Well have you heard the latest Islamofascist tiff? Usama bin Laden is calling President Musharraf of Pakistan an infidel thereby reasoning that Pakistan should rise up and revolt against him.
Now here is the thing. I can just imagine all the pro-Arab experts saying I told so, Musharraf’s regime as an ally to America is hanging by a thread and it may collapse placing nuclear arms into Islamofascist hands.
Maybe; however that is a worse case scenario. There is another extreme possibility. The other Arab Kingdoms and Dictatorships fearing a UBL led nuclear armed Wahhabi Pakistan and a nuclear arming radical Twelver Shia Iran might be the card played that may topple their autocratic gigs.
I can see the Saudi’s, Jordanians, the more capitalistic oil Saudi Peninsula Sheikdoms and Egypt (O yes Egypt) taking a cooperative stand against internal Wahhabis and Muslim Brotherhood factions and weighing in with support for Musharraf.
Again Iraq becomes the wild card. Why? The reason is because of its divided nature of Sunni, Kurd and Shia not piecing together as a hoped for uniform puzzle.
A not much talked about is a still powerful Turkey, the remnant of the last Muslim Empire to terrorize the globe with Mohammedanism.
Turkey figures in because Ataturk’s secular revolution that booted out its last Emperor and terminated the Caliphate will have to choose sides. You would think it would be a no-brainer that Turkey would line up with an American led Arab coalition against Islamofascists; however Turkey has two considerations:
1. The hated Kurds trying to establish an independent nation of the current Northern Iraq.
2. The modern electoral process has placed an Islamist head of government in secular Turkey. If he calls the shots on foreign relations, at best Turkey would stay out the conflict at worst Turkey would help the coalescing Sunni/Shia (i.e. a Wahhabi-Taliban ruled Pakistan if Musharraf cannot hold on and the Twelver Shias of Iran).
To complicate the reading of Turkey’s direction further, the Turkish generals have not hesitated in the past to boot out an elected leader if he did not comply to the beloved Ataturk secular revolution.
You might say a Wahhabi-Taliban terrorist will not get along with an Iranian radical Shia nation because the hatred between the two sects has existed since the assassination of Mohammed’s nephew (and I think son-in-law by marriage). The irony is Iran has been playing the enemy of my enemy is my friend game.
Iran has openly aided al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan (even protecting some al Qaeda elites and UBL’s family). Plus Iran has been training Sunni Hamas the official offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt.
Here is another chaotic scenario to add: Certainly the Saudi royals will line up with America because the West pays them the money for their oil to make the royals ridiculously wealthy. However a significant amount of the royals and wealthy Saudi elites only give lip service to the Wahhabi dominating school of the Saudi Peninsula by providing money for the Wahhabi leadership. BUT the Saudi government leadership is socially Western outside the borders of Saudi Arabia.
A prince of a Saudi bloodline that has totally conformed to the Wahhabi way may be developed as a usurper of the throne by the typical Mohammedan way of securing power: killing all the rivals to power.
If that scenario was permitted to occur then a huge mess could begin that might last years or seconds depending if a button pushing Islamist finds a nuclear arsenal.
And that is just the intra-regional conflict.
Due to the entire world running on oil; I guarantee China and Russia will decide what benefits their respective national interests and may line up with the Islamists for a trade guarantee of oil for weaponry.
O did I mention that Hindu dominated India is a nuclear power as well. India has been cozy with Russia and contemptuous of China; however I strongly suspect Hindu India will align with the faction (i.e. Western coalition led Arabs) that prevents the hated Muslims from gaining a toe hold on India’s land. There is much bad blood between Hindus and Muslims that actually may make the Jewish/Muslim conflict look like a picnic.
Conquering Mohammedans would slaughter and torture Hindus until they realized it was more profitable to enslave them with humiliation (contrary to their Quran). Thus the Muslim Mughal Empire of Northern India humiliated Hindus until the British came along. That was a long time!
Jews and Christians humiliated for their faith under conquering Muslims; however in the Quran they were named as people of the book. That meant according to the Muslim Scriptures Jews and Christians had three choices of lifestyle after conquest: Conversion to Islam, substandard humiliating no rights as dhimmi paying a jizya tax, or death.
The Hindus are considered polytheists; therefore their only (initial) choices were conversion or death.
Now this has been a very simplistic run down of what the fuse lit by UBL could do calling for a revolution in Pakistan and naming U.S. ally Musharraf an apostate. I am certain someone with more expertise could add to the complexity of developing scenarios in the Middle East and the interconnectedness of a globalized economy; nonetheless I am also certain you get the picture of what is impending. And take note: As the Middle East conflagrates in conflict, who lines up with whom is far from etched in stone. The National Interests of the moment will form the puzzle of who sides with whom in the greater scheme of the clear mutual enemies.
Read and post comments |
Send to a friend
]]>