About this website

SydWalker.Info is a personal website. I live in tropical Australia near Cairns. I oppose war, plutocracy, injustice, sectarian supremacism and apartheid. I support urgent action to achieve genuine sustainability and a fair and prosperous society for all. I rely upon - and support - free speech as defined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (see below).

with the dawg

"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers"

Blog Issues

Unless otherwise indicated, material on this website is written by Syd Walker.

Anyone is welcome to re-publish material sourced from this site, as long as the source is acknowledged with a hyperlink.

Material from other sources reproduced here is presented on a 'Fair Use' basis. I try to cite references accurately. Please contact me if you have queries, comments, broken link reports, complaints - or just to say hello.

Boycott Apartheid!
Misc Menu
August 2009
« Jul   Sep »
Search this website
Women just pawns in wars over opium, energy & power
August 3rd, 2009 by Syd Walker

Womens’ liberation in Afghanistan has been a cause célèbre in western countries for some time.

Conveniently absent from the discussion, in most cases, is the rather significant fact that the ascendancy of “Islamic fundamentalism’ in Afghanistan, to the detriment of human rights for women, has been largely the consequence of deliberate western policy over three decades.

Zbigniew Brzezinski

Zbigniew Brzezinski: has enjoyed playing chess with other countries

The left-leaning Afghan Government of the late 1970s that initially invited the Soviet Union to assist with military support, actually included significant female participation. The regime in Kabul asked the USSR for help in response to destabilization by Islamic fundamentalists, who were trained and financed by the USA and its proxies. Zbigniew Brzezinski, a US policy-maker responsible for developing this strategy back in the 1970s, gleefully admitted it in an interview 20 years later. He’s proud he played a key role in entrapping the USSR into an unwinnable conflict in Afghanistan.

It’s true that by the time the Taliban consolidated its power in the late 1990s, organisations such as RAWA (the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan, which had also opposed Soviet occupation) were deeply engaged in opposing heightened oppression of women under the zealous new Government’s policies. In 2000 and 2001, as invasion hysteria was brewed up by the western mass media, it often quoted RAWA to highlight the backwardness of the Taliban. But anyone imagining that RAWA supports current US/UK/Australian policy in Afghanistan needs to check the facts.

Report in The Scotsman, July 2009

Excerpt from an artice in RAWA News, July 2009: Child Rapist Police Return Behind U.S., UK Troops

Not only does RAWA oppose the brutal and illegal war, escalated during the Obama Presidency to his great shame. RAWA also publishes some of the most damning criticisms of the war.

Recently it published a quite explosive analysis of what’s really driving the war in Afghanistan and the other US-sponsored wars in the region.

Most people in western countries – including western feminists – get their opinions about Afghanistan from pro-war spin doctors and rarely if ever directly access authentic voices within Afghanistan.

RAWA School

Afghani children attending a RAWA-supported school

I hope to get a better balance of perspectives – and sometimes re-publish unpopular views that deserve at least to be aired.

I can’t vouch for the accuracy of this recent article by Farooq Hussain: Defeated in Afghanistan; Let’s invade Iran, published by the RAWA website. I know nothing about the author, whose online references all seem very recent.

I do, however, believe this is a perspective that merits consideration. We need to probe what’s really behind the US/western war surge in central Asia, because the official explanations sure as hell don’t stack up (links and emphasis added):

Defeated in Afghanistan; Let’s invade Iran

Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran share the common reasons for the Israel Lobby to force Washington to fight wars for Israel – which are: threat to Israel’s military superiority in the region, opium, and oil.

Farooq Hussain

The Israel Lobby boy from Bush era – US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, admitted defeat in Afghanistan – as quoted by Las Angeles Times on July 19: “The troops are tired. The Americans people of pretty tired. The US-lead forces must gain ground against militants (as if Taliban are the only people carrying guns while Americans, British, Canadian, Australian and Nato – are in Afghanistan to feed hungry people and spread Christianity!) in Afghanistan by next summer to avoid a public perception that war is unwinable. Taliban would not be defeated within one year (it would be 9th year, idiot) but it’s critical that the US military and its allies showed that they are making progress….”

Last week at Economic Club of Chicago – Robert Gates spilled his Zionist beans: “Iran is the one that concerns me the most because there don’t seem to be good options (other than war) wher one can have optimism that good option will be found…..Iran’s is going to have capability to deliver nuclear weapons to the people in their region (maybe the Zionist is ignorant of the fact that Tehran already has the delivery mechanism to reach Tel Aviv – however, they need a nuclear weapon. Maybe they can steal one of Israel’s 240 nuclear bombs!) a lot sooner than they’re going to have the capability to deliver them to us (don’t woory – Tehran already has a terrorist group in the US, known as MOSSAD).

[The] Jewish controlled mainstream media has already started echoing Afghanistan to become Obama’s Vietnam. For example, Newsweek, on July 16 published John Barry’s article saying that “even the coalition commanders in Afghanistan wonder if they can win the war”. Sahil Kapur writing for the Zionist think tank Huffingtonpost, though admitted that Iraq-Afghanistan war has “contributed to an exploding deficit, a $10 trillion debt, a US army stretched thin and a nearlu unmanageable economic crisis”. However, for the benefit of his native India – he pleaded on February 18, 2009: “Don’t Let Afghanistan Become Obama’s Vietnam”.

Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran share the common reasons for the Israel Lobby to force Washington to fight wars for Israel – which are: threat to Israel’s military superiority in the region, opium, and oil. In addition to Iran’s progress in the nuclear field, Islamic Resistance groups Hizb’Allah and Hamas have shaken Israel’s myth of invincibility. Like Iraq, Iran too has huge deposits of oil and gas. It sits on the world’s largest oil reserves, the Zagros Oil Belt. Taliban banned opium cultivation and brought it to its lowest level (178 tons), which sent socks to the Jewish monopolized The Wall Street. Since US occupation – the opium cultivation has jumped to over 4,000 tons per year. Afghanistan also sits between Turkmenistan, home to world’s third largest natural gas reserves and a lucrative market for the Israelis. The Caspian Basin is estimated to be worth more than US$5 trillion.

There are two plans to exploit Caspian oil reserves. One is oil and gas pipelines through Afghanistan to Pakistani port of Gwadar (Balochistan) and then shipped to refineries in Israel – and the other is oil and gas pipelines to Turkish port of Ceyhan and thence to Israel’s oil terminal at Ashkelon and on to its Red Sea port of Eilat.

Yosef A. Maiman, an Israeli billionaire, owns lion’s share of Turkmenistan’s oil and gas industry. He is the “Special Ambassador” of Israel to Turkmenitan government. He is also Israel’s “Honrary Consul” in Peru. In keeping with Israeli political interests, Maiman’s planned pipelines bypass Iran and Russia. Maiman has said: “I have no objection in dealing with Iran, “when and if Israeli policy allows it”.”

According to American WesternGeco Geophysical Company – “The Turkmen sector of Caspian Sea contains up to 11 billion tons of oil and 5.5 trillion cubic meters of gas. A few days earlier the Special Envoy of the US Secretary of State for Eurasian Energy, Richard Morningstar, visited Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan. Both the US and Israel are training Azerbaijan armed forces against Armenia which maintains close relations with Islamic Iran and Russia.

This oil is mine: G-d gave it to me just as He gave me the Holy Land (Palestine).

8 Responses  
  • mark writes:
    August 3rd, 20093:03 pmat

    I reckon the article is on the money, Syd. I’ve no doubt the US and Israel will at some point use the flimsy nuclear pretext to try to steal Iran’s resources.

  • Nick writes:
    August 3rd, 200910:36 pmat

    Afghanistan was just one of many places where the USA and the USSR were fighting their proxy war at the time. There was genuine resistance in the countryside against the reforms imposed from Kabul. The Americans exploited this, because the Russians were supporting the other side. Similar scenarios were being played out in Africa, in South East Asia, in South America and elsewhere.

    There is a long history of rivalry between the USA and the USSR in Afghanistan and the Afghanis were experts at playing out the various “benefactors” against each other.

    The original “Lonely Planet-Overland to Asia” guide of 1978 describes how the road from Herat (near the Iran border) to Kabul was financed by the Americans and the road from Kabul to Mazar-i-Sharif (near the Russian border) was financed by the Russians.

    It is more than ironic that the USA, after creating a Vietnam for the Russians, are now entangled in a second Vietnam of their own.

    This 2001 article from The Central Asia-Caucasus Institute (which describes itself as independent and privately funded) sheds some interesting light on Israel’s involvement and some of the unexpected partnerships and alliances it has formed to pursue mutual interests.

    It would seem that there are many bit payers involved in this horrible tragedy. Pity the poor Afghani…

  • Catherine writes:
    August 4th, 20094:48 amat

    The degree to which policies/political structures oppressive to women can be kept in place while the U.S. can masquerade as liberators is the degree to which the U.S. can “recruit” women’s participation/support in their ongoing wars, as witness recent statement of support for the war in Afghanistan by the Global Fund for Women. You’d think they’d try different tactics, but if the old ones work . . .

    By the way, why do we continue to use the preposition “in” related to the various wars? It’s the war ON Afghanistan, the war ON Iraq, the Israeli war ON Palestine.

    Thanks for your site.

    • Syd Walker writes:
      August 4th, 20098:37 amat

      Well said Catherine and thanks for your comment. I agree about prepositions. This is really one big war ON humanity.

      Here’s a short extract from another article on the RAWA website: Why Is a Leading Feminist Organization Lending Its Name to Support Escalation in Afghanistan?

      Years ago, following the initial military success of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan and the temporary fall of the Taliban, the people of Afghanistan were promised that the occupying armies would rebuild the country and improve life for the Afghan people.

      Today, eight years after the U.S. entered Kabul, there are still piles of garbage in the streets. There is no running water. There is only intermittent electricity in the cities, and none in the countryside. Afghans live under the constant threat of military violence.

      The U.S. invasion has been a failure, and increasing the U.S. troop presence will not undo the destruction the war has brought to the daily lives of Afghans.

      As humanitarians and as feminists, it is the welfare of the civilian population in Afghanistan that concerns us most deeply. That is why it was so discouraging to learn that the Feminist Majority Foundation has lent its good name — and the good name of feminism in general — to advocate for further troop escalation and war.

      On its foundation Web site, the first stated objective of the Feminist Majority Foundation’s “Campaign for Afghan Women and Girls” is to “expand peacekeeping forces.”

      First of all, coalition troops are combat forces and are there to fight a war, not to preserve peace. Not even the Pentagon uses that language to describe U.S. forces there. More importantly, the tired claim that one of the chief objectives of the military occupation of Afghanistan is to liberate Afghan women is not only absurd, it is offensive.

      Waging war does not lead to the liberation of women anywhere. Women always disproportionately suffer the effects of war, and to think that women’s rights can be won with bullets and bloodshed is a position dangerous in its naïveté. The Feminist Majority should know this instinctively.

  • Catherine writes:
    August 4th, 200911:28 amat

    OOh, doggy. I just saw him/her, over to the left. What’s his/her name?

    Ok, you look fine, too.

    • Syd Walker writes:
      August 4th, 200912:17 pmat

      Thanks Catherine. Wwoolf is the better looking of the two of us, no doubt about it.

      He is also featured in this blog in a speculative article about prehistory – see The Shaggy Dog of Giza

  • Jay writes:
    August 11th, 200910:42 amat

    You’re right that Western concerns over women’s rights are not sincere although I would disagree with the common assumption that they are merely a pretext to take resources out of the middle-east.

    The real fact that no one on either the left or the right wants to touch is that Bush was eager to impose feminism on the middle-east because deep down he knows feminism weakens society and will keep the middle-eastern birth rate lower. Feminism is simply a powerful weapon used to wreak have on traditional ethnic cultures and reduce them to shallow materialistic consumer cultures like our own. Women were used as pawns in the exact same way in Western nations.

    If we really believed that feminism worked, let’s let feminism flourish in our own society and allow the middle-east to determine its own social course based on its traditions. Natural selection will favor the society that has chosen wisely. But no liberal really wants to try to let evolution take its course and that’s the real reason why Pelosi and others won’t ever really stand up to Bush.

    I am not making any of this up. Check out Thomas Barnett’s books. The Pentagon insider directly states that redefining gender roles in the middle-east is integral to making consumerism and capitalism work in the middle-east.

    • Syd Walker writes:
      August 11th, 200912:18 pmat

      Thanks for your comment.

      To clarify my own position: I think war is unpopular and invading other countries is unpopular.

      To blaunt anti-war sentiment, various tricks are used from time to time.

      The women’s rights ‘card’ is played from time to time, especially when justifying attacks on Muslim countries.

      Some people who get swept up in this may well be sincere and well-meaning, but I agree that at the top, this agenda is utterly insincere.

      In the case of Afghanistan, it’s now been such a long time since US (and allied) troops invaded that we can judge the case for invading on its historical merits. The evidence seems clear on that front and I tried to present some of it in the article.

      This war has been disastrous for Afghan women as a whole. Continuing the war is a recipe for continuing misery and disaster.

Leave a Reply must be logged in to post a comment.

»  Substance:WordPress   »  Style:Ahren Ahimsa