Trump's "Migrant Policy" Exposes Continuity of Agenda

February 2, 2017 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - The full scope of the current deception being perpetrated against both the American people, and the rest of the world under the presidency of Donald Trump and the supposed "push back" from the "liberal media" is exposed in full amid President Trump's unfolding migrant policy.

Bloomberg, in two articles, reveals in full how the US proxy war against Syria, presided over by US President Barack Obama, prepared for under US President George Bush Jr., and plotted since President Bush's father was in office in the 1990's, continues in earnest under President Trump. The articles also reveal how the so-called "liberal media's" "push back" against President Trump willfully omits this glaring fact, and diverts public attention toward more partisan explanations for what is blatantly continuity of agenda.

Bloomberg's first article titled, "Trump Freezes Refugee Program, Orders New Vetting for Entry," claims:

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Friday indefinitely banning admission of people fleeing Syria, temporarily freezing the entry of other refugees and prohibiting entry by people from seven majority-Muslim nations for 90 days. 

Trump said the measure would prevent terrorists from being admitted into the country. Democrats labeled the order a "Muslim ban" and criticized it as inhumane. Absent from the order was a provision from a draft of the document, obtained by Bloomberg, that would require the Defense Department to make a plan to create "safe zones" in Syria and neighboring countries for people fleeing that nation’s civil war.

The article also claims:

The admission of refugees would be suspended for 120 days. Citizens of Syria, Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, and Libya would be banned from entering the U.S. for 90 days, while the government determines what information it needs from other countries to safely admit visitors. The order doesn’t list the countries but points to laws that cover those seven, which were provided by the White House.

Bloomberg and other allegedly "liberal" media platforms have attempted to link President Trump's policies to his own business interests, deflecting public attention away from the fact that the seven nations targeted by the new executive order are precisely the same nations targeted since the 1990's by Wall Street and Washington special interests.

US and European media are also leveraging their own manufactured "migrant crisis" to sell the concept of "safe zones" in Syria, a policy laid out and pursued under President Obama when initial US-backed regime change in Syria failed to materialize. The policy is now being continued without interruption under President Trump.


Bloomberg's second article titled, "Trump’s Immigration Ban Excludes Countries With Business Ties," claims:

President Trump has signed an executive order that bans citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries in the Middle East from entering the United States for 90 days, according to the White House. His proposed list doesn’t include Muslim-majority countries where his Trump Organization has done business or pursued potential deals. Properties include golf courses in the United Arab Emirates and two luxury towers operating in Turkey.

In reality,  the nations spared from President Trump's executive order are those nations the United States has partnered with for decades, including premier state-sponsors of terrorism.

At Face Value 

Even a cursory glance at the latest executive order defies the alleged purpose behind it - fighting terrorism. Saudi Arabia and Qatar's exclusion from the list of restricted nations begs belief.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar are the ideological and financial centers of terrorist organizations including Al Qaeda and the self-proclaimed Islamic State (ISIS). These nations have provided extensive material support to both terrorist groups according to not only President Trump's National Security Adviser, retired US Army lieutenant general Michael Flynn, but also President Trump's opponent in the 2016 presidential election and former US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.

Flynn was director of the US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) when in 2012, a memo was leaked revealing "the West, Gulf monarchies, and Turkey" behind the rise of a what at the time was called a "Salafist principality."

The leaked 2012 report (.pdf) states (emphasis added): 

If the situation unravels there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).

To clarify precisely who these "supporting powers" were that sought the creation of a "Salafist" (Islamic) principality" (State), the DIA report explains:

The West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition; while Russia, China, and Iran support the regime.

In other words, the US, its European allies, and its closest allies in the Middle East, sought the rise of a "Salafist" (Islamic) "principality" (State) in eastern Syria, precisely where ISIS is now centered. The immensity of ISIS forces, territorial holdings, and its ability to continuously wage war against the combined military forces of Syria, Iraq, Lebanon's Hezbollah, Iran, and Russia leave no doubt that the terrorist organization enjoys not only state-sponsorship from abroad, but is the recipient of a multinational state-sponsorship.

In 2014, in an e-mail between US Counselor to the President John Podesta and former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, it would be admitted that two of America's closest regional allies - Saudi Arabia and Qatar - were providing financial and logistical support to ISIS.

The e-mail, leaked to the public through Wikileaks during the 2016 US presidential election campaign, stated:

...we need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to [ISIS] and other radical Sunni groups in the region.

How then, does a state sponsor of terrorism like Saudi Arabia escape President Trump's alleged "anti-terror" executive order which conveniently excludes - once again - the greatest offender and threat to the security of the American people and the world at large?



Digging Deeper - General Wesley Clark's "Seven Nations" 

Retired US Army general, Wesley Clark, during a 2007 Flora TV talk titled, "A Time to Lead," revealed a singular agenda stretching back as far as 1991, relayed to him by then US Under Secretary of Defence for Policy Paul Wolfowitz. Clark stated (emphasis added):

I said Mr. Secretary you must be pretty happy with the performance of the troops in Desert Storm. And he said, well yeah, he said but but not really, he said because the truth is we should have gotten rid of Saddam Hussein and we didn't. And this was just after the Shia uprising in March of 91' which we had provoked and then we kept our troops on the side lines and didn't intervene. And he said, but one thing we did learn, he said, we learned that we can use our military in the region in the Middle East and the Soviets wont stop us. He said, and we have got about five or ten years to clean up those all Soviet client regimes; Syria, Iran, Iraq, - before the next great super power comes on to challenge us. 

Clark would fast forward to the wake of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 and the US invasion of Afghanistan. He would state (emphasis added):

...we attacked Afghanistan. I was pretty happy about that, we should have. And then I came back to the Pentagon about six weeks later, I saw the same officer, I said why why haven't we attacked Iraq? We are sill going to attack Iraq, he said, oh sir he says, its worse than that. He said he pulled up a piece of paper of his desk, he said, I just got this memo from the Secretary of Defense's office, it says we are going to attack and destroy the governments in in seven countries in five years. We are going to start with Iraq and then we are going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran seven seven countries in five years. 

It is no coincidence that so many years later, and transcending both President Obama and now President Trump's administrations, the same seven nations are still being targeted, while the admitted global centers of terrorism - Riyadh and Doha - remain protected - even nurtured, heavily armed, and defended - by the United States and its European allies.

What is unfolding is decades-long continuity of agenda - simply dressed up in the latest and presumed-to-be most effective partisan narrative Wall Street and Washington can script - one in which President Trump is pursuing "racist" and "discriminatory" migrant policies while hypocritically defending his own personal business interests.

And while it is no coincidence, but rather documented conspiracy - media organizations like Bloomberg apparently expect the public to believe it is just a coincidence, that President Trump's abhorrent rhetoric and transparent hypocrisy just so happens to serve several decades of policy - perpetuated regardless of who is in the White House, and regardless to how various US presidents have spun their role in advancing this singular, nonpartisan policy throughout those decades.

However, the script writers on Wall Street and in Washington have once again skillfully manipulated the American people - not on an intellectual level - but on a very elementary, emotional level. Hatred or support for President Trump and his crass rhetoric blinds both sides from the fact that all President Trump is doing, is precisely what President Obama, President Bush, President Clinton, and President Bush Sr. did before him - exactly what US corporate-financier special interests desire - nothing more and nothing less.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.   

Declassified 9/11 Report Portrays US-Saudis as Partners in Crime

July 25, 2016 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - The recently released, previously classified report titled, "Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001" (.pdf), reveals that indeed long-time US ally, Saudi Arabia, had connections to the alleged hijackers who purportedly carried out the 9/11 attacks.

While the US would go on to invade Afghanistan and Iraq predicated on the 9/11 attacks, it should be noted that all of the alleged hijackers were either Saudis or Persian Gulf citizens, or connected to terrorist organizations supported by Persian Gulf states.

The Western media has attempted to downplay the impact of the document's release, claiming that subsequent investigations found the "many" of the allegations in the document "without basis" - even as the US and Saudi Arabia today openly arm and fund terrorists in Syria.

To Whose Benefit? 

Many mistakenly believe on one hand terrorism is simply an inevitable clash of civilizations between "Islam" and the West, while others maintain it is the predictable backlash to flawed or unjust Western foreign policy.

In reality, it is neither.

It is meticulously engineered violence used as a tool for achieving geopolitical objectives around the world - from overthrowing governments and justifying military interventions, to creating paralyzing fear and hysteria at home to garner support for a growing domestic police state and a large military footprint overseas.

In essence, it is a highly conductive medium through which modern day empire can spread.

This can clearly be seen through the use of terrorism today. Some 14 years after the September 11, 2001 attacks, and as memories begin to fade, the US finds itself partnered with Saudi Arabia once again, arming and funding terrorists to fight their proxy wars in Libya, Syria, Iraq, and beyond, just as they did in the 1980s when they jointly created Al Qaeda to begin with.

As the pendulum of geopolitical necessity swings from needing heavily armed, fanatical proxy forces to fight abroad, to needing a pretext at home to initiate large-scale military interventions overseas, these terrorist organizations are characterized by Western politicians and the media in a similarly shifting manner. During the 1980s Al Qaeda was portrayed as "freedom fighters." In 2001 when the United States sought to use full-scale military force to rearrange the Middle East, North Africa, and Central Asia, Al Qaeda was transformed into a villain.

The 2001 terrorist attacks allowed the US to justify over a decade of global-spanning war that it otherwise would have been unable to wage.

The Hijackers Had Ties to Saudi Intelligence 

The 28 pages now declassified depicts a tangled web of connections between the Saudi government, Saudi intelligence agencies, the Bin Laden family, and the hijackers - most of whom were Saudi citizens themselves.

The report states:

While in the United States, some of the September 11 hijackers were in contact with, and received support or assistance from, individuals who may be connected to the Saudi Government. There is information, primarily from FBI sources, that at least two of those individuals were alleged by some to be Saudi intelligence officers. 

The report also reveals that the suspected Saudi intelligence officers worked for companies that had ties to both the Saudi government, and Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden (spelled: Usama Bin Ladin throughout the report).

And not only did various Saudi intelligence officers have connections to the alleged hijackers, several are revealed to have known each other as well.

Mentioned also is Osama Bin Laden's half-brother, Abdullah Bin Ladin, claimed to have worked for the Saudi Embassy in Washington D.C. as an "administration officer," revealing once again the incestuous ties between the Bin Ladin family, the Saudi government, and through equity firm - the Carlyle Group - the Bush family and other political and business leaders in the United States.

The report also mentions that despite the many apparent links, and attempts by the FBI to investigate them further, many suspects were inexplicably able to "leave" the United States and return to Saudi Arabia.

Image: Fake mosques like this one in Denmark, openly recruit Europeans to fight Western proxy wars in the Middle East. Instead of being immediately shut down and those involved for providing material support for terrorism, often European governments and security agencies work with them to manage terrorists as they come home - again - not to imprison them, but use them to manipulate public perception and shape domestic policy. Such "mosques" are often Saudi-funded. 

The report also referred to "mosques" either directly funded by the Saudi government in which various aspects of terrorism were thought to be coordinated, or mosques in which associates of the hijackers met frequently or operated out of.

This illustrates precisely how the US-Saudi terror enterprise keeps its ranks full - through a global network of centers masquerading as mosques, protected by law enforcement and intelligence organizations linked to the West, allowing for both the recruitment and radicalization of terrorists, as well as the planning and financing of terrorism itself.

US Intelligence Community Before 9/11: Incompetence or Collusion? Or Both?  

The US and Saudi Arabia helped create Al Qaeda and for years used the organization to wage proxy war around the world. It's actions on 9/11 then helped set the stage for a decade of war in which the US toppled governments, occupied nations, while conducting covert warfare against others, expanding US hegemony across the globe, and dividing and destroying nations allied to its rivals in Beijing and Moscow.

It is very clear that Saudi Arabia played a role in the 9/11 attacks, as well as in terrorism of all kinds around the world before and after the attacks.

Clearly the FBI and the CIA both were aware of Saudi Arabia's role. It is also clear that efforts were made to protect valuable Saudi assets by spiriting them out of the country as dutiful agents attempted to do their jobs by investigating them further. Those who spirited Saudi agents and officials out of the country, protecting them from further investigation regarding their role in 9/11, are likely linked to those Americans who helped their Saudi counterparts organize and carry out the attacks.

And while some FBI and CIA agents attempted to do their job, one comment toward the end of the 28 pages reveals that perhaps agents were not as aware as they should have been regarding the nature of Al Qaeda and its relationship to Saudi Arabia.

The report quotes a former FBI Assistant Special Agent in Charge, saying:

Basically [redacted]. They were not a country identified by the State Department as a state sponsor of terrorism. And the theme or the common modus operandi that we saw in San Diego was that if there were [redacted] there, their primary objective was to monitor dissidents in the interest of protecting the royal family. So they were not viewed as an inimical threat to national security.  

The agent's conclusion is based entirely on the assumption that the State Department's terrorist designations are meaningful and accurate. If such designations are not accurate, then the FBI would have neglected to fully investigate suspects who were indeed very much an inimical threat to national security.

Today, Al Qaeda and the self-proclaimed "Islamic State" (ISIS) are likewise portrayed as enemies of Saudi Arabia. This is despite clear evidence showing both terrorist organizations and their affiliates in Iraq and Syria, are armed and funded by, as well as working in the direct interests of Riyadh - as well as Washington. When terrorist attacks do unfold in Saudi Arabia, despite being portrayed as attacks aimed at Riyadh itself, they are often instead aimed at Shia'a targets throughout the country.

Shia'a in Saudi Arabia, unlike Al Qaeda and ISIS, do represent a threat to Riyadh - not predicated on fanatical extremism - but instead upon self-defense against the brutality and injustice of the Saudi political system which specifically targets Shia'a.

It appears that some agents, despite laboring under faulty assumptions, did attempt to do their jobs, while others appear to have been protecting suspects very likely tied to the 9/11 attacks, and possibly even tied to the attacks themselves. Together, through incompetence and collusion, the attacks unfolded, and the rest - as they say - is history.

Protecting Saudi Terrorism Then and Now 

While the Western media now claims that many of the declassified report's allegations have been found to be "without basis," the heavy redaction throughout the report leads one to believe that Saudi Arabia and the various tentacles of its security apparatus reaching into the United States are still being covered up by complicit American agents and interests.

Image: At some points, redaction of the 9/11 document becomes almost comically obstructive, defeating the purpose of declassifying it and making it public in the first place. 

Additionally, despite the very troubling implications of the report's contents, it should be noted that in the aftermath of 9/11 the US, along with Europe, continued supplying Saudi Arabia with billions of dollars worth of military weapons while politically supporting Riyadh during its own brush with the "Arab Spring" in 2011. Today, despite evidence of Saudi Arabia's arming and funding of designated terrorist organizations including Al Nusra, the US and Europe continue lending military and political support to Riyadh nonetheless.

Saudi Arabia didn't victimize the United States on 9/11, nor trick Washington. Riyadh and Washington are partners in crime, at times in lockstep, at other times posing as adversaries when maximum plausible deniability is desired.

Despite attempts to claim Saudi Arabia is blameless in the 9/11 attacks, the hijackers were undoubtedly Saudis, inspired by indoctrination that originated in Saudi-funded networks, allegedly approached and assisted by Saudi intelligence agents, and representative of terrorist organizations Riyadh to this day still arms, funds, and uses to wage it and America's proxy wars with.

The report is not really a revelation, but instead another piece of evidence that affirms the US and Saudi Arabia are collaborators in terrorism, not partners fighting it. Those who depend on either in a true fight against global terrorism, should be prepared for perpetual failure.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.     

Saudi Arabia Supported Al Qaeda Before and After But Not On 9/11?

May 6, 2016 (Ulson Gunnar - NEO) - The BBC in its 2004 article, "Al-Qaeda's origins and links," would frankly admit that (emphasis added):

Al-Qaeda, meaning "the base", was created in 1989 as Soviet forces withdrew from Afghanistan and Osama Bin Laden and his colleagues began looking for new jihads. 

The organisation grew out of the network of Arab volunteers who had gone to Afghanistan in the 1980s to fight under the banner of Islam against Soviet Communism. 

During the anti-Soviet jihad Bin Laden and his fighters received American and Saudi funding. Some analysts believe Bin Laden himself had security training from the CIA.

The BBC's article merely reports what is accepted as common knowledge and documented fact regarding the inception of this now enduring, notorious and shape-shifting terrorist organization... that it was the initial creation of joint US-Saudi interests.

This fact would carry with it an ironic sting in 2001 when Al Qaeda, allegedly led by Bin Laden, struck the Pentagon in Washington and the World Trade Center in New York City on September 11, killing nearly 3,000 people and precipitating now over 15 years of global war.

Without doubt, the US and Saudi Arabia created Al Qaeda, and many believe still control the terrorist organization citing that the immense material support it and its subsidiaries require along with the virtual impunity they enjoy as they operate worldwide could only be due to substantial and influential state sponsorship.

Many have postulated that because the 15 years of war following September 11, 2001 have benefited only a handful of special interests both in the US and Europe, as well as in the Persian Gulf, that it cannot be ruled out that these interests were also somehow involved in the attacks that justified this enduring war to begin with.

At least one center of power involved in Al Qaeda's creation, has been called out by members of the United States government as having continued to support the terrorist organization, including on September 11, 2001. Riyadh.

Before, After, and During 9/11... 

Recently making headlines, the US Congress is attempting to make it possible for victims of the September 11 attacks to sue Riyadh over its role in supporting the terrorists allegedly behind them.

15 of the 19 alleged hijackers were Saudis, 2 were from Saudi Arabia's close ally, the United Arab Emirates, another from Egypt (a Muslim Brotherhood member) and the last from Lebanon. Despite the identities of the hijackers and the obvious ties to both Persian Gulf despots and terrorist organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood they openly back, the United States opted to first invade Afghanistan, then inexplicably Iraq in the wake of the attacks.

The Independent's article, "Saudi Arabia, 9/11, and what we know about the secret papers that could ignite a diplomatic war," would elaborate, stating:

The US Congress is considering legislation which would enable the families of victims of the September 11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia, presented by the West as its most valuable ally in the Middle East, over alleged links with al-Qaeda terrorists who carried out the attacks on New York and Washington. 

The issue had cast a long shadow over the recent visit of President Barack Obama to Riyadh, with the Saudis threatening to sell off $750bn of American assets they hold if the bill is passed by Congress. 

The classified pages are in a file titled “Finding, Discussion and Narrative Regarding Certain Sensitive Narrative Matters”, which have never been published from the findings of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into the attacks which killed 3,000 people and injured more than 6,000 others.

It is a fact that the US and Saudi Arabia jointly created Al Qaeda in the late 1980s.  It is also clear that something is being hidden about Saudi Arabia's role regarding Al Qaeda during the September 11, 2001 attacks.

What is also clear is that since September 11, 2001, Saudi Arabia has continued arming and funding the terrorist group everywhere from Iraq to Libya to Yemen to Syria. In fact, a US Army report investing records related to foreign fighters battling and killing US soldiers during the US occupation of Iraq would reveal that these foreign fighters were primarily from, and backed by Saudi Arabia, Turkey and those currently labeled "rebels" backed by the US and Saudi Arabia in Syria.

Image: Many of the Americans killed in Iraq were victims Saudi-backed terrorists. Despite this fact, Saudi Arabia remains one of Washington's closest allies. 

West Point's Combating Terrorism Center (CTC)'s report, "BOMBERS, BANK ACCOUNTS AND BLEEDOUT al-Qa'ida's Road In and Out of Iraq," would reveal some very disturbing facts about one of America's oldest and staunchest allies in the region, Saudi Arabia, and the role Riyadh was playing in the trafficking of arms and fighters from across the region, and into Iraq where they would inevitable clash with, and kill US service members. 

The report would establish that Saudi Arabia (41%) and Libya (19% and more specifically, from those regions associated with the so-called "rebellion" in 2011) supplied the most foreign fighters to Iraq.  The report also concluded that 46% of all funding came from Saudi nationals, and noted specifically that Saudi Arabia at the very least had little to gain from stemming the flow of its nationals into the ranks of Al Qaeda in Iraq because of what the CTC report claimed was a desire to limit the "perceived influence of Iran."

Similar arguments are made to defend Saudi funding and arming of Al Qaeda in Syria today, which is far less ambiguous in nature than the CTC report makes out its role during the US occupation of Iraq.

Saudi Arabia Supports Al Qaeda Today 

The Independent would report in a May 2015 article titled, "Turkey and Saudi Arabia alarm the West by backing Islamist extremists the Americans had bombed in Syria,"  that:

Turkey and Saudi Arabia are actively supporting a hardline coalition of Islamist rebels against Bashar al-Assad’s regime that includes al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria, in a move that has alarmed Western governments. 

The two countries are focusing their backing for the Syrian rebels on the combined Jaish al-Fatah, or the Army of Conquest, a command structure for jihadist groups in Syria that includes Jabhat al-Nusra, an extremist rival to Isis which shares many of its aspirations for a fundamentalist caliphate.

And as Turkey and Saudi Arabia openly arm and fund a terrorist organization listed and sanctioned by the US State Department, the United States government and its closest European allies continue to ship arms to Saudi Arabia and provide it with both political and military protection on unprecedented scales. In fact, one weapons deal struck between the US and Saudi Arabia constituted the largest ever in US history.

The Guardian reported in its article, "Barack Obama to authorise record $60bn Saudi arms sale," that:

Barack Obama is to go ahead with plans to sell Saudi Arabia advanced aircraft and other weapons worth up to $60bn (£39bn), the biggest arms deal in US history, in a strategy of shoring up Gulf Arab allies to face any military threat from Iran.

With the US and Saudi Arabia having jointly created Al Qaeda, and with Saudi Arabia continuing to this day to openly arm and support the terrorist group worldwide with America's enthusiastic ($60bn) approval, it is probably not just US-Saudi relations being protected by keeping the missing pages implicating Saudi Arabia in the September 11, 2001 attacks a secret, it is probably the existence of the entire Washington and Wall Street ruling class as well that is at stake.

Image: The US claims to be "shocked" by Saudi Arabia's support of Al Qaeda in Syria, yet in reality, it is a mere continuation of what Al Qaeda began as in the 1980s to begin with, a joint US-Saudi tool to project geopolitical power globally where conventional forces could not go. 

Regardless of whether the papers are released, or what their contents may hold, that the US is still to this day involved in propping up a regime openly arming and funding an organization responsible for the worst terrorist attack in US history is an indictment not only the moral bankruptcy of the United States, but of the faltering narrative that it is a force fighting terrorism worldwide rather than one spreading it to the four corners of the globe, and one that must be exposed and stopped.

Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Saudi Arabia's "Northern Thunder," Sound and Fury Signifying Nothing

March 2, 2016 (Ulson Gunnar - NEO) - The news has been abuzz before and during the ceasefire announced amid Syria's conflict about Saudi Arabia's possible intervention. Saudi Arabia has threatened to intervene amid incomprehensible, contradicting rhetoric, claiming that it would enter Syrian territory to "fight" IS (the Islamic State), but would do so only now because the Syrian government has refused to step down.



Of course, the only coherent forces on the ground fighting IS now are the Syrian government's troops and Kurdish fighters who now appear to be working with Damascus. Saudi Arabia's intervention to remove President Bashar al Assad from power would seem to work in IS' favor, not against it. To give Saudi Arabia's confusing threats some teeth, Riyadh announced its "Northern Thunder" military exercises which it claimed would be one of the largest military exercises ever held. The United Arab Emirates' "The National," would report in an article titled, "Saudi Arabia hosts joint military exercise," that:

Armed forces from 20 countries have begun manoeuvres in northeastern Saudi Arabia, described by the official Saudi Press Agency as one of the world’s biggest military exercises.

Troops from the other five Gulf Arab states – the UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar – as well as Pakistan, Malaysia, Turkey, Egypt, Morocco, Jordan and Sudan are among those participating in the Ra’ad Al Shamal, or Northern Thunder, exercise, Spa agency reported.

The military drill – which began on Saturday and involves ground, air and naval forces – will be “one of the world’s most important military exercises based on the number of forces participating and the area of territory used”, the agency said.

While that sounds impressive, with Saudi news outlets claiming some 350,000 troops were expected to participate, not a single photo or video has surfaced so far showing this impressive force in action. The entire point of mounting such monumental military exercises is to show off one's military power to the world, not merely write about it in news articles. And more specifically, in Saudi Arabia's case, such exercises are meant to show those nations it is trying to coerce by threat of military force just what it faces if concessions are not made.

The National Interest in an article titled, "Saudi Arabia Goes to War," points out some obvious shortcomings of Saudi Arabia's military that, even at face value, undermine Riyadh's threats before they left the mouths of its diplomatic corps.

In the article it states:

Tanks, combat aircraft and missiles are only as powerful as the people operating, maintaining and supporting them. And in this domain, Saudi Arabia has a very long way to go.

Not much is known about the proficiency of Saudi Arabia’s military as a fighting force. The only real war the Saudis have taken part in was Operation Desert Storm in 1991; and most of the fighting there was done by the US. More recently Saudi Arabia has been fighting in Yemen, but unsuccessfully so far. Foreign advisers speak about the difficulties in bringing Saudi Arabian soldiers to the desired combat readiness and proficiency.

The article also mentions another key shortcoming, Saudi Arabia's overdependence on foreign soldiers filling its ranks and the high number of contractors it relies on, as illustrated in its ongoing war with neighboring Yemen.

Multiplying Complications

There are several complications that immediately undermine Saudi Arabia's threats.

It's one thing to have an army, but it's another thing to actually get it into another theater of war that isn't bordering your own nation. Moving troops into Syria will require the cooperation and complicity as well as additional logistical expertise of other nations to move troops from Saudi Arabia either through Jordan and into Syria, or in large numbers to Turkey by sea and then onward to Syria.

And, it is one thing to have such capabilities to move enough troops for any sort of meaningful incursion into Syria, and quite another thing to be able to keep them armed, fueled and otherwise supplied, especially during sustained combat operations.

Image: Al Qaeda and IS supply lines have been having trouble making it over the Turkish-Syrian border without being picked off by Russian and Syrian airpower. Would they have greater success if they flew the Saudi flag? 

However, this last point could be addressed by Saudi troops simply latching on to the supply lines already in place for Al Qaeda and IS, lines likely already very familiar to planners in Riyadh, since they have helped underwrite them to begin with. Still, the unique requirements for a modern, mechanized army would need these lines expanded and augmented, something Saudi Arabia has little experience doing.

And experience is perhaps a third failing Saudi Arabia brings with it when it tries to threaten other nations of invasion. Entering into the Syrian conflict and doing anything more than seizing a buffer zone at the edge of Syria's territory would be the first "rodeo" of its kind for Riyadh. And if such a move was considered a "rodeo," its move into Yemen next door could be considered a "junior rodeo," and one Riyadh has yet to finish.

Saudi Arabia's Threat of Invasion is Cover For Something Else...

If Saudi Arabia cannot even win on the battlefield in neighboring Yemen, with fighting even spilling over the border into Saudi territory, it is unlikely it will do any better against the battle-hardened, better organized and better equipped forces of the Syrian Arab Army, let alone Russia's presence in the country. Clearly Saudi Arabia's phantom military exercises and posturing are cover for something else. It is likely that anything that goes over the border into Syria under the Saudi flag will be anything other than actual Saudi forces. Remember those Al Qaeda and IS supply lines mentioned earlier? What if the fighters and equipment pouring into Syria simply changed their black flags to Saudi Arabia's?

Image: A no-fly-zone over Syria to protect Syrian forces as they near Al Raqqa could help the West back down from a series of final but desperate options their bad judgement seems to be encouraging them to consider. 

And though Saudi Arabia's demands for "democracy" in Syria despite the fact that Saudi Arabia itself is an absolute monarchy devoid entirely of elections, staged or otherwise, are particularly discredited, an undeserving air of legitimacy still surrounds the regime in Riyadh, perhaps enough to make it difficult for Syrian or Russian forces to attack terrorists flagged as Saudis.

Consider also that while moving thousands of additional troops into the theater may be difficult, moving Saudi warplanes is not. Many are already reportedly in Turkey, standing by for operations. Saudi-flagged terrorists backed by Saudi airpower would be a particularly potent mix that could keep supply lines to terrorists fighting in Syria's interior open long enough to break Syrian-Russian operational momentum and create a stalemate only tough concessions made by Moscow and Damascus could break.

With this possibility, it would benefit Syria and its allies to begin considering a true no-fly-zone over the country, excluding from Syrian airspace all nations (especially the Saudis and Turks) not given authorization by Damascus. The matter could be brought before the UN under the plausible pretext that Syrian troops are closing in on IS positions in Al Raqqa and the chance of mishaps are growing by the day. This is not even a ploy, because in fact, Syrian forces are closing in on Al Raqqa. Now would be as good a time as any to begin closing off Syrian airspace and helping the US and its allies back down from increasingly desperate options, saving them from themselves and their demonstrably bad judgement.

Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

NATO's Expanding Presence in "Fortress Persian Gulf"

What Are the Possible Consequences of Turkey-Qatar Military Cooperation?

February 15, 2016 (Martin Berger - NEO) - A short while ago Turkey and Qatar announced that they have an agreement in place to further deepen their military cooperation within the framework of the “struggle against common enemies“, which implies the construction of two new military bases: a Turkish one in Qatar and a Qatari base in Turkey.

As it was made clear by the Turkish Ambassador to Qatar, Ahmet Demirok, Ankara is planning to construct a multi-purpose military installation that will become home to some 3,000 soldiers. By taking this step Turkey expects to become a state that is directly influencing security in the Persian Gulf. In the future, this base will also provide Turkish armed forces with an outpost for operations in the Red Sea, North Africa, along with the access to the waters of the Pacific, which Turkey lost back in 1950.

Just as with the creation of the British military base in Bahrain, and the French military base in the UAE, this deal is but a step in the implementation of Washington’s plan of enhancing the role of its allies in ensuring regional security in the Persian Gulf, that its satellites are to take at their own expense. It is expected that in late February, the US Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Charles Johnson is going to visit Turkey to offer local authorities American technologies that should allow Ankara to enhance its own national security, including reconnaissance balloons, explosives spotting devices, and so on. It is believed that Secretary Jeh Charles Johnson is going to discuss the strengthening of the fight against ISIL along with “the mutual interests” the US and Turkey can protect with the Turkish base in Qatar.

Turkey has been a NATO member since the 1950s.

Of course, experts that have been watching closely Turkey’s and Qatar’s policies in recent years, won’t be surprised by this chain of events. In an effort to regain the influence that the Ottoman Empire enjoyed in the Middle East, President RecepTayyip Erdoğan and his Justice and Development Party have been using every pretext to justify the future deployment of its troops in the Persian Gulf through the “sincere” desire to intensify “the fight against common threats“, while making Turkey’s military presence in the region official.

However, a military agreement between Qatar and Turkey is of vital strategic importance for both states, since by coincidence or not, they share regional interests. Turkey and Qatar have been supporting similar extremist and even terrorist groups used extensively in the fight against the Syrian government. Both states have also been deeply involved in the political struggle for influence in Egypt, by sponsoring the Muslim Brotherhood organization and former President Mohamed Morsi, along with promoting Wahhabi ideas not only in North Africa and the Middle East, but also in Central Asia.


It should be noted that Qatar and Turkey are the original creators of ISIL, and they have been investing heavily in the strengthening of this terrorist organization ever since. While Qatar provided a certain share of its financial wealth with ISIL, Turkey has spent significant time on the recruitment and training of ISIL militants for them to then wreak havoc in Iraq and Syria. Turkey did its best to provide its terrorist creation with sophisticated smuggling networks that allowed ISIL to ship stolen oil and drugs across the globe. The Islamic State repaid their masters with a constant stream of Muslim refugees heading to Europe in a bid to save their lives. After all, Turkey is the first to benefit from the flow of migrants that are supposed to conquer a foothold in new lands, planting the seeds for future victories of a new Ottoman Empire.

Bilateral military cooperation between Turkey and Qatar received a significant boost back in December 2014 when the parties signed a military agreement that received a whole new meaning a year later. This secret agreement was expanded during the visits of Turkish intelligence chief Hakan Fidan to Doha last December, when Ankara managed to secure Doha’s promise to compensate a portion of its losses from the cessation of Russian tourism to Turkey, believed to have caused a whopping 3 billion dollars in economic damage, along with the promise that Qatar will be providing Ankara with gas supplies, should Russia decide to terminate its supplies. In addition, Qatar has agreed to pay all the costs that will be attributed to the construction of Turkey’s military base on its territory, believed to be as high as 1 billion dollars.

The real question is what is Qatar getting in return? – Although both countries have sought to hide the answer from the general public, it is still fairly obvious.

First of all, Qatar will greatly enhance its military and political independence from its neighbor – Saudi Arabia, which has been repeatedly trying to distance itself from Qatari policies and even condemned Doha for the financial support it has been providing to radical extremists. Moreover, there’s little doubt that it will untie Doha’s hands in the business of sponsoring radical movements in the Islamic world, which have been labeled by numerous experts as extremist or even terrorist groups. Qatar will be able to train future members of such groups on its military base in Turkey, as well as using Turkish extremists on its territory for the same purposes, raising new radical hordes for military engagements in Syria or other countries. Such grim predictions are not only made by international experts, but by the members of the Turkish opposition, the Republican People’s Party as well.

According to the French agency Intelligence, Saudi Arabia has opposed the construction of the Turkish military base in Qatar since its first announcement, as has the UAE.. The Arab world seems to be frankly worried by the strengthening of the military cooperation between Turkey and Qatar, since this basically means that radical movements like the Muslim Brotherhood will be getting even more active, equating to greater adversity for a number of regional players. Under these circumstances, taking into account the well-known unpredictability of Erdogan’s behavior, in the near future we may witness the worsening of Turkey’s relations with a number of Arab states and the further destabilization of the region.

Martin Berger is a Czech-based freelance journalist and analyst, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.

 
http://journal-neo.org/2016/02/15/what-are-the-possible-consequences-of-turkey-qatar-military-cooperation/

Who is Responsible for the Suffering of Yemen?

January 23, 2016 (Martin Berger - NEO) - As noted by numerous commentators on the Middle East, the situation in Yemen remains very grave. The country has been devastated by the armed conflict being waged between the Houthis and the troops of ousted President Mansour Hadi, which in turn are being heavily supported by the air forces of the so-called Arab coalition led by Saudi Arabia.

The ongoing airstrikes claim civilians lives, leave districts in ruin, and destroy the country’s infrastructure. Earlier this month at least three people were killed in an air raid on the hospital of Doctors Without Borders in the governorate of Saada. It’s been reported that hospitals are closing their doors, unable to operate under the current circumstances.

This is not the first medical facility to be bombed in Yemen – the so-called Arab coalition has even destroyed the Center for Care and Rehabilitation of the blind in the Yemeni capital Sana’a. Moreover, the international Human Rights Watch organization reported that the coalition was using cluster bombs to destroy certain facilities in Sana’a back in January.

One should note that massive civil unrest began in Yemen in 2011 as the direct result of so-called the Arab Spring, orchestrated by the US and its allies. In 2014, Shia tribesmen that are known today as the Houthis started fighting government forces and consequently managed to capture a significant part of the country due to the massive support that was shown for them by the Yemeni population. In March 2015, Saudi Arabia launched its first airstrikes against the Houthis, which were, according to various human rights organizations, badly coordinated and resulted in massive civilian casualties.


Concerned by the grave state of affairs in Yemen, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad al Hussein announced at a meeting of the UN Security Council back in December that it is the so-called Arab coalition that is responsible for the absolute majority of attacks on residential areas and civilian targets in Yemen. According to Reutres, the UN High Commissioner announced that he:

...observed with extreme concern heavy shelling from the ground and air in areas of Yemen with a high concentration of civilians and the destruction of civilian infrastructure, such as hospitals and schools.

It is curious to note that in pursuit of its criminal goals in Yemen, Saudi Arabia has been using weapons that were bought from the UK in 2012. Moreover, it keeps on restocking its supply of deadly British-made weapons. For this reason, at the end of last year, leading British diplomats and lawyers warned David Cameron that he was running the risk of facing an international tribunal for war crimes due to the fact that the weapons that his government supplies to Saudi Arabia are being extensively used against civilian targets in Yemen.

According to The Independent:

Advisers to Philip Hammond, the Foreign Secretary, have stepped up legal warnings that the sale of specialist missiles to the Saudis, deployed throughout nine months of almost daily bombing raids in west Yemen against Houthi rebels, may breach international humanitarian law…

…thousands of Yemeni civilians have been killed, with schools, hospitals and non-military infrastructure hit. Fuel and food shortages, according to the United Nations, have brought near famine to many parts of the country.

Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch (HRW) and other NGOs, claim there is no doubt that weapons supplied by the UK and the United States have hit Yemeni civilian targets. One senior Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) legal adviser told The Independent: “The Foreign Secretary has acknowledged that some weapons supplied by the UK have been used by the Saudis in Yemen. Are our reassurances correct – that such sales are within international arms treaty rules? The answer is, sadly, not at all clear.”

Yet, The Guardian notes that Saferworld and Amnesty released a legal opinion from Professor Philippe Sands QC and a number of other lawyers, according to which the sales of British arms to Saudi Arabia in the light of its military intervention and bombing of Yemen violate national, European and international laws. The lawyers are pointing out that in the period of 9 months before July 2015 the UK supplied 9 million pounds worth of rockets and bombs, while in the next three months this number hit a staggering one billion pounds. Additionally, there’s clear evidence that those weapons were used against hospitals, schools, markets, warehouses, ports, and camps for displaced persons, turning Yemen into a nightmare. The Saferworld human rights organization is convinced that there’s a direct link between the increase in sales of ammunition and bombings in Yemen.

Many British observers, including those from The Guardian, have been pointing out that days after David Cameron’s statements about his attempt to “initiate a political process in Yemen,” and remarks that “there could be no military solution in Yemen,” the data released by the government showed that UK officials approved the sale of a billion pounds worth of bombs to Saudi Arabia.

Under these circumstances the only natural question is: Will international human rights organizations and the international community as a whole, all those who failed to say a resounding “NO” to Western military interventions in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, that were only profitable for arms sellers, carry on watching silently the destruction of Yemen? How many Yemenis do we need to see die before we start solving conflicts within a political framework? How many lives should be spared? Do we ever bring to justice those responsible for such massacres? Or will we rather allow politicians, the likes of Cameron, to call for peace, while selling huge amounts of deadly weapons behind our backs with impunity?

Martin Berger is a Czech-based freelance journalist and analyst, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook."

Saudi "Anti-Terror Coalition" a Facade to Hide Yet More Terrorism

December 30, 2015 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - A recently announced Saudi-led "anti-terror" coalition was met with great skepticism recently. This is not because of doubts over Saudi Arabia's sincerity alone, but because of the fact that much of the terrorism the "coalition" is allegedly to fight is an intentional creation of Saudi Arabian foreign policy to begin with. 

Image: Saudi Arabia, indisputably the premier state-sponsor of terrorism on Earth, and supplying the ideological "source code" carried forth by Al Qaeda and the so-called "Islamic State," claims it wants to lead an "anti-terror coalition." The world is reasonable to call this disingenuous at best, a ploy to continue, or even expand terrorism at worst. 

CNN's article, "Muslim nations form coalition to fight terror, call Islamic extremism 'disease'," claims: 

Calling Islamic extremism a disease, Saudi Arabia has announced the formation of a coalition of 34 largely Muslim nations to fight terrorism.

"This announcement comes from the Islamic world's vigilance in fighting this disease so it can be a partner, as a group of countries, in the fight against this disease," Saudi Deputy Crown Prince and Defense Minister Mohammed bin Salman said.

Asked whether the new coalition could include ground forces, Saudi Arabia's top diplomat told reporters in Paris on Tuesday that "nothing is off the table."

In reality, decades of documented evidence reveal that the Saudis are the primary conduit through which Western cash, weapons, support, and directives flow into mercenary armies of extremists, indoctrinated by Saudi Wahhabism - a politically-motivated perversion of Islam - and sent to execute joint Western-Saudi  geopolitical ambitions in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region and beyond.

In fact, over the decades, one can see a direct relation to the increasing impotence of Western conventional forces and their ability to project power across the planet, and the rise of unconventional terrorist forces that reach into otherwise inaccessible regions in their stead.

Image: The seats were still warm in Riyadh where representatives from Al Qaeda affiliates fighting in Syria sat, discussing with their Saudi sponsors future collaboration as Saudi Arabia announced its "anti-terror coalition." 

This does more than the West's feigned ignorance and surprise to explain why, after a year of allegedly battling the so-called "Islamic State" (ISIS, ISIL, or Daesh) in Syria, the United States made little progress and only after Russia's recent intervention, has the terrorist organization's existence been put in jeopardy.

The rise of ISIS, turns out to be the premeditated machinations of the West and its regional partners. A Department of Intelligence Agency (DIA) report drafted in 2012 (.pdf) admitted:

If the situation unravels there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).

To clarify just who these "supporting powers" were that sought the creation of a "Salafist" (Islamic) principality" (State), the DIA report explains:

The West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition; while Russia, China, and Iran support the regime.

The DIA report makes it clear that Saudi Arabia's "coalition" is the source of all terrorism, not the solution, and that there already exists a coalition sincerely committed to exterminating the scourge of militant extremism in the MENA region - Russia, China, Iran, and of course Syria itself.

A Facade to Hide Continued Terrorism Behind 

Likely what Saudi Arabia is doing, is attempting to reboot a narrative that, as of late, is increasingly implicating it and many of the members of its "coalition" as the very source of global terrorism. Additionally, Saudi Arabia has become increasingly involved directly with military operations beyond its borders. Its forces are fighting in neighboring Yemen, and military forces from Saudi Arabia and its Persian Gulf neighbors have been fighting covertly and semi-covertly in operations stretching from Libya to Syria.

Creating a "coalition" to fight "terrorism," would give the Saudis another rhetorical ploy to hide their increasingly direct role in supporting militarily the terrorist proxies they have deployed and who are now being defeated across the MENA region. Just as the US has done in Syria, using ISIS as a pretext to involve itself directly and militarily in the Syrian conflict without ever actually fighting ISIS, Saudi Arabia is seeking to create a plausible cover story to do the same.

For those interested in truly defeating terrorism globally - recognizing the state sponsors of terrorism and excluding them categorically from solving the problem until they are held responsible for creating it in the first place is essential. Saudi Arabia's announcement was met with skepticism, even ridicule for this very reason. Second, to defeat terrorism globally, those truly interested in investing in such a battle, should do so with those demonstrating a sincere desire to eradicate this scourge.

Thanks to the US DIA, a list of nations leading the fight has already been provided.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.   

Total War in Yemen Totally Ignored by Western Media

August 27, 2015 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - With almost a whimper, the Western media reported that the US-backed regimes of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and their auxiliary fighters drawn from Al Qaeda have begun carrying out what is the ground invasion of Yemen. Along with an ongoing naval blockade and months of bombing raids, the ground invasion adds a lethal new dimension to the conflict - for both sides.

Landing at the port city of Aden on Yemen's southern tip, it is reported that an "armor brigade" consisting of between 1,000 - 3,000 troops primarily from the UAE are now moving north, their ultimate destination Sana'a, the capital of Yemen.

Columns of the UAE's French-built Leclerc main battle tanks were seen moving out of the port city though their numbers are difficult to establish. Reports claiming that the UAE unit is brigade-sized might indicate as many as 100 tanks involved - a third of the UAE's total armored force.

The bold move comes after months of frustrating failures for the two Arabian regimes. Their Yemeni proxies - loyalists of the ousted president Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi - have proven all but useless in fighting Houthi fighters across most of Yemen despite air superiority provided to them by their Arabian allies. And while it appears the well-equipped Arab forces are able to concentrate firepower, overwhelming Houthi fighters in pitched battles, the ability for Saudi, UAE, and Al Qaeda forces to actually hold territory they move through is questionable at best.

Opportunity 

The Roman Empire throughout much of its reign was feared as invincible. After suffering several major defeats, the veneer of invincibility began to peel and along with it crumbled inevitably their empire. Likewise, Western hegemony has been propped up by the illusion of military superiority on the battlefield. By carefully picking its battles and avoiding critical defeats, the West, and the US in particular, has maintained this illusion of military invincibility

As the US moves against nations with larger, better equipped and trained armies, it has elected to use proxies to fight on its behalf. Thus, any humiliating defeat could be compartmentalized.

However, by most accounts the war in Yemen is not only a proxy war between Iran and the Persian Gulf monarchies, it is one of several such conflicts raging regionally that constitutes a wider proxy war between the US and its regional allies on one side, and Iran, Syria, Russia, and even China on the other.

With the presence of Western main battle tanks in Yemen attempting to move north, the opportunity now presents itself to punch holes through this illusion of Western invincibility. Yemen as the graveyard for an alleged brigade of French-built Leclerc main battle tanks would be one such hole. It would also set the UAE's extraterritorial military ambitions back, if not overturn them entirely, and finally, would leave whatever fighting was left in Yemen to the Saudis who have thus far proven incompetent.

Perhaps this is one of the many reasons the Western media has decided not to cover the events unfolding in Yemen.

Yemen Vs. Ukraine 

One might ask how - in the context of international law - it is possible for unelected absolute autocracies like Saudi Arabia and the UAE to intervene militarily in Yemen with naval blockades, aerial bombardments, and now an overt ground invasion including armor columns to restore an ousted regime. This is done with seemingly little concern from the United Nations and with the enthusiastic support both politically and militarily of the United States.

The answer to this question becomes more confounding still when considering Western condemnation of Russia for any attempt to support or defend the ousted government of Ukraine, a nation now overrun by NATO-backed Neo-Nazi militias who in turn are backing a criminal regime in Kiev which includes foreigners assigned to cabinet positions and even as governors. Saudi and UAE military aggression in Yemen makes it increasingly difficult for the West to maintain the illusion of moral superiority regarding Ukraine.

Russia's relative restraint when compared to US-backed aggression on the Arabian Peninsula exposes once again the pervasive hypocrisy consuming Western legitimacy.

This may be yet another reason the Western media refuses to cover the events unfolding in Yemen.

Responsibility to Protect...? 

After NATO's attempt to invoke the "responsibility to protect" (R2P) as justification for the destruction of Libya, it became clear that NATO was merely hiding behind the principles of humanitarian concern, not upholding them. And while it may be difficult to believe, there are still those across the Western media and policy think-tanks attempting to use R2P to justify further military aggression against nations like Syria.

However, R2P is conveniently absent amid what little talk of Yemen that does take place in the Western media. US-backed blockades and months of aerial bombardments have tipped Yemen toward a humanitarian catastrophe. Not only does both the UN and the West fail to demand an end to the bombings and blockades, the West has continued to underwrite Saudi Arabia and the UAE's military adventure in Yemen.
 

The carnage and injustice visited upon Yemen serves as yet another stark example of how the West and its institutions, including the United Nations, are the greatest dangers to global peace and stability, using the pretext of defending such ideals as a means to instead undo them.

Considering this, we discover yet another potential reason the Western media's coverage of Yemen is muted.

It remains to be seen how the Houthi fighters react to the ground invasion of Yemen by Emirati troops. Dealing severe losses to the UAE's armor while continuing to weather aerial bombardment may see the stalling or even the withdrawal of this latest incursion. Not unlike the 2006 Lebanon War where Hezbollah fighters expertly used terrain to negate Israeli advantages in airpower and armor, forcing an early end to the fighting, the Houthis may yet answer this latest move by US-backed proxies operating in Yemen.

Perhaps this possibility above all, is why the Western media would rather the general public knew little of what was going on in Yemen. It would represent yet another conventional Western-equipped proxy army defeated by irregular forces in yet another failed campaign fought in the interests of Wall Street and Washington. While the Western media refuses to cover the events unfolding in Yemen with the attention and honesty they deserve, the conflict is nonetheless pivotal, and may determine the outcome of other proxy wars raging across the Middle East and North Africa, and even beyond.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.   

US NED Ignores Saudi Barbarism

The Arabian Peninsula has been trapped in a time warp for nearly a century, thanks to the House of Saud and indomitable Western support.

July 15, 2015 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) -  Some may find it curious, browsing the US State Department's National Endowment for Democracy (NED) website, reviewing the unending lists of faux-NGOs special interests in the West have propped up across the planet to project influence and political meddling into every corner of the planet under the pretense of supporting "freedom and democracy," to discover this meddling extends to nearly all nations except a select few.

Image: Saudi troops move into Bahrain to crackdown on demonstrations there against the also-autocratic regime in power. While the West actively supported and even intervened on behalf of militant mobs across the MENA region seeking regime change, it not only failed to condemn the Saudis in their bid to crush dissent, but actively assisted.

One of these blind spots includes Saudi Arabia. In fact, under the category "Middle East and North Africa" (MENA), Saudi Arabia isn't even listed. NED-funded NGOs attempt to leverage every noble cause conceived by human empathy, from representative governance, to the rights of women and children, from behind which to hide their true agenda of political meddling, undermining local institutions, and the overwriting of a nation's sociocultural landscape. Yet, it would seem, even this farce has its limits, which begin at the borders of favored client-states including Saudi Arabia.

It would seem, were NED a genuine sponsor of such causes, Saudi Arabia would have attracted special attention. It is literally a nation where women do not exist as human beings legally or socially, unable to even drive, and were Saudi Arabia to have anything resembling actual elections, unable to vote as well. The lack of any semblance of representative governance is another aspect one might expect the National Endowment for Democracy to find issue with. Yet it doesn't.

This transparent, obvious hypocrisy exposes the entirety of NED's work for what it is - meddling behind an elaborate facade of defending freedom, democracy, and human rights.

But beyond this intentional blind spot the self-proclaimed arbiters of global freedom and democracy have created for the autocratic, brutal regime of Saudi Arabia to hide within, we find more than just silent approval, we find also active, even eager complicity.

The entirety of Saudi Arabia's security apparatus, both internal and military, has been created and propped up by the West through billions upon billions of dollars in aid, weapon sales, and direct military cooperation and support. This includes the immense 60 billion USD arms deal signed between Riyadh and Washington, the largest arms deal in US history.

This says nothing of covert operations the West, including the United States and United Kingdom, have been carrying out throughout the MENA region with Saudi Arabia as the chief proxy and local facilitator.

Saudi Barbaria 

Saudi Arabia is ruled by an unelected, hereditary dictatorship. In fact, so autocratic is Saudi Arabia, the nation is literally named after the single family that has ruled it since it was created - the House of Saud - or "Saud's Arabia."

While Western NGOs fund to the tune of millions per year activists around the world agitating political instability in nations like Thailand, claiming that the constitutional monarchy there is some sort of impediment to "democracy," the fact that a single family has ruled Saudi Arabia uninterrupted for decades, even naming the country after the family who rules it unopposed without even the semblance of elections or representative governance, seems to be more than acceptable.

To remain in power for decades, the House of Saud has instituted an extensive and barbaric punitive system which includes public beheadings for everyone from "witches and heretics" to enemies of the state. What is considered as intolerable barbarity in Syria or Iraq when Al Qaeda beheads prisoners of war or local civilians to impose their rule on seized territory, is just another day at "Chop-Chop Square" in Riyadh.

The International Business Tribune would report in its article, "Execution Central: Saudi Arabia's Bloody Chop-Chop Square," that: 

In the capital Riyadh, public executions take place in the central Deera square, usually at 9am. The wide ochre square has been grimly dubbed "chop chop square" has seen dozens of condemned men and women put to death in recent years.

"When they [death row prisoners] get to the execution square, their strength drains away. Then I read the execution order, and at a signal I cut the prisoner's head off," al-Beshi said.

According to Human Rights Watch, from January to September 2012, at least 69 people were executed in Saudi Arabia. Another 10 beheadings have been reported in just the first six weeks of 2013.

Beheadings are imposed mainly for murder or drug offences, but cases of apostasy (renunciation of one's faith), sorcery and witchcraft can also end up in Chop Chop square. Indeed a man named Muri' al-'Asiri was executed last year in the southern town of Najran, as punishment for being a sorcerer.

The parallels between Al Qaeda and Saudi Arabia are no coincidence. Al Qaeda and the subsequent "Islamic State" (ISIS) it has created, straddling Syria and Iraq and spreading across the rest of the MENA region in fact finds its genesis and chief patrons in Riyadh. The West props up Riyadh, and Riyadh props up a regional army of mercenaries waging relentless war on Washington and Wall Street's enemies throughout MENA. A torrent of supplies brought in by literal convoys of trucks even streams into the war zone via NATO territory.

ISIS can in fact be considered a "colony" of Riyadh, and a reflection of the depravity actively encouraged by the West on the Arabian Peninsula for decades. 

Saudi Barbarism Actively, Intentionally Enabled by West

A barbaric autocracy lopping the heads off its own citizens while creating colonies of terrorism across the globe through direct support of marching terrorist armies and a global network of madrases promoting the state-cult of Saudi Arabia, Wahhabism, under the guise of Sunni Islam would seem like one of the West's greatest threats. 

Yet in most cases, particularly when these Saudi-sponsored madrases are established in Europe or North America, national intelligence and law enforcement agencies, including the FBI, the CIA, MI5, and MI6 actively participate in the cultivating, exploitation, and entrapment of radicals created within. Never is it attempted to expose and dismantle these networks, and instead, an intentional strategy of tension is created around these rat nests of extremism to promote hysteria, division, and further fan the flames of fear at home, while justifying perpetual war abroad.

Considering this, it is clear why Saudi Arabia is not only pardoned for its inhumanity and criminality, but encouraged and enabled by special interests in the West. These interests are able to manipulate and terrorize their population at home, justify the creation and enlargement of domestic surveillance networks, and justify the use of military force abroad in campaigns of hegemonic conquest predicated on "national defense" against "terrorism" they and their allies have themselves created to begin with.

Image: Saudi Arabia wages relentless war against Yemen with absolute impunity - even complicity and support from the so-called "international community" comprised of Wall Street, Washington, London, Brussels, and the myriad of faux-international institutions they have created to lend legitimacy to their otherwise illegitimate, unwarranted power and influence.

When Saudi Arabia began airstrikes on neighboring Yemen, we saw once again not only the United States, United Kingdom, and the European Union fail to protest the extraterritorial aggression, but the United Nations itself also failed to condemn or act in response. Furthermore, Western support for Saudi military aggression has continued unabated regardless of the atrocities and deaths unfolding in Yemen.

And while it can safely be said that Al Qaeda is a reflection of Saudi Arabia, it can also be safely stated that Saudi Arabia, its barbarism and regional crimes against humanity, its state-sponsorship of global terrorism, and even the ideology it actively promotes worldwide that serves as the foundation global terrorism is inspired from, is a reflection in turn of the depravity of the special interests ruling Wall Street, Washington and their Transatlantic counterparts in London and Brussels.

Understanding the special accommodations made by the West for perhaps the most barbaric nation on Earth, amid disingenuous bleating about "Iran," "North Korea," "Russia," "China," and other enemies of Western hegemony, exposes the emptiness of Western principles - or more accurately - the emptiness of those hiding behind them.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.