excerpts from the book

War and Globalization

The Truth Behind September 11

by Michel Chossudovsky

Global Outlook, 2002, paper


Under the Bush administration, the military and intelligence apparatus has clearly taken over the reins of foreign policy in close consultation with Wall Street. With key decisions taken behind closed doors at the CIA and the Pentagon, "civilian political institutions" including the U.S. Congress increasingly become a facade. While the illusion of a "functioning democracy" prevails in the eyes of public opinion, the U.S. President has become a mere public relations figurehead, with vaisibly little understanding of key foreign policy issues.

In the U.S., the "PATRIOT Act" criminalizes peaceful anti-globalisation protests. Demonstrating against the IMF or the WTO, for instance, is considered "a crime of domestic terror". Under the Act, "domestic terrorism" includes any activity which could lead to "influencing the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion".

The [Patriot] Act [also] creates a number of new crimes. One of the most threatening to dissent and those who oppose government policies is the crime of "domestic terrorism". It is loosely defined as acts that are dangerous to human life, violate criminal law and "appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population" or "influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion". Under this definition, a protest demonstration that blocked a street and prevented an ambulance from getting by could be deemed domestic terrorism. Likewise, the demonstrations in Seattle against the WTO could fit within | the definition.

Five days before the terrorist assaults on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon (September 6, 2001), President Bush stated almost prophetically:

I have repeatedly said the only time to use Social Security money is in times of war, times of recession, or times of severe emergency. And I mean that.

The CIA's role in support of the Mujahideen is confirmed in a 1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, who at the time was National Security Adviser to President Jimmy Carter:

Brzezinski: According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahideen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, [on] 24 December 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Indeed, it was July 3, 1979, that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the President in which I explained to him that in my opinion, this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

Question: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

Brzezinski: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Question: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?

Brzezinski: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam War. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Question: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

Brzezinski: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War?

U.S. Post-Taliban Puppet Regime Restores Narcotics Trade

Following the year 2000 ban on poppy production imposed by the Taliban government, opium production collapsed by more than 90 per cent. The Northern Alliance became the main political force involved in protecting the production and marketing of raw opium. As a result, America's 2001 war has contributed to restoring the opium trade, under a U.S.-sponsored Northern Alliance puppet government in Kabul.

Under the interim government of President Hamid Karzai, opium poppy cultivation has skyrocketed. Opium markets have been restored. In the immediate wake of September 11, the price of opium in Afghanistan increased three-fold. By early 2002, the price (in dollars/kg) was almost 10 times higher than in the year 2000. According to the United Nations Drug Control Program (UNDCP), opium cultivation increased by 657 per cent in 2002 (in relation to its 2001 level). The UNDCP estimates 2002 opium poppy cultivation as covering an area of between 45,000 and 65,000 hectares. In 2001, opium cultivation had fallen to an estimated 7,606 hectares.

The entire U.S. Congress-with only one honest and courageous dissenting voice in the House of Representatives -has endorsed the Administration's decision to go to war. Members of the House and the Senate have access through the various committees to official confidential reports and intelligence documents which prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that agencies of the U.S. government have strong ties to international terrorism. They cannot say "we did not know". In fact, most of this evidence is in the public domain.

Under the historical resolution of the U. S. Congress adopted by both the House and the Senate on the 14th of September:

The President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

Conquest of Oil Reserves and Pipeline Routes

"America's New War" consists of extending the global market system while opening up new "economic frontiers" for U.S. corporate capital. More specifically, the U.S.-led military invasion -in close liaison with Britain-responds to the interests of the Anglo-American oil giants, in alliance with America's "Big Five" weapons producers: Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, Boeing and General Dynamics.

The "Anglo-American axis" in defence and foreign policy is the driving force behind the military operations in Central Asia and the Middle East. This rapprochement between London and Washington is consistent with the integration of British and American business interests in the areas of banking, oil and the defence industry. The merger of British Petroleum (BP) and the American Oil Company (AMOCO) into the world's largest oil conglomerate has a direct bearing on the pattern of Anglo-American relations and the close relationship between the American President and the British Prime Minister. In the wake of the 1999 war in Yugoslavia, Britain's giant weapons producer, British Aerospace Systems (BAES), was fully integrated into the U.S. system of defence procurement.

America's War Economy

The military buildup initiated during the Clinton administration has gained a new momentum. September 11 and Bush's "war on terrorism" are used as an excuse for expanding America's military machine and fuelling the growth of the military-industrial complex. A new "legitimacy" has unfolded. Increased military spending is said to be required "to uphold freedom" and defeat "the axis of evil":

It costs a lot to fight this war. We have spent more than a billion dollars a month-over $30 million a day- and we must be prepared for future operations. Afghanistan proved that expensive precision weapons defeat the enemy and spare innocent lives, and we need more of them. We need to replace aging aircraft and make our military more agile, to put our troops anywhere in the world quickly and safely.... My budget includes the largest increase in defence spending in two decades- because while the price of freedom and security is high, it is never too high. Whatever it costs to defend our country, we will pay.

Since September 11, billions of dollars have been channelled towards developing new advanced weapons systems, including the F22 Raptor fighter plane and the Joint Fighter (JF) program.

The Strategic Defence Initiative ("StarWars") not only includes the controversial "Missile Shield", but also a wide range of "offensive" laser-guided weapons with striking capabilities anywhere in the world, not to mention instruments of weather and climatic warfare under the High Altitude Auroral Research Program (HAARP). The latter has the ability of destabilizing entire national economies through climatic manipulations, without the knowledge of the enemy, at minimal cost and without engaging military personnel and equipment as in a conventional war.

Long-term planning pertaining to advanced weapons systems and the control of outer space is outlined in a U.S. Space Command document released in 1998, entitled "Vision for 2020". The underlying objective consists o£

... dominating the space dimension of military operations to protect U.S. interests and investment.... The emerging synergy of space superiority with land, sea and air superiority will lead to Full Spectrum Dominance.

David Rockefeller - Statement to the United Nations Business Council, 1994

We are on the verge of global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.

Excerpted Books page

Index of Website

Home Page