The United States and Europe, along
with many willing collaborators have waged a series of wars and proxy
wars stretching across much of Africa, the Middle East, and Central
Asia.
What the West was pursuing in reordering
the post-Soviet world through conventional military means in
Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq beginning in 2003, it continued through
somewhat less-conventional means – the so-called “Arab Spring” and the
series of proxy wars that erupted afterward beginning in 2011.
Today, Western-fueled wars continue to
consume Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Yemen, while violence and
political instability plague other nations the West has either recently
meddled in or is currently occupying or undermining.
France
alone – in addition to conducting military operations in Libya in 2011,
and currently carrying out military operations in Syria and Iraq – has
troops stationed in African nations including the Central African
Republic (2,000), Chad (950), Ivory Coast (450), Djibouti (2,470), Gabon
(1,000), Mali (2,000), and Senegal (430).
Eritrea and Somalia during this 15 year
period have been subjected to invasions from neighboring Ethiopia – who
despite being plagued by widespread poverty – has been the benefactor of
US military support and encouraged to carry out proxy war upon its
neighbors not unlike Saudi Arabia is now doing in Yemen.
Predictably, the result is an arc of
chaos stretching halfway around the world. Also predictably, from this
arc of chaos refugees flee, and they are fleeing to Europe, the only
place they can go to escape the chaos.
For Africa, perhaps the most ironic aspect of the current refugee crisis besetting Europe is the fact that Libya – whom Europe conspired to destroy – had been absorbing refugees from across Africa for years, putting them to work and giving them a stable nation to live their lives in. When Libya was set upon by the US and Europe in 2011, it was predicted that Libya would go from serving as a destination for refugees, to a gateway for them, onward to Europe. And that is precisely what has happened.
For Africa, perhaps the most ironic aspect of the current refugee crisis besetting Europe is the fact that Libya – whom Europe conspired to destroy – had been absorbing refugees from across Africa for years, putting them to work and giving them a stable nation to live their lives in. When Libya was set upon by the US and Europe in 2011, it was predicted that Libya would go from serving as a destination for refugees, to a gateway for them, onward to Europe. And that is precisely what has happened.
Europe Created the Refugees, Europe Must Take Responsibility for Them
Without
doubt, along with the US and many others, Europe is responsible for the
refugee crisis. Every nation that voted for or contributed military
assets to operations across North Africa, the Middle East, and Central
Asia are directly responsible for the subsequent instability that has
inevitably followed.
It was in “humanitarianism” that the
West justified these wars, and now that is time to provide humanitarian
assistance to refugees created by these same wars, there is now
inexplicably a debate on whether or not to render aid, and to what
degree.
Citing international law is moot, since
one would have expected international law to have made the
extraterritorial aggression that precipitated this refugee crisis in the
first place an impossible proposition. But the inescapable question
remains – if Europe is not to take in the refugees its own wars created,
nor will its collaborators – the US, Turkey, Israel, and the Persian
Gulf – who should?
Turning a Crisis into Chaos
Tens
of thousands of people flooding from a trans-regional conflagration
into Europe will inevitably create tension. Systems must absorb a
growing number of people who need to be fed, clothed, housed, cared for
medically, and eventually educated and put to work. Under the best
circumstances with a reasonable and honest government, it would be a
challenge. Considering that those charged with managing the crisis were
those directly responsible for creating it, ensures that a manageable
crisis turns to greater chaos.
Turning this crisis cynically into chaos requires three ingredients:
Fascists: First, the US
and Europe have invested heavily in the spreading of “Islamophobia” in
the wake of September 11, 2001, to help fuel the endless wars
subsequently predicated on the terrorist attacks on New York,
Washington, and Pennsylvania. Groups like the English Defense League
(EDL), and the more recent “Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamisation
of the West” (PEGIDA) have sprung out of and have since been supported
by the very engineers of the wars driving
people from their countries into Europe. Ironically, this “War on
Terrorism” was being waged by armies of terrorists these very same
interests along with their Saudi partners were arming and funding for
decades.
The EDL and PEGIDA deal in the worst
sort of disinformation, lumping the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims into a
single group they claim is set on “Islamizing” the planet. For the
average EDL or PEGIDA member, it doesn’t matter to them that if even 1%
of the world’s Muslims were violent extremists, that would constitute an
army 10 million strong that would have long already “Islamized” them.
When torrents of refugees began flooding
into Europe, in a climate of fear and ignorance carefully and
methodically constructed over the past 15 years, it doesn’t take much to
convince EDL and PEGIDA followers that the “invasion” had begun.
Terrorists: The second
ingredient is extremists. The United States, Europe, and its Turkish and
Persian Gulf allies have invested for decades in creating terrorist
groups to both act as a proxy mercenary force abroad and a means of
violent, coercive fear inducement at home. Through a concerted campaign
by the media, these extremists are lumped in together with the refugees –
and Western intelligence agencies may even be literally lumping them
into camps and enclaves springing up all across Europe.
For those that doubt this, reports of
“mosques” featuring “imams” supporting the so-called “Islamic State” and
even recruiting fighters from across Europe to join the fight in Syria
should be of particular interest. Especially when these same “mosques”
are revealed to be working with the police and government to manage
these fighters when they return as was the case with one notorious
“mosque” in Denmark.
The Local DK would report in an article titled, “Danish mosque doubles down on Isis support,” that:
“We want the Islamic State to come out on top. We want an Islamic state in the world,” the mosque’s chairman, Oussama El-Saadi, said in the DR programme.
El-Saadi also said that he views Denmark’s participation in the US-led battle against Syria as a direct affront not only to his mosque but to all Muslims.
“The war is against Islam,” he said.
Paradoxically, a man who should by all
accounts be arrested and removed from society for providing support for a
listed terrorist organization was later revealed to be the centerpiece
of a Danish program rolled out to handle returning ISIS fighters from
Syria. Der Spiegel’s article, “Community Response: A Danish Answer to Radical Jihad,” would report:
Commissioner Aarslev says he is proud of what they have thus far achieved, though he never forgets to praise his people and the others involved in the program. He is particularly effusive when speaking of one man: a bearded Salafist who is head of the Grimhøjvej Mosque in Aarhus, where many of the young men who left Aarhus to join the war in Syria were regulars. It’s leader is a man named Oussama El Saadi….
…these two men have joined forces in a project that is seeking to find answers to questions that are plaguing the entire continent of Europe: What can be done about radical returnees from Syria? What measures are available to counter the terror which once again seems to be threatening the West closer to home?
El Saadi role is threefold. He
intentionally feeds into the narratives of the EDL and PEGIDA, fills the
ranks of the West’s terrorists forces abroad, and serves as a handler
for them when they return home, with a deadly array of skills and
connections which can be leveraged to further inflame existing tensions
inherent with any influx of refugees.
Multiculturalism: The
third and final ingredient is the West’s version of “multiculturalism.”
Like terrorism and far-right extremism, the same special interests have
also invested in an army of NGOs to prop up their own take on what should be a fairly straightforward concept.
Far
from anything resembling impartial mutual respect for other people’s
race, religion, and culture, under a singular national identity, it is
instead the intentional, selective, and cynically manipulative use of
culture, lending it primacy not only over national identity and the rule
of law, but over the cultures of others whenever and wherever
convenient.
This way, those cultural characteristics
found as most disruptive can be intentionally placed ahead of those
that are most stabilizing and constructive, at the expense of other
people’s lives and liberty. It is done intentionally to breed a sense of
privilege and animosity among different cultures, races, and religions,
and has historically been an integral part of any ‘divide and conquer’
stratagem.
Together, this trifecta works with
devastating efficiency, turning what is already a crisis of Europe’s own
creation, into chaos – chaos that can be wielded to suit the special
interests behind this trifecta.
From Chaos, to Crisis, to Stability
Throughout human history, huge numbers
of refugees and migrants have been absorbed into nations not only with
success, but to the benefit of those who made genuine efforts to absorb
these influxes. For Europe, doing likewise will be difficult but is not
impossible, but several matters must be addressed.
1. End the Wars: Even
under ideal conditions, the refugee crisis would be difficult to manage.
As long as Europe wages or backs wars around the world, this crisis
will not only continue, it will only get worse. Even as European leaders
pose as victims amid their own self-made catastrophe, they are still
pushing for war in Syria, allowing Saudi Arabia with absolutely impunity
to destroy neighboring Yemen, and occupying with their military forces a
large number of foreign nations.
Ending the wars and allowing these nations to rebuild in their own way is the only way the
current deluge will be stayed. Obstructing Syrian and Russian forces in
the restoration of peace and order in Syria is an indictment of the
lack of sincerity expressed by European leaders regarding humanitarian
concerns and more specifically their refugee crisis they are attempting
sidestep.
2. Humanize the Refugees: To
truly protect the refugees, they must be given an identity. Calling
them “refugees” rather than humanizing them, and recognizing them not
only as an “influx,” but as individuals, denies those that both created
this crisis and seek to exploit it the opportunity to collectivize the
influx and thus collectivize responsibility for when anyone amongst this
influx commits a crime or is even baselessly accused of doing so.
For many Europeans, they cannot
distinguish the difference between Shia’a and Sunni, let alone
understand how Wahhabism is neither. Many cannot even distinguish the
difference between Sikhs and Muslims in most cases. This ignorance is
the swamp within which racism and bigotry breed. Draining this swamp is
essential. Rather than attacking the most extreme and immovable edifices
leading the EDL and PEGDIA in the streets, appealing to and educating
the silent majority as to who is really in these camps will make it ever
so much clearer who is creating trouble among a very small minority,
and who came to Europe and is prepared to live within the rules to build
a new future.
Pretending that out of tens of thousands
of refugees no where will there be found a criminal element denies the
realities of human nature itself – and by collectivizing the refugees in
this matter, we aid those who seek to exploit this crisis in
collectivizing responsibly among all refugees when one does ill.
Assigning characteristics, good or bad, to any group is the very
definition of bigotry. If one doesn’t want it wielded against the
refugees, they must not wield it in their defense.
3. Reclaim Multiculturalism: Russian President Vladimir Putin himself would say in a piece titled, “Russia: The Ethnicity Issue,” that:
Any individual living in this country [Russia] should be keenly aware of their faith and ethnicity. But above all they must be citizens of Russia – and be proud of it. No one has the right to place ethnic and religious concerns above state law. The law, however, must take account of ethnic and religious concerns.
President
Putin claims this is demonstrated in Russia. In Singapore, it is also
the definition of multiculturalism. For Singaporeans who range from
Muslims to Christians, from Buddhists to Hindus and secular, they are
all first and foremost Singaporeans. Their national identity is defined
by universal ideas like meritocracy, professionalism, excellence in
education, and hard work. They provide mutual respect for one another’s
cultures, faiths, and beliefs, neither asking to be spared from those of
others, nor being forced to abandon their own. What results is
distinctively different cultures and religions working together under a
singular identity as Singaporeans.
The abuse of multiculturalism takes this
concept and twists it. Like an imperial viceroy ruling over a colony
intentionally showing favor for one tribe over all others to
intentionally bait the others into attacking the former, Western
“multiculturalism” is really the playing off of one culture against
another – keeping all of them weak, and with mutual respect erased
entirely from the equation.
Moving beyond the false ‘left-right’
pro- and anti-multiculturalism narrative, it must instead be redefined
and taken back. When those defending the refugees are able to delineate
between real refugees and their religion and culture, versus
Western-created cartoon characters like “Imam” Oussama El Saadi and the
perversions he passes off as religion and culture, the majority in the
middle gravitating toward PEGIDA will finally have a rational
alternative to turn to.
4. Integrate the Refugees: Leaving
the refugees segregated and in legal and socioeconomic limbo ensures
only further tension and incidents. Integrating them into society and
allowing them to begin rebuilding their lives must take precedence above
all else. In the unlikely event that Europe and its allies cease
hostilities across the globe and withdraw their troops and proxies from
the many nations they are now destroying and undermining, resources can
then be invested in helping these people return home.
The refugees are capable and willing to
work, like the many millions already doing so across Europe from over
the decades and even centuries. They will become an asset to Europe and
the economic threat they pose to Europeans will not exist if afforded
equal protection under the law on the streets, at school, and especially
at work. Additionally, by integrating them socioeconomically, they
begin the process of assimilation.
Europeans who fear their nations will be
changed by this influx of refugees are at least partially right. Europe
will change. After all, a nation’s current state is but an amalgamation
of its history. Part of that history for Europe is invading and
destroying the nations of other peoples, faiths, and cultures, leaving
them with no alternative but to follow the trail their futures were
stolen down. The refugees will change Europe precisely because Europe
has changed the nations the refugees are fleeing.
Cause, for better or worse, and effect, for better or worse, but inescapable.
Tony Cartalucci is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.
The original source of this article is New Eastern Outlook
Copyright © Tony Cartalucci, New Eastern Outlook, 2016
Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page
Become a Member of Global Research
No comments:
Post a Comment