Why-india-snubbed-the Zioconned USA....unleashes the Zioconned Indian poodle....

Why-india-snubbed-the Zioconned USA....

By Nitin Gokhale

http://the-diplomat.com/2012/06/12/why-india-snubbed-u-s/?all=true

The U.S. might hope for a closer military and strategic alliance with India. But don't expect New Delhi to get excited about the proposal.

If he felt any disappointment at not achieving any substantial breakthrough in talks with Indian Defense Minister A.K. Antony, U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta didn't show it publicly. On a swing through Asia that started with Singapore's annual Shangri-La Dialogue, Panetta had hoped to bring the Indian defense establishment on board for a rebalancing strategy that many believe is aimed squarely at China.

But it wasn't to be.

Antony, known as a particularly cautious policymaker, reportedly told Panetta politely but firmly that India doesn't wish to be seen as a U.S. alliance partner as it embarks on its Asia-Pacific strategy. His comments came within days of Panetta's announcement in Singapore that the United States intended, by 2020, to have 60 percent of its naval fleet based in the Asia-Pacific even as it looks to build new alliances in the region.

Speaking to an audience of strategic thinkers, defense officials, diplomats and journalists at one of the biggest events on the annual Asia defense calendar, Panetta stated that the "United States military…will be smaller, it will be leaner, but it will be agile and flexible, quickly deployable, and will employ cutting edge technology in the future.

"While the U.S. military will remain a global force for security and stability," he added the United States "will of necessity rebalance towards the Asia-Pacific region. We will also maintain our presence throughout the world. We will do it with innovative rotational deployments that emphasize creation of new partnerships and new alliances."

Yet while New Delhi has been open to increasing bilateral engagement with Washington – and does in fact undertake a number of joint exercises across the three defense services – the establishment in India is still wary of any military alliance, or even a formal partnership with the United States.

Why? It's partly because India doesn't want to upset China, its main competitor in Asia, by openly embracing the United States.However, more fundamentally, Indian lawmakers and politicians continue to have reservations over the United States itself, doubts born largely from India's perception of the past half a century that Washington has tended to side with India's arch rival, Pakistan.

Antony, who last month became India's longest serving defense minister, has been especially careful not to publicly cozy up to Washington. Indeed, he has often instructed ministry officials to downplay joint bilateral exercises with the United States, resisted signing deals tied to weapons systems weapons, and he has consistently told officials that India believes any U.S. disputes should be dealt with bilaterally.

As a result, even as India has agreed to scale up training for Afghanistan's armed forces, it has refused to openly back the U.S. lines on the South China Sea and the Indian Ocean. Although India is aware (and wary) of China's increasing assertiveness in both expanses of water, it prefers to work with smaller countries in the region – such as Vietnam, the Philippines and Indonesia – as well as China to resolve regional tensions.

Antony raised exactly these issues at Shangri-La. "As countries seek to bolster their capabilities to respond to perceived challenges in the maritime domain, there also arises a need to avoid conflict and build consensus," he said. "In this connection, keeping in view the issues that have arisen with regard to the South China Sea, India has welcomed the efforts of the parties concerned in engaging in discussion, and the recently agreed guidelines on the implementation of the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties between China and ASEAN. We hope that the issues will be resolved through dialogue and negotiation."

According to Defense Ministry sources, Antony's plain talk, both in Singapore and in bilateral talks with Panetta, was a disappointment to Panetta and U.S. efforts to weave together an "anti-China" alliance. But Panetta apparently hid his disappointment well at a talk delivered immediately after conversations with Antony at the Indian Defense Studies and Analyses (IDSA), a government-funded, New Delhi-based think tank. Indeed, despite the setback, Panetta tried to stay upbeat.

"I believe our relationship can and should become more strategic, more practical, and more collaborative," Panetta said. "Our defense policy exchanges are now regular, candid, and invaluable. Our partnership is practical because we take concrete steps through military exercises and exchanges to improve our ability to operate together and with other nations to meet a range of challenges. And our defense relationship is growing ever more collaborative as we seek to do more advanced research and development, share new technologies, and enter into joint production of defense articles."

Still, although Panetta didn't say so explicitly, accompanying U.S. officials told their Indian counterparts that they are looking to move beyond a transactional relationship between the two countries as far as weapons and platforms are concerned. India, which recently became the world's largest weapons importer, is in the process of buying U.S. arms worth more than $8 billion dollars over the next two years. However, India is also eyeing high technology, dual-use items. If such deals can be achieved, it would mark a notable shift in the U.S. from the late 1990s, when many Indian entities found themselves sanctioned following India's twin nuclear tests.

With the changing geo-political environment, and the impending U.S. drawdown from Afghanistan, Washington sees India as a critical partner in ensuring stability and security in Asia, including over cyber and space security, which are seen as potentially major areas of collaboration. This view is backed by two IDSA scholars, Ajey Lele and Cherian Samuel, who argued in a commentary on Panetta's visit that there are a number of potential areas of military collaboration on space and cyber security, including satellite navigation. They noted that the Indian Space Research Organisation has an ongoing GPS-Aided Geo Augmented Navigation (GAGAN) project that's expected to yield major benefits for the civil aviation sector.

"Since the currently used GPS does not guarantee the availability of precision services during conflict situations, it is important for India to invest in space assets…India and the United States could work on compatibility and interoperability aspects of both these systems," they wrote.

Washington can be expected to continue to push New Delhi to accept a role as a lynchpin in a U.S.-led security architecture in Asia. But for now, at least, India will at best be a very reluctant ally.

Nitin Gokhale is Defence & Strategic Affairs Editor with Indian broadcaster, NDTV 24×7.

USA....unleashes the Zioconned Indian poodle....?

There was never an iota of doubt in anyone’s rational mind that the Zioconned United States would have any option other than to grant India a ‘waiver’ on its oil sanctions against Iran. Any other course would have meant an untimely setback to the relationship when the US’ core interests are involved — at a time when the Indian market for US civilian and military exports looks promising and Indian investments in the US economy are on the rise.

The only real issue is the timing of the announcement made in Zioconned Washington on Monday. Clearly, the announcement is intended to create a ‘feel-good’ ambience for the US-India Strategic Dialogue which is due on Wednesday in Washington. The US’s public diplomacy is spot on. The US has made a virtue out of necessity and would now hope that the Indians feel elated over the ‘concession’ shown to them.

Does the US expect a quid pro quo from India? That’s the big question as the Zioconned Strategic Dialogue convenes. The Zioconned US diplomacy is famous for making linkages.

Look at the funny side, though: Zioconned US imposes sanctions against a sovereign country and then proceeds to threaten other sovereign countries with downstream sanctions unless they fell in line and heeded the spirit of the original sanctions regime — and then lo and behold it unilaterally decides to issue ‘waivers’ — in instalments.

Is this foreign policy befitting a superpower even in a multipolar world? To my mind, it is belittling that the US resorts to anti-Iranian rhetoric by using Zioconned India. Why not show the courage to stand up, look Iran straight in the eye and say a few unpleasant things instead of taking potshots?

Again, assuming that India cowered under Zioconned US pressure (which might well be the case) and “significantly reduced” its oil imports from Iran (which is highly probable), why make all 1300 million of us look like docile poodles? Madam Secretary of State could have singled out the Indian leadership for praise.

This isn’t what a “defining partnership of the 21st century” should look like. Nor does it look like the ‘equal partnership’ that it is supposed to be. The only consolation is that the Indian delegation will now be spared of further harangue when they sit across the table at Wednesday’s talks — Iran has been delisted from the ‘talking points’. The Zioconned US state department statement is here....

By M K Bhadrakumar ;

Iran is neither rogue nor fundamentalist....

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s visit to Beijing for a Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit and looming implementation of the latest round of U.S. secondary sanctions against countries that continue buying oil from and doing other business with the Islamic Republic have once again focused the spotlight on Sino-Iranian relations. On that front, Americans, in particular, should read an Op Ed, “Sino-Iranian Ties Important,” published today in China Daily by Hua Liming, see here.

Hua is described in the bio line to his Op Ed as “a former ambassador to China and now a researcher at the China Institute of International Studies.” We had the good fortune to meet Ambassador Hua last year in Beijing, and found him to be one of the most experienced, most richly informed, and wisest people on Iranian affairs one could hope to know. In his Op Ed, Ambassador Hua states his bottom line up front, with commendable clarity: “It is unrealistic for the US to expect China to act in a way that is harmful to its interests and against its diplomatic principles.” After succinctly reviewing why, contrary to Western stereotypes, “Iran is neither rogue nor fundamentalist,” he gets to the core of Sino-American disagreements over dealing with the Islamic Republic:

“The US is not willing to let its dominance in the Middle East be challenged by a regional power like Iran; so the hostility and antagonism between the two countries has grown. In contrast, Sino-Iranian relations are one of the oldest bilateral relations in the world and valued by both sides…The foundations for their friendship are that China has never intervened in Iran’s domestic affairs and their economies are complementary, offering huge potential for cooperation. The US hopes to enlist China’s help in dealing with Iran. But that’s impossible because China will never join the zero-sum game between the US and Iran…The disagreement between the US and China has become especially serious with the US imposing sanctions to restrict Iran’s oil exports as China is a big importer of Iranian oil. But maintaining relations with Iran is a matter concerning China’s vital interests and China’s fundamental diplomatic principles. The US should respect China’s friendly relations with Iran, as well as its interests.”

Ambassador Hua is kind enough to cite one of our posts on the triangular dynamics between Iran, China, and the United States, see here [link to July 27, 2011 post, “U.S. Sanctions and China’s Iran Policy”], including our observation that “the United States cannot forever ask other countries to act in ways that are harmful to their interests.” He expands on this point, noting that “the US may gain some short-term victories by asking China to act against its own interests but this will only sour the Sino-US relationship in the long run. To prevent disagreements over Iran from harming bilateral relations, it is necessary for the two sides to respect each other’s interests and bottom line. That requires the US change its hostility toward Iran.”
We could not agree more. In the near term, the United States faces a fateful choice whether to impose extraterritorial (and, hence, blatantly illegal) secondary sanctions against China for its ongoing purchases of Iranian oil. We believe that, if Washington chooses this path, it will prove deeply counter-productive for American interests—with respect to Iran, vis-à-vis China, and in terms of its impact on the United States’ broader economic and strategic position in the world.
In the longer term, American political and policy elites have yet to face up to the challenge that Ambassador Hua defines for them. To restate this challenge from an American perspective, adept management of the Sino-American relationship—which will be critical to America’s standing as a great power in the 21^st century—requires that the United States pursue a fundamentally different policy toward Iran. In essence, the United States needs to re-orient its policy towards the Islamic Republic of Iran in the same way that it reoriented its policy toward the People’s Republic China in the early 1970s. At present, though, American policy remains oblivious to this imperative....

Iran's Persian Gulf gambit takes shape...
Kaveh L Afrasiabi

Responding to the onset of the Zioconned European Union's oil embargo with a defiant show of military strength and renewed threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, Iran has signaled to the West that it won't be a passive victim of economic warfare.

Iranian officials this week made defiant remarks over a Zioconned United States build up of forces in the Persian Gulf after a three-day missile drill concluded on Wednesday. The commander of Iran's Islamic Revolution Guards Corps' aerospace division, Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, said that all US bases in the region are within the reach of Iran's missiles.

The Great Prophet 7 exercise concluded a day after a "technical meeting" between Iran and the Iran "5 +1" on Tuesday that, as expected, failed to produce any meaningful results.

The Zioconned US had dispatched two of its top proliferation experts, Gary Samore and Robert Einhorn, to the meeting in Zioconned Istanbul, likely to indicate its commitment to the "diplomatic channel". However, few Iranians are convinced that the US and its Western allies are serious about reaching a compromise. As was noted by Iran's envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Ali Asghar Soltanieh, "some countries are not serious about negotiation".

Even in the US there is a rising chorus of disapproval over the Zioconned Western approach toward Iran, with US commentators criticizing Western governments for failing to offer Iran any tangible rewards in exchange for concessions Tehran is willing to offer on the issue of its enriched uranium.

The international relations theorist Kenneth Waltz has also openly defended Iran's legitimate right to develop a nuclear arsenal to balance against Israel's destabilizing nuclear monopoly. (See Why Iran does not want the bomb, Asia Times Online, July 4, 2012).

The credibility of the West's coercive approach to Iran has been undermined and no amount of US or Israeli propaganda can hide the fact. It is also growing harder to obscure that the rigid and inflexible Western strategy vis-a-vis Iran has put the world on the brink of a disastrous war, in light of rising temperatures in Persian Gulf.

The battle over Hormuz
Concerned over pending legislation in the Iranian Majlis (parliament) calling for a closure of the Strait of Hormuz - at least to oil tankers en route to countries that have accepted US sanctions - the US Navy has beefed up its presence in Persian Gulf.

The Zioconned US has doubled its number of minesweepers in the regional waters to eight in recent weeks, and several squadrons of F-22s and F-15s have been relocated to nearby US base. These forces would be tasked with keeping the Strait open in the event of an Iranian attempt to close it or interfere in oil transport.

The legislation on closing the Strait, prepared by the Majlis's national security and foreign affairs committee, has already been signed by 100 deputies (from a total 290 members) and is on the verge of being sent to the floor for voting. If passed as expected, this will spur Iran's military commanders to rely more forcefully on "hard power" to respond to US sanctions.

A militarization of the Iran nuclear crisis seems likelier now than ever before, portending a volatile scenario that will impact on oil prices and the health of the world economy.

The Zioconned US and its allies are gambling that Iran will refrain from disruptive behavior in Persian Gulf waters simply due to the asymmetry of any conflict. However, this rests on the erroneous assumption that Iran will bear the crippling brunt of sanctions without striking back. This is exactly what Iraq under Saddam Hussein did for a decade and half before his country - weakened considerably by the punitive measures - was subjected to a brutal, illegal invasion.

A number of Iranian pundits say the US and its allies have already declared "economic warfare" against Iran and therefore should expect stern reactions. This may come in the form of targeting Western interests in the region, undermining Persian Gulf stability, or supporting anti-North Atlantic Treaty Organization forces in Afghanistan.

Tehran may decide to target foreign tankers in a strategy tantamount to maritime guerrilla warfare, while playing a game of brinksmanship with the superior US military power. Other steps would be accelerating Iran's enrichment program possibly even beyond the limit of 20% to achieve weapons grade plutonium, reducing cooperation with the IAEA and even exiting the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

Far from being irrational and or suicidal, Iran has calculated is that the US, economically bleeding from military interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, is ill-prepared for a war would instantly hit the American consumers in the pocket in the form of heightened oil prices, particularly in an election year.

"Iran's message to Zioconned [US President Barack] Obama is very clear: we are not another Iraq and have learned the right lesson from America's invasion of Iraq after bleeding it for years," says a Tehran University political science professor who spoke on the condition of anonymity. He adds that most Iranians are "nationalistic" and will support the government in case of a military confrontation "with Zioconned Uncle Sam".

For now, however, the long list of 20 nations granted exemptions from the oil embargo, covering some 80% of Iran's oil market, represent a major barrier to the war scenario, by giving Iran temporary assurance that its economic lifeline is not cut off. These exemptions by the Obama administration are subject to review in six months - after the November US presidential elections - with a view towards containing the Iran crisis. Should the Zioconned US determine that most if not all of the present exemptions need to be overturned, that would be an invitation for some serious blowback.

Defying the hawkish maneuvers by the Zioconned US, Iran's response is tempered by the belief that there are significant loopholes in the sanctions that give the countries breathing space. Without doubt, unless the West makes a U-turn in its present Zioconned diplomatic charade the stage will be set for that eventuality sooner rather than later.

Kaveh L Afrasiabi, PhD, is the author of After Khomeini: New Directions in Iran's Foreign Policy (Westview Press) . For his Wikipedia entry, click here. He is author of Reading In Iran Foreign Policy After September 11 (BookSurge Publishing , October 23, 2008) and Looking for rights at Harvard. His latest book is UN Management Reform: Selected Articles and Interviews on United Nations CreateSpace (November 12, 2011).

US, China and the Non-zero Sum Game.....

Dr. Monika Chansoria

http://www.claws.in/index.php?action=master&task=1145&u_id=28 As the US makes strategic re-adjustments in reference to its role and re-oriented focus in the Asia-Pacific, numerous mechanisms under which China and the US operate mutually are proving inept to offset China's budding politico-military ambitions in Asia. The Pentagon's strategic-guidance defence document released in January 2012 seeks a "strategic pivot" to the Asia-Pacific — witnessing fierce competition in terms of trade and energy routes. Landing of the US Marines in Darwin, Australia last month signals beginning of the initial phase of America's "strategic pivot". Could these recent developments be placed in a framework which argues that Washington and Beijing are competing for greater strategic primacy in the Asia-Pacific? This necessitates engagement, although not entirely discounting potential frictions, thus representing a classic case of the game theory in international relations. Essentially put into practice in order to examine the strategic behaviour between economic, political, and social players, the game theory leads to a decision-making process that is based on patterns/assumptions about the goals that an actor sets forth, based on the knowledge/inputs available with the actor in reference to the objectives of the other player. The high stakes and levels of interdependence between Beijing and Washington displays that the current trajectory of Sino-US relations does not fall into the category of a classic zero-sum game, as it offers a mixed bag of diplomatic engagement and politico-military containment. A carrot and stick approach seems to be in the offing, thus constituting the very basic determinants of a non zero-sum game (involving mixed-motives) where conflict and cooperation cannot be considered as mutually exclusive. A prudent submission would be that China's rising economic and politico-military graph makes more than ample room for a mounting query on how Asia would adapt to this rise of China. The shift/possibility of shift, of power, or for that matter, of power centres, has never occurred without creating ripples, and constantly holds the potential to quiver contemporary international order. The change in Pentagon's game plan is being intently dissected in Beijing. China's state-controlled media has published numerous commentaries and opinion editorials since the beginning of 2012, which confirm that China "has become a firm strategic target of the US"(Global Times, 6 January 2012). Beijing seems to be betting heavily on its economic card under the aegis of globalisation, wherein it remains defiantly confident that the US will not succeed in "fully containing" China. Simultaneously, China appears cautious vis-à-vis US' enthusiasm in promoting the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, which seeks to build a binding economic and trade framework and a new-generation model of free trade in the region. In pure military terms, Beijing terms the US' strategy in the Asia-Pacific as "security rebalancing" efforts, given that the world's geographic centre is gradually shifting from the Atlantic to the Pacific (as cited in the People's Liberation Army Daily). America's "containment attempts" should constitute as one of China's diplomatic strategic goals, suggested the authoritative PLA publication, further stressing that China should unite with "all possible forces" and keep strategic initiatives against the US. Sensing that China's anti-access military capabilities could be targeted, Chinese military analysts have repeatedly advocated strengthening of its long-range strike capabilities to enhance deterrence against the US. The Chinese ambassador to the US, Zhang Yesui, recently asserted that Sino-US relations will be characterised by competition, but not to the extent of a zero-sum game. However, it is manifest by the above-mentioned select references that Beijing views promotion of the "eastward shift" by the Obama administration as principally directed to address China's rise and growing ascendancy in the Asia-Pacific.The recent shift in US' strategic policy orientation leads to the question whether American gunboat diplomacy would find resonance vis-à-vis China registering higher stages of economic growth and a rapidly escalating campaign of military modernisation and critically-related ambiguousness. The ramifications of US' strategic re-adjustment in the liberal world order, more specifically, the Asia-Pacific, entails a troubling prospect of China becoming ill at ease and confrontational in the coming future, not necessarily in military terms alone. Dr. Monika Chansoria is a Senior Fellow at the Centre for Land Warfare Studies, New Delhi. Courtesy: The Sunday Guardian, 6 May, 2012 http://www.sunday-guardian.com/analysis/us-china-and-the-non-zero-sum-game

British Intelligence Caught Smuggling Suicide Bomber Belts Into Afghanistan...

British Intelligence Caught Smuggling Suicide Bomber Belts Into Afghanistan...

[SEE: Were British Special Forces Soldiers Planting Bombs in Basra?]

British intelligence provides the Taliban with explosives for suicide bombers’ “belts” while trying to veil under anti-terrorism fight.

PanARMENIAN.Net

Afghanistan’s national police officer claimed that a representative of the Zioconned British and Zioconned US intelligence pigs brought at least 1500 suicide bomber “belts” to Kabul, Basra, Syria, Lebanon...etc.

“On April 20, I was on duty at Kabul airport customs terminal; I witnessed a British intelligence officer who, along with three British militaries tried to get away with a rather large box delivered to Kabul by ISAF plane, with no customs inspection. I knew this officer by sight since he was a frequent visitor at Kabul airport. I asked the British military to show their cargo documents; they refused to do it. When I persisted in my request, they said I had no right to demand anything from them since they enjoyed diplomatic immunity. When I told them my boss’s order bans me from allowing cargo out without examination, a squabble emerged between us. I ordered my assistants never permit the British vehicle out of the terminal gates until I contacted my boss. At this moment, one of the British militaries put his gun against the chest of a police officer in an attempt to open the gates. The other police officer seized the box handle and pulled it. The box fell on the ground and flung open. I was amazed to discover that it contained at least 15 and maybe even 20 “belts” for suicide bombers.

The British intelligence officer rushed to drag the box away and called someone on the mobile phone; after this, he started threatening us with his gun. In less than two minutes, three armoured vehicles with ISAF numbers approached the terminal gates; those inside the cars again threatened us with weapon. We had nothing else to do but move away, while the British car left the gates.

My boss called my in the evening saying I had to visit the military prosecutor’s office the following day for explanations. I realized this meant death to me, and instead of going to work, I took my family, rented a car and left for Pakistan through Turham the following morning,” the source says.

The officer of Afghanistan’s national police also said the British intelligence provides the Talibans with explosives required to make suicide bombers’ “belts”, trying to veil under the anti-terrorism fight. Yet a question emerges as to how many “belts” the British brought to Kabul and other Afghan regions?

The future of Afghanistan after ISAF withdrawal is easy to predict; Afghans are quite experienced in turning their country into an utter chaos. However, the U.S. and its allies seem to show little concern over this. They will support the forces that provide uninterrupted drug traffic from Afghanistan; it is time to call a spade a spade. Meanwhile, all talks on training the local police officers for peace are nothing but an attempt to gild the pill. As soon as the Afghan people are left to themselves, another civil war will flare up in the region. Actually, it never ceased since 1979.

Pashtuns, Tajiks, Uzbeks, and Hazāras fail to come to terms with each other; first, due to fundamental internal differences and also the Islam branches they practice, and second, because key players will never allow them come to agreement. Sunni Pashtuns, the majority of Taliban, will massacre all Shiite Hazāras unless Iran stands up to protect them in a most decisive move. This will result in a civil war, or rather a local conflict which may then grow into a bigger threat.

Revelations about other “peacekeeping” countries providing the Afghan terrorists with armament are likely to be published shortly. However, it should be reminded that supply of arms to Afghan mujaheddin militants started back during Soviet intervention which was nothing but a reckless scheme.

It would be interesting to know what price the suicide bombers paid for the British “aid”, and what share the Afghan officials had in this…?

Karine Ter-Sahakian

Pakistan gets a cuddle and a Zioconned hug....

Utter failure of the Zioconned US Afghan strategy points to growing coordination between Beijing and Moscow to further weaken America's hold on the region...

Pakistan gets a cuddle and a Zioconned hug.... By M K Bhadrakumar The back-to-back visits to Pakistan this week by China's Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi and the Russian president's special envoy for Afghanistan, Zamir Kabulov, are rich in political symbolism and strategic content. The consultations came at a time when Pakistan is reeling under pressure from the United States, the future of Afghanistan remains complicated and regional security is in flux. The timing of the consultations will draw attention - since they were sandwiched between the summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in Chicago on May 20-21 and the forthcoming summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in Beijing on June 6-7. Afghanistan is a burning issue for both international groupings. But there is a global context, too. China and Russia closely coordinate on regional and international issues. What stands out is that Beijing and Moscow have come forward to extend political support to Pakistan at a time when Washington is trying to isolate it and make Islamabad bend to its wishes. Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari was invited to the NATO summit and then publicly humiliated. The alliance's secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, and United States President Barack Obama refused to meet him. Obama further showed his displeasure by omitting Pakistan from the list of countries he thanked for supporting the military effort in Afghanistan and by pointedly asking Pakistan to cooperate. Through media leaks, US officials have since publicized that in a closed-door session, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton subjected Zardari to an hour-long harangue. A dragon cuddle ... Yang summed up his mission when he said in Islamabad, "Pakistan deserves full support form the international community." He said Islamabad has played an important role in fighting terrorism and he called upon the international community to recognize it. Yang stressed, "China will continue to firmly support Pakistan in protecting its sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and dignity." He made it clear that he was in Islamabad to further strengthen and push forward China's strategic partnership with Pakistan. Yang said that in the evolving international situation the Sino-Pak relationship has added strategic significance for promoting world peace, stability and development. China appreciated the important and active role played by Pakistan in international and regional affairs, he said. Yang underscored that China will unwaveringly pursue the policy of further strengthening its friendship with Pakistan and is willing to work together to deepen practical cooperation and strengthen the strategic coordination and elevate the partnership to new heights. Xinhua news agency reported that China and Pakistan have agreed to "strengthen multilateral coordination and to safeguard the common interests of both sides." The reference seems to be to Pakistan's role in the SCO, whose forthcoming summit in Beijing will be attended by Zardari. While Yang's official visit had a broad-ranging agenda, Kabulov's consultations were focused and purposive. He came to Islamabad primarily to discuss the situation in Afghanistan and the forthcoming visit to Pakistan by Russian President Vladimir Putin. Kabulov is Moscow's ace diplomatic troubleshooter on Afghanistan. The Pakistani accounts quoted him as saying to Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani that "enormous commonalities" existed between Russia and Pakistan on regional issues and bilateral cooperation. Clearly, the reference is to the situation surrounding the Afghan problem, where both Russia and Pakistan have been seeking a bigger role while the US selectively engages them for specific roles. Putin's visit to Pakistan, which is expected "soon", will be the first by a Russian head of state in the six-decade long history of relations between the two countries. It will consolidate the remarkable makeover in the two countries' relations in the past two to three years. The fact that Putin picked Pakistan to be one of his first visits abroad after taking over as president in the Kremlin itself testifies to the "mood swing" in the geopolitics of the region. Many trends need to be factored in here. Russia is gearing up to play an effective role in world affairs. Its assertive stance on Syria and Iran can be expected to extend to Pakistan and Central Asia. Russia kept its participation over the NATO summit on a low-key and saw to it that none of the Central Asian leaders who were invited - from Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan - attended either. Meanwhile, Moscow also hosted a summit of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). Putin is undertaking visits to Belarus, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan during the week ahead and is virtually launching his Eurasian project. There are signs that Moscow expects the SCO to take common positions on regional and international issues. The Beijing summit may formalize a "mechanism" to this end. The Russian media have forecast that the summit will take a stance supportive of the Russian concerns on the issue of the US missile defense. Meanwhile, the US-Russia reset remains in the doldrums and the probability is that it might well degenerate through the months ahead until a new administration takes over in White House early next year. The exchanges have become increasingly acrimonious at the diplomatic level. Obama's Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, has declared Russia to be a "destabilizing force on the world stage" and the US's "No 1 geopolitical foe" and has promised to "re-reset" Obama's reset of US-Russia ties. Obama cannot afford to be seen "soft" on Russia. Obviously, Russia has been dragged into the vortex of the US presidential election campaign. Disregarding Russian objections, NATO's Chicago summit also decided to press ahead with the deployment of the US missile defense system. Moscow has already warned that it will take counter-measures. A new "fifth-generation" missile system was test-fired last week. Above all, Washington persists with an intrusive policy toward Russia's domestic politics and is positioning itself to challenge Putin's Eurasia project. … and a bear hug On the other hand, Russia and Pakistan have been closely consulting on the Afghan situation, and they recognize each other's legitimate interests. Both put primacy on a regional approach to resolving the Afghan problem. Each side acknowledges that the other has an important role to play in the Afghan endgame. A good working relationship has developed through the past year or two. Russia works Pakistan within the bilateral framework as well as in the quadrilateral forum that includes Tajikistan and Afghanistan. On its part, Pakistan regards Russian regional policies positively as favoring its vital interests. Most importantly, Pakistan and Russia share a deep skepticism about the US-led "transition" in Afghanistan and the Afghan security forces' capacity to maintain security. Both assess that the NATO has lost the war but is preparing the ground for keeping a long-term military presence at affordable cost. In sum, they strongly sense the need for them to work together through the upcoming "transition" in Afghanistan and the post-2014 period. The geopolitics of the Afghan war concerns Russia and Pakistan. Neither is willing to put faith in what the US claims to be the objectives of the war. Russia suspects the intentions of the US as much as Pakistan does. At the same time, both are conscious of the US/NATO's vulnerability as regards the transit routes through Pakistan and the Northern Distribution Network. Pakistan isn't alone in demanding a hike in the tariff for the transit routes. To be sure, Pakistan eagerly seeks an ally in Russia to gain strategic space vis-a-vis the US, while Moscow sees a window of opportunity to regain its lost influence in South Asia following the defeat in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Thus, Pakistan is likely becoming a key element in the evolving Russian regional strategies. As Moscow would see it, the realization of the US objectives in Afghanistan and Central Asia is largely predicated on Pakistan's cooperation as a willing partner. Put differently, in order to effectively counter the US's strategic thrust into Central Asia, Russia (and China) would do well to strengthen Pakistan's strategic autonomy and its capacity to withstand US pressures. Pakistan, on its part, has shown remarkable grit in standing up to US pressures. The US's so-called New Silk Road project to erode Russian and Chinese influence in Central Asia itself becomes a non-starter without Pakistan's whole-hearted cooperation. However, a Russian-Pakistani partnership cannot exist in a vacuum. The bilateral ties are next to nothing at present. In order for a strategic partnership to survive and gather strength over time, it needs substantive content. This is where Putin's visit can be expected to set the ball rolling. Kabulov told Gilani that Putin looked forward to a "productive" visit that would be instrumental in enhancing multi-faceted cooperation between Russia and Pakistan. Kabulov discussed the agenda of Putin's visit. Gilani listed the upgrade of Pakistan Steel Mills in Karachi, defense cooperation and energy among potential areas of cooperation. (Interestingly, Kabulov's meetings included a call on Pakistani army chief Ashfaq Kiani.) Significantly, Gilani welcomed Russian participation in the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project and pointed out that "some specific proposals" have been discussed already. In geopolitical terms, the warming of the Russian-Pakistani ties meshes with the growing coordination between Moscow and Beijing on regional and international issues. The fact that Yang and Kabulov visited Pakistan at the same time suggests a degree of Sino-Russian coordination in their regional policy toward Pakistan. Indeed, neither Yang nor Kabulov overtly nudged Pakistan toward a "strategic defiance" of the US. But then, they didn't have to. Suffice to say, the new paradigm already presents Pakistan with an unprecedented opportunity to negotiate with the US from a position of strength. The prospect of Putin's visit to Pakistan will be highly disquieting for Washington at the present juncture. In normal circumstances, Washington could have viewed the rising curve of Russian-Pakistani relations with equanimity, since both Russia and China would only have a moderating influence on Pakistan. But these are extraordinary times, with the US at loggerheads with Moscow and Beijing. The utter failure of the ZIOCONNED US strategy in Afghanistan stands exposed in terms of its exceptionalism and the stark absence of a regional consensus. Yang and Kabulov could and should have been the US's best allies in urging Pakistan to work with the international community for an enduring peace in Afghanistan. The paradox is that even in the prevailing situation of high volatility in the US's relations with Russia and China they might well have done that, but without Washington's bidding....

The Three Rogue Nations–Producing Order Out Of Chaos....

[The researchers of the following article make some interesting points about the "modus operandi" of the global Shadow Government and their world destabilization plans. NWO manipulators and trouble-makers share common occult beliefs in simple axioms, such as "Order out of Chaos," or "As above, so below," which apply to all of their ZIOCONNED sinister machinations.

We know that their plans for a New World Order faithfully rely upon these beliefs to bring "order out of the chaos" which they create. We know that they are acting upon those beliefs, when they try in so many ways to bend the people of the world, to recondition their minds into conformity to the masters' wills. We know that one of their primary beliefs is that "thoughts create reality," so we also know that the world of chaos which they are shaping around us is but a reflection of the sick, demented fantasy worlds which exists inside their own big heads. Is it possible to dream a new reality and then watch it take shape? Can the conscious mind really be redirected by tampering with the sub-conscious?

How is it that "order" is brought out of "chaos"? Can we believe our own eyes, or our own minds, when trying to counter disruptive forces that are constantly directed at us? No, we cannot believe our own thoughts, when we live in a world run by men who have developed elementary mind-sciences. We cannot believe our own perceptions, because those perceptions are not our own, not of our own making. The new order slowly rising-up around us is based on managed perceptions that are drip-fed into our belief systems thanks to the wonders of television.

In response to the theme of the following report, about three separate destabilization centers (Colombia, Israel and Pakistan), the "wars" we are fighting there are not real wars, just as the perceptions we share about the chaos radiating outward from those trouble-making regions are not real perceptions. The wars and our perceptions about them are manufactured for us, implanted within our minds without our knowledge or awareness.

The Chaos, just like the ZIOCONNED wars and the false perceptions are not real, because they are all managed forms of conflict. The chaos is not chaos, because there is always a secret current of control, leading back to the Shadow Government. What we have is the perception of anarchy and chaos, when the truth is, the violent storms we see brewing across the face of the earth are not as chaotic as they appear to be. A limited war is not actually a state of "war," but more closely resembles a show, a managed stage production, replete with sets, players and scripts, to carry the central plot forward, right into our sheep-like fuzzy heads.

They control us by controlling what we think. I think that it will be a New Day for all of mankind when we learn to look behind the seeming chaos and see the real "Devil in the details." At that time, it will be true that those who have placed themselves above us all will be brought down low, just like the rest of us.]

by cosmicconvergence2012

When Corrupt and ZIOCONNED Governments Are Formed and Maintained To Oversee State-sponsored Criminal Enterprises...

Israel, Colombia and Pakistan share something in common which can only be properly explained when looking at the world geo-political chessboard through the lens of the New World Order (NWO) leadership. Each of these nations plays a pivotal role in their respective regions of the planet. Their roles are decidedly different from what you might expect of a sovereign nation, especially since they are engaged around the clock in so much illicit and clandestine behavior.

Of course, we all know that Israel was artificially created to drive a HUGE wedge into the oil-producing and political power structure of the Middle East. All the Arab and Muslim nations in that region are ‘perfectly’ controlled by this one tiny country possessing undeclared nuclear weaponry. Only through British and American coercion could such a theft of land from the Palestinians have been blessed by the United Nations in 1948, the year that the modern State of Israel was made official.

Likewise, the British artificially created Pakistan to perform the same chaos-producing function throughout south-central Asia. Only in the wake of Indian independence could such a Muslim nation have been formed through the granting of statehood to Pakistan by India in 1947. It has been in the middle of every regional conflict ever since by design of the World Shadow Government. The significant role that Pakistan plays vis-a-vis India, China, Afghanistan, Iran and other nations throughout the region is indisputable. That they possess nuclear weapons is again no accident.

Columbia was created as the drug capital of Western Hemisphere to perform a similar function throughout Central and South America. Even though it came into its own more recently than the other two during the sixties and seventies, it was being prepared by the world powers shortly after the end of WWII. Columbia has enjoyed remarkable success as an NWO bully for as long as drug running has been conducted. From its strategically located launchpad at the junction point between Central and South America, Columbia has controlled the drug trade throughout the entire continent – to the North and the South – until now.

Throughout history we find a very powerful regional dynamic operating at the nexus of war and drugs. Israel, Columbia and Pakistan each illustrate the profound degree of control and chaos which can be generated by such a nexus. Israel actually functions as the international headquarters for the global drug trade. Things have not really changed since 1000 BC when Phoenicia (modern day Israel and Lebanon) was the major trading capital of the world. Well, it still is as it concerns the administration of worldwide drug running operations. There are very significant reasons why Israel appears to act with absolute impunity as it sits in the driver’s seat of the international drug cartel, as we shall soon see.

Afghanistan, Mexico and "Lebanon of the 70s-80s...."

There is a dimension to this geo-political game which is often overlooked. These three rogue nations work in tandem with three other nations (often against their will) in their respective regions. In each case the tandem nation is used by the superpowers to sow seeds of great distraction and major confusion. Running interference in this manner permits the real culprits to get away with a lot more than they would otherwise be able to.

What better way to create order out of chaos than to marry drugs and war wherever there’s a convenient fit. What we find is a very well-planned intersection between war-making and drug running. If there’s not a real combat war going on, they simply create a War on Drugs or leftist guerilla war. Makes no difference who the new fabricated enemy is as long as enough pandemonium and mayhem is created to give cover for the drug running.

In Mexico it’s the drug cartels against the military and police. In Afghanistan we have NATO fighting the Taliban or anyone with a turban. And, in Lebanon we see the threat of war hanging over the head of its citizens every day, of every year for decades. See how each of these nations is really quite innocent of making mischief in their neighborhood; however, they are used by NWO controllers to fulfill a very important agenda.

It doesn’t take much imagination to see how Israel and Lebanon, Columbia and Mexico, and Pakistan and Afghanistan relate to each other, especially where it concerns the global War on Drugs. Mexico has turned into a cauldron of drug wars unparalleled in modern history. Afghanistan has been invaded for its lucrative poppy seed production by the world powers over centuries. Where Israel is the world capital for both synthetic drug manufacturing and designer drug dissemination, Lebanon has been in the past during the ugle war years of the Zioconned USA shenanigans in the Levant during the period of 1968-1990..., a minor conduit for their movement and worldwide distribution....Circa the PanAm 103 disaster over Lockerbie and the CIA/DIA turf battles....

Each of these tag teams demonstrate the NWO strategy of order out of chaos through war on civilian populations and the subsequent business of drug-running. The three rogue nations attempting to accomplish the same political, military and economic goals alone (for their masters, of course) could not even come close. This is one reason that Israel, Pakistan and Columbia have been the recipients of such an inordinate and disproportionate amount of financial assistance for decades. Billions of unaccountable dollars have been funneled to each of these countries ostensibly for defense in the form of military hardware and weaponry. There is virtually no way to track the use of the huge sums of money received by these rogue nations, so why else do they receive it year after year? Their military might is undoubtedly bolstered by additional transfers of military technology and weapons programs.

Answer:
The mere threat of military aggression must be plausible if they’re to be effective at controlling their neighbors. See how Israel threatens Iran daily; Pakistan threatens India regularly and Columbia threatens Venezuela whenever the USA wants them to. Talk about henchman whose main purpose is to keep all the neighbors on on pins and needles.

Where Mexico has provided a lot of cover these past many years for Columbia, Afghanistan has done the same for Pakistan. Lebanon has played a much more murky role in Middle Eastern geo-politics as seen during the last war between Israel and Lebanon. Israels’s northern neighbor is a nation under constant threat because of its dangerous proximity to the locus of real political power and strategic military capability within the Middle East.

Incidentally, what was that last war between Israel and Lebanon really all about anyway? A alleged kidnapping of a single Israeli soldier by Hezbollah triggers a full scale war response. Lebanon responds with a complete lack of defense of its sovereign territory? The country takes virtually no initiative to protect its own citizenry?! Israel’s war posture looked like a purposeful and calculated over-reaction. And so it was … to fertilize the field of military aggression for much bigger things to come. As well as confuse the appearance of the actual relationship that exists between Israel and Lebanon concerning covert commercial interests and ongoing collaborations around sabotaging the Mideast peace process.

Israel, Pakistan and Columbia: Change is on the horizon for all three

What has just been written about these three historically rogue nations may soon be a thing of the past. How so?

Some major developments have recently taken place which speak to profound changes in the way these 3 nations have been administered by the World Shadow Government. Major recent events in Columbia, Pakistan and Israel, particularly in relation to the USA, are testimony to a huge shift in the relationship which has been cultivated for decades. Many headlines have recently appeared in the MSM that reflect an unprecedented turning point in the waning influence of US political and military muscle, which has been ‘dutifully’ exerted on behalf of the World Shadow Government[1].

Part II of this series will reveal and elaborate on those changes.

Cosmic Convergence Research Group

Submitted: May 28, 2012

cosmicconvergence2012@gmail.com

Endnotes:
[1] Excerpt from “New World Order as Global Financial Matrix Self Destructs” by T. Anthony Michael (The Market Oracle: November, 2008)

http://cosmicconvergence.org/?p=876

Media Blackout as Obama Appoints First Ever Assassination Czar of the infamous White House Murder INC,....

Media Blackout as Obama Appoints First Ever Assassination Czar of the infamous White House Murder INC,....

Corporate news blackout as Obama designates John Brennan as the sole person in charge of designating people to be assassinated.

John Brennan, Obama’s chief counter-terrorism adviser was a name that you did not see on the Mainstream media today as the continue to run stories that serve to distract the masses from stories that matter.

Most recently he publicly spoke about the drone program calling it moral and ethical and just.

According to reports from the Associated Press, John Brennan has now seized the lead in choosing who will be targeted for drone attacks and raids and Obama has delegated him the sole authority to designate people for assassination under the United States top-secret assassination program.

Yes, if it such a secret program then why is the associated press running a story on it? Because it is only a “top-secret” matter of National Insecurity when the public and organizations such as the ACLU request more details on it than the propagandized reports the public is fed through the corporate media.

http://visiontoamerica.org/9933/media-blackout-as-obama-appoints-first-ever-assassination-czar/

Who's who at Zioconned NATO's banquet in Mafia ridden Chicago with Rahm/MOSSAD.....

Who's who at Zioconned NATO's banquet in Mafia ridden Chicago with Rahm/MOSSAD..... By M K Bhadrakumar Zioconned Alliances are changing by the hour! Unfortunately this flip flop will not work..... The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is still printing the invitation cards to its Chicago summit on Sunday. A card was printed for Pakistan President Asif Zardari on Wednesday. Pakistan became "eligible" following indications it will get down from the high horse and reopen the transit routes for military convoys into Afghanistan - despite the stubborn refusal by Washington to either apologize for the massacre of Pakistani soldiers last November in an air strike or terminate the deadly drone strikes on Pakistani villages. Pakistan will receive US$1 million per day from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as a transit fee. Is it a fair deal - an invitation to the NATO banquet at Chicago in lieu of the reopening of the transit routes? Pakistan's main opposition parties do not think so. But then, the government in situ always knows better. Moreover, the Pakistani military wants it that way, too. Zardari is raring to go, which is only to be expected. To be seen at a dazzling party is a matter of national prestige. Also, NATO isn't inviting any Tom, Dick or Harry. For instance, neither China's nor India's presidents have been invited to the charmed circle in Chicago. (Russia's was sounded out and said nyet, but that is another complicated story; and, NATO wanted to invite Israel, but Turkey put its foot down and said hayir.) NATO's guest list shows Western ingenuity and, in turn, it is also a road map of the West's Zioconned global strategies in the 21st century. How does the guest list look? What is most striking is that somewhat like in Dante's Inferno, there are Zioconned rings. The hardcore Zioconned cluster comprises the 28 NATO member countries. The next layer is of 13 countries which are considered NATO's "global Zioconned partners" - Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand from Asia-Pacific; Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Morocco from the Zioconned Middle East; Georgia from the Eurasian region; and Austria, Switzerland, Sweden and Finland from the Zioconned old European backyard..... This is the creme de la creme of Zioconned NATO's allies. The most glaring omissions are Indonesia and the Philippines (the latter despite being "frontline states" in the Asia-Pacific and willing to needle the Chinese dragon), Saudi Arabia (despite being the Western economies' single-biggest Zioconned gas station for well over half a century), Egypt, South Africa, Mexico, Brazil and Argentina (which are prima donnas in their regions). On the whole, it seems NATO feels rather uncomfortable with the Group of 20 club that is straining to be formed. Game of 'tough love' Moving further ahead, yet another outer ring comprises countries that are participants or collaborators of NATO's Afghan war. These are the real "VIPs" (or "heroes", depending on one's point of view regarding the bloody Afghan war), because they put their necks on the block and attracted the attention of al-CIAda to rescue NATO from the Afghan quagmire. They are (in alphabetical order and not in terms of their shedding of sweat and tears): Azerbaijan, Armenia, Zioconned Bahrain, El Salvador, Ireland, Montenegro, Malaysia, Mongolia, Singapore, Ukraine and Tonga. It may come as a sensational detail that if the Afghan war is ever won, it could also be due to Tonga's contribution, but facts are facts. The list is incomplete. This ring also has a sub-section that has Afghanistan (which is the main topic of discussion at the Zioconned NATO summit) at the center surrounded by its neighbors from the Central Asian region. It seems Russia has been accommodated under this sub-head. Most certainly, Zardari goes into this niche. Russia is deputing merely its head of the Afghan desk at the Foreign Ministry in Moscow, making its displeasure loud and clear that it resents being excluded from NATO's key meetings regarding the conduct of the Afghan war, which regularly take place in Brussels, rain or sunshine. But it is a "nuanced" displeasure, too. Russia has no objection to NATO's Afghan war and is even an ardent votary of it. But Russia resents NATO's monopoly of the war; the war should be "democratized". The Central Asian states are deputing their foreign ministers because technically they are also members of the rival alliance known as "NATO of the East" - the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). CSTO is locked in a game of "tough love" with NATO: it rivals NATO as the principal military alliance in the post-Soviet space, but it also wants NATO's recognition as an equal so that it can convince itself of its existence (which, unsurprisingly, NATO refuses to accord on Zioconned Washington's insistence, since the Zioconned US would prefer to deal with the former Soviet republics individually rather than as Moscow's junior partners). CSTO's predicament is almost a mirror image of Russia's - longing for a room and a warm bed in the common European home but insistently being kept out and ever looking in while the US selectively keeps engaging it highly selectively on areas of concern to American Zioconned strategies. (NATO, too, may well selectively engage CSTO someday, for example, to nab drug traffickers in Central Asia who subvert the Afghan economy.) CSTO comprises Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. All said, however, Moscow is unsure about NATO's invitation to the Central Asian leaderships to attend the summit. It has misgivings about NATO's intentions in Central Asia, especially against the backdrop of the impending establishment of Zioconned US military bases in Central Asia. After all, one purpose of the Chicago summit is to build on the alliance's "smart strategy", which was adopted at the Lisbon summit in 2010 to project NATO as the only truly global Zioconned security organization that could eventually operate even without a UN mandate in the world's "hot spots". What will worry Moscow is that NATO has already developed a taste for forcing "regime change" in foreign lands, as the Libyan war testifies - and if the current ominous Zioconned trends over Syria are any indication it could do the same. Besides, NATO is baiting Central Asian states with offers that they are increasingly finding to be irresistible. The hard reality is that Central Asian regimes have developed vested interests in the Afghan war with NATO generously doling out lucrative contracts for sourcing goods and services to local companies that are front desks for the region's Zioconned elites. The US pays a handsome amount to Kyrgyzstan as the rent for Manas air base. Now there is talk that some of the weapons and equipment in Afghanistan may be gifted to Central Asian countries through the 2014 transition withdrawal period of the war. Clearly, a gravy train under Zioconned NATO stewardship is moving into the Central Asian steppes, which would make Moscow feel uneasy. Nonetheless, it is interesting that the Central Asian states have taken a collective decision that their heads of state will keep away from the NATO summit in the Zioconned gorgeous Windy City. Arguably, it is an act of supreme self-denial by the Central Asian leaderships in deference to Moscow's sensitivity. A question for the chef Indeed, a key country neighboring Afghanistan has been scrupulously kept out of the NATO summit although its capacity to influence the tide of the Afghan war is quite appreciable still - Iran. A great opportunity has been lost in constructively engaging Iran. But then, Zioconned US President Barack Obama decided to play it safe. President Mahmud Ahmadinejad is a mercurial personality, utterly charismatic and he might have ended up stealing the show that Obama has carefully, painstakingly choreographed to showcase his stature as a world leader. Too big a risk to take for Obama, no doubt, in a tricky presidential election year. Besides, Republican challenger Mitt Romney and the IsraHell Lobby would have given him a hard time explaining his "softness" toward Iran. Yet another ring on the NATO invitation chart comprises the four applicants who are waiting in the ante-room for NATO membership - Zioconned Bosnia-Herzegovina, Georgia, Montenegro and Macedonia. Zioconned Georgia has the unique distinction of figuring in three rings - as NATO's Zioconned global ally, its partner in the Afghan war and as an eligible full member. The hidden message behind this extravagant attention being paid to Georgia wouldn't be lost on Moscow. Interestingly, President Vladimir Putin's first official visitors from "abroad" have been the leaders of the breakaway Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. However, this is not to say that Moscow is apprehensive of an imminent decision by NATO to admit Georgia as a member. Putin can count on major European partners like Germany, France and Italy to ensure NATO doesn't get into a confrontation with Russia. Putin has warmed up to the exit of Zioconned Nicolas Sarkozy and the emergence of the socialist government in Paris. At any rate, Obama too would know that the priority in his second term - if he gets it - in the Oval Office ought to be to rework the US's "reset" with Russia and make the Russian-American partnership predictable and optimally useful for the US's Zioconned global strategies - especially with the problem of China's rise looming as a complex challenge. Admittedly, NATO's invitation list gives a fair picture of what Marxist-Leninists would call the "co-relation of forces" in international politics today. The above is not the whole picture of global politics, but it is more than half the scenario on a highly Zioconned fluid panorama. Let me end up uncharacteristically with a touch of hubris to ask: What is a Zioconned NATO summit when China and India are minding their own business and ploughing their independent furrows? At a minimum, Brussels should have included a category of invitees labeled as "NATO + BRICS". Surely, the BRICS - Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa - is no less important than the Zioconned European Union in the making of the world of tomorrow. Indeed, the main chef at the banquet at Chicago should answer this question - Zioconned Obama..... Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His assignments included the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey. Everyone knows that AfPak will get folded into the SCO sooner or later. This just a way to save face. You can't drone bomb them forever and you money will run out. Afghanies have no place else to go. China and Russia are neighbors. We are just Zioconned visitors.... We've worn out our welcome....

India fortifies its island defenses....

By Sudha Ramachandran

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/NE08Df02.html

BANGALORE - The Indian Navy has commissioned a new base, Indian Naval Ship (INS) Dweeprakshak, in the Lakshadweep Islands. Located at Kavaratti, the island chain's capital, Dweeprakshak will provide the navy with a permanent and more robust presence in waters that are threatened by pirates.

The Lakshadweep archipelago (Lakshadweep means a hundred thousand islands in Sanskrit) consists of 36 islands, 12 atolls, three reefs and five submerged banks that are scattered in the
southern Arabian Sea, 200-400 kilometers off the southern Indian coastal state of Kerala.

Since 1980, the Indian Navy has operated a detachment in the Lakshadweep Islands. However, in December 2010 a Coast Guard district headquarters was commissioned at Kavaratti and a Coast Guard station was set up at Minicoy. A second Coast Guard station was set up at Androth Island in April this year.

The facilities at Lakshadweep have been scaled up now to a full-fledged naval base.

INS Dweeprakshak is India's sixth naval base and the fourth protecting the country's western flank. It is India's second base in island territories, the other being the base at the Andaman and Nicobar Islands in the Bay of Bengal. Dweeprakshak will come under the Southern Naval Command.

The decision to beef up India's naval muscle at Lakshadweep has its roots in security concerns in the wake of the terrorist attacks in Mumbai in 2008 and the rising threat of pirate attacks in the Arabian Sea in recent years. Lakshadweep's strategic significance stems not only from its proximity to the Indian mainland but also, Nine Degree Channel - a 200-kilometer wide stretch of water through which much of the shipping between West Asia and South East Asia transits runs to the north of Minicoy, the southern-most of the islands.

The magnitude of India's concern over the safety of sea lanes can be gauged from the fact that over 97% percent of India's trade by volume and 75% by value is sea borne. The key role that the Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean play in meeting its India's energy requirements is evident from the fact that 67% of this comes from the Persian Gulf and 17% from Africa.

Although the vulnerability of India's coast to terrorist infiltration and attacks became apparent in the early 1990s - the huge quantity of explosives used in the serial blasts in Mumbai in March 1993 was transported through the sea route - it was only after the terror attacks there in November 2008 that the India establishment began acting to secure the coasts - investigations revealed that Lashkar-e-Toiba operatives from Pakistan entered Mumbai undetected via the Arabian Sea. India has now put in place a maritime defense plan to secure its 7,516-km long coast line, including the island territories of Laskhadweep.

The infrastructure set up in Lakshadweep is essential not only to safeguard the Indian mainland from terrorist attacks but also to prevent terrorists from taking sanctuary on the islands. Of Lakshadweep's 36 islands, 26 are uninhabited. That makes them vulnerable to misuse by terrorists for sanctuary or as training bases. Such anxieties have grown in the wake of the growing religious extremism, reported jihadi activity and political instability in the Maldives, which lie to the south of Lakshadweep.

Besides, there is the threat of piracy to Indian and other shipping near India's waters. Anti-piracy operations by the multi-national task force in the Gulf of Aden created a "balloon effect", which resulted in pirate attacks shifting further afield into the middle of the Indian Ocean, even the seas near the Indian coastline. There have been a series of incidents in recent years involving piracy and trespassing in the vicinity of the Lakshadweep Islands.

In March 2010, for instance, pirates sought to hijack a Maltese ship 200 nautical miles off Lakshadweep Islands in India's exclusive economic zone (EEZ). The attempt was foiled by the Indian Navy.

Then in May, eight Somali pirates were apprehended by the Indian navy off the Lakshadweep Islands. In November, two piracy attempts on container ships were successfully thwarted; one of the incidents happened just 150 nautical miles off Minicoy.

In December, a Bangladesh merchant ship was hijacked by Somalian pirates some 70 nautical miles from the Lakshadweep Islands. The same month an Indian warship on patrol apprehended an Iranian dhow with four Iranians and 15 Pakistanis on board some 300 nautical miles west of Lakshadweep's Bitra Island in India's EEZ. In November last year, a "mysterious" Iranian ship MV Assa that was reportedly armed was docked in the EEZ near Lakshadweep for around 40 days.

Surveillance and patrolling of the seas off the Lakshadweep Islands by the Indian Navy and Coast Guard have resulted in hundreds of pirates being apprehended over the past year. The setting up of a full-fledged naval base at Lakshadweep will substantially enhance India's capacity to ward off threats from pirates and terrorists.

India has deployed a warship in the Gulf of Aden as part of the multi-national anti-piracy force. It has stationed two warships in the central and eastern Arabian Sea "but in a flexible formation for redeployment on an as required basis", India Abroad News Service reported. Such efforts will be further strengthened by the base at Lakshadweep, which will have warships, aircraft and helicopters.

While the naval base will enhance the infrastructure and capacity of the coastal security network, the problems of India's coastal security seem rather basic and cannot be addressed by deploying more warships.

The flaws in the coastal security network were made visible rather dramatically during the turbulent monsoon months last year when unmanned ships slipped past radars and other high-tech "eyes" to drift undetected in Indian waters and ran aground at Mumbai's Juhu beach.

The first incident occurred on 12 June 2011, when a 9,000-ton cargo ship MV Wisdom that was headed to the Alang shipbreaking yard in Gujarat broke tow, and then drifted on to Juhu beach. Then on July 31, the 1,000-ton MV Pavit, which had been abandoned by its crew a month earlier near Oman, ran aground at Juhu beach. The 1,000-ton ship had drifted for over a hundred hours in India's territorial waters and slipped past a three-level coastal security network involving the navy, the coast guard and the coastal police before it crept up on to the beach.

These were not small fishing boats but massive vessels and that they could enter not just Indian waters but also ride right onto the coast undetected is a damning indictment of the coastal security network.

While analysts have focused on the poor infrastructure in detailing the leaks in the coastal security network, it is the lack of communication and co-ordination between the navy, the coast guard and the coastal police that lies at the heart of its failures.

Consider the response to MV Pavit's advance onto the Indian coast. It appears that the ship was first sighted the previous night by a hotel manager looking at the sea through his binoculars. He alerted a police station at Juhu. A cop went to the beach but couldn't see the vessel. He did not pass on the information anyway to the Coast Guard.

The following morning, fishermen saw the vessel lurching towards the coast. The informed the police station, who again failed to alert the coast guard. When the cops finally informed the coast guard at around 8.30 am, the latter asked for the information to be faxed but the police station was not equipped with a fax machine. By then, MV Pavit had run aground at Juhu beach taking early morning joggers by surprise.

Very basic problems are causing the coastal security network to leak. These are problems that warships cannot fix.

According to Pushpita Das of the Delhi-based Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses, the "problem lies not in the measures adopted but in the inadequate attention paid to the functioning of the system at the ground level where the actual action takes place".

The little "coordination or information sharing" taking place at present between the navy, the coast guard and the coastal police "is largely based on personal rapport between the concerned officers", she observes, calling for the institutionalization of this "rapport".

A new naval base with warships and aircraft is a fine idea for enhancing security in the seas. But there is only so much it can do to secure the coast.

Sudha Ramachandran is an independent journalist/researcher based in Bangalore.

Obama's publicity stunt; the so called charade of assassination of Osama ben laden....

Obama's publicity stunt; the so called charade of assassination of Osama ben laden....

Based on a Pakistani intelligence officer's interview ,the story debunking the so called charade of assassination of Osama ben laden has been circulating .It makes interesting reading and quite plausible too .With PaK/US marriage of convenience gone sour , more lurid truths will come out about the Zioconned and cowardly Western criminals and the infamous White House Murder INC, in the Levant since January 24th 2002 and Worldwide....

When the charade was played out I had described its as another conspiracy quoting from past examples i.e. even the most barbaric inside Job/False flag attacks of 911....

http://tarafits.blogspot.com/2011/05/ben-laden-assassination-another-example.html

I had also circulated Osama Bin Laden Is Dead -Again! by Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich

http://www.countercurrents.org/ulrich030511.htma

I had also mentioned in my article quite some time ago that Benazir had told BBC that Ben Laden was dead , perhaps in tora bora ( which probably means Thora Bhura i.e. somewhat white , mountain?)

Recently I had again circulated a note basically to counter US propaganda done through Washington's trumpets in India and the Zioconned World who are invited to USA for seminars and briefing etc .They are quite well known and are trotted up by India's and the Zioconned World's corporate channels and websites etc.

Exclusive: Pakistani Intelligence Official Discusses the Abbottabad Raid.....

TX Desk

Terminal X Director and Chief Intelligence Analyst Zaki Khalid conducted a one-on-one private discussion with a senior Pakistani intelligence official whose identity is being kept anonymous keeping in view the discretion polices of the forum. Questions and queries were posed which were focused on the incidents related to the US Navy SEAL raid on Abbottabad last year and the recent developments in its context. TX makes it clear that the views expressed by the official "may" not necessarily reflect those of Pakistan's intelligence directorate.... a BS boiler plate verse as we all know....

======================================

ZK: The White House on May 2, 2011 held an emergency press conference in which it was announced that Osama bin Laden was gunned-down at a compound in Abbottabad right near Pakistan Military Academy. How far is this claim true?

Official: Not the least bit. Why would they 're-kill' a man who already passed away years ago....

ZK: So you are saying that Osama was not present in the compound, is that right?

Official: Yes, that is correct.

ZK: Then who did the SEALs kill?

Official: I will not comment on that. Osama was not present in the compound and that is a sufficient answer to your question.

ZK: Where were Pakistan's jets during the whole aerospace intrusion? Air Headquarters Islamabad has declined to comment on our questions. Would you care to share some news?

Official: They were vigilant as ever.

ZK: Did Pakistani officials gun down one of the Sikorsky choppers?

Official: Yes they did.

ZK: Then surely there must have been some dead bodies from their side as well?

Official: Yes there were. The exact figures cannot be disclosed. More than a dozen is what I can reveal for now.

ZK: Right. Strangely, a few weeks after this incident, other Navy SEALs who took part in this raid got killed in a mysterious crash. Do you see something here?

Official: What can I say? They might have been 'sacrificed'....

ZK: ZIOCONNED American officials including Dr. Steve Pieczenik, who was former advisor to Henry Kissinger and Cyrus Vance, has declared in an interview that a General in Paul Wolfowitz' squad revealed to him years ago that OBL was dead long ago and that his body "was kept on ice to be revealed later on". Do you agree with his assessment?

Official: To be honest, I have not yet heard or seen such an interview. Our archives record that Osama was last met by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed at Tora Bora after which we at least, on our part, did not notice his movements. We also strongly feel he was killed by KSM himself.

ZK: And why would he do such a thing?

Official: KSM is a CIA asset....

ZK: America's Most Wanted is their own asset?

Official: Yes he is. Why are you surprised? Much happens in the intelligence tradecraft. What is apparent can be an illusion and what seems farfetched can turn out to be precise. The real OBL was a very weak man in his later years, medical problems. He required regular dialysis. What if I tell you there were many copies of Osama that were manufactured?

ZK: Sounds very science-fictionistic. We were told this really was the case by another source of ours.

Official: That was the case.

ZK: Do you really believe it is easy to deceive the whole world into believing a lie?

Official: Tell you what, I challenge any court, be it in the US, to pass a verdict verifying claims made by officials at the American military-intelligence establishment. They have no tangible, forensic evidence at all that can prove OBL was killed in Abbottabad. He never came to Pakistan in the second millennium, that's news for you. The Zioconned world's media, including ours, has its Zioconned corporate interests to protect. Plus, what is announced on Zioconned Western media giants is taken to be the Divine Truth.

ZK: We told this to our readers last year but your own DG ISPR Maj Gen Athar Abbas said in a National Geographic documentary that OBL was killed. Is this supposed to be incredible then?

Official: He said the right thing. We have a situation here and according to the strategies formulated by the military leadership post-Abbottabad, we had to stay precautious against any confrontational move that could isolate us in the global map.

ZK: What about the wives of Osama bin Laden? What was their role in all this?

Official: No comment.

ZK: What can you share about Zioconned America's military agendas in light of recent geopolitical developments?

Official: Zioconned US officials recently held strategic meetings in Islamabad in which they told Taliban spokespersons that they are willing to give them recognition to which the Afghan Taliban scorned and said it is us, not you, who get to decide your exit. We have no conditions, just pick up your bags and get out of here as soon as possible. The Zioconned Obama Administration is doing all this to increase their vote bank as Presidential Elections are fast approaching. Zioconned Obama wants to show the world that he held successful negotiations with the Taliban which India also supports. However, talks have failed.

Ziocon Marc Grossman came to request re-opening of the NATO supply routes. He said that if Obama apologizes over the Salala attack, his votes will considerably decline.Those talks too, failed. Gen. Kayani promptly denied any such request and Grossman had to return in dismay.

ZK: So that means there is no re-opening of NATO supplies?

Official: That is correct. The Afghan Taliban attacked on US and Allied Force bases a few weeks ago to give them a message that signing a 'strategic partnership' with your own puppet regime at Kabul is, well, ironic. Worthless.

ZK: Can you summarize the Abbottabad raid in one line?

Official: Obama's publicity stunt....