Tuesday, April 17, 2007

The Establishment Plan for the Middle East

The Establishment Plan for the Middle East was based on a model developed by the British and French after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.  You start by drawing some sloppy national borders.  Then you pick as the leader of each country someone from a minority group or clan, someone who will require the assistance of the imperial power in order to stay alive.  In return for imperial support, the grateful leader provides a favorable deal on the oil.  The model has worked perfectly – at least from the point of view of the Establishment – for decades, and is still working like a charm in those places not touched by neocon ‘improvements’ to the model.

When a neocon’s car breaks down, he parks it in his garage next to his other vehicles, pours gasoline over it, lights it on fire, and hopes that the car, his other vehicles, his garage, his whole house, and the entire neighborhood, burns.  In a nutshell, that is the Zionist model.  The plan is to use the attack on Iraq to set the entire Middle East on fire, leading to the weakening of all possible opponents to the Zionist Empire.  Contrast that with the Establishment model.  When an Establishment car breaks down, they send it to be fixed by swapping out a part.  When a leader isn’t providing proper service to the Empire, they don’t start a war,  They just swap out a part, like the CIA did in 1953 in Iran.  A nice clean coup which doesn’t mess with the oil fields.

Pumping oil isn’t as easy as it looks.  It requires a completely stable political environment, preferably supplied by a ruthless dictator beholden for his power to the Empire.  The pipes and ports required to move the oil are very delicate, and essentially indefensible, so you have to depend on the dictator to provide the political stability necessary to move the oil out of the ground, and out of the country.  The huge downside to a war in countries under the Establishment Plan is that the systems are set up to be inherently unstable.  A war is a disaster, as it allows all the forces held in check by the dictator  to run amok, leading to exactly the kind of problems we are seeing in Iraq, and the danger, promoted by the neocons, of causing a domino effect in every other country set up on a similarly unstable basis in the Middle East.

Even the Gulf War followed the Establishment Plan.  When Saddam got out of line by interfering with Kuwait oil production, they didn’t set out to destroy Iraq with a war in Iraq.  They simply did what was required to push Saddam out of Kuwait, and intentionally didn’t follow him to Baghdad.  They then had the option of doing a deal with him to bring him back into the fold, like they have subsequently done with Libya, or swap him out with another Sunni general.  In neither case do they mess with anyone’s oil fields.

There is a stark contrast between the completely destructive Zionist Plan for the Middle East, and the Establishment Plan for the Middle East.  Of course, neither does the people living under these regimes much good, but at least the Establishment Plan leaves them alive.  The Establishment Plan also protects oil production, something not a part of the Zionist Plan.  This has finally become clear to the Establishment, prompting the resistance to Zionism which we are starting to see.