Friday, 7 August 2015

A NEW MIDDLE EAST:



AN ASSESSMENT

Developments in SYRIA and IRAQ are in an dynamic phase where day to day developments can distract from the assessment of probable midi- to long-term developments. Operand factors in this assessment are RUSSIAN – TURKISH relations, a redirection of RUSSIAN MIDDLE EAST policy, the accord on IRAN’S nuclear energy program, the KURDISH discourse, and long-term US strategy with regard to the wider MIDDLE EAST.

The SYRIAN government’s control over the nation has suffered substantial setbacks since early 2015. The recent establishment of a safe zone in northern SYRIA – equivalent to a no-fly-zone – in SYRIA along the TURKISH border has challenged DAMASCUS’ capability to provide air support for ground operations against insurgents of the ISLAMIC STATE, AL-NUSRAH and other insurgents.
US-led air-strikes against ISLAMIC STATE are largely displacing ISIS towards DAMASCUS and BAGHDAD. US and TURKISH air-strikes in SYRIA have provided a safe-haven for the separatist KURDISH YPG. Predominantly TURKISH air-strikes against militants of the KURDISTAN Workers Party (PKK) in IRAQ, on the other hand, are keeping vital supply routes for the ISLAMIC STATE open while PKK fighters are dislodged and have to seek strategic depth in the predominantly KURDISH north – northwest of SYRIA.
Background Information:  KURD'S
TURKEY’S DREAMS OF BEING ENERGY HUB STRENGTHENED BY PKK NEGOTIATIONS? http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.co.at/2013/03/turkey-and-kurds.html
WHAT HAPPENS IN SYRIA NEXT WILL BE OF IMMENSE GEOPOLITICAL SIGNIFICANCE - THE KURDISH EQUATION   http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/10/libya-syria.html
TURKEY WOULD MAKE A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION TO THE RESOLUTION OF THE SYRIAN CRISIS IF IT COULD BRING ITSELF TO RISE ABOVE THE SECTARIAN CONSIDERATIONS THAT HAVE DICTATED ITS REGIME CHANGE POLICY IN SYRIA. http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/08/turkeys-syrian-policies.html
TURKEY'S GAMBLE ON KURDISTAN OIL http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/08/turkeys-erratic-foreign-policies-all.html

THE KURDISH PEOPLE ARE THE WORLD’S LARGEST ETHNICITY OR PEOPLE WITHOUT A NATION
Along with the UNITED STATES and TURKEY’S policies with regard to KURDISH autonomy and the eventual establishment of a KURDISH State in NORTHERN IRAQ, these policies and strategies are largely consistent with long-established plans to create a KURDISH federation or a KURDISH State with breathing straw access to the MEDITERRANEAN. Considering that the various KURDISH parties and paramilitary organizations don’t have converging policies, strategies, aims, and for that sake regional and international allies, the establishment of a KURDISH construct, whether as a federation or as a State will be lasting for anything between 5 – 25 years. The establishment of a KURDISH dominated region that includes northern IRAQ and northern SYRIA is well underway. US policy aims at expanding this development into northern IRAN.
CONFLICTING PRINCIPLES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

The KURDISH people are, arguably, the world’s largest ethnicity or people without a nation. International law provides the right to self-determination. This principle of the right to self-determination is conflicting with the equally valid principle of a nation’s right to territorial integrity. Both principles are lacking enforcement mechanisms that are based in coherent law. Currently any enforcement of these principles would either have to be based on one actor, usually supported by one of the superpowers, to establish a de-facto situation, or by a unanimous vote of the UN Security Council. Both situations are equally problematic and questionable and based on policy and power rather than in law. The situation about the establishment of a KURDISH State is being further complicated by TURKEY’S support of SYRIAN and IRAQI KURDS while TURKEY is careful not to include TURKISH territories in a future KURDISH construct. That situation may change if the pro-KURDISH parties in TURKEY gain additional momentum while nationalists continue to suffer election losses. Ironically, a potential breakup of the TURKISH Republic, a NATO member, poses a potential threat to RUSSIA.
THE SITUATION IN SOUTHERN AND WESTERN SYRIA

DAMASCUS is increasingly having difficulties with asserting sovereignty over the region along the LEBANESE border, the GOLAN HEIGHTS and at its border to JORDAN. ISRAEL has, by supporting JABHAT AL-NUSRAH and associated brigades via the GOLAN HEIGHTS and the SHEEBA FARM area achieved two major objectives. It has weakened DAMASCUS, but it has also weakened HEZBOLLAH and HEZBOLLAH’S capacity to resist against ISRAEL. ISRAEL has, by implication, weakened TEHERAN’S sphere of influence. Long-term ISRAELI policy aims at the permanent annexation of the GOLAN HEIGHTS and the SHEEBA FARM area. Weakening DAMASCUS and HEZBOLLAH was one of the main stumbling stones ISRAEL is about to have overcome. Considering the strength of the ISRAELI military, it will have no problems with dislodging AL-NUSRAH and others from the GOLAN once that becomes opportune. This move would ultimately further weaken DAMASCUS and HEZBOLLAH.
Background Information: ISRAEL AND THE MIDDLE EAST

VILIFICATION OF IRAN BY QATAR, TURKEY AND SAUDI ARABIA IN ORDER TO GAIN GEO-STRATEGIC LEVERAGE OVER IRAN http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.co.at/2013/05/syria-israel-and-turkey-and-iran-love.html
TWO “ARCH FOES” ALLIED IN OPPOSING IRAN DEAL? http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.co.at/2013/11/israelis-saudis-and-iranian-agreement.html

COULD IT BE THAT KEEPING ASSAD IN POWER IS MAYBE THE EXACT INTENTION OF ISRAEL?
In June 2012 Geopolitical Analysis and Monitoring wrote: ISRAEL’S INTERESTS……….This is almost certainly because the ISRAELI Prime Minister would, on balance, prefer the Assad regime to continue; it is a known quantity and any new regime could severely destabilize the effective balance-of-power between two uneasy neighbors’…..
THE ALAWITES AND ISRAEL
IT IS GENERALLY BELIEVED THAT AMONG THE ARAB REGIMES SYRIA IS THE MOST IMPLACABLE ENEMY OF ISRAEL. http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/10/the-alawites-and-israel.html
ISRAEL COPING WITH A FULL SCALE CIVIL WAR IN SYRIA http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/06/syria-israel-iran-and-usa.html
ARE IRAN AND ISRAEL REALLY ARCHENEMIES, OR IS IT JUST A FACADE?  http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2013/05/iran-and-israel-real-archenemies.html  
ISRAEL’S IRAN “WARMONGERING RHETORIC’S” ARE DECEIVING TACTICS FOR A GREATER CAUSE  http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/10/israel-azerbaijan-and-kazakhstan_6.html
POLITICAL DYNAMICS IN THE SOUTH CAUCASUS AND IRAN’S PRIORITIES IN THE REGION http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com/2013/06/israeli-azerbaijani-alliance-and-iran.html
ISRAEL SUCCESSFULLY ESTABLISHED DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH NINE NON-ARAB MUSLIM STATES http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com/2013/06/israeli-azerbaijani-alliance-and-iran_21.html

SYRIA has long been MOSCOW’S primary ally in the MIDDLE EAST. The naval base in TARTOUS was MOSCOW’S sole MEDITERRANEAN naval base. RUSSIAN policy and strategy had, however, to adjust to the developments in UKRAINE and SYRIA. MOSCOW was, in other words, confronted with the problem how to secure its export of gas to EUROPE via UKRAINE while searching for alternatives. It is here that TURKEY is playing a key role. Even though it is possible to compartmentalize energy policy and geopolitics, this option is inherently risky. The more secure option is to combine the two. Developments in RUSSIAN – TURKISH relations suggest that TURKEY and RUSSIA may be approaching a consensus with regards to both gas pipelines, the KURDISH question as well as the question about at least parts of KURDISH – SYRIAN territory.
RUSSIA IS NOT DEPENDENT ON IMPORTING ENERGY FROM THE MIDDLE EAST
MOSCOW has redirected its naval presence by agreement with CYPRUS as well as by attempting to gain leverage via developing and re positioning RUSSIAN – EGYPTIAN relations. Also this ultimately suggests that MOSCOW is thinking in terms of – the inevitable – development of a KURDISH construct and a substantially weakened SYRIA.
Background Information: MIDDLE EASTERN ENERGY EQUATION

NEW ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALIST REGIME IN SYRIA IN ORDER TO REACTIVATE SAUDI ARABIA’S AND USA ARAMCO  TRANS ARABIAN OIL PIPELINE?

An additional, largely ignored factor is that RUSSIA is not dependent on importing energy from the MIDDLE EAST. The RUSSIAN FEDERATION is, to the contrary, aiming at the export of energy. Long-term RUSSIAN MIDDLE EAST policy will have to be based on this consideration.
IRAN – NOT TO BECOME A WILD CARD

An additional factor in the midi- to long-term considerations pertaining the MIDDLE EAST is IRAN. It is noteworthy that the UNITED STATES and RUSSIA compartmentalized their otherwise tense relations and cooperated with regard to finding a solution to IRAN’S nuclear energy program. Neither the UNITED STATES nor RUSSIA are interested in an IRAN that could develop nuclear weapons capabilities within a relatively short time span; that is 7 – 24 months. Where WASHINGTON’S and MOSCOW’S policies don’t converge is the reason why they share this common goal. All IRANIAN political posturing for consumption in foreign media set aside, one only has to follow statements by the leadership of the IRANIAN National Guard in PARSI to understand that the development of nuclear weapons capabilities is boiling underneath the surface of lack-luster diplomacy.
The UNITED STATES, for its part, is aiming at a continuation of a strategy that aims at weakening IRAN, starting with diminishing TEHERAN’S influence as regional player and ultimately aiming at destabilizing at least northern IRAN. This policy is consistent with midi- to long-term US goals to establish low-intensity conflicts along the southern border of the RUSSIAN FEDERATION, RUSSIA’S CSTO allies as well as along CHINA’S southern borders.
RUSSIA, for its part, is acutely aware of the US’ midi- to long term strategic goals. To counter these strategies, MOSCOW requires a stable IRAN, but also an IRAN that does not develop its own nuclear capabilities. In other words, MOSCOW needs IRAN for strategic depth and MOSCOW depends on IRAN as a stabilizing force that prevents or at least weakens or delays the spread of ISLAMIST militant organizations along its southern borders.
THE NEW MIDDLE EAST INEVITABLE

The irony of the situation is that all of the permanent UN Security Council members argue that the current borders in the MIDDLE EAST are an artifact of colonialism. A divergence between WASHINGTON, LONDON, PARIS on one hand and MOSCOW and in part BEIJING arises due to the question whether these borders are invulnerable. One could also say that the divergence arises in the discussion about the primacy of the invulnerability of the territorial integrity of nation States vs the right to self-determination.
“BALKANIZATION” OF THE MIDDLE EAST
Whichever principle the one or the other nation chooses depends – for all of the involved parties – on utility, not on international law. A comparison between 2015 and 2025 maps of the MIDDLE EAST is likely to be equivalent to comparing a 1980 map of YUGOSLAVIA with a 2015 map of the BALKANS. The tragedy is that the UN and the Security Council are failing the nations and the people of the MIDDLE EAST as much as the League of Nations has failed those MIDDLE EASTERN and AFRICAN nations who would suffer the consequences of two EUROPEAN Wars.
Background Information: BALKANIZATION

Adapted by Geopolitical Analysis and Monitoring from an article written by Dr. Christof Lehmann, an independent political consultant on conflict and conflict resolution and the founder and editor in chief of nsnbc.


Posted by at No comments:

GREECE: BANK BAILOUT

DOES THE GREEK BAILOUT PAVE THE WAY FOR THE UNITED STATES OF EUROPE?


The Greek Coup: 

Liquidity as a Weapon of Coercion

Ellen H. Brown: In the modern global banking system, all banks need a credit line with the central bank in order to be part of the payments system. Choking off that credit line was a form of blackmail the Greek government couldn’t refuse.
Former Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis is now being charged with treason for exploring the possibility of an alternative payment system in the event of a Greek exit from the euro. The irony of it all was underscored by Raúl Ilargi Meijer, who opined in a July 27th blog:

The fact that these things were taken into consideration doesn’t mean Syriza was planning a coup . . . . If you want a coup, look instead at the Troika having wrestled control over Greek domestic finances. That’s a coup if you ever saw one.

Let’s have an independent commission look into how on earth it is possible that a cabal of unelected movers and shakers gets full control over the entire financial structure of a democratically elected eurozone member government. By all means, let’s see the legal arguments for this.

So how was that coup pulled off? The answer seems to be through extortion. The European Central Bank threatened to turn off the liquidity that all banks – even solvent ones – need to maintain their day-to-day accounting balances. That threat was made good in the run-up to the Greek referendum, when the ECB did turn off the liquidity tap and Greek banks had to close their doors. Businesses were left without supplies and pensioners without food. How was that apparently criminal act justified? Here is the rather tortured reasoning of ECB President Mario Draghi at a press conference on July 16:

There is an article in the [Maastricht] Treaty that says that basically the ECB has the responsibility to promote the smooth functioning of the payment system. But this has to do with . . . the distribution of notes, coins. So not with the provision of liquidity, which actually is regulated by a different provision, in Article 18.1 in the ECB Statute: “In order to achieve the objectives of the ESCB [European System of Central Banks], the ECB and the national central banks may conduct credit operations with credit institutions and other market participants, with lending based on adequate collateral.” This is the Treaty provision. But our operations were not monetary policy operations, but ELA [Emergency Liquidity Assistance] operations, and so they are regulated by a separate agreement, which makes explicit reference to the necessity to have sufficient collateral. So, all in all, liquidity provision has never been unconditional and unlimited. [Emphasis added.]
In a July 23rd post on Naked Capitalism, Nathan Tankus calls this “a truly shocking statement.” 

Why? Because all banks rely on their central banks to settle payments with other banks. “If the smooth functioning of the payments system is defined as the ability of depository institutions to clear payments,” says Tankus, “the central bank must ensure that settlement balances are available at some price.”

How the Payments System Works

The role of the central bank in the payments system is explained by the Bank for International Settlements like this:

One of the principal functions of central banks is to be the guardian of public confidence in money, and this confidence depends crucially on the ability of economic agents to transmit money and financial instruments smoothly and securely through payment and settlement systems. . . . 

[C]entral banks provide a safe settlement asset and in most cases they operate systems which allow for the transfer of that settlement asset.
Internationally before 1971, this “settlement asset” was gold. Later, it became electronic “settlement balances” or “reserves” maintained at the central bank. Today, when money travels by check from Bank A to Bank B, the central bank settles the transfer simply by adjusting the banks’ respective reserve balances, subtracting from one and adding to the other.

Checks continue to fly back and forth all day. If a bank’s reserve account comes up short at the end of the day, the central bank treats it as an automatic overdraft in the bank’s reserve account, effectively lending the bank the money in the form of electronic “liquidity” until the overdraft can be cleared. The bank can cure the deficit by attracting new deposits or by borrowing from another bank with excess reserves; and if the whole system is short of reserves, the central bank creates more to maintain the liquidity of the system.

The most dramatic exercise of this liquidity function was seen after the banking crisis of 2008, when credit was frozen and banks had largely stopped lending to each other. The US Federal Reserve then stepped in and advanced over $16 trillion to financial institutions through the TAF (Term Asset Facility), the TALF (Term Asset-backed Securities Loan Facility), and similar facilities, at near-zero interest. Toxic unmarketable assets were converted into “good collateral” so the banks could remain solvent and keep their doors open.

Liquidity as a Tool of Coercion

That is how the Fed sees its role, but the ECB evidently has other ideas about this liquidity tool. Whether a country’s banks are allowed to “access monetary policy operations” is seen by the ECB not as mandatory but as discretionary with the central bank. And as a condition of that access, if a country’s bonds are “below investment grade,” the country must be under an IMF program — meaning it must subject itself to forced austerity measures. According to ECB Vice President Constâncio at the same press conference:

[W]hen a country has a rating which is below the investment grade which is the minimum, then to access monetary policy operations, it has to have a waiver. And the waiver is granted if there are two conditions. The first condition is that the country must be under a programme with the EU and IMF; and second, we have to assess that there is credible compliance with such a programme. [Emphasis added]

Liquidity is provided only on “adequate collateral” — usually government bonds. But whether the bonds are “adequate” is not determined by their market price. Rather, political concessions are demanded. The government must sell off public assets, slash public services, lay off public workers, and subject its fiscal policies to oversight by unelected bureaucrats who can dictate every line item in the national budget.

Tankus observes:

Europe now has a system where liquidity and insolvency problems can occur and can be deliberately generated (at least in part) by the central bank. Then the Troika can force that country into an “IMF program” if it wants to continue having a functioning banking system. Alternatively, the central bank can choose to simply “suspend convertibility” to the unit of account [i.e. cut off the supply of Euros] and force the write down of deposits [haircuts and bail-ins] until the banks are solvent again.

Pushed to the Cliff by the Financial Mafia

Were liquidity and insolvency problems intentionally generated in Greece’s case, as Tankus suggests? Let’s review.

First there was the derivatives scheme sold to Greece by Goldman Sachs in 2001, which nearly doubled the nation’s debt by 2005.

Then there was the bank-induced credit crisis of 2008, when the ECB coerced Greece to bail out its insolvent private banks, throwing the country itself into bankruptcy.

This was followed in late 2009 by the intentional overstatement of Greece’s debt by a Eurostat agent who was later tried criminally for it, triggering the first bailout and accompanying austerity measures.

The Greek prime minister was later replaced with an unelected technocrat, former governor of the Bank of Greece and later vice president of the ECB, who refused a debt restructuring and instead oversaw a second massive bailout and further austerity measures. An estimated 90% of the bailout money went right back into the coffers of the banks.

In December 2014, Goldman Sachs warned the Greek Parliament that central bank liquidity could be cut off if the Syriza Party were elected. When it was elected in January, the ECB made good on the threat, cutting bank liquidity to a trickle.

When Prime Minister Tsipras called a public referendum in July at which the voters rejected the brutal austerity being imposed on them, the ECB shuttered the banks.

The Greek government was thus broken Mafia-style at the knees, until it was forced to abandon its national sovereignty and watch its public treasures sold off piece by piece. Suspicious minds might infer that this was a calculated plot designed from the beginning to throw Greece’s prized assets onto the auction block, a hostile takeover and asset stripping for the benefit of those well-heeled entities in a position to purchase them, including the very banks, hedge funds and speculators instrumental in driving up Greek debt and destroying the economy.

No Sovereignty Without Control Over Currency and Credit

In the taped conference call for which Yanis Varoufakis is currently facing treason charges, he exposed the trap that eurozone countries are now in. It seems there is virtually no legal way to break free of the euro and the domination of the troika. The government has no access to the critical data files of its own banks, which are controlled by the ECB.

Varoufakis said this should alarm every EU government. As Canadian Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King warned in 1935:

Once a nation parts with the control of its currency and credit, it matters not who makes the nation’s laws.  Usury, once in control, will wreck any nation.

For a nation to regain control of its currency and credit, it needs a central bank with a mandate to serve the interests of the nation. Banking should be a public utility, serving the economy and the people.

Ellen H. Brown, Web of Debt

P.S.: “My father made him an offer he couldn’t refuse. Luca Brasi held a gun to his head and my father assured him that either his brains, or his signature, would be on the contract.”      — The Godfather (1972)
Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, 22 July 2015

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE JORDANIANS




THERE CAN BE NO PEACE IN JORDAN UNTIL THE WORLD APPRECIATES THE COUNTRY’S TRUE ETHNOGRAPHY

ARAB nationalism is dead. It lasted for 100 years and it has suddenly disappeared. In the former states of now war-torn LIBYA, SYRIA and IRAQ, speaking ARABIC now means nothing. However, being a member of a family, lineage or clan of either the SHIA, SUNNIS, CHRISTIANS, DRUZE, YAZIDI, TUAREG or BEDOUIN means everything. The “ARAB LEAGUE” is now totally dysfunctional.
From MOROCCO to MALAYSIA, ISLAMIC JIHADIS go from one place to another in support of recently created political entities like the TALIBAN, AL-QAIDA, or ISIL. Nations and their borders now count for nothing. Yet the new POPE has just recognized yet another ARAB state, “PALESTINE.” Perhaps this is because he has critically misread how ARAB entities really rise and fall.

Background Information:

PALESTINIANS ARE ARABS, WITH ARAB CULTURE, ARABIC LANGUAGE AND ARABIC HISTORY – PHILISTINES ARE FROM CRETE, PRESENT DAY GREECE

PALESTINE - ORIGIN OF PEOPLE - WHO ARE THE PALESTINIANS?
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.co.at/2015/02/palestine-origin-of-people-who-are.html

Until the end of the First World War, most of the ARABIC-speaking MIDDLE EAST was under the authority of the TURKISH OTTOMAN EMPIRE. The TURKS lost their empire when they fought against the allies during the war. And so, after four centuries of subservience to the TURKS, CHRISTIAN and MUSLIM speakers of ARABIC, longing for independence, created ARAB nationalism, a political movement that mirrored the ethnic and linguistic nationalism that were then transforming the landscape of 19th-century EUROPE.

In this new ideology, an “ARAB” was someone who spoke ARABIC. The largely CHRISTIAN ARAB proponents of this ideology hoped that as citizens of newly created secular states, they would finally be given the legal and political equality denied to them for centuries under ISLAMIC law and MUSLIM rulers. And so, after the First World War, a number of “ARAB” states were created by the LEAGUE OF NATIONS, such as LEBANON, SYRIA and IRAQ. By the end of the Second World War, they had all gained their independence.

AFTERMATH OF BRITISH COLONIALISM IN THE MIDDLE EAST

Among these newly created states, there arose the HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN, which became formally independent in 1946. Until then, it was legally part of the LEAGUE OF NATIONS Mandate for PALESTINE, implemented on trust from the LEAGUE OF NATIONS by the BRITISH government. So we must ask, in this age of suddenly disintegrating “ARAB states,” where do the JORDANIANS live and who are they?
Bad times ahead: Sir Edmund Allenby enters 
Jerusalem’s Old City Photo: 2013 Culture Club
The people who reside in JORDAN live on the east side of the JORDAN River. Anyone who has ever been to Sunday school probably knows the regions and cities of this area better than they know their own state or province. This is the biblical land of BASHAN and of GILEAD.

Three thousand years ago, what is now northern JORDAN was the territory of the ISRAELITES: specifically the tribes of DAN, MANASSEH, GAD and REUBEN. Later, the area became part of the second JEWISH Commonwealth under the MACCABEES, before the ROMANS conquered the whole area and made it part of their empire (the CHRISTIAN Bible has retained numerous books which describe the history of the MACCABEES until the ROMAN conquest).

HASHEMIS WERE AND CONTINUE TO BE A USURPING BEDOUIN TRIBAL ELITE IN EASTERN PALESTINE

No one reads the LEAGUE OF NATIONS Mandate for PALESTINE document anymore. But according to international law, it is still valid
Who are the JORDANIANS? Until the second decade of the 20th century there had never been a JORDANIAN people, ethnic group or tribe by that name, or a group of diasporic exiles who thought of themselves as “JORDANIAN.” JORDAN is a 20th-century BRITISH invention, dreamed up in the 1920s, for the peoples living in what BRITAIN illegally hived off from the LEAGUE OF NATIONS Mandate for PALESTINE in 1923. Until 1946 its BRITISH administrators called it just that — EASTERN PALESTINE.

Background Information: 

BRITISH RULING IN THE MIDDLE EAST – THE CAUSE OF CURRENT SITUATION - SKYES PICOT AGREEMENT   


The British diplomat Mark Sykes and a FRENCH counterpart Francois Georges Picot divided the Middle East into zones of influence that later served as the frontiers of independent Arab states.
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.co.at/2013/12/syria.html


LEAGUE OF NATIONS MANDATE FOR PALESTINE

No one reads the LEAGUE OF NATIONS Mandate for PALESTINE document anymore. But according to international law, it is still valid. It is the legal basis for the creation of the JEWISH state of ISRAEL. Its provisions still stand, because all of the legal pronouncements of the League were subsequently recognized as binding, when the UNITED NATIONS was created after the Second World War.

In 1923 the BRITISH arbitrarily violated the Mandate, morally and legally, by creating the “EMIRATE OF JORDAN” in EASTERN PALESTINE. The BRITISH announced that this was a “temporary” measure, which they quietly and quickly made “permanent.” Jews were no longer allowed to live there.

BRITISH WHEELING AND DEALING

The name, the “HASHEMITE” Kingdom of JORDAN, makes reference to the fact that its ruling tribe, the HASHEMIS, were imported by the BRITISH from outside of JORDAN in the HEJAZ (what is now western SAUDI ARABIA). The HASHEMIS rule JORDAN today as the SAUDIS do ARABIA, claiming the name of the country by right of tribal conquest and occupation, but in their case with the connivance of the BRITISH, who unilaterally lopped off 70 per cent of mandated PALESTINE, and gave it to them as their compensation for their tribal revolt against the TURKS during the First World War.

In order to give this new national fiction of JORDAN some instant legitimacy, the BRITISH creatively mistranslated ARABIC titles like “emir” (in those days it meant an often non-hereditary, elected BEDOUIN tribal leader) and “SHARIF,” and called these men “kings,” giving them a kind of faux-royal aura. In fact, the HASHEMIS were and continue to be a usurping BEDOUIN tribal elite in EASTERN PALESTINE.

This explains all those “tribal rebellions” that occurred there during the 1920s and 1930s. Clearly, the BEDOUIN tribes that were there before the HASHEMIS invaded had a hard time understanding why they should give up their independence and be ruled by these BRITISH imports. The HASHEMIS put down these “rebellions” with the active aid and military support of thinly disguised BRITISH mercenaries, in an army that was ironically named THE ARAB LEGION, trained and led by BRITISH officers.

Although the BEDOUIN were the masters of most of the desert lands of JORDAN, east of the river there were always small towns and villages, where farmers and townsmen eked out a living. Many of the ARAB MUSLIMS of these towns and villages were former BEDOUIN who had become farmers. Among them were the demographically reduced survivors of the BYZANTINE EMPIRE, which had fallen to the invading ARAB MUSLIMS in the seventh century during the first MUSLIM invasions from ARABIA. These included various ARABIC- and ARAMAIC-speaking CHRISTIANS, as well as ARMENIANS who were later joined by MUSLIMS from the CAUCASUS, and DRUZE immigrants from SYRIA.

Background Information:  PALESTINIANS

PALESTINE - MIDDLE EAST: THE MYTH OF PALESTINIAN CENTRALITY
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.co.at/2015/01/middle-east-myth-of-palestinian.html

LICENSE TO STATEHOOD
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.co.at/2011/07/license-to-statehood.html

TELLING THE UN SIX HOME TRUTHS
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2011/09/palestine.html

CONTEMPLATING A SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE IN THE PALESTINIAN POSITION
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2013/10/israel-and-palestine-to-be-or-not-to-be.html

PALESTINE, AND ITS PROSPEROUS MARKETING CONCEPT
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2015/01/palestine-and-mainstream-media.html


PALESTINIAN ARAB IDENTITY DEVELOPED QUITE RECENTLY, AS A CONTRARY MOVEMENT AND MIRROR IMAGE TO THAT OF THE JEWS

Today the majority of the country’s inhabitants are largely MUSLIM ARABS who now think of themselves as PALESTINIANS. Before the Mandate, they had no national identity and like that of JORDAN, there is no record of a self-defined, self-declared PALESTINIAN national identity in any historical document before the early to mid-20th century.
PALESTINIAN ARAB identity seems to have developed quite recently, as a contrary movement and mirror image to that of the JEWS, who were returning to their ancient homeland by right, and whose physical, religious and cultural connection to the land had never been severed, or questioned, and which was formally recognized by the LEAGUE OF NATIONS after the First World War. This is the essence of that strange and paradoxical ethno genesis of what is now called the PALESTINIAN nation.

Once the BRITISH established the Mandate, and JEWISH immigration began to create a mini-industrial revolution, both WESTERN and EASTERN PALESTINE attracted waves of MUSLIM ARAB immigrants from EGYPT and SYRIA. These new immigrants found it convenient to make common cause with the non-BEDOUIN residents of JORDAN and much later, specifically after 1967, called themselves and their children PALESTINIANS. President ROOSEVELT pointed out in 1939 that “ARAB immigration into PALESTINE since 1921 has vastly exceeded the total JEWISH immigration during this whole period.”

JORDAN IS CLEARLY A PALESTINIAN ARAB STATE IN WHAT WAS FORMERLY BRITISH MANDATED PALESTINE

The great historical irony of this period is that all of the ancestors of today’s MUSLIM ARAB PALESTINIANS, now living in Mandated EASTERN PALESTINE, all of a sudden stopped being thought of as ARABS of PALESTINE by the BRITISH, and then by the members of the UNITED NATIONS after 1948, and even more so since the OSLO process began in 1992. This has been and remains one of the great disappearing acts of modern history, for JORDAN is clearly a PALESTINIAN ARAB STATE in what was formerly BRITISH MANDATED PALESTINE, with a majority of non-BEDOUIN villagers and townspeople who do not define themselves as BEDOUIN or JORDANIAN.

Background Information: TRANS JORDAN

JORDANIAN-PALESTINIAN CONFEDERATION
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.co.at/2013/01/israel-jordan-and-palestine.html

DOES JORDAN WANT PALESTINIANS IN CONTROL OF THE BORDER?
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2013/10/jordan-and-israel.html


In 1948, the same year that the BRITISH-led ARAB (BEDOUIN) LEGION OF JORDAN invaded the newly created State of ISRAEL, KING ABDULLAH of JORDAN declared that “PALESTINE and JORDAN are one.” And so in 1948, ARABS resident in both EASTERN and WESTERN PALESTINE went to war with the newly created state of ISRAEL in that small part of WESTERN PALESTINE that had been begrudged by the UN to the JEWISH people. No one thought that this new state of ISRAEL would survive.

The ARABS of the BRITISH Mandate on both sides of the JORDAN attacked ISRAEL and when they were defeated, many of them removed themselves from one part of WESTERN PALESTINE to those parts of PALESTINE, on both sides of the JORDAN, then under “JORDANIAN” authority. The same thing happened when ARABS from the WEST BANK chose to cross the JORDAN after the 1967 and subsequently, when JORDAN and so many of them had once again taken up arms against ISRAEL, in the hope of conquering all of WESTERN PALESTINE. If that is the case, are they really “refugees” or are they not still residents in the territory of the PALESTINE Mandate?

“PALESTINE IS JORDAN AND JORDAN IS PALESTINE.”


The political and ethnographic disappearance of the PALESTINIAN nature of the ARABS of EASTERN PALESTINE (JORDAN), has largely been a tactic used by the ARAB LEAGUE, and its allies on the left, to put ISRAEL and its supporters on the defensive, for many ARABS have made public statements in favor of the JORDAN-IS-PALESTINE argument. They just happen to do so in a way that usually implies the destruction of the JEWISH State.

For example, on Feb. 2, 1970. Prince HASSAN of the JORDANIAN NATIONAL ASSEMBLY said, “PALESTINE is JORDAN and JORDAN is PALESTINE: there is only one land, with one history and one and the same fate.” On March 14, 1977, FAROUK KADDUMI, the head of the PLO political department told Newsweek, “There should be a kind of linkage because JORDANIANS and PALESTINIANS are considered by the PLO as one people.”

Also in 1977, speaking to a DUTCH newspaper, PLO representative ZOUHAIR MUHSEN said, “For tactical reasons, JORDAN, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to HAIFA and JAFFA, while as a PALESTINIAN, I can undoubtedly demand HAIFA, JAFFA, BEER-SHEVA and JERUSALEM. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of PALESTINE, we will not wait even a minute to unite PALESTINE and JORDAN.”

Perhaps the most revealing public quote by MUHSEN was when he bluntly stated that “There are no differences between JORDANIANS, PALESTINIANS, SYRIANS and LEBANESE. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our PALESTINIAN identity. … The existence of a separate PALESTINIAN identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a PALESTINIAN state is a new tool in the continuing battle against ISRAEL.” (And this goes some way to explaining why ARAB states rise and fall so quickly. They have little historical or ethnographic unity, with the exception of EGYPT.)

THE MINUTE A MINIMUM LEVEL OF DEMOCRACY IS IMPLEMENTED IN JORDAN, THE PALESTINIAN MAJORITY WOULD TAKE OVER THE POLITICAL MOMENTUM
MUDAR ZAHRAN is an ARAB, MUSLIM, PALESTINIAN, and JORDANIAN, who has had to flee JORDAN because he had told the truth to his fellow ARABS— that JORDAN is a PALESTINIAN State. In a recent article he has bluntly stated: “There is, in fact, almost nothing un-PALESTINIAN about JORDAN except for the royal family. Despite decades of official imposition of a BEDOUIN image on the country, and even BEDOUIN accents on state television, the PALESTINIAN identity is still the most dominant … to the point where the JORDANIAN capital, AMMAN, is the largest and most populated PALESTINIAN city anywhere. PALESTINIANS view it as a symbol of their economic success and ability to excel. Moreover, empowering a PALESTINIAN statehood for JORDAN has a well-founded and legally accepted grounding: The minute the minimum level of democracy is applied to JORDAN, the PALESTINIAN majority would, by right, take over the political momentum.”

The JEWISH state of ISRAEL lies west of the JORDAN RIVER and has sovereignty over that territory by historical and legal right. There is no “occupation.” If the ISRAELI government decides to give back some of this land in a territory-for-peace deal, it will have done so knowing it is sacrificing part of its historic homeland to hostile ISLAMIC expansionists, not to “a people without a land,” for the ARABS OF PALESTINE, that is the PALESTINIANS, are a majority in EASTERN PALESTINE.

ETHNOGRAPHIC FICTION

The world has been living with a two-state solution for decades. No matter what the faux King of JORDAN may say or do, his country and his people are not JORDANIAN. JORDAN is what anthropologists call an “ethnographic fiction.” The majority of JORDANIANS are PALESTINIANS living in Mandated PALESTINE. There can be no peace without the recognition of this simple ethnographic truth. The Pope should know this.

Adapted by Geopolitical Analysis and Monitoring from the article originally written by Geoffrey Clarfield and Salim Mansur  
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)