminister Lawrow geistesgegenwärtig reagiert und eine neue Initiative präsentiert. So soll Syrien sein gesamtes Giftgasarsenal an eine zentrale Stelle bringen, die unter internationaler Aufsicht steht und dort von diesen unabhängigen Dritten zerstört wird.
Damit zeigt der gewiefte Außenpolitiker Lawrow dem überheblichen und arroganten Kerry wie das Spiel der Diplomatie gespielt wird und setzt ihn wie auch die gesamte US(t)A(si) schachmatt.
Das US-Regime kann durch diese “russische Initiative” nur verlieren. Egal, ob es dieser Option zustimmt oder sie ablehnt.
mehr hier: http://konjunktion.info/2013/09/syrien-usa-schachmatt/
auch die allermeisten altnerativen Medien schweigen sich beharrlich aus, danke dass wenigstens IKN nun einen Artikel bringt.
Wie sagte Putin so schön:“Die USA lügen uns alle an und sie wissen es.“ Er fühlt sich schlecht, wenn er Kerry, der im US-Senat über die Al-Kaida-Beteiligung gelogen hat, immer wieder persönlich treffen muss. 🙂
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5cbvJap6LZE#t=15
Nun, heute ist mal wieder 11. September!
Anscheinend versucht man jetzt Israel reinzureissen bzw. Israel will reingerissen sein. Die Terroristen wissen, dass dann eh kein Halten mehr ist. Und dann die Weltöffentlichkeit von wegen „mal wieder vergast …“ viel leichter einem Syrien / Iran Krieg zustimmen könnte:
http://www.infowars.com/urgent-false-flag-involving-israel-to-implicate-syria-in-the-works-says-rt/
Dieser Krieg wird immer schmutziger. Auch Putin kann seines Lebens nicht mehr sicher sein bei so einer „vereinten westlich-arabischen Schwerverbrecherbande“.
Wie wir ja jetzt wissen, sind neben den Israelis auch die Saudis an jeglicher Eskalation interessiert und wollen sogar den US-Krieg komplett finanzieren. Was ist jetzt eigentlich aus den „verschwundenen Atombomben vom texanischen Militärstützpunkt“ geworden und der Graham South Carolina Rede? Ich schliesse ein 2. 9/11 nicht aus und zwar allein schon dem Umstand wegen um die US-Bevölkerung aus ihrer „Kriegsmüdigkeit“ aprupt aufzuwecken. Das geht aber nur mit einem richtigen „neuen Pearl Harbour Event“ bei dem man der extremen Dimension wegen kaum hinterfragen will, dass die US-Regierung z.B. einen Atomanschlag auf ihre eigene Ostküste selbst inszenieren um es dann dem Iran in die Schuhe zu schieben. Sehr viele Menschen sind ja bei dem im Vergleich dazu „kleinen 9/11“ schon nicht bereit sich mit Beweisen zu konfrontieren die eben gegen die offizielle Darstellung sprechen. Um wieviel mehr wird das der Fall sein, wenn das Verbrechen noch viel monströser ist?
Im Jahre 1913 wird das FED gegründet. Im Jahre 2013 feiert man 100 Jahre Rache an Gottes ersten Diener. Die Bewegung vom berg Zion (die bruderschaft der Zeloten) will dem Römer und seinen Abkömmlingen sein reich zerstören und ein eigenes Weltreich aufbauen (neue Religion). Dumm nur das bald (die) der 70. JAHR(woche)ESTAG der 3. Gründung Israels kommt.
Der neue Tempel Israels wurde ja schon zerstört,….wenn ihr Krieger des Lichts doch nur sehen könntet.
Israels Wahnsinniger Bibi und der größenwahnsinnige Sultan Erdogan bringen zusammen mit den durchgeknallten Saudis und Kataris Königen die gesamte Region in Unordnung. Die USA als Sklave seiner eigenen Indoktrineure muß samt Briten und Franzosen, sowie Deutsche die Suppe auslöffeln, die sie da angerichtet haben.
Russen und Chinesen versuchen verzweifelt irgendwie Balance da noch hineinzubekommen. Sie wissen wie der Hase läuft. Eine tatsächliche Lösung haben aber beide nicht in der Tasche.
Der Tot der Kontrolleure passt ins Bild der Wall Street Junta, ist indirekt deren Handschrift.
Nach Infos aus dem Background kommt noch mehr Iron Blood and Fire ins Mittelmeer geschippert!!!
Schon interessant wer in Britannien wen beeinflusst:
Diana durfte bekanntlich einen Muslimen nicht ehelischen….da gabs einen „Unfall“.
Und dann solche aggresiven Töne….sagt mehr als Verschwörungstheorien beweisen können, sie verraten sich selbst am Besten.
http://www.hagalil.com/archiv/2013/09/10/karten/
http://www.hagalil.com/archiv/2013/09/09/iranisches-tv/
Es ist nur eine kleine radikale Gruppe, die alles zerstört in grenzenlosem Selbsthass.
etwas das das Christen und Muslimen im inneren fremd ist.
Aber verweltlichte Führer und Entscheider verstehen das nicht mehr. An ihnen sind schon so viele viele Analysten und Mahner gescheitert.
Erst wenn’s zu spät war wurden sie kleinlaut. Dann hat man sich ihrer erinnert, die man zuvor entsorgt hatte.
Diana angagierte sich für wirklichen Frieden. Dem Schwiegerdrachen war’s ja bekanntermaßen oberpeinlich.
Und der kath. Klerus? Was soll er machen, er hat einen speziellen Staatsauftrag, der sich in Opposition dazu befindet. Und er bleibt stur auf dieser Linie – ohne zu merken das er sich an der Agenda damit beteiligt. Nette Gemengelage nicht wahr?
The article below entitled Who is Osama bin Laden? was drafted twelve years ago on September 11, 2001.
I started writing on the evening of September 11, late into the night, going through piles of research notes, which I had previously collected on the history of Al Qaeda. It was first published on the Global Research website on the evening of September 12, 2001.
From the outset, the objective was to use 9/11 as a pretext for launching the first phase of the Middle East War Central Asian war, which consisted in the bombing and occupation of Afghanistan.
Within hours of the attacks, Osama bin Laden was identified without evidence as the architect of 9/11. On the following day, the “global war on terrorism” had been launched. The media disinformation campaign went into full gear.
Also on September 12, less than 24 hours after the attacks, NATO invoked for the first time in its history “Article 5 of the Washington Treaty – its collective defense clause” declaring the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center (WTC) and the Pentagon “to be an attack against all NATO members.” Implied in this statement was that Afghanistan as a nation state had attacked the United States, a totally absurd proposition.
What happened subsequently, with the invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya is already part of history.
Syria and Iran constitute the next phase of the US administration’s military road map.
Al Qaeda is a terrorist construct, and “intelligence asset” financed, trained and supported covertly by the CIA.
“Jihadist” mercenaries continue to be recruited by the US and its allies. Al Qaeda and its numerous affiliates –including Al Nusrah in Syria– are used as a means to destabilizing sovereign countries under the banner of the “Global War on Terrorism”.
9/11 propaganda prevails. The September 11, 2001 attacks continue to be used by the US administration as a pretext and a justification for waging a war without borders.
On this twelfth anniversary commemoration of the tragic events of September 11, 2001, the central issue remains 9/11 Truth as a means to dismantling Washington’s global military agenda, upholding civil liberties and restoring World Peace.
Michel Chossudovsky, Montreal, September 10, 2013
___________________________________________________
Who Is Osama Bin Laden?
by Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, September 12, 2001
A few hours after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, the Bush administration concluded without supporting evidence, that “Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda organisation were prime suspects”. CIA Director George Tenet stated that bin Laden has the capacity to plan “multiple attacks with little or no warning.” Secretary of State Colin Powell called the attacks “an act of war” and President Bush confirmed in an evening televised address to the Nation that he would “make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them”. Former CIA Director James Woolsey pointed his finger at “state sponsorship,” implying the complicity of one or more foreign governments. In the words of former National Security Adviser, Lawrence Eagleburger, “I think we will show when we get attacked like this, we are terrible in our strength and in our retribution.”
Meanwhile, parroting official statements, the Western media mantra has approved the launching of “punitive actions” directed against civilian targets in the Middle East. In the words of William Saffire writing in the New York Times: “When we reasonably determine our attackers’ bases and camps, we must pulverize them — minimizing but accepting the risk of collateral damage” — and act overtly or covertly to destabilize terror’s national hosts”.
The following text outlines the history of Osama Bin Laden and the links of the Islamic “Jihad” to the formulation of US foreign policy during the Cold War and its aftermath.
Prime suspect in the New York and Washington terrorists attacks, branded by the FBI as an “international terrorist” for his role in the African US embassy bombings, Saudi born Osama bin Laden was recruited during the Soviet-Afghan war “ironically under the auspices of the CIA, to fight Soviet invaders”. 1
In 1979 “the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA” was launched in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in support of the pro-Communist government of Babrak Kamal.2:
With the active encouragement of the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI [Inter Services Intelligence], who wanted to turn the Afghan jihad into a global war waged by all Muslim states against the Soviet Union, some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined Afghanistan’s fight between 1982 and 1992. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistani madrasahs. Eventually more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by the Afghan jihad.3
The Islamic “jihad” was supported by the United States and Saudi Arabia with a significant part of the funding generated from the Golden Crescent drug trade:
In March 1985, President Reagan signed National Security Decision Directive 166,…[which] authorize[d] stepped-up covert military aid to the mujahideen, and it made clear that the secret Afghan war had a new goal: to defeat Soviet troops in Afghanistan through covert action and encourage a Soviet withdrawal. The new covert U.S. assistance began with a dramatic increase in arms supplies — a steady rise to 65,000 tons annually by 1987, … as well as a “ceaseless stream” of CIA and Pentagon specialists who traveled to the secret headquarters of Pakistan’s ISI on the main road near Rawalpindi, Pakistan. There the CIA specialists met with Pakistani intelligence officers to help plan operations for the Afghan rebels.4
US President R. Reagen meets Afghaistans Mujaahedins http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/reaganandmujahideen1.jpg
The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) using Pakistan’s military Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) played a key role in training the Mujahideen. In turn, the CIA sponsored guerrilla training was integrated with the teachings of Islam:
Predominant themes were that Islam was a complete socio-political ideology, that holy Islam was being violated by the atheistic Soviet troops, and that the Islamic people of Afghanistan should reassert their independence by overthrowing the leftist Afghan regime propped up by Moscow.5
Pakistan’s Intelligence Apparatus
Pakistan’s ISI was used as a “go-between”. The CIA covert support to the “jihad” operated indirectly through the Pakistani ISI, –i.e. the CIA did not channel its support directly to the Mujahideen. In other words, for these covert operations to be “successful”, Washington was careful not to reveal the ultimate objective of the “jihad”, which consisted in destroying the Soviet Union.
In the words of CIA’s Milton Beardman “We didn’t train Arabs”. Yet according to Abdel Monam Saidali, of the Al-aram Center for Strategic Studies in Cairo, bin Laden and the “Afghan Arabs” had been imparted “with very sophisticated types of training that was allowed to them by the CIA” 6
CIA’s Beardman confirmed, in this regard, that Osama bin Laden was not aware of the role he was playing on behalf of Washington. In the words of bin Laden (quoted by Beardman): “neither I, nor my brothers saw evidence of American help”. 7
Motivated by nationalism and religious fervor, the Islamic warriors were unaware that they were fighting the Soviet Army on behalf of Uncle Sam. While there were contacts at the upper levels of the intelligence hierarchy, Islamic rebel leaders in theatre had no contacts with Washington or the CIA.
With CIA backing and the funneling of massive amounts of US military aid, the Pakistani ISI had developed into a “parallel structure wielding enormous power over all aspects of government”. 8 The ISI had a staff composed of military and intelligence officers, bureaucrats, undercover agents and informers, estimated at 150,000. 9
Meanwhile, CIA operations had also reinforced the Pakistani military regime led by General Zia Ul Haq:
‘Relations between the CIA and the ISI [Pakistan’s military intelligence] had grown increasingly warm following [General] Zia’s ouster of Bhutto and the advent of the military regime,’… During most of the Afghan war, Pakistan was more aggressively anti-Soviet than even the United States. Soon after the Soviet military invaded Afghanistan in 1980, Zia [ul Haq] sent his ISI chief to destabilize the Soviet Central Asian states. The CIA only agreed to this plan in October 1984…. `the CIA was more cautious than the Pakistanis.’ Both Pakistan and the United States took the line of deception on Afghanistan with a public posture of negotiating a settlement while privately agreeing that military escalation was the best course.10
The Golden Crescent Drug Triangle
The history of the drug trade in Central Asia is intimately related to the CIA’s covert operations. Prior to the Soviet-Afghan war, opium production in Afghanistan and Pakistan was directed to small regional markets. There was no local production of heroin. 11 In this regard, Alfred McCoy’s study confirms that within two years of the onslaught of the CIA operation in Afghanistan, “the Pakistan-Afghanistan borderlands became the world’s top heroin producer, supplying 60 percent of U.S. demand. In Pakistan, the heroin-addict population went from near zero in 1979… to 1.2 million by 1985 — a much steeper rise than in any other nation”:12
CIA assets again controlled this heroin trade. As the Mujahideen guerrillas seized territory inside Afghanistan, they ordered peasants to plant opium as a revolutionary tax. Across the border in Pakistan, Afghan leaders and local syndicates under the protection of Pakistan Intelligence operated hundreds of heroin laboratories. During this decade of wide-open drug-dealing, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency in Islamabad failed to instigate major seizures or arrests … U.S. officials had refused to investigate charges of heroin dealing by its Afghan allies `because U.S. narcotics policy in Afghanistan has been subordinated to the war against Soviet influence there.’ In 1995, the former CIA director of the Afghan operation, Charles Cogan, admitted the CIA had indeed sacrificed the drug war to fight the Cold War. `Our main mission was to do as much damage as possible to the Soviets. We didn’t really have the resources or the time to devote to an investigation of the drug trade,’… `I don’t think that we need to apologize for this. Every situation has its fallout…. There was fallout in terms of drugs, yes. But the main objective was accomplished. The Soviets left Afghanistan.’13
In the Wake of the Cold War
In the wake of the Cold War, the Central Asian region is not only strategic for its extensive oil reserves, it also produces three quarters of the World’s opium representing multibillion dollar revenues to business syndicates, financial institutions, intelligence agencies and organized crime. The annual proceeds of the Golden Crescent drug trade (between 100 and 200 billion dollars) represents approximately one third of the Worldwide annual turnover of narcotics, estimated by the United Nations to be of the order of $500 billion.14
With the disintegration of the Soviet Union, a new surge in opium production has unfolded. (According to UN estimates, the production of opium in Afghanistan in 1998-99 — coinciding with the build up of armed insurgencies in the former Soviet republics– reached a record high of 4600 metric tons.15 Powerful business syndicates in the former Soviet Union allied with organized crime are competing for the strategic control over the heroin routes.
The ISI’s extensive intelligence military-network was not dismantled in the wake of the Cold War. The CIA continued to support the Islamic “jihad” out of Pakistan. New undercover initiatives were set in motion in Central Asia, the Caucasus and the Balkans. Pakistan’s military and intelligence apparatus essentially “served as a catalyst for the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the emergence of six new Muslim republics in Central Asia.” 16.
Meanwhile, Islamic missionaries of the Wahhabi sect from Saudi Arabia had established themselves in the Muslim republics as well as within the Russian federation encroaching upon the institutions of the secular State. Despite its anti-American ideology, Islamic fundamentalism was largely serving Washington’s strategic interests in the former Soviet Union.
Following the withdrawal of Soviet troops in 1989, the civil war in Afghanistan continued unabated. The Taliban were being supported by the Pakistani Deobandis and their political party the Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Islam (JUI). In 1993, JUI entered the government coalition of Prime Minister Benazzir Bhutto. Ties between JUI, the Army and ISI were established. In 1995, with the downfall of the Hezb-I-Islami Hektmatyar government in Kabul, the Taliban not only instated a hardline Islamic government, they also “handed control of training camps in Afghanistan over to JUI factions…” 17
And the JUI with the support of the Saudi Wahhabi movements played a key role in recruiting volunteers to fight in the Balkans and the former Soviet Union.
Jane Defense Weekly confirms in this regard that “half of Taliban manpower and equipment originate[d] in Pakistan under the ISI” 18
In fact, it would appear that following the Soviet withdrawal both sides in the Afghan civil war continued to receive covert support through Pakistan’s ISI. 19
In other words, backed by Pakistan’s military intelligence (ISI) which in turn was controlled by the CIA, the Taliban Islamic State was largely serving American geopolitical interests. The Golden Crescent drug trade was also being used to finance and equip the Bosnian Muslim Army (starting in the early 1990s) and the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). In last few months there is evidence that Mujahideen mercenaries are fighting in the ranks of KLA-NLA terrorists in their assaults into Macedonia.
No doubt, this explains why Washington has closed its eyes on the reign of terror imposed by the Taliban including the blatant derogation of women’s rights, the closing down of schools for girls, the dismissal of women employees from government offices and the enforcement of “the Sharia laws of punishment”.20
Chechnya Warlords made by CIA
http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/basayevKHATTAB.jpg
The War in Chechnya
With regard to Chechnya, the main rebel leaders Shamil Basayev and Al Khattab were trained and indoctrinated in CIA sponsored camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan. According to Yossef Bodansky, director of the U.S. Congress’s Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, the war in Chechnya had been planned during a secret summit of HizbAllah International held in 1996 in Mogadishu, Somalia. 21
The summit, was attended by Osama bin Laden and high-ranking Iranian and Pakistani intelligence officers. In this regard, the involvement of Pakistan’s ISI in Chechnya “goes far beyond supplying the Chechens with weapons and expertise: the ISI and its radical Islamic proxies are actually calling the shots in this war”. 22
Russia’s main pipeline route transits through Chechnya and Dagestan. Despite Washington’s perfunctory condemnation of Islamic terrorism, the indirect beneficiaries of the Chechen war are the Anglo-American oil conglomerates which are vying for control over oil resources and pipeline corridors out of the Caspian Sea basin.
The two main Chechen rebel armies (respectively led by Commander Shamil Basayev and Emir Khattab) [image right] estimated at 35,000 strong were supported by Pakistan’s ISI, which also played a key role in organizing and training the Chechen rebel army:
[In 1994] the Pakistani Inter Services Intelligence arranged for Basayev and his trusted lieutenants to undergo intensive Islamic indoctrination and training in guerrilla warfare in the Khost province of Afghanistan at Amir Muawia camp, set up in the early 1980s by the CIA and ISI and run by famous Afghani warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. In July 1994, upon graduating from Amir Muawia, Basayev was transferred to Markaz-i-Dawar camp in Pakistan to undergo training in advanced guerrilla tactics. In Pakistan, Basayev met the highest ranking Pakistani military and intelligence officers: Minister of Defense General Aftab Shahban Mirani, Minister of Interior General Naserullah Babar, and the head of the ISI branch in charge of supporting Islamic causes, General Javed Ashraf, (all now retired). High-level connections soon proved very useful to Basayev.23
Following his training and indoctrination stint, Basayev was assigned to lead the assault against Russian federal troops in the first Chechen war in 1995. His organization had also developed extensive links to criminal syndicates in Moscow as well as ties to Albanian organized crime and the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). In 1997-98, according to Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) “Chechen warlords started buying up real estate in Kosovo… through several real estate firms registered as a cover in Yugoslavia” 24
Basayev’s organisation has also been involved in a number of rackets including narcotics, illegal tapping and sabotage of Russia’s oil pipelines, kidnapping, prostitution, trade in counterfeit dollars and the smuggling of nuclear materials (See Mafia linked to Albania’s collapsed pyramids, 25 Alongside the extensive laundering of drug money, the proceeds of various illicit activities have been funneled towards the recruitment of mercenaries and the purchase of weapons.
During his training in Afghanistan, Shamil Basayev linked up with Saudi born veteran Mujahideen Commander “Al Khattab” who had fought as a volunteer in Afghanistan. Barely a few months after Basayev’s return to Grozny, Khattab was invited (early 1995) to set up an army base in Chechnya for the training of Mujahideen fighters. According to the BBC, Khattab’s posting to Chechnya had been “arranged through the Saudi-Arabian based [International] Islamic Relief Organisation, a militant religious organisation, funded by mosques and rich individuals which channeled funds into Chechnya”.26
Concluding Remarks
Since the Cold War era, Washington has consciously supported Osama bin Laden, while at same time placing him on the FBI’s “most wanted list” as the World’s foremost terrorist.
While the Mujahideen are busy fighting America’s war in the Balkans and the former Soviet Union, the FBI –operating as a US based Police Force- is waging a domestic war against terrorism, operating in some respects independently of the CIA which has –since the Soviet-Afghan war– supported international terrorism through its covert operations.
In a cruel irony, while the Islamic jihad –featured by the Bush Adminstration as “a threat to America”– is blamed for the terrorist assaults on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, these same Islamic organisations constitute a key instrument of US military-intelligence operations in the Balkans and the former Soviet Union.
In the wake of the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, the truth must prevail to prevent the Bush Adminstration together with its NATO partners from embarking upon a military adventure which threatens the future of humanity.
Notes
Hugh Davies, International: `Informers’ point the finger at bin Laden; Washington on alert for suicide bombers, The Daily Telegraph, London, 24 August 1998.
See Fred Halliday, “The Un-great game: the Country that lost the Cold War, Afghanistan, New Republic, 25 March 1996):
Ahmed Rashid, The Taliban: Exporting Extremism, Foreign Affairs, November-December 1999.
Steve Coll, Washington Post, July 19, 1992.
Dilip Hiro, Fallout from the Afghan Jihad, Inter Press Services, 21 November 1995.
Weekend Sunday (NPR); Eric Weiner, Ted Clark; 16 August 1998.
Ibid.
Dipankar Banerjee; Possible Connection of ISI With Drug Industry, India Abroad, 2 December 1994.
Ibid
See Diego Cordovez and Selig Harrison, Out of Afghanistan: The Inside Story of the Soviet Withdrawal, Oxford university Press, New York, 1995. See also the review of Cordovez and Harrison in International Press Services, 22 August 1995.
Alfred McCoy, Drug fallout: the CIA’s Forty Year Complicity in the Narcotics Trade. The Progressive; 1 August 1997.
Ibid
Ibid.
Douglas Keh, Drug Money in a changing World, Technical document no 4, 1998, Vienna UNDCP, p. 4. See also Report of the International Narcotics Control Board for 1999, E/INCB/1999/1 United Nations Publication, Vienna 1999, p 49-51, And Richard Lapper, UN Fears Growth of Heroin Trade, Financial Times, 24 February 2000.
Report of the International Narcotics Control Board, op cit, p 49-51, see also Richard Lapper, op. cit.
International Press Services, 22 August 1995.
Ahmed Rashid, The Taliban: Exporting Extremism, Foreign Affairs, November- December, 1999, p. 22.
Quoted in the Christian Science Monitor, 3 September 1998)
Tim McGirk, Kabul learns to live with its bearded conquerors, The Independent, London, 6 November1996.
See K. Subrahmanyam, Pakistan is Pursuing Asian Goals, India Abroad, 3 November 1995.
Levon Sevunts, Who’s calling the shots?: Chechen conflict finds Islamic roots in Afghanistan and Pakistan, 23 The Gazette, Montreal, 26 October 1999..
Ibid
Ibid.
See Vitaly Romanov and Viktor Yadukha, Chechen Front Moves To Kosovo Segodnia, Moscow, 23 Feb 2000.
The European, 13 February 1997, See also Itar-Tass, 4-5 January 2000.
BBC, 29 September 1999).
http://www.globalresearch.ca/who-is-osama-bin-laden-3/5349194