excerpted from the article
Towards the Conquest of the Middle
East and North Africa: The U.S., the E.U. and Israel join hands
by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
http://globalresearch.ca/, February
18, 2008
NATO Expansion in the Mediterranean: Paving
the Way for E.U. Enlargement
France and Germany are partners in the
Anglo-American wars and the Project for the "New Middle East."
This is not a recent development, this is the resumption of the
strategic understanding that existed between the Franco-German
and Anglo-American sides before the Bush Jr. Administration seemed
to have diverged from Anglo-American geo-strategy. The global
military deployments of Germany, France, Spain, and Italy coincide
with statements of expanding the European Union's security borders,
which can in turn be equated to expanding the European Union's
sphere of influence.__
In 2004 and 2007 E.U. expansion followed
the NATO expansion of the 1990s eastward in the European continent.
This pattern sets a methodological precedent that should be acknowledged
with some value. This same NATO-E.U. template of expansion is
also being applied in the Middle East and North Africa. This modus
operandi of military-political expansion is also noted by Bzezinski:
"In July [1997] Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary were
officially invited to join NATO. Invitations to the Baltic [Republics;
Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia], Romania, and Bulgaria soon followed.
This expansion made Europe's own expansion logical and unavoidable.
With the former European Community having redefined itself as
the European Union, Europeans themselves decided that it made
no sense to exclude their newly democratic [neighbours] - already
tied through NATO to both the United States and the European Union
- from actual [European Union] membership." [1] __
However Brzezinski's casual rationalization
of NATO and E.U. expansion and his bumbling effort to casually
link them as if it all was an unplanned accident that presented
a sensible response is false. If this was true then why has, hereto
in 2008, Turkey been denied E.U. membership since the creation
of the European Union? The answer is that NATO and E.U. expansion
were pre-planned objectives in Eastern Europe.__
The Franco-German and Anglo-American agenda
in the Mediterranean explains several other international developments
and realities. Firstly, the objective of forming a bloc in the
Mediterranean explain the earlier expansion of NATO in the area
through what NATO terms the "Mediterranean Dialogue."
This so-called Mediterranean Dialogue is part of NATO's "Mediterranean
Initiative." The framework of this relationship creates a
de facto extension of NATO, which includes Israel as an informal
member. Morocco, Algeria, Mauritania, Tunisia, Egypt, the Hashemite
Kingdom of Jordan, and Israel are all members of NATO's Mediterranean
Initiative. The only Arab nations in the Mediterranean littoral
that are excluded are Libya, Syria, and Lebanon. Through this
mechanism the Mediterranean Sea has virtually become a NATO lake,
almost surrounded entirely by NATO members or de facto NATO members.
Albania and the coastline of the former Yugoslavia off the shore
of the Adriatic Sea are also controlled by NATO.__
Secondly, the German naval and French
land commands over NATO troops on Lebanese soil and off the Lebanese
shore are explained by the categorizing of the Mediterranean as
an area under Franco-German management. It should also be noted
that it was in 2001 that the E.U., particularly the French, started
talking about sending troops under the banner of NATO into the
Eastern Mediterranean, in particular Palestine.
Israel to join the E.U. and NATO
The exclusion of Syria and Lebanon from
NATO's Mediterranean network can be used to explain the next point.
Syria is the last Arab state in the Middle East that is independent
in its policy making. Both Syria and Lebanon are slated to fall
under the authority of Franco-German interests and the political
sphere of the European Union. This is what the Israeli war against
Lebanon in 2006 sought to partially accomplish.__
The post-mortem facts of the 2006 Israeli
aerial siege against Lebanon show that Syria was also an intended
Israeli target. However, Israel was unable to attack Syria and
hesitated because of its failures in Lebanon and Iranian threats
to intervene militarily if Israel attacked Syria. __
Strategic planners within the U.S., Israel,
the E.U., and NATO have also formulated several contingency plans
to partition Syria and Lebanon under several alternative arrangments
and maps. This is part of the broader objective to control the
coastline of the Eastern Mediterranean as well as both the Middle
East and North Africa.__
As NATO solidifies, its military presence
in the western outer periphery of the "Arc of Instability,"
the governments of France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and other E.U.
members have also started close security dialogues with Tel Aviv
over Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, and Iran. [2] Israel not only
has a relationship within a multilateral framework with NATO,
it also has strong bilateral ties with Brussels that were deepened
in 2004. __
It is not by chance that Israel is a partner
in Operation Active Endeavour, the force that has spawned the
NATO naval armada off the coasts of Syria and Lebanon. [3] Nor
is it coincidental that Israel announced it would fully participated
in NATO naval exercises in May of 2006, right before attacking
Lebanon. [4] This was under the pretext of a so-called "Iranian
threat."__
Starting in August, 2007 Israeli ships
have joined NATO warships in the Eastern Mediterranean, Red Sea,
and Black Sea in full naval cooperation. [5] This has been marked
by joint Israeli-NATO exercises that have taken place in the Red
Sea and the Black Sea. __
It should be noted that minesweepers have
participated in the inaugural Israeli-NATO naval exercises. This
alludes to possible action against Iran in the Persian Gulf. Many
establishment figures in Germany, including those from the German
Green Party, have also called for the inclusion of Israel into
NATO as a full member. [6]__
According to Avigdor Lieberman, an important
figure in Israeli politics, "Israel's diplomatic and security
goal...must be clear: joining NATO and entering the European Union."
This is considered as the strategic path that Israel must take.
[7] __
Israel is expected to eventually join
the European Union. The E.U.'s enlargement is tied into the process
of NATO expansion. Israel and the E.U. will both manage, from
an economic and political standpoint, the western outer periphery
of the "Arc of Instability" under the framework of a
Mediterranean Union.
Western Energy Security, NATO, Israel,
and the Bigger Picture __
The Mediterranean Union is tied to "energy
security." It is a process towards the economic domination
of the Mediterranean by the European Union._
The balkanization of Lebanon and Syria
serve the interests of Western energy corporations, amongst a
host of other interests. The envisioned redrawn borders for the
Middle East that are tied to the Mediterranean Union and the Project
for the "New Middle East" are designed to secure energy
corridors, "pacify" the region's population, and ultimately
set the stage for the economic colonization of the new weaker
states.
Israeli security concerns through the
Yinon Plan would be integrated into the equation, but only because
of the regional security role Tel Aviv serves for the U.S. and
the European Union.
This process of dividing and economically
absorbing is similar to the pattern imposed in the former Yugoslavia
by the Franco-German entente and the Anglo-American alliance through
the E.U. and NATO.__
Aside from neutralizing Iran and its allies
in the Middle East, the main themes of the Herzliya Conference
of 2008 in Israel were Israeli-NATO and Israeli-E.U. relations
and integration. The latent role of Tel Aviv acting as a guarantor
of energy security for the European Union and NATO was also an
object of important discussions.
The February 2008 issue of Commentary
Magazine, the official periodical of the American Jewish Committee,
has also proposed in an article by Norman Podhoretz that Israel
could launch a devastating pre-emptive nuclear attack against
Iran and Israel's Arab neighbours (including the countries of
Arab regimes allied to Israel and NATO like Egypt) and militarily
occupy the oil fields, refineries, and naval ports of the Persian
Gulf countries to establish energy security. [8]__
The pieces of the grand strategy unfolding
over the strategic map are becoming clearer. Podhoretz asserts
that Israel could liquidate large populations in the Middle East
("tens of millions") and that Israel could virtually
annex energy-rich areas in the Persian Gulf. The substance of
these diabolical statements emanate from an American think-tank,
the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), which
is closely linked to the formulation of the U.S. foreign policy
and military agenda in the Middle East.__
These statements and notions from Norman
Podhoretz and the Center for Strategic and International Studies
act as a window of insight into the thoughts of the Anglo-American
establishment and its European and Israeli partners. There is
also a link between the concept that Israel could militarily occupy
the oil fields of the Persian Gulf and the 2008 Herzliya Conference's
discussions about Israel acting as an agent of E.U. and NATO energy
security.__
The 2006 Riga Summit illustrates the full
scope of the strategic objectives of NATO in securing energy resources
in the Middle East, North Africa, and the former Soviet Union.
In 2006, during NATO's Riga Summit in Latvia, which included Israel,
energy security was also a major theme; energy security was discussed
to the point where it was pushed forward as an Article 5 (Mutual
Defence Clause) issue. [9] If the case of Iraq were not enough,
it is clear that a real and dangerous intent exists within the
U.S., the E.U., and Israel to take control of the energy resources
of other nations through force. _
NATO and the Persian Gulf: Rivalry with
the Eurasian Heartland?__
The divided European military-political
relationship, which is being replicated in the Mediterranean,
can also be observed in the Persian Gulf where NATO and NATO members
have military and security agreements with Gulf Cooperation Council
(GCC) states. Moreover, the GCC is creating a common market with
a similar structure to the proposed bloc in the Mediterranean.
The GCC common market is also slated for gradual amalgamate with
the E.U. and the Mediterranean Union.
The E.U. has had a formal relationship
with the GCC since 1988 and NATO initiated ties starting with
the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative in 2004.__
However, the process that has been underway
in the Mediterranean is being fast-forwarded in the Persian Gulf.
This could be because of a possible threat from the rising strength
of the players in the Eurasian Heartland. Iran, Russia, and China
are now engaging the GCC in economic as well military affairs.
During a conference in Bahrain, Russia's
Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Saltanov called for the creation
of a new collective security arrangment in the Persian Gulf and
the Middle East, which would include Iran and could include Russia.
[11] According to Chinese reports, Saudi Arabia and China have
also had discussions on establishing military ties. [12]__
The members of the GCC, which are all
members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC)
aside from Oman, are clearly being tempted to switch camps. Both
Washington, D.C. and Brussels are concerned by the overtures made
to the GCC and the Arab World by Iran, Russia, and China. The
U.S. National Director of Intelligence, Michael McConnell has
even warned the U.S. Congress in an annual assessment that Russia,
China, and all of the members of OPEC, which includes Iran and
Venezuela, all represent growing financial threats to American
supremacy. [13]__
Plans for establishing a petro-rubble
system for energy payments have also been the subject of numerous
exchanges between Russia, Iran, Kazakhstan, China, and the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization (SCO). This project, if realized, would
challenge the financial centres of the U.S. and the European Union.
NATO, E.U., and U.S. military forces are
deployed over a vast area: from West Africa, Central and East
Africa to the Balkans, the Middle East, Pakistan, Afghanistan,
and a large portion of the Indian Ocean. __
Brute force is being used as the muscle
behind neo-liberal economic policies. NATO is playing a major
role in enforcing the establishment of the Mediterranean Union
and the creation of the "New Middle East." __
These objectives are part of the reality
behind NATO's document Towards a Grand Strategy for an Uncertain
World. The NATO document also puts a concept into the limelight
that is being discussed by E.U. and U.S. officials: the amalgamation
of the military assets of the U.S., the E.U., and NATO into one
streamlined military body. [14] It is clear that the primary function
of the military has been to aid economic objectives and the case
is no different in regards to NATO's role in the conquest of the
Middle East, North Africa, and beyond.
Israel watch
Home Page