How
the Cold War Encouraged “Radical Islam” - (PART 3)
by Gary
Leupp
Surely the
U.S.—which had packed up and left after the Soviet withdrawl,
leaving the Pakistanis with a massive refugee problem and Afghanistan
in a state of chaos—had bled the Soviets, and anyone daring to ally
with them. And surely this experience contributed to the realization
of Brzezinski’s fondest wish: the collapse of the Soviet Union.
But it also
produced Islamist terrorism, big time, while the U.S.—having once
organized the recruitment and training of legions of jihadis from
throughout the Muslim world to bleed the Soviets—was and is now
obliged to deal with blow-back, and in its responses invariably
invites more terror.
Is it not
obvious that U.S. military actions against its various “terrorist”
targets in the “Greater” Middle East, including Afghanistan,
Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Libya have greatly swelled the ranks of
al-Qaeda branches as well as ISIL?
And does not
the course of events in Afghanistan—where the Kabul government
remains paralyzed and inept, warlords govern the provincial cities,
the Supreme Court sentences people to death for religious offenses,
much of the countryside has been conceded to the Talibs and the
militants are making inroads in the north—convince you that the
U.S. should not have thrown in its lot with the jihadis versus the
Soviet-backed secular forces thirty-five years ago?
In a 1998
interview by Jeffrey St. Clair and Alexander Cockburn Brzezinski was
asked if he regretted “having given arms and advice to future
[Islamist] terrorists.”
Brzezinski:
What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or
the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the
liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Q: Some
stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated: Islamic
fundamentalism represents a world menace today.
Brzezinski: Nonsense! It is said
that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is
stupid. There isn’t a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational
manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading
religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is
there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate
Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central
Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian
countries.
|
In other
words, winning the contest with Russia—bleeding it to collapse—was
more important than any risk of promoting militant Islamic
fundamentalism. It is apparent that that mentality lingers, when,
even in the post-9/11 world, some State Department officials would
rather see Damascus fall to ISIL than be defended by Russians in
support of a secular regime.
Source:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/12/25/nato-seeking-russias-destruction-since-1949/
[1] [2] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]
[1] [2] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]
Comments
Post a Comment