This article appears in the January 8, 2016 tssue of Executive Intelligence Review.
The British Pull the Plug for Global War
by Jeffrey Steinberg
Jan. 5—The Jan. 2 mass executions by the Saudi regime, including the execution of the top Shi’ite cleric in the Kingdom, were not only an act of barbarism, in keeping with the Wahhabi/Salafi terrorism of the Islamic State. The action was aimed at triggering a new Hundred Years religious war within the Islamic world, pitting Sunni against Shia, and Arab against Persian.
Beyond the Greater Middle East region, the Saudi actions aim to fuel the ongoing war provocations against Russia and China, steered by President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron on behalf of the British Crown, with the potential for a global thermonuclear war of annihilation.
To properly understand the full implications of the Saudi actions, some not-so-obvious factors must be taken fully into account, starting with the fact that the Saudi Monarchy is a pawn of the British Empire, and has been so from its founding. Under the current rule of King Salman, the most extreme form of Wahhabi fundamentalism has been brought to the fore, and this is perfectly in keeping with the British agenda of permanent population warfare.
The most critical factor, however, is the onrushing collapse of the global British System, which dominates the financial and monetary policies of the entire trans-Atlantic region. Not only is that system crashing at an accelerating rate, as events since the start of the New Year have evidenced. The epicenter of the disintegration is the trans-Atlantic region itself, including the United States, Britain, and continental Europe,—while the Asia-Pacific region, led by a growing collaboration between China, Russia, and India, is relatively prospering and growing. While the disintegration of the trans-Atlantic region will clearly impact on the Asia-Pacific theater, the collaborative projects there, including China’s “One Belt, One Road” program, and its intersection with Russia’s Eurasian Economic Union program, will buffer Eurasia against the most immediate shocks of the collapse.
It is because of this emerging China-Russia-India collaboration that London is intent on provoking war with both Moscow and Beijing—and using the remaining months of the Obama presidency to pull it off.
Both the European Union and the United States have instituted bail-in programs, in effect as of Jan. 1, 2016 throughout Europe (and already in place in the United States since the passage of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, under which bank deposits can be stolen as part of a desperate and futile effort to save the bankrupt too-big-to-fail financial institutions). Those too-big-to-fail financial institutions have amassed a derivatives exposure well above $1 quadrillion dollars, and a $5 trillion junk-bond and bank debt bubble, tied to the shale oil and gas sector, is immediately set to detonate.
The bail-in swindle is not only a recipe for mass social chaos, but is a measure of just how desperate the defenders of the British System are at this moment. They are desperate enough to go for global confrontation with Russia and China, rather than surrender their power.
This is the context for understanding why the Saudi butchers were encouraged to carry out the mass executions, knowing it would set off a process of conflict and chaos throughout the Persian Gulf and Southwest Asia.
Release the 28 Pages
The Saudi barbarism cannot go unanswered. The most efficient action, already in front of the United States Congress and the Obama Administration, is to release the 28-page chapter from the original Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11, which documented the Saudi Monarchy’s hand behind the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
The central figure in the Saudi promotion of the 9/11 attacks was Prince Bandar bin-Sultan, a son of the late Defense Minister and Crown Prince, Sultan bin Abdulaziz. Prince Bandar was Saudi Ambassador to the United States for decades, up through the 9/11 attacks. He bankrolled at least two of the lead hijackers, and was also the bridge between Britain and Saudi Arabia in the infamous al-Yamamah barter deal, which bound London and Riyadh together in managing the biggest offshore covert funds for running terrorism. The al-Yamamah deal, first consumated in 1985 by Bandar and then-British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, continues to the present, and has been the source of funding for almost every jihadist terrorist front, dating from the original Arab-Afghan Legions that spawned al-Qaeda and the Islamic State.
Russians Address Reality
Russian President Vladimir Putin, along with his Chinese counterpart, President Xi Jinping, is fully aware of the war provocations directed against Russia and China, and Russia has made major strides in the past several years to beef up its military capacities in response.
On New Year’s Eve, President Putin signed a new Russian National Security Strategy, the first such broad policy statement since 2009. The document made the point that, while Russia seeks cooperation and equal partnership with the United States and NATO, the actions taken by Western powers, including the violent coup d’état in Ukraine in 2014, are seen as a serious national security threat to Russia. The document detailed the threats coming from jihadist terrorists, and from non-governmental organizations and state agencies promoting regime change, ultimately targeting Russia itself.
The document also emphasized that a major source of global instability was the crisis in the world financial system, stating that “Against the background of structural imbalances in the global economy and the financial system, the growth of sovereign debt, and energy market volatility, the risk of a repeated major financial and economic crisis remains high.”
Soon after the document’s release and circulation, the Chinese government announced its endorsement of the paper, and vowed to expand Russian-Chinese strategic partnership collaboration.
American Voices Warn of World War Threat
The direct policy warnings coming out of Moscow have reverberated in the United States as well, with some leading voices warning about the danger of thermonuclear world war, which stems from the Obama Administration’s continuing commitment to regime change against the Bashar al-Assad government in Syria. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Ha.) has been the leading spokesperson for those within the military-intelligence establishment (she served two terms in combat in Iraq) who demand that Obama drop the regime-change schemes, because they can lead to direct confrontation with Russia. Rep. Gabbard has introduced a bill into the House of Representatives, barring the United States from seeking the overthrow of the Assad government.
Former Clinton Administration Secretary of Defense William Perry has also come out sharply, warning about the danger of nuclear war, stemming from the U.S. policy of confrontation with Russia. Perry has published a new memoir, My Journey at the Nuclear Brink, which not only recounts his own experiences in fighting to avoid a nuclear confrontation, but warns that the danger of nuclear war is greater today than during the height of the Cold War. In a recent interview with Sputnik News, Perry was blunt: “I see an imperative to stop this damn nuclear race before it gets under way again, not just for the cost, but for the danger it puts all of us in.”
In a quasi-official statement of warning along the same lines, the U.S. Army’s most prestigious journal, Military Review, published a series of three article in the latest edition, clearly stating the actual Russian military doctrine and calling for the United States to develop a cooperative approach to Moscow. The first two articles were reprints of President Putin’s address to the United Nations General Assembly in Sept. 2015, and the Feb. 2013 address by Chief of the Russian General Staff, Gen. Valery Gerasimov to the Academy of Military Sciences.
The third article, by Charles K. Bartles, a Russia specialist at the Army’s Foreign Military Studies Office at Fort Leavenworth, explained the actual Russian military policy, in response to the new NATO-USA doctrine of “color revolutions’ and regime change. Echoing earlier warnings by Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Bartles emphasized that it is imperative for Western strategists to understand and appreciate the Russian assessments and policies, and not to buy the hokey Western propaganda that it is Russia that has adopted the policy of hybrid asymmetric warfare.
Despite these voices of warning, the greatest danger today stems from the fact that too few people in the know are willing to act before it is too late. Congress fled town at the end of 2015 without addressing the imminent blowout of the financial system, and loud voices in Congress and among a majority of presidential candidates are pressing the very policies that can lead to a war of annihilation.
The mere fact that President Obama remains in office, after having violated the Constitution repeatedly, is a testament to the bankruptcy of official Washington. Going into 2016, the consequences of failing to reverse course can and will be catastrophic.