Verdidebatt

IS - en ny amerikansk Midtøsten-strategi?

Journalisten Seymour M. Hersh avdekket i 2007 planer for et viktig amerikansk strategi-skifte i Midtøsten, der en religionskrig mot Iran var en svært vital komponent. Er dette forklaringen på IS, de nye religiøse volds-ekstremistene?

Dette er en kommentar. Den gir uttrykk for skribentens analyser og meninger.

Vi vet allerede om USA at de ikke går av veien for å hjernevaske selv små barn til å bli hellige krigere for USAs politikk slik de gjorde i Afghanistan der Sovjet var en trussel. Og vi vet de forsynte Al-Qaida med våpen i Libya. Så hvorfor skulle de ikke også nå kunne stå bak den nyeste strømmen av "hellige" voldsekstremister i Midtøsten, der IS har hatt en fremgang som synes å gå alldeles som på skinner?

Etter å ha hoppet over grensen fra Syria og inn i Irak har IS mistenkelig nok klart kunststykket å snuble over den ene gryten med kriger-gull etter den andre. Først fant de våpen, så fant de olje, og så fant de en forbannet mengde penger. Og bare på noen få dager nå har de minsanten også funnet både kjemiske lagre og et helt eget flyvåpen. Du verden for en ekstremist-suksess! Men er det virkelig noen som kan få seg til å tro at dette bare viser at noen ekstremister er mye, mye heldigere enn alle andre?

Annals of National Security March 5, 2007 Issue

The Redirection

Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?

By

A STRATEGIC SHIFT

..."In the past few months, as the situation in Iraq has deteriorated, the Bush Administration, in both its public diplomacy and its covert operations, has significantly shifted its Middle East strategy. The “redirection,” as some inside the White House have called the new strategy, has brought the United States closer to an open confrontation with Iran and, in parts of the region, propelled it into a widening sectarian conflict between Shiite and Sunni Muslims."...

..."To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East."...

..."One contradictory aspect of the new strategy is that, in Iraq, most of the insurgent violence directed at the American military has come from Sunni forces, and not from Shiites. But, from the Administration’s perspective, the most profound—and unintended—strategic consequence of the Iraq war is the empowerment of Iran. Its President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has made defiant pronouncements about the destruction of Israel and his country’s right to pursue its nuclear program, and last week its supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said on state television that “realities in the region show that the arrogant front, headed by the U.S. and its allies, will be the principal loser in the region.”"...

..."Some of the core tactics of the redirection are not public, however. The clandestine operations have been kept secret, in some cases, by leaving the execution or the funding to the Saudis, or by finding other ways to work around the normal congressional appropriations process, current and former officials close to the Administration said."...

..."A senior member of the House Appropriations Committee told me that he had heard about the new strategy, but felt that he and his colleagues had not been adequately briefed. “We haven’t got any of this,” he said. “We ask for anything going on, and they say there’s nothing. And when we ask specific questions they say, ‘We’re going to get back to you.’ It’s so frustrating.”"...

..."The key players behind the redirection are Vice-President Dick Cheney, the deputy national-security adviser Elliott Abrams, the departing Ambassador to Iraq (and nominee for United Nations Ambassador), Zalmay Khalilzad, and Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi national-security adviser. While Rice has been deeply involved in shaping the public policy, former and current officials said that the clandestine side has been guided by Cheney. (Cheney’s office and the White House declined to comment for this story; the Pentagon did not respond to specific queries but said, “The United States is not planning to go to war with Iran.”)"...

..."“It seems there has been a debate inside the government over what’s the biggest danger—Iran or Sunni radicals,” Vali Nasr, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, who has written widely on Shiites, Iran, and Iraq, told me. “The Saudis and some in the Administration have been arguing that the biggest threat is Iran and the Sunni radicals are the lesser enemies. This is a victory for the Saudi line.”"...

Les mer om mer disse temaene:

Vårt Land anbefaler

1

1

1

Annonse
Annonse

Les dagens papirutgave

e-avisen

Mer fra: Verdidebatt