by Tony Cartalucci
Bangkok, Thailand May 6, 2011 - Much to Wired writer Spencer Ackerman's credit, amidst the first several paragraphs of his article, "First Drone Strikes Since Bin Laden Raid Hit Pakistan, Yemen," it is noted that after Pakistan's warnings and demands that the US cease and desist from violating its airspace, the US's subsequent drone attacks made the Pakistanis "look either complicit — and, hence, hypocritical — or incompetent." While the article continues by covering the official narrative citing the Soros-funded New American Foundation and the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies' propagandist mouthpiece "Long War Journal," this initial moment of clarity strikes at the very center of America's use of drone attacks in Pakistan.
In "Free Baluchistan," he explicitly calls to "aid the 6 million Baluch insurgents fighting for independence from Pakistan in the face of growing ISI repression." He continues by explaining the various merits of such meddling by stating, "Pakistan has given China a base at Gwadar in the heart of Baluch territory. So an independent Baluchistan would serve U.S. strategic interests in addition to the immediate goal of countering Islamist forces."
In a follow up article titled, "The Chinese Cozy Up to the Pakistanis," Harrison begins by stating, "China’s expanding reach is a natural and acceptable accompaniment of its growing power—but only up to a point. " He then repeats his call for meddling in Pakistan by saying, "to counter what China is doing in Pakistan, the United States should play hardball by supporting the movement for an independent Baluchistan along the Arabian Sea and working with Baluch insurgents to oust the Chinese from their budding naval base at Gwadar. Beijing wants its inroads into Gilgit and Baltistan to be the first step on its way to an Arabian Sea outlet at Gwadar."
Viewing America's presence in Central and South Asia through this prism of reality, we see quite clearly the "War on Terror" is but a pretense to pursue a policy of regional hegemony plus a containment policy toward China. This is not merely a speculative conclusion, rather it is the stated goal contained within the 2006 Strategic Studies Institute's report "String of Pearls: Meeting the Challenge of China's Rising Power across the Asian Littoral." Throughout the report, China's efforts to secure its oil lifeline from the Middle East to its shores in the South China Sea are examined as are means to maintain American hegemony throughout the Indian and Pacific Ocean. The premise is that, should Western policy wonks and paper-pushers fail to entice China into participating in the "international system" as "responsible stakeholders," an increasingly confrontational posture must be taken to contain the rising nation.
A map taken from SSI's report on China's "String of Pearls." The bluearrow and the nations it passes represents China's strategic interests.
It also represents a region now mired in US-backed chaos.
Looking at events today, it appears that enticement has failed, and that the worst case scenarios discussed within the report have not only been put into play, but have thus far proven ineffective. This latest farcical hoax - finding "Osama Bin Laden" in the heart of Pakistan's intelligence and military community of Abbottabad - is clearly a means to extort cooperation and concessions from Islamabad. In fact, such cooperation and concessions are already being compiled into a wish-list by corporate and foundation funded think-tanks like the Brookings Institution.
As Wired's Spencer Ackerman astutely noted, renewed drone attacks against Pakistan undermine the government's legitimacy and the military's competency to protect the nation. The ire of Pakistan's population in conjunction with calls to support an armed insurgency in Pakistan's Baluchistan region creates a potent mix of destabilization that threatens not only the government and the military, but stakeholders throughout the region who will be faced with a nuclear-armed state mired in unpredictable chaos. If there is any doubt over the resolve of American policy wonks to create such chaos, one needs only to read Brookings' "Which Path to Persia?" report.
China has already rushed to Pakistan's defense calling for support from the international community for Pakistan. China also stated that, "China also suffers from terrorism. Some terrorist forces are engaged in a great many violent, terrorist activities for the purpose of splitting China, and seriously threaten China’s national security, and regional peace and security."
It is quite clear who China is referring to, as just weeks earlier an April 2011 Reuters report, "China crackdown driven by fears of a broad conspiracy," stated that "Chinese leaders believe domestic foes, their foreign backers and Western governments are scheming to undermine and ultimately topple the Communist Party. Recent speeches and articles from security officials echo with warnings of subversive plots backed by Western "anti-China" forces."
While mewing propagandists like those of FDD's "Long War Journal" continue to insist this conflict is about bearded goat-herders threatening our freedoms and way of life, even as magazines like Foreign Policy celebrate America's disregard for all we stand for in pursuit of "national security," those who take the time to look behind the curtain see a true terror at work. It is a terror based not in a cave in Pakistan's frontier, but upon Wall Street, their enablers in Washington, and the myriad of think-tanks that peddle their agenda. In turn, it is these facilitators, not bearded cavemen, that ceaselessly and systematically destroy America by bleeding it dry through endless wars, bankrupting it through larcenist Ponzi-schemes, and squandering the good will, awe, and inspiration the United States once lent the world.
