TURKISH – UYGHUR TERROR
INC. – USA’S OTHER AL QAEDA
It is no longer tenable
for the United States and its regional allies in and near the Middle East to
claim they are backing “moderate rebels” in the proxy war raging in Syria,
Iraq, and parts of Lebanon. There is the Syrian government on one side, and terrorists
including Al Qaeda and its various franchises such as the Al Nusrah Front and
the so-called “Islamic State” (ISIS/ISIL) on
the other.
Background Information: 2013 we wrote:
UYGHUR ACTIVISTS
ALLEGEDLY LINKED TO AL-QAEDA AND EASTERN TURKISTAN ISLAMIC MOVEMENT http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2013/11/china-and-uyghur.html
If one is not supporting
the Syrian government, it is very clear they are supporting Al Qaeda. So
obvious is this fact, that the Western press and the corporate-financier think
tanks that produce for them their talking points, have begun a campaign to
re-brand Al Qaeda as a lesser evil vis-a-vis ISIS. In reality, there is virtually no
difference, with the US and its
regional allies clearly arming, funding, and supporting both.
The most recent and
obscene manifestation of this re-branding was US Army General and former CIA
Director David Petraeus’ open calls to use Al Qaeda to “fight” ISIS. In the
Daily Beast’s article, “Petraeus: Use Al Qaeda
Fighters to Beat ISIS,” it was reported that:
Members of al Qaeda’s
branch in Syria have a surprising advocate in the corridors of American power: retired
Army general and former CIA Director David Petraeus.
The former commander of U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan has
been quietly urging U.S. officials to consider using so-called moderate members
of al Qaeda’s Nusrah Front to fight ISIS in Syria, four sources familiar with
the conversations, including one person who spoke to Petraeus directly, told
The Daily Beast.
US AND
ITS SAUDI ALLIES CREATED AL QAEDA AS A PROXY MERCENARY FORCE TO FIGHT THE
SOVIET UNION IN AFGHANISTAN IN THE 1980’s
Within this rhetorical
shift we find an admission that there is indeed no “moderate rebel” force to
speak of. All that exists, admittedly, are extremists operating under the
various banners of Al Qaeda and ISIS.
Revelations of America’s
support behind Al Qaeda may not have ever been so overt, but are certainly
nothing new. It is admitted that the US and its Saudi allies first created Al
Qaeda as a proxy mercenary force to fight the Soviet Union in a proxy war in Afghanistan
in the 1980s. In 2007, long before the current war in Syria broke out, it was
warned by Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh in the pages of the
New Yorker that under the then Bush administration, support already began to
flow to the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria and other extremists groups including
Al Qaeda for the purpose of violently undermining the Syrian government in
Damascus.
Hersh’s article, “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” it is explicitly stated:
Hersh’s article, “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” it is explicitly stated:
To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush
Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the
Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has cooperated with Saudi Arabia’s
government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to
weaken Hezbollah, the
Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken
part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product
of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that
espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic
to Al Qaeda.
Past and present, it is clear that Al Qaeda was and still is a
central instrument of the United States in achieving geopolitical objectives –
particularly where Western forces cannot immediately or in any practical sense
intervene directly.
But Al Qaeda and its various affiliates are only one faction
among many terrorist groups minding the vast interests of American global
hegemony. A recent bombing in the heart of Bangkok, capital of Southeast Asia’s
nation of Thailand, and ongoing violence in China’s Xinjiang region expose
another vast network of US-sponsored terrorism operating in tandem with Al
Qaeda and in fact stretching from Asia all the way to frontiers of America’s
proxy war with Syria.
Background Information:
TURKISH UYGHUR MUSLIM MINORITIES A CAUSE OF CONCERN?
TURKEY AND CHINA AT ODDS
OVER 10 MILLION TURKISH UYGHUR MINORITIES LIVING IN CHINA
TURKISH-UYGHUR TERROR –
THE OTHER AL QAEDA
Because it relatively poorly understood and under-reported in
comparison to other more notorious terrorist groups, the Turkish-Uyghur terror
network is perhaps more dangerous and of greater utility to the United States
and its allies presently versus their increasingly exposed Al Qaeda legions.
The genesis of modern
Turkish-sponsored terrorism, like Al Qaeda, also originates from
the Cold War. Part of the wider stay-behind networks known as “Gladios” created by Western
entities to allegedly fight Soviet forces in the event of a Soviet invasion and
occupation of Western Europe, these terrorist groups were instead turned
against the population of NATO member states and engaged in violence,
terrorism, mass murder, and assassinations. A group of ultra-nationalists known
as the “Grey Wolves” would
be cultivated for this task within Turkey.
In a 1998 LA Times
article titled, “Turkish Dirty War Revealed, but Papal
Shooting Still Obscured,” it would be reported that (emphasis added):
In the late 1970s, armed bands of Gray Wolves launched a wave of
bomb attacks and shootings that killed hundreds of people, including public
officials, journalists, students, lawyers, labor organizers, left-wing
activists and ethnic Kurds. During this period, the Gray Wolves
operated with encouragement and protection of the Counter-Guerrilla
Organization, a section of the Turkish Army’s Special Warfare Department.
Working out of the U.S. Military Aid Mission building in Ankara, the Special
Warfare Department received funds and training from U.S. advisors to establish
“stay behind” squads of civilian irregulars who were set up to engage in acts
of sabotage and resistance in the event of a Soviet invasion. Similar
Cold War counter-guerrilla units were created in every member state of the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization. But instead of preparing for
foreign enemies, these operatives often set their sights on domestic targets.
Another LA Times piece
titled, “Turkey’s Gray Wolves
Nip at Heels of Power,” would reveal the extent of the Grey Wolves reign of terror
(emphasis added):
At the height of the Cold War, the army used the Gray Wolves as
a violent counterweight to Turkish Communists. The party’s coffers swelled with
secret contributions from the government.
By the late 1970s, the Gray Wolves had spun out of state control. Their paramilitary wing fought a campaign against leftist rivals that killed nearly 6,000 people. Ali Agca, who shot Pope John Paul II in a 1981 assassination attempt, is alleged to have been affiliated with the party.
By the late 1970s, the Gray Wolves had spun out of state control. Their paramilitary wing fought a campaign against leftist rivals that killed nearly 6,000 people. Ali Agca, who shot Pope John Paul II in a 1981 assassination attempt, is alleged to have been affiliated with the party.
The article would also reveal that despite this horrific past,
the Grey Wolves and their political allies were still a very potent political
force in Turkey. Today, the Grey Wolves function as a paramilitary wing of the
Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), which holds the third largest number of seats
in Turkey’s parliament.
As troubling as this should be to Turks who may find themselves
on the receiving end of a politically powerful terrorist organization
apparently tolerated, even sponsored by NATO for decades and in particular,
supported by the United States, the Grey Wolves’ terrorism has branched out far
beyond Turkey’s borders.
NATO STRATEGIES
According to a 2009 New
American Media report titled, “Behind the China Riots
— Oil, Terrorism & ‘Grey Wolves’,” Turkey’s Grey Wolves
have established militant training camps as far as China’s western Xinjiang
region, helping produce violent terrorists who have carried out a series of
deadly attacks across China. The report would state (emphasis added):
Enter the Grey Wolves,
one of the world’s most notorious terrorist organizations. Founded in the
1960s, the Wolves are a pan-Turkic paramilitary group with 1 million followers
across the Near East, Central Asia and inside Xinjiang. During the decade of
political violence in Turkey in the 1980s, the military-backed activists
launched a wave of assassinations, massacres of ethnic minorities, and
extortions of businesses. By official count, the Turkish government holds the
Wolves responsible for more than 600 murders, while leftists estimate the victims
numbered in the many thousands.
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Grey Wolves set
up training camps in Central Asia for youths from Turkic language groups,
including Uighur. Their indoctrination program embraces the goal of establishing
Turan, a Turkish empire across Euro-Asia, subjugating non-Turkish races and
unleashing violence to achieve their ends. Out of the limelight, the Wolves
provided commando training and material support for the East Turkestan
Independence Movement.
In essence, NATO’s stay-behind networks had become NATO’s
“go-abroad” networks, projecting the same sort of violence, terrorism, and
political coercion abroad after the Cold War that these networks carried out
domestically during the Cold War.
The alleged “struggle” by
the Uyghur people in Xinjiang,
referred to by the terrorists and their foreign sponsors as “East Turkistan,”
consists of two essential components – a foreign harbored political front
including the Washington D.C. and Munich-based World Uyghur Congress (WUC) and
a militant front clearly backed by the US and NATO through intermediary groups
like Turkey’s Grey Wolves.
Like the Grey Wolves, the
World Uyghur Congress is a creation and perpetuation of Western special
interests. WUC is directly funded by the US State Department via the National Endowment for
Democracy (NED) over a quarter of a million dollars (on record) a year. The
NED admittedly organizes and underwrites all of WUC’s events, and their annual
meetings usually feature almost exclusively US representatives reaffirming
their commitment to support WUC’s objectives which, as stated on their official website,
include:
The WUC declares a nonviolent and peaceful opposition movement
against Chinese occupation of East Turkestan and an unconditional adherence to
the international accepted human rights standard as laid down in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, and adherence to the principals of democratic
pluralism and rejection of totalitarianism, religious intolerance, and
terrorism as an instrument of policy.
And while WUC claims to stand
for a “peaceful opposition” to resist what it calls “Chinese occupation,” it
regularly justifies, defends, or covers up violence. Perhaps the most appalling
example of this was when it failed to condemn the 2014 brutal murder of
prominent Uyghur imam, 74 year old Jume Tahir, in front of China’s biggest and
oldest mosque. WUC would denounce him as a “tool” of the Chinese government and
even go as far as denounce China for
sentencing his killers – Uyghur terrorists – to death for the
horrific murder.
Clearly WUC not only finds it impossible to denounce terrorism,
it willfully serves as rhetorical cover for it.
Looking at a map of China
it is clear that this campaign of separatism directly serves the long-standing
plans of the United States to encircle and contain China’s rise – a campaign
that has been openly and repeated outlined in US policy papers for decades –
the most recent of which was published by the Council on Foreign Relations
(CFR) and was titled, “Revising U.S. Grand
Strategy Toward China.” It states in no uncertain terms:
Because the American effort to ‘integrate’ China into the
liberal international order has now generated new threats to U.S. primacy in
Asia—and could result in a consequential challenge to American power
globally—Washington needs a new grand strategy toward China that centers on
balancing the rise of Chinese power rather than continuing to assist its
ascendancy.
Encouraging separatism in
China’s western Xinjiang region, if successful, would carve off a substantial
amount of territory. In conjunction with US-backed separatism in China’s Tibet
region, an immense buffer region stands to be created that would virtually
isolate China from Central Asia. And while the Grey Wolves and their Uyghur proxies are working hard to create this
barrier to China’s west, with their involvement in a recent bombing in Bangkok,
it appears the US is now using them to augment efforts to create a similar
encirclement across Southeast Asia.
NATO EXPANDS INTO
SOUTHEAST ASIA
The Turkish-Uyghur terror network, in addition to fomenting
violence across China, has more recently been trafficking terrorists from
Xinjiang, through Southeast Asia, and onward to Turkey where they are staged,
armed, trained, and then sent to fight NATO’s proxy war in Syria. This
trafficking network apparently snaked its way through Thailand – exposed when
Thailand detained over 100 Uyghurs which it then deported upon Beijing’s
request back to China in July.
On the same day the deportations occurred WUC and NATO’s Grey
Wolves organized violent protests in Turkey both in Ankara and at the Thai
consulate in Istanbul during which the consulate was invaded and destroyed.
A month later, a devastating bomb would detonate in the heart of
Bangkok, killing 20 mostly Chinese tourists and injuring over 100 more. In
addition to the BBC already being on site before the blast, the British network
would conclude even before bodies were cleared from the site that Uyghurs were
likely behind the blast. This was done specifically to deflect blame from
another US proxy, Thaksin Shinawatra, who has been attempting for years to
regain power in Thailand.
In reality, Shinawatra and the Uyghur terrorists are both
functions of the same Westesrn agenda to encircle and contain China by building
up a “wall” of proxy states around Beijing, and if nothing else, to create
chaos in which Beijing finds it nearly impossible to prosper.
What is perhaps most concerning regarding these two Western
proxies is the fact that many past bombings associated with Shinawatra’s
terrorist networks – networks which are extensive – match the methods used by
Turkish-Uyghur terrorists making it likely that NATO’s extraterritorial
networks New American Media reported on in 2009 being set up in China, are
likely now dotting Uyghur trafficking routes throughout Southeast Asia as well.
The blast in Bangkok
likely took place for a number of reasons. Not only did Thailand ignore US
demands to release the detained Uyghurs to
Turkey, as well as oust a long-cultivated US proxy – Thaksin Shinawatra – but
it has been cultivating unmistakably closer ties to Beijing including the signing
of major joint-infrastructure development projects, closer military
cooperation, and even the potential procurement of 3 Chinese-made submarines –
all of which US policymakers have been decrying with increasing indignation.
TURKISH-UYGHUR INFLUENCE
BEYOND ASIA
And while the US is using Turkish-Uyghur terror to extort
concessions from Southeast Asia and to destabilize China, it is likely that
this “other Al Qaeda” will turn up still in other regions – most predictably,
Russian Crimea.
Crimea rejoined Russia after a NATO-backed, violent Neo-Nazi
coup overthrew the government of Ukraine, creating a cascade of anti-Russian
violence across the country. Eager to avoid the fate of many cities across
Ukraine, the people of Crimea overwhelmingly voted in a referendum to rejoin
Russia. Since then, Crimea has enjoyed peace and prosperity just across the
border from a Ukraine now mired in civil war and economic catastrophe, all
compounded by an illegitimate regime beholden to the US and NATO who thrust it
into power.
The fact that the border between Russian Crimea and Ukraine also
represents the border between peace and pandemonium highlights the criminal
chaos fostered by US-NATO meddling in Ukraine. A peaceful, stable Crimea serves
as a constant reminder to all in Eastern Europe that where ever NATO goes,
chaos follows.
If the US and its NATO allies could destabilize Crimea, thus
creating chaos within newly repatriated Russian territory, the West could make
a compelling case that dealing with Russia is at least as undesirable as
dealing with NATO.
US-NATO backed Turkish terrorism would be the key to
accomplishing this. Crimea’s proximity to Turkey and a sizable Turkish Tatar
minority serves as a potential medium for the West to carry this out. Already
the Western media has invested heavily in a narrative centered around
“disenfranchised Tatars” and has begun working with opposition groups to stir
up confrontations. Like in Xinjiang, those willing to participate in such an
opposition constitute a fractional minority – but through the power of Western
media, are inflated in the minds of impressionable audiences.
The US State Department’s Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty media
outlet in an article deceptively titled, “Putin Warns Crimean
Tatars Not To Seek Special Status,” indicated that Russia
was well aware of the ruse:
Putin suggested that
foreign countries were funding rights activists in an effort to “destabilize
the situation” by playing up problems faced by Crimean Tatars, the
third-largest ethnic group after Russians and Ukrainians on the peninsula, and
said that Moscow would not allow this.
“You and I know full well who we are talking about. There are a
number people who consider themselves professional fighters for rights,” he
said, adding that “they want to receive foreign grants and acknowledgement and
realize their ambitions, including political ambitions.”
Already in Kiev, these
Tatar opposition fronts have begun organizing and attempting to fan the flames
of conflict in Crimea. This includes ATR – a Tatar media channel with opaque
funding, now based in Kiev and now what US NED funded “Human Rights in
Ukraine” (KhPG) calls fighting “to counter the psychological and propaganda
influence from Russia.”
Understanding the scope
of Turkish-Uyghur terrorism,
their rhetorical supporters, and the function both serve toward maintaining US
global hegemony helps disarm the West of its various volatile narratives and
criminal conspiracies aimed at creating and leveraging terrorism. If when each
bomb goes off, or when any consulate is attacked, the public points the finger
not at America’s proxies, but directly at the special interests upon Wall
Street and lining Washington instead, all benefits of carrying out a proxy
campaign of global terrorism to begin with will evaporate before the West.
As is already happening in Syria where Western plans have been
frustrated by growing global awareness of the West’s true involvement in the
conflict and its role behind groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS, by exposing their
“other Al Qaeda,” their plans elsewhere around the globe will likewise be
confounded.
And while the US has attempted for years to galvanize the world
behind its global agenda through the use of terrorism, it is ironic that now
China, Russia, and even nations like Thailand all now find themselves on common
ground, having reason to cooperate closer together in facing a common threat –
America’s global terror enterprise.
Written by Tony Cartalucci,
Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online
magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.
No comments:
Post a Comment