From: "Verlag Neue Einheit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 15:52:31 +0200
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Neue Einheit: The World At the Brink of War
*The World At the Brink of War*
Since the 20th of September the world is full of loud war-
cries. For many days now this policy keeps being repeated
every day and all around the clock in almost all the media
and press organs. On Sept. 11th, 2001 two hijacked large
airliners rammed the towers of the World Trade Center. In an
act of borderless cynicism they were driven, the passengers
as part of the projectiles included, into these skyscrapers
in which thousands of people were present. From the beginning
this occurrence was estimated by many people to serve as a
justification for belligerous actions and repression in the
world, whoever the originators were, a question which under
any circumstances was unclear yet at the time of the first
days. And hardly one day after the attack, although nothing
had been proven yet and the originators were still uncertain,
NATO already declared the alliance to be ready to respond,
for the first time in its more than 50 years of history.
Rightly the question was put then what was to happen if it
had been inner forces of the US which had organized this
attack. Against whom was this response of the alliance in
fact directed? Is it possible to declare a case of the
alliance when the enemy is not yet known at all? Then very
soon the conjecture was uttered that the terrorist network of
Osama bin Laden, which however is appropriately known to the
Western secret services, as we soon shall see, was behind
this attack.
In the mess of the first hours quite a lot of statements
occurred, the way of which to interpret the occasion gives
reason to ponder. Thus, the Israeli foreign minister Peres
declared that this attack "showed that there was no means
against this invisible enemy". Other accusations were
directed against the US for too little engagement in the
Middle East (!), and that the reason had to be seen here. A
representative of the Israeli secret service stated on Sept.
12 in Berlin that this attack had hit the heart of the
superpower. At many points the press expressed the opinion,
uttered by renowned authors, that "this crime has changed the
world." Several of these remarks in fact contain a certain
admiration for the assassins. This indirect, or partly even
open acknowledgement for this attack has in fact to be
regarded also as an encouragement for such deeds. Of course
it is wrong what is said in this vein. The attack has not
changed the world but it is itself an expression of the
tensions in this world. There were different voices, too,
among the official representatives of America. New York's
mayor Giuliani, for example, said, to give the gist of his
words, that this would not shake the fundaments of society.
In fact such an attack is incapable to change the essentials
of the political constellation.
The contradictions between the large number of nations which
in fact stand on the exploited side and whose population pays
a gigantic tribute in order to keep this economic system of
today alive, and the small number of beneficiary nations in
the middle of which it is again a minority which concentrates
the largest part of the wealth, will not in the least be
changed by this act. The power structures of the US won't be
changed either by such an act. The contradictions between
Europe and the US which had become somewhat more loudly
noticeable during the last weeks cannot be changed either by
such an act, even if the European states at first are in a
frenzy of loyalty declarations. And the fact which we have
noticed already so many times that the Pax Americana has deep
fissures won't be changed by such an attack either. Finally,
the economic crisis which accelerated extremely during the
past two months is neither essentially intensified nor is it
even caused or essentially influenced by such an occurrence.
This attack only shows that there are forces who for all they
are worth perhaps attempt to help certain military potentials
to be applied, which however had been existing previously. It
only shows that there are tensions within society which
certain circles think they could direct into a certain
direction by such an attack.
What happens today, namely that the US plan to occupy
Afghanistan and apparently to have a prolonged "stay" there,
has been prepared already a long time and was observed in the
context of the discussion about war in the Caucasus, about
the expansion undertaken by NATO in the very direction of the
Caucasus and beyond, in the extension of which just
Afghanistan is situated. The resistance put up by large
nations like Russia, China, but also India and Pakistan
against the US in the world, whatever their domestic regimes
may be, still counted among the factors limiting the US'
power. An occupation of Afghanistan must be seen as an
attempt to influence this state of affairs and at least to
attempt to eliminate it. Afghanistan has been in the US'
focus for a long time. Since 1979 at the latest the US has
strengthened the Islamic fundamentalists there, collaborated
with them and erected a regime which from the beginning was
unprecedentedly reactionary, and in doing so was successful
in driving the other superpower, the Soviet Union, out of the
country and in leading it to its breakdown. If the US direct
her grip there, this is not new.
Right from the beginning a lot of questions posed themselves
as to how this occurrence was possible at all; questions
which at first must be directed at scrutinizing the
conditions in the US herself. How could it happen that four
planes started practically at the same time, and without
intervention by the American air defense could be lead to
their goals in three cases? In the fourth case it was the
resistance by the passengers which prevented this. How could
it happen that, although the terrorist networks who do such
things are known, they were able to organise such things in
the US at the airports and in the air operations? How at all
could one drive the machines at 500 mph so well-aimedly with
narrow maneuvers into the towers? Experienced pilots of the
German airforce said they are convinced that only
professional pilots are capable of something like that. The
hijackers switched off the transponders of the machines. If
this happens with four planes approximately simultaneously,
the highest degree of alert should have been triggered in the
offices, but the measures which were undertaken lagged far
behind the necessities. Later it was said, using it as a
reason for the immediate suspicion, that Osama bin Laden had
announced a heavy attack already three weeks ago. But if this
was the case, why didn't one become especially cautious,
keeping in mind that he had already carried through attacks
with mass casualties against US institutions? Therefore, also
from the prime facts of the attacks themselves the question
is directed at the US herself. Over and above that, as we
could state in a leaflet the next day, the whole of the
experiences gained in Germany and Italy about terrorist
campaigns point to connections with institutions of the state
itself. And the circumstances in the case being gave a lot of
hints to look into this very question. But this was not done.
In Germany the events lead to such unequivocal and far-
reaching declarations of support already on the 12th and 13th
of Sept., that one had to ask oneself if all of this happened
only spontaneously because of a single, although grave and
spectacular incident. The politicians of all parties in the
German Bundestag, the parliament,(except the PDS) stated
their agreement with the case of the alliance. Besides the
chancellor Schroeder, for example the minister for consumers'
protection, Kuenast of the Green party, declared on the 13th
of Sept.: "The defence case is here." And Schroeder talked
about "unconditional support" for the US. Commentators said
that one had to be prepared to many innocent deaths, and that
one must let the German army march without obstacles into
such a war with such phenomena. This caused considerable
unrest. On the abovementioned 13th the defence minister
Scharping attempted a backward motion and said that the case
of the alliance was not the case of defence, and that it was
not necessary to calculate a war. It was attempted to calm
down the population with qualifying remarks. Simultaneously,
though, in reality the preparations for a war started which
the US was to begin.
It was very astonishing. Within only two days this nation was
in the preparatory stage of the state of war, and this
because of an event the originator of which was not even
known yet. Already the postulation alone that the NATO
alliance which comprises the largest industrialized nations
except Japan, declares war especially to a single person
sitting in the Afghan mountains and to a terrorist network
subordinated to this person, must produce a lot of question
marks. Our country's parliamentarism, though, is subject to
pressure, it verbally submits immediately to the demand for
alliance.
Since then we are incessantly hearing in the media: "The US
has been attacked, we must fight back!" "The whole civilized
world has been attacked and it must fight back!" Every hour,
in dozens of TV programs as well as in the radio and the
press it is going like that. And the character of the
monstrous attacks of New York indeed makes many people
willing to call for protection. Consequences must in fact be
taken. Therefore the uncovering of the political frame of all
what is happening is of prime importance. Based on its
longtime observations our group was able to publish an appeal
still in the night after the incident which pointed to the
connections of the US to the terrorist organisations, the
neoislamic forces and also to Osama bin Laden who temporarily
maintained closest connections with the secret services of
the US. In spite of the largely uniform canon these facts
subsequently could not be concealed any longer completely,
neither in the media. They became a point of discussion which
since then increasingly occupies the public. And in fact it
is worthwhile to go deeper into the details here.
*The long trace of the alliance*
Who knows the political incidents knows that between the US
and the Islamic fundamentalists there has been a longtime
profound relation. Already in 1965 the overthrow in Indonesia
was pushed through by means of the Islamic religion and the
Islamic fanaticism. The feelings of this religion were
stimulated in the people, and the existing mystical and
fatalistic inclinations for submitting to the rulers were
furthered; the communists were pointed at, because they do
not participate in this belief, up to the murder of 1,5
million people. The US already then were stirring this
overthrow, and already then military men who themselves were
not at all in the center of these religious efforts, as the
general Suharto and his surroundings, pushed forward this
counterrevolutionary overthrow and used the religion in doing
so. Saudi-Arabia represents a power which has been in closest
relation with the oil monopoly and the policy of the US for
decades and which by its whole substance is fundamentalist.
From its ranks came also that Osama bin Laden. Further
examples are Afghanistan and Iran, with the US in both cases
supporting the overthrow in the neo-Islamic direction, gladly
accepting into the bargain that these religious
representatives shouted "Death to the American devils!" at
public gatherings, while simultaneously sponsoring them
nevertheless because they engineered the repression by
corresponding means in their own countries and, for example,
deflected the revolution against the Shah into a theocratic
regime. And all Islamic-fundamentalistic, religiously fanatic
organisations have in common the hatred against the modern
society, against education, connections, modern means of
communication and informations. The methods of mass-slaughter
have for a long time had their predecessors when buses were
attacked and tourists were shot by submachine guns. In
general the method of taking the passengers of civil aircraft
as hostages has revealed a corresponding contempt.
The US who plays the enlighted and the modern, has therefore
its longtime coalition with Islamic-fundamentalistic forces.
But even more glaring is the fact that they have close
connections also with the most extreme representatives of
this misanthropic religious fanaticism and until recently
collaborated with that organisation of Osama bin Laden in the
Kosovo, in the Albanian region as well as in Bosnia. The
German government's present attitude, its submissiveness to
the US, as well as the conformity of the media and the
omnipresent relentless propaganda concerning belligerous
actions become ridiculous in the face of these connections.
When NATO intervened in Yugoslavia these forces were directly
allied with the KLA which used to carry US flags wherever it
appeared. This, as already mentioned, is not surprising, as
Osama bin Laden in the past had already distinguished himself
as one of the closest partners of the US, as fighter against
the Soviet Union, against the Soviet rule in Afghanistan.
These people don't have an inhibition to carry through such a
policy.
It is not only the US who supports these forces. The Federal
Republic of Germany has since long had a domestic alliance
with Islamic fundamentalist forces, which enjoyed a great
freedom here and exert an influence upon the Turkish citizens
in Germany relatively much larger than in Turkey itself. And
the Soviet Union, too, and several successor states of the
Soviet Union, they themselves cherished the overthrow in Iran
towards the theocratic regime at that time as a liberation
coup and as an alleged national revolution, and some of its
representatives not too rarely were eager to assert that
these peoples necessarily must undergo a phase of this
reaction. And in the Central Asian region where there are a
lot of small states forming a belt between Russia,
Kazakhstan, China and Iran, the China of today has no
inhibitions to collaborate with the Iranian mullah regime,
although Islamic fundamentalists attempt also within China to
instigate their reactionary unrest.
There is a lot of contributions like from the Canadian
professor Chossudovsky, and from many organisations which
point to the collaboration of the CIA with the Taliban and
their predecessors in Afghanistan, to the drug regime which
stood in closest connection to the US, to the Islamistic
regime in Pakistan which also was active in furthering this
ultra-reactionary wave into Afghanistan, namely also with
support from the US. Also in Pakistan a fundamentalism is
raging which was covered by the US. The connections of the US
to the fundamentalists in Kosovo and Bosnia, too, are a
subject which has been examined already a hundred times.
(Note 1)
Numerous commentators stress that the CIA closely
collaborated with the fundamentalists in Afghanistan, that it
even took part in creating them in order to drive the Soviet
Union out of Afghanistan, after the latter had committed a
gross miscalculation in intervening there. Equally gladly the
US collaborates with these terrorists in the Kosovo in order
to enhance the Muslim influence. Even after the attacks on
the embassies in East Africa to which hundreds of people fell
victims, this collaboration with the Islamists continued.
But this is not the whole story, there is an even more
important aspect. When the US collaborated with
fundamentalism she also worked against the Afghan people
itself. She used the religion and the seclusion in order to
bar the Afghan people from any modern development and to
force it into submission under the militias, the military and
a drug economy, Afghanistan definitely becoming one of the
largest drugs producers in the world during this phase.
Today the Taliban, these Islamists bordering to absurdity,are
deeply estranged with the fundamentalists of Iran. The
Taliban were able to tie up to the decomposition of the
economy which had started already in the whole 80ties, to the
emerging of a drug culture, and erect their regime,
incredible for modern times, depriving the population,
especially the women of their rights. Without the support
from the US they cannot at all be imagined. The opposition in
Afghanistan is absolutely right in speaking about the Taliban
as a regime which has been forced upon the country from
abroad. Their regime which is unable to offer a higher
economic development could persist not even in Iran where
there is anyway a modern industry. The Shiite mullahs must at
least pretend to adapt to modern times. But they were equally
initially launched by the US. A monarchy, the Shah's, was
replaced by a theocracy in the end of 78/the beginning of 79.
The Shah who had for many years been a follower of the US and
Great Britain, in the seventies had the nerve to put up some
demands against them and to demonstrate independency at least
in some points. In this he was encouraged also by the
revolutionary China until the middle of the seventies. In
1975 Iran and Iraq concluded a vital agreement about the
Schatt-El-Arab, the mouth of the Euphrates river, which
strengthened both sides against the US but also the Soviet
Union. The aristocratic and absolutist regime of the Shah,
though, itself had its inexorable contradictions against the
modern age, the agriculture was in a crisis which seemed
hopeless. The media in his country were controlled by the US,
many intellectuals hated his regime because of the repression
and did not pay attention to the fact that the US and the
European countries in which many of them were students, had
more irons in the fire and among other things were capable of
coming to an arrangement with the Islamists.
From the middle of 1978 on a campaign for the neo-Islam and
against the Shah started in Iran, which lead to success in
February 1979 without any considerable resistance by the
alleged communist parties and the intelligentsia.
Today Islamism in Iran plays the enlightened and "solid"
business partner of Western banks and companies, as compared
with the Taliban. But in reality its repression also means
the stoning of the women and the suppression of any
independent thinking, the deprivation of the whole labouring
population of their rights. Enormous sufferings have been
inflicted upon the peoples of Iran and Afghanistan, and both
these regimes could not have come to power and stayed in
power without the activities of the US and her close allies.
Similar things are true with respect to Pakistan. And
Islamism which likes to act the godfearing and severe is
absolutely not immune against corruption and crime, an
experience made for a long time by these nations. The present
threats of war by the US are completely detrimental also with
regard to the domestic conditions of these states, because
they again stage the Islamists and give a lift to their
demagogy as defenders of national independence. Thus
Afghanistan at first got the civil war, under active support
by the US and the then Soviet Union, then the regime of the
drug barons and finally that of the Taliban, and now the
country is to be sacrificed for the Taliban, for the
consequences of the policy the US has to blame herself for,
because who helps such regimes to power is responsible also
for the deeds resulting from it.
Frequently the question is asked whether there is something
like the clash of civilizations. Yes, it really exists, and
actually with regard to Islam which is threatened by the
modern society. The modern communication, knowledge which is
acquired at school, sciences are death to Islam, as to any
other larger religions belief in general. The dissemination
of the theory of development about the human development
cannot in the long run coexist with a so-called word of God
which allegedly is written down in certain books.
Communication breaks the bars of these religions, goes into
the villages and thus destroys their base. In this respect it
is not at all surprising that the fanatic Islamistic forces
on the one hand make use of the modern technology and attempt
to place themselves within, and on the other keep back their
population in the most brutal Middle Ages. They are waging a
war against the culture because this modern development, that
is to say the modern culture in these countries destroys
them. And if it can be heard now that Islam is not like the
terrorists, it is our opinion that Islam cannot be equated
with the Islamic fascist forces, but that because of the
threat to its outdatedness it tends to produce this
fanaticism. It is detrimental to the cause of independence of
the nations, and now it is to be used by the US to achieve
fundamental hegemonistic advantages, if she implants herself
in Central Asia under the pretext of fighting it.
II.*The terrorist base cannot be only abroad the US*
The contradictions with regard to the alleged terrorist
originators are obvious, many people in the US herself see
them. That this terrorism comes from the very Islamistic soil
the CIA itself has fertilized, is in itself a point nobody
must disregard. But is this sufficient for the examination?
Is it possible to imagine an international network which
proceeding from the Islamic countries intervenes so deeply
into the US' structures that attacks of this dimension are
possible? We think that such an analysis is incomplete.
If we summarize the core point of the considerations we meet
one necessity again and again: within the US herself there
must be a correspondence to these machinations, taking part
in supporting this whole political direction of
intensification in a very special sense; there must be a
grouping within capital which takes part in supporting this
matter. At that it is not necessary that these people in the
background are identical with those who themselves commit the
terrorist acts and are the executives. This grouping,
connected to Bush or not, can calculate that by the US'
reaction a corresponding imperialistic policy is initiated
which they, too, want. Without such a grouping it cannot be
imagined that the whole conspiratorial network in the US
carries, that it holds its ground against the gigantic
American secret service. For these forces these attacks are
part of their political calculations, however badly they may
hit single cities or regions.
All the experiences with this kind of terrorism, in
particular in Germany and Italy, show that it had part of its
anchoring in the country itself, in the institutions of the
state, as it was the case with the Federal Republic of
Germany, in the cultural institutions as for example the
media, but also the churches, as well as it was also directly
sponsored by foreign forces, as it has been really perfectly
proven in Italy. Also in the case of the German "RAF" ("Red
Army Fraction") a connection abroad, to Soviet revisionism,
and later to the secret service of the German Democratic
Republic was obvious, as proven by the organised and lasting
accommodation of these people in the former German Democratic
Republic, which had at least the blessing by the West German
secret services, if it was not organised by them. That is to
say that domestic as well as foreign forces take part in
carrying such a terrorism, and there is no reason to suppose
that the structures look different in the case of this new
terrorism organised on a large scale. It makes no sense that
these terrorist structures are said to be anchored only in
other countries, but we must assume that they have their
anchoring also in the US herself.
The journalist Juergen Elsaesser who is near to the magazine
"konkret", the Deutsche Kommunistische Partei Party (DKP)
etc., asserts that men of bin Laden in a connection with
certain Albanian people had made a deal especially also with
the German imperialism in the Kosovo. This is in fact
possible. In Germany there really is the connection with the
Islamic fundamentalism and its reaction in an astounding
manner, it goes so far as to have enabled the Islamic
fundamentalists in their mosques for decades to sing the
dirtiest hateful litanies against the majority population in
its own country, having the de facto covering by the state of
the Federal Republic. This fact which is well-known in the
Federal Republic of Germany and has been pushed aside again
and again, among others also by the means of the so-called
campaign against xenophobia, shows how much all these
activities are covered, and it is only now after the terrible
incidents that the idea occurs to the authorities of the FRG
to take away the so-called privilege of religion and for the
first time to initiate major steps against the Islamic
fundamentalists, after having collaborated with them for
thirty years.
Incidentally, the German population has rightfully got worked
up with regard to these fascists and their arrogant behavior
in the country. These people come up to a relevant part of
the Muslim population in Germany. They tyrannize also the
Muslim population, in particular the youth in order to keep
it in its reactionary grip.
So also the German inner structures make it clear how closely
dovetailed Islamic criminal fascist reaction is with Western
state authorities.
There are such connections also in the realm of the so-called
Left. For example, it is well-known that the Islamic
fundamentalistic leaders call the Turks who have the right to
vote in Germany to vote for the "Greens". They are forces who
even openly declare that by enhancing their part in the
population they want to increasingly get the country into
their grip. These groupings, with their arch-rightist and
authoritarian structures, in the scene of the political
parties stood behind the Greens for whom population reduction
and similar things are almost program. People who within
their own population show the most severe religious and moral
standards, further such forces within the German population
who wrote the reduction of the population on their banners.
And there is even more: the German rightists, the neonazis,
the NPD and their company maintain for a relevant part good
relations with these very Islamic fundamentalists.
Thus it can be seen that virtually every kind of reaction,
from so-called leftists to rightists, of course also the so-
called middle parties have made deals with this reactionary
ultra-rightist dirt.
As correct as it is to point to the connection of the German
strategy with the Islamic fundamentalists in the Kosovo or in
Iran, it is equally necessary to point to the longtime
connections of these forces *within* our country, as well as
to the silence of the large majority of alleged socialists
about this point.
All of this, however, cannot at the same time put into
question the US' dominance also in this point. For in the
whole international strategy, concerning Central Asia,
Afghanistan, Saudi-Arabia, Indonesia, everywhere US
imperialism is in the position of a central chainlink. If one
supposes that the Germans are the originators of the whole
bin-Laden story, one deflects in a dangerous way from the
drive of the US to war who uses this matter. The strategic
interest is in this case directed to China, India and Russia.
We have thus to start out from the existence of such
connections of the state, and is beyond reason to assume that
the system is like that, that such connections exist
everywhere, but not in the US. On the contrary: this system
which favours this terrorism, that is the connection with
apparatus of the state, must have its equivalent in the US,
too.
To make a comparison with matters of astronomy: If one can
notice planets which are revolving around a fixed star, if
one has a planetary system which unequivocally proves that
there must be a center of gravitation somewhere which keeps
everything together, then such a thing exists, even if it
cannot be seen yet.
So let us extract once more:
What this whole propaganda wants to insinuate is the
following:
The world is no longer governed by the contradictions, the
insolubility of the capitalist conflicts which again became
apparent just during the last weeks and months, disappears
in the void. The breakdown of the promises connected to
"turbocapitalism" does no longer find attention. Not the
matter-of-fact tasks, the solution of the contradictions are
confronting society any more, but an ominous network, an
"allmighty enemy" with whom all people now have to deal
commonly, from the top of the US, the financial capitalists,
to the poorest people of the Third World. The whole of
humanity, thus, no longer in the struggle around its
contradictions but only against an ominous networking enemy.
One needs in fact only to put it into words like this in
order to already know what is going on, and to be able to
catch an idea where this phenomenon, this all-endangering
terrorism comes from.
Editorial staff of Neue Einheit Sept.21,2001
-ks-
Internet-Statement 2001/36
_____________
Note 1: About this we want to recommend a variety of writings
which are to be found on our homepage, among others, or by
which one can connect to more.
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet: http://www.neue-einheit.com
------------------------------------------------------
neue einheit
Zeitschrift fuer Politik, Oekonomie und Kultur
------------------------------------------------------
copyright 2001, Verlag NEUE EINHEIT (Inh. H.Dicke)
Mallinckrodtstr 177, D-44147 Dortmund Germany
and D-10973 Berlin, Postfach 360 309
Phone: +49-231-838932 resp. +49-30-6937470
_________________________________________________
KOMINFORM
P.O. Box 66
00841 Helsinki
Phone +358-40-7177941
Fax +358-9-7591081
http://www.kominf.pp.fi
General class struggle news:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
subscribe mails to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Geopolitical news:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________________________
