The NEWS from 15.January.02
What Comes after Afghanistan?
The American president, George W. Bush, has declared the new
year to be “another year of war.” Where should the war continue to be waged?
While the German navy is on its way to the horn of Africa and people are
speculating about stationing German ABC defense forces in Kuwait, according to
an article in Newsweek the joint chiefs of staff of the American army are
playing out a campaign against Iraq. The scene is as follows: 50,000 men on the
southern and northern borders respectively and then a march on Baghdad from both
directions. On the northern border is the NATO nation Turkey, on the southern
border is Kuwait. The Emirate would be acutely threatened by an American attack
on Baghdad. So it would certainly make sense to station there the German fox
tanks in case of poison gas attacks. It appears that the American Secretary of
Defense Rumsfeld and his undersecretary are tempted to carry the campaign of
1991 to its end, while the American Secretary of State, Colin Powell and the
head of the CIA, George Tenet, do not want to get involved in a new adventure in
Iraq. The Secretary of State would get into serious political trouble over this,
for until now there is no proof that Saddam Hussein has worked with Osama bin
Laden and his organization. Under these circumstances an attack on Saddam would
be explosive material for the Islamic countries of the anti-terror-coalition.
A military action against Somalia seems to be less explosive for the American
terrorist hunters. An allied flotilla is daily monitoring the ship traffic
before Somalia’s coast. The reconnaissance flights of American fighting forces
have been intensified. If bin Laden or one of his loyal friends were to ask for
shelter there, they would have a hard time in Somalia.
Yemen and Sudan, two other candidates that are suspected of terrorism are
presently attempting to clear themselves of suspicion by waging their own war
against terrorism. Sudan arrested Islamists in its country and made extensive
information about their financial dealings available to the Americans. And in
Yemen, where it is thought that the perpetrators of last years’ attack against
the American destroyer Cole in the harbor of Aden may be found there, a Yemenist
military offensive against suspected Al-Qaida hiding places is even taking
place.
Military attacks against these nations can hardly be justified at present, even
allowing for a loose interpretation of international law, because no attack took
place against which one must defend oneself. The extent of the need for
justification is shown by statements of German naval officers regarding the use
of their frigates and speedboats in the Indian ocean: They say that
target-oriented shots from weapons on board the warships are not to be excluded
from consideration, for this is covered under “martial international law” since
NATO called into effect the alliance agreement regarding an attack against one
of its members. With this, military strikes in Afghanistan as well as on the
ocean around the horn of Africa are sanctioned.
What a fatal mistake! The alliance agreement as such does not justify any order
to shoot; it is linked with the right to self-defense. But where is the
attacker? Afghanistan, the presumed source of the strikes against New York and
Washington, is in an entirely different place. Should the German navy soon
search and bring in trade ships under martial law? Or bombard Somalia with
missiles that reach as far as 150 kilometers? Has Germany now entered a
worldwide war – under the supreme command of Washington, before which the German
Chancellor bows in “unlimited solidarity” for every armed encounter?
A Shift in
Power:
America’s Military Presence in Central Asia
Originally, Afghanistan was merely considered a prelude to, and
an intermediate stop in, the war against terrorism. In any case, Washington
constantly made public statements to the effect that they did not want to stay
there much longer. After the defeat of the Taliban regime and the Al-Quaida
organization, they would move out again. But meanwhile the strategists in the
Pentagon seem to have changed their plans: The marines are being relieved by
regular troops and in several of Afghanistan’s neighboring states military bases
are developing: in Kirgizia, Turkmenistan, Usbekistan and Pakistan, airforce
bases, some of which can be expanded to hold several thousand men based on
long-term agreements with host nations.
It is as though an old wish of the American geo-strategist with the Polish name
of Zbigniew Brzezinski is being fulfilled. In his bestseller published many
years ago, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic
Imperatives, the former national security advisor of President Carter wrote,
among other things: “America is today the sole primary power in the world, and
Eurasia is its central showplace. From this the question is raised of how the
power will be divided on the Eurasian continent, for the global supremacy and
historical legacy of America is of decisive significance.” The geo-politician
Brzezinski sees the world supremacy of his country as guaranteed only when it
can extend its sphere of influence from Europe to the former Soviet Union all
the way to China, Japan, India and Pakistan – politically, militarily, and when
it is in control of the oil and gas regions of the Middle East, the Caspian
Basin and Central Asia. And we quote again: “And since the unprecedented power
of the USA necessarily decreases with time, it must above all get along with the
emergence of other regional powers, so that America’s supremacy is not
threatened ... at first the task is to make sure that no nation or no group of
nations attain the capacity to drive the United States from Eurasia or even to
decisively limit its role as arbitrator.
During the coarse of the Afghanistan war, America has reached “the region of its
dreams,” so to speak, as the Süddeutsche newspaper formulated it: “A presence in
the heart of the Asian continent is very tempting to the sea-power, America,
because from there China, Russia, the subcontinent and the Middle East can be
quickly reached. With this, Washington is sending a signal to the governments
and regimes that this time it wants to permanently keep a eye on the region. Of
course, one could have already worked this out before. In the end, Central Asia
with it oil and gas deposits is an important energy-supplier for the future.
American, in turn, would rather get its hand on foreign energy sources than to
cut back and save energy at home.”
No wonder that the regional powers, and above all the superpower Russia, eye
this development with mistrust. This mistrust is strengthened by statements of
the American military that the “job” in Central Asia will last longer than was
originally assumed. They say that one cannot leave Afghanistan without
supervision to prevent the repetition of terrorist acts. Recently while on a
good-will tour through Central Asia, the Russian Secretary of State had a look
at the political weather conditions of the region, in which America is also
starting to invest financially. Secretary of State Iwanow may have realized that
Russia is not economically up to the competition. Putin is keeping quiet about
this – at least publicly. But the communistic head of parliament in Russia does
not mince his words: Russia does not want the USA to remain in Afghanistan and
that “permanent military bases of the USA appear in Central Asia.”
Back to CNA-News-Overview
CNA - Christlian News Agency in
Universal Life e.V.
Haugerring 7, 97070 Würzburg, 21. Sept. 2001
Tel.: 09391/504-200, Fax: 09391/504-202
