Secretary of State Clinton introduces President Obama to give his speech on the current events in the Middle East in the Benjamin Franklin Room in the State Department, as a kind of up-to-date counter-piece to his 2009 Cairo speech. Quite naturally, the President at first deals with the execution of Bin Laden and the fate of that shadowy organisation known as Al Qaeda, before delving into the recent events in the Middle East and North Africa that have now been termed the Arab Awakening or Arab Spring. Barack Obama employs these events as a way to reiterate his theme of change and hope, and how America will now deal with the rest of the world in the multi-polar world of the 21st century.
“There must be no doubt the U.S. welcomes change that advances self-determination and opportunity. . . . We have a chance to pursue the world as it should be . . . It was the people themselves who launched these movements, and it’s the people who must ultimately determine their outcome”.
And here is Megan Murphy presenting multiple-sourced stories on the Obama speech and other relavent events occurring simultaneously.
Anwar al-Awlaki . . . or as reported by AP and reproduced by Fox: the supposed ‘al-Qaida offshoot in Yemen has been boosted by inspiration from American-born operative Anwar al-Awlaki, who has radicalized a younger generation of extremists. A British woman who stabbed a lawmaker last year had watched about 100 hours of al-Awlaki videos, British officials said. Al-Awlaki is also believed to have inspired and even plotted or helped coordinate attacks on the U.S., including the failed 2009 airline bombing and last year’s mail bombing’.[1]
CNN’s Dan Rivers assesses the possible appointment of a new caretaker leader of al Qaeda. CNN’s Peter Bergen says that an “Egyptian who was once a Special Forces officer has been chosen “caretaker” leader of al Qaeda in the wake of Osama bin Laden’s death, according to a source with detailed knowledge of the group’s inner workings. Al Qaeda’s interim leader is Saif al-Adel, who has long played a prominent role in the group, according to Noman Benotman. Benotman has known the al Qaeda leadership for more than two decades. He was once a leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), a militant organization that used to be aligned with al Qaeda, but in recent years renounced al Qaeda’s ideology”.[2]
Authorities in Yemen have ordered Al-Jazeera‘s offices shut and its journalists stripped of accreditation, escalating a week-long series of reprisals against the station that has included beatings, expulsions, raids, and death threats.
Libya’s rebels will agree to a cease-fire if Moammar Gadhafi pulls his military forces out of cities and allows peaceful protests against his regime, an opposition leader said Friday (1 April 2011).
The FT’s Andrew England and Matthew Green report from Ajdabiya that the “Libyan opposition on Friday [, 1 April 2011] outlined conditions for a potential ceasefire with Muammer Gaddafi as fighting continued around an oil town in the east and regime forces bombarded the besieged western city of Misurata. Mustafa Abdul Jalil, the head of the opposition’s National Council, said the conditions would have to include Col Gaddafi withdrawing his forces from cities under siege, such as Misurata, which is controlled by opposition supporters but surrounded by pro-Gaddafi forces that have been relentlessly pounding the city. Few believe a ceasefire is likely and the opposition has previously insisted they will not want to negotiate a political solution with Col Gaddafi, with the only exception being if there were discussions that led to his immediate departure from the oil-rich north African state. Mr Abdul Jalil, who was speaking at a news conference with Abdelilah al-Khatib, the UN envoy to Libya, added that Libyans would also need assurances they could choose the leader they wanted. He insisted the opposition’s goal remained the ouster of Col Gaddafi”.[1]
Following the “leaking” of Obama’s Presidential Finding, the presence of CIA operatives in Yemen has now become public knowledge. The Iranian English-language broadcaster Press TV gave the Editor of Pan-African News Wire Abayomi Azikiwi an opportunity to voice his concerns: “We have felt since the beginning of the uprising [in Libya] that the Central Intelligence Agency was playing a key role in the whole process of not only coordinating but financing and providing political covers for the rebels who are fighting against the Libyan government. The CIA has a history in Africa since World War II by getting involved in all destabilization efforts against progressive governments and against the national liberation movement. This has continued through the Bush administration with the existence of extraordinary rendition, with the involvement in documents that were released on the Wikileaks where the US state department and the CIA is still heavily involved in trying to destabilize African governments, destabilize progressive and democratic movement on the continent. The New York Times revealed this in an article yesterday [, 31 March 2011]. It pointed out, I quote, “that a small group of CIA operatives have been working in Libya for several weeks as part of a shadow force of Westerners that the Obama administration hopes it can help lead Colonel Gaddafi’s military. In addition to the CIA’s presence composed of an unknown number of Americans who have worked at the Spy Agency Station in Tripoli, current and former British officials said that dozens of British special forces and MI6 special operatives are working inside Libya.” Even The New York Times is revealing the fact that the Central Intelligence Agency as well as the military intelligence of Britain are heavily involved in supporting and coordinating these rebels that are fighting against the Libyan government. It is interesting that your correspondent in Benghazi pointed out that when NATO bombs areas in Libya they become happy and when there’s a lull in the bombing their morale goes down. This is a clear indication that NATO, led by the United States, is providing political cover for these people who are fighting against the Libyan government. There is a clear indication that this is not a genuine rebellion but an operation designed by the United States and NATO to really interfere with the regime change in Libya and to bring about the seizure of its natural resources in the same way in which they’ve taken over the resources of Iraq and privatized them, and instituted the government. They have the same agenda with regards to Libya as well”.[2] Whereas I posed the question whether the situation in Libya was an “Assisted Rebellion or a Just War” in a piece I posted earlier,[3] Azikiwi here clearly declares the whole rebellion to have been nothing but a staged event.
While the CIA and assorted individuals appear to be working hard behind the scenes in Libya, Yemen unrest continues to experience troubling unrest as well in view of the fact that the incumbent president /dictator refuses to move. As reported by AP: ‘Yemeni anti-regime protesters shout slogans during the ‘Day of Martyr’ demonstration demanding an immediate end of the 32-year rule of Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh in Sana’a, Yemen (31 March 2011)’.
The intrepid Jeremy Scahill, however, warns that the situation in Yemen might well spiral out of control, as Libya’s apparently staged civil war continues its winding route into an uncertain future.
About a week ago, Scahill told Amy Goodman the following: “Right, well, I mean, first of all, the no-fly zone has always been a recipe for disaster. It was a disaster in Iraq, where it resulted in a strengthening of Saddam Hussein’s regime. The U.S. has bombed Gaddafi’s house. The U.S. is bombing targets that have no aerial value whatsoever. You know, I’m against the U.S. policy in Libya for tactical and strategic reasons. I think that it could end up backfiring in a tremendous way and keeping Gaddafi in power even longer. And if the United States is going to start intervening in every failed rebellion or insurrection around the world, it’s going to be very, very busy. I think this was a reactionary policy with very little sight of an endgame. This morning we heard that an F-15 went down inside of Libya. Remember Donald Rumsfeld said in November of 2002, “Iraq might be five days, five weeks or five months, but no longer than that,” and 50,000 U.S. troops and an equal number of private contractors remain there. So, I don’t see an endgame here. I think this is a classic case of knee-jerk “we need to remain relevant in the world so we’re going to take military action,” while propping up ruthless dictators elsewhere that have conducted the same kinds of operations, or ignoring far worse humanitarian crises and far worse mass slaughter on the part of dictators around the world”.[1]
CNN’s Mary Snow looks at some of the anxiety in Saudi Arabia as its neighbors are engulfed in unrest.
9 March 2011
Whereas it seems to me that the Big Prize in the Offing has to be Iran, with a possible redux of 2009’s Green Revolution to be staged. Still, America’s big ally Saudi Arabia seems somewhat worried about a transnational movement developing its own momentum, irrespective of international support or behind the scenes’ planning. Already last month, Robert Worth declared in the New York Times that “the rulers of Saudi Arabia — the region’s great bulwark of religious and political conservatism — are feeling increasingly isolated and concerned that the United States may no longer be a reliable backer, officials and diplomats say” “[a]s pro-democracy uprisings spread across the Middle East”.[1] At the same time, Worth downplays King Abdullah’s worries, saying that “Saudi Arabia is far less vulnerable to democracy movements than other countries in the region, thanks to its vast oil wealth, its powerful religious establishment and the popularity of its king”.[2] An anonymous Arab diplomat made the following declaration over the telephone: “The Saudis are completely encircled by the problem, from Jordan to Iraq to Bahrain to Yemen. Saudi Arabia is the last heavyweight U.S. ally in the region facing Iran”.[3] Worth adds that the “Saudis tend to see any threat to the established order in the region as a gain for their nemesis Iran, and its allies Syria and Hezbollah. They have grown increasingly worried that the Obama administration is drifting away from this perspective and supporting movements for change whose outcome cannot be guaranteed. Those worries were heightened by the crisis in Egypt, where the Saudis felt that Mr. Mubarak should have been allowed to stay on and make a more “dignified” exit, Saudi officials say. King Abdullah had at least two phone conversations with President Obama to convey his concerns in the weeks before Mr. Mubarak’s ouster, and the last conversation ended in sharp disagreement, according to officials familiar with the calls”.[4]
A former long-time CIA officer and now a senior fellow in the Saban Center at the Brookings Institution, Bruce Riedel also opines that the “Saudis have no love for Libya’s Gaddafi, who tried to assassinate King Abdullah only a few years ago, but they are worried by the contagion of unrest that is rolling across North Africa and into the Arabian Peninsula. The unrest in tiny Bahrain next door is particularly alarming as it threatens a fellow Sunni Muslim kingdom linked by a causeway to the Saudi Eastern Province where most of the royals’ oil is located. The Eastern Province is also the home of the Kingdom’s small (10-15%) Shia minority. Unrest among the Shia is endemic, and protests have already begun this month. Shia protests are inevitably seen through the prism of Persian-Arab rivalry with Iran across the Persian Gulf. For the Saudis Shia gains are seen as Iranian gains and thus bad news. The bad news extends to the south as well for the Saudis. They have never been fond of Yemen’s dictator Ali Abdallah Salih. They tried to overthrow him in 1994 by encouraging a revolt in southern Yemen which only united with the north in 1990. The Saudis lost out in the subsequent civil war to Salih and the north. But Salih is the devil they know and has been the recipient of billions in Saudi aid since the 1990s. Unrest in Yemen threatens to give more room for operation to Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which is dedicated to the overthrow of the Kingdom and the death of the family princes. Salih is now in deep trouble, he has lost the backing of the south, many key tribes and some senior Muslim clerics. But the Saudis have few if any options for buttressing him in power”.[5] The international Arab broadcaster Al Jazeera reports now that ‘[a]nti-government unrest continued in Yemen on Tuesday [, 8 March] with three people reported dead in a prison riot in support of protests and dozens reported injured when police opened fire on crowds in Sanaa, the Yemeni capital. Policemen and security agents in civilian clothes opened fire as they tried to prevent people from joining thousands of protesters camped out in front of Sanaa University, witnesses told the Reuters news agency. Three of the injured were said to be in a serious condition. Meanwhile, three prisoners at a Sanaa prison were reported killed and four others injured, Sharif Mobley, an inmate, told Al Jazeera via phone from within the prison. Officials said at least one inmate was dead and dozens more injured as a consequence of the unrest which began on Monday [, 7 March] when around 2,000 prisoners staged, taking a dozen guards hostage. The inmates set their blankets and mattresses on fire before occupying the prison’s main courtyard, an official who declined to be named because he is not authorised to speak to the media said’.[6] On Tuesday, 8 March, then ‘[s]ecurity forces in Yemen have opened fire on peaceful protesters in the capital Sanaa . . . wounding at least 75 people demonstrating for an end to President Ali Abdullah Saleh’s 32-year rule. Three of the wounded were in a serious condition, according to medical sources. Policemen and security agents in civilian clothes opened fire as they tried to prevent people from joining thousands of protesters who have camped out for weeks in front of Sanaa University, the epicentre of the demonstrations’.[7]
All around King Abdullah unrest is spreading, while in Egypt sectarian violence has erupted as well now: ‘At least six Coptic Christians have been killed and 57 others injured in religious clashes with Muslims in the Egyptian capital Cairo, a hospital official has told Al Jazeera. An official death toll has yet to be released by the country’s ministry of interior. The deaths on Tuesday [, 8 March] occurred in the working-class district of Moqattam after at least 1,000 Copts gathered to protest the burning of a church last week. It was the second burst of sectarian fighting in as many days and the latest in a string of violent protests over a variety of topics as simmering unrest continues nearly a month after mass protests led to the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak. Al Jazeera‘s Ayman Mohyeldin, reporting from the capital Cairo, said that Christians were demanding “an end to what they describe as discrimination by the state.” “The military intervened to prevent further clashes, but the episode underscores the simmering tension between the two communities,” he said’.[8]
Colonel Ghaddafi has long been a thorn in the West’s side . . . Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, and Libya . . . are they dry runs for the big one in Iran???
The ‘virus of democracy’, to paraphrase John McCain, has now also infected tiny Bahrain. The Daily Telegraph’s Middle East Correspondent Richard Spencer explains why this is a major development from the West’s point of view: “Bahrain is an island in one of the world’s most important shipping lanes – The Gulf – and plays a key role in Western security policy. It is home to the United States’s Fifth Fleet, which is dedicated to keeping the Gulf and the Straits of Hormuz, through which 40 per cent of the world’s oil tankers pass – open to traffic. It is a short hop also from Iran, and connected to Saudi Arabia by a causeway. Since American troops were withdrawn from Saudi Arabia, other US bases in the region have assumed an even greater importance”. Spencer then goes on to say that the demonstrators “and opposition parties have so far not called for an end to the monarchy but are demanding full democracy. They want the prime minister to be replaced by an elected politician, and for the royal family to retreat to a ceremonial position. They are also calling for an end to what they say is a tradition of police brutality, and for improved living conditions, particularly for the poorer Shia majority”.[1] The always-trustworthy BBC adds that ‘[s]ecurity forces have dispersed protesters in Bahrain with tear gas and batons, killing at least three people. Protests are still going on outside a hospital in Bahrain. In Libya, a security official has reportedly been sacked because of his handling of an earlier protest, and unconfirmed reports suggest widespread anti-government rallies have taken place in the regions. Clashes have broken out in the Yemeni capital Sanaa between anti-government protesters and supporters of the regime’.[2] The BBC’s Middle East analyst Roger Hardy summarises the past weeks events in four points: “First, President Mubarak’s resignation and his departure from Cairo do not mean that the Egyptian crisis is moving towards an early resolution. On the contrary, Mr Mubarak has simply dumped his dilemmas into the lap of the military top brass. Whether they can do a better job of dealing with them than he did – and whether the military can even retain its own cohesion – are far from certain . . . Second, the success of ‘people power’ in Egypt is far more significant for Arabs everywhere than its success in Tunisia. Egypt is the biggest and most powerful Arab state. Mr Mubarak had ruled it for three decades. The Egyptian example has already electrified public opinion throughout a region where a similar set of ills – autocracy, corruption, unemployment, the dignity deficit – prevail. Autocrats whose security services are smaller and weaker than Egypt’s are more vulnerable to the chill wind of popular anger . . . Third, the impact of the crisis on regional economies – in such obvious areas as oil prices, tourism, the ability to attract foreign investment – has already been severe. Fourth, the fall of Mubarak will affect a host of regional issues – the Arab-Israeli peace process, the growing influence of Iran, the battle against Muslim extremism – in ways that are hard, if not impossible, to predict”, and then he adds, in an way arguably meant to placate worries as expressed by McCain’s viral phrase: “Fears of Islamic revolutions everywhere are misplaced. Most of the current dissent seems driven by nationalist rather than religious sentiment”.[3]
As I have indicated elsewhere, there are good indications that the U.S. government has been preparing these events since the early days of December 2008, at least as far as Egypt was concerned apparently.[4] In other words, one could argue that these “revolutions” are but the outcome of the Bush Freedom Agenda. Lee Smith, senior editor at The Weekly Standard, an American neoconservative opinion magazine published by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, opines that “President George W. Bush’s Freedom Agenda was based on the notion that around the world all men share the desire for liberty. It was our founding fathers who put forth the idea that this was not merely a human aspiration but a natural right, and it was the many generations of our forefathers who fought for that right, both at home and abroad. The Arabs had not been born with that privilege. Instead, they were ruled by princes and presidents for life whose governance amounted to little more than repression and the instruments of torture used by the various regimes’ so-called security apparatuses. With no room to act freely in their political lives, it was little wonder that Arabs turned to violence and extremism. In the wake of Sept. 11, Bush believed that freedom was not only best for the Arabs, but also a vital national interest that would keep Americans, U.S. allies and interests around the world safe from terrorism. The Freedom Agenda became the cornerstone of the Bush administration’s Middle East policy”.[5] Today’s Obama Administration prefers to keep its distance in public however. White House Spokesman Jay Carney says the U.S. has stayed consistent on its message to denounce Mideast violence.
The Associated Press’ Ahmed Al-Haj reports that around “3,000 people are protesting in Yemen for a fifth consecutive day to demand political reforms and the ouster of the country’s U.S.-allied president. A small contingent of police tried to disperse the demonstrators using tear gas and batons but the protesters have continued their march Tuesday [, 15 February] from Sanaa University toward the city center. The demonstrators — mainly university students and rights activists — are chanting slogans against President Ali Abdullah Saleh, including “down with the president’s thugs.” A heavy police force and about 2,000 pro-government supporters are waiting for the protesters in the city center. The demonstration is expected to get larger as hundreds of people, students and rights activists are joining it as it moves through the city”.[1]
Professor Juan Cole relates in a detailed manner that last ‘Friday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad expressed support for Egyptian protesters. “Despite all the [West's] complicated and satanic designs . . . a new Middle East is emerging without the Zionist regime and U.S. interference, a place where the arrogant powers will have no place”. Yet on Monday [, 14 February], Iran reacted to its own street protests in a manner only the worst of the Egyptian secret police tried, on one or two days. The Iranian security forces deployed tear gas, pepper spray and batons against the demonstrators. In some instances they opened fire, wounding protesters. Thousands of Iranians demonstrated in the streets of Tehran on Monday, with a handful being wounded and at least one dead in the course of the regime’s crackdown. Protesters were attempting to revive the excitement and anti-government feeling of summer-fall 2009, when millions objected to the announced vote tallies that affirmed the victory of president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad . . . Unlike in Egypt, where except for a day or two the Mubarak regime avoided direct physical confrontation of the demonstrators, in Iran the Basij, or volunteers for the Islamic Republic, attacked protesters on motorcycle and repressed them. Eyewitnesses said that dozens were jailed. Meanwhile clerics in parliament called for the death penalty for demonstrators arrested at the scene. Opposition leader, Mehdi Karroubi had been placed under house arrest last week for calling for further demonstrations. Meanwhile, protests also broke out in Bahrain, where Shiite activists are protesting their marginalization by a Sunni monarchy, even though Shiites form two-thirds of Bahrain’s population. The US Fifth Fleet is based at Bahrain in the Gulf . . . And in Yemen, 3,000 students, attorneys and activists demonstrated in the capital of Sanaa, demanding that long time strong man Ali Abdallah Saleh step down. In Egypt, which inspired the current round of demonstrations, the martial law government pledged to have the constitution amended within 10 days, with the changes put to a national referendum within 2 months. Demonstrators had demanded that clauses disadvantageous to free and fair elections be removed or changed before polls are held, sometime before October. In Algeria, where there have also been small demonstrations, the government is now saying it will lift the emergency laws through which it has ruled with an iron fist’.[2]
Protestors have once again clashed with police in the capital of Yemen. Hundreds of anti-government demonstrators marched through Sanaa demanding that President Ali Abdullah Saleh step down. Police wielding batons blocked the road leading to the Presidential Palace. Witnesses say several people were hurt. The protests have gathered momentum in the wake of events in Egypt. Yemen is the poorest country in the Arab world. It has caught the attention of the West having also become a regional base for al Qaeda militants.
Obama’s Middle East Speech 2011
Secretary of State Clinton introduces President Obama to give his speech on the current events in the Middle East in the Benjamin Franklin Room in the State Department, as a kind of up-to-date counter-piece to his 2009 Cairo speech. Quite naturally, the President at first deals with the execution of Bin Laden and the fate of that shadowy organisation known as Al Qaeda, before delving into the recent events in the Middle East and North Africa that have now been termed the Arab Awakening or Arab Spring. Barack Obama employs these events as a way to reiterate his theme of change and hope, and how America will now deal with the rest of the world in the multi-polar world of the 21st century.
“There must be no doubt the U.S. welcomes change that advances self-determination and opportunity. . . . We have a chance to pursue the world as it should be . . . It was the people themselves who launched these movements, and it’s the people who must ultimately determine their outcome”.
And here is Megan Murphy presenting multiple-sourced stories on the Obama speech and other relavent events occurring simultaneously.
Category:
9/11, Af-Pak Theatre, Afghanistan, Africa, Algeria, Americana, Bahrain, Current Affairs, Current History, Democracy, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Islam, Islamophobia, Israel, Libya, Middle East, Muslim Brotherhood, Obama, Oil and Gas, Political Commentary, Regime Change, Religion, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Taliban, Terrorism, Yemen