Z Magazine March 2013: Turkey, Central Asia, and the Failure of U.S. Imperialism

My most recent article has been published in the March edition of Z Magazine.  While Z has put the article behind a subscribers paywall (and I encourage everyone to subscribe), I will post the article here for Open Source reasons.  Part 2, "The New Crossroads of Empire," will be published in the April edition of Z.  Turkey, Central Asia, and the Failure of  Imperialism

Z is definitely worth reading if you don't know about it.  A monthly magazine published out of Woods Hole, Massachusetts since 1987, Z is edited by Lydia Sargent, Michael Sargent, and Michael Albert.  Coming out of Boston's radical 1970s South End Press (Chomsky, exposes on COINTELPRO and FBI domestic action, gender and identity politics, critical theory), Z now puts out a monthly magazine, publishes books, puts out videos and documentaries  and organizes community action.  It is the living lion of the American New Left, available at Barnes and Nobles, and it is excellent.  The March issue features 2012 Green Party Presidential Candidate Jill Stein, Wharton Professor Emeritus Edward S. Herman, and 12 others, including feature articles on climate change in India, U.S. domestic economics, and me on U.S. attempts at dominion over everything).  Z also features an excellent calendar of national events, brief news recaps, and reviews.  With yearly subscription rates at $3 per issue, it is definitely worth it.

Patrick Cockburn on Iraq

Patrick Cockburn, the world's most knowledgable English language journalist on Iraq, published three articles last week on the present day situation in the country.

"How Baghdad Became a City of Corruption"
"The Sunni Rise Again"
"Death and Dollars in the New Iraq"

Some excerpts:
"The corruption is unbelievable,” says Ghassan al-Atiyyah, a political scientist and activist. “You can’t get a job in the army or the government unless you pay; you can’t even get out of prison unless you pay. Maybe a judge sets you free but you must pay for the paperwork, otherwise you stay there. Even if you are free you may be captured by some officer who paid $10,000 to $50,000 for his job and needs to get the money back.” In an Iraqi version of Catch-22 everything is for sale. One former prison detainee says he had to pay his guards $100 for a single shower. Racketeering is the norm: one entrepreneur built his house on top of a buried oil pipeline, drilled into it and siphoned off quantities of fuel...

There is more to Iraqi corruption than the stealing of oil revenues by a criminalised caste of politicians, parties and officials. Critics of Nouri al-Maliki, Prime Minister since 2006, say his method of political control is to allocate contracts to supporters, wavering friends or opponents whom he wants to win over. But that is not the end of the matter. Beneficiaries of this largesse “are threatened with investigation and exposure if they step out of line”, says one Iraqi observer. Even those who have not been awarded contracts know that they are vulnerable to being targeted by anti-corruption bodies. “Maliki uses files on his enemies like J Edgar Hoover,” the observer says. The system cannot be reformed by the government because it would be striking at the very mechanism by which it rules. State institutions for combating corruption have been systematically defanged, marginalised or intimidated.

*****
Demonstrations by Sunni, in their tens of thousands, began with the arrest of the bodyguards of a Sunni politician on 20 December and are still continuing. For the first time since 2003 the Sunni – one fifth of the 33 million Iraqi population – are showing signs of unity and intelligent leadership as they try to escape political marginalisation in a country ruled since the fall of Saddam Hussein by the Shia majority in alliance with the Kurds...

The Sunni demonstrations, now entering their third month, raise a question crucial to the future of Iraq: how far will the Sunni, once dominant, accept a lower status? Members of the government fear the real agenda of the Sunni is not reform but regime change, a counter-revolution reversing the post-Saddam Hussein political settlement. “Shia leaders believe they have been elected, are legitimate and any change should come through an election,” said one senior official. “If there should be any attempt to take power from them by force, they will fight.”

*****
The Sadrists are seeking to transform themselves from a feared paramilitary organisation into a respected political movement. There are parallels here with the way Sinn Fein and the IRA in Northern Ireland demilitarised during the 1990s in order to gain power constitutionally and share it with their former enemies. Earlier this year Muqtada attended a Christian service in the Our Lady of Salvation Church in central Baghdad where some 50 worshippers had been slaughtered by al-Qa’ida in 2010. He later prayed in the Sunni Abdul-Qadir al-Gailani mosque in central Baghdad. He supports the protests in Anbar and Sunni areas on the condition they do not demand regime change. He said: “We support the demands of the people but I urge them to safeguard Iraq’s unity.” He attacked Maliki for giving the impression that the Shia want domination over Sunni, Kurds, Christians, Mandeans and Jews in Iraq. He added that “what was happening in Anbar is not a crisis, but a healthy phenomenon that reflects a popular and democratic movement...”

Kurdistan presents itself as the new economic tiger of the Middle East, flush with the prospect of exploiting its oilfields. The tall towers of two new luxury hotels rise high above the Kurdish capital Erbil, the oldest inhabited city in the world whose skyline had previously been dominated by its ancient citadel for thousands of years.

Nearby, a glittering new airport has replaced the old Iraqi military runway. In contrast to Baghdad and other Iraqi cities the cars in the streets look new. Above all, and again in sharp contrast to further south, there is a continuous supply of electricity.

“I cannot find employees to go and work in the oilfield,” complains a Kurdish manager in a Western oil company. “I cannot even find rooms in the new hotels for visiting executives because they are so full.” Convoys of shiny black vehicles conveying delegations of visiting businessmen from Germany, France, the UAE and Turkey race through the city...

In many respects the exaggerated expectations generated by the Kurdish tiger resemble those surrounding the Celtic tiger in Ireland before 2008. Both nations are small, long-oppressed and impoverished, and feel history has treated them unfairly. Having endured hard times for so long, both may be vulnerable to seeing a boom as being permanent when it is in fact part-bubble.

Excellent interview on Iran

My favorite radio host, Scott Horton, recently conducted an hour long interview with Flynt and Hilary Mann Leverett on Iran.  If you don't know the Leveretts, they are worth checking out.  A married couple, they worked in both the Clinton and Geore W. Bush administrations negotiating with Iran, quit to become academics, and have written two books on U.S.-Iranian relations, including the recently published Going to Tehran: Why the United States must come to terms with the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The interview, from late February, can be found here
The Leveretts' website can be found here

Recent Publications and the new Imperial Ireland

A recent essay of mine was just published on the online edition of Counterpunch, and two longer articles will be forthcoming in the March and April edition of Z magazine.  Like many, I was very sad when Counterpunch founding editor Alexander Cockburn passed away last year, but his spirit lives on through the wonderful magazine and website.  And as Bruce Springsteen said, "everything dies, baby, thats a fact.  But maybe everything that dies someday comes back."

An Irish reader emailed me a startling fact.  By joining British troops in a training mission in Mali, the Irish military will be officially partnering with the British for the first time  since Irish independence over 90 years ago.  There is an odd historical synchronicity to this.  Ireland gained independence in the neocolonial moment following the first World War, when a global "mandate" system was set up with the League of Nations, putting the former German and Ottoman colonies--including parts of Africa--that still needed "tutelage" under the imperial thumb on London and Paris.  And now it has all come full circle, with Ireland and Britain back together again in a post-modern empire trying to reconquer Africa.  Half a thought, to be sure, but a fruitful lead nonetheless.  If only I had paid attention more in Irish history class.

Asia and Africa: Same world, Same War

Barack Obama loves basketball, and the media loves to analyze his maneuvering of U.S. Foreign Policy as if it were a basketball game.  The first term was the "Asia Pivot,"—Barack backing down China in the lane, clearing out space for U.S. influence in Vietnam and Thailand and Myanmar.  But the White House was actually another running a different play all along, or so the Washington Post now says, a shift to Africa.[1]  

While Asia got the U.S. rhetoric down low, it was in Africa where the Pentagon was getting its hands bloody, participating in “a string of messy wars,” as the Post’s excellent Pentagon reporter Craig Whitlock put it.  And while messy wars in Africa are sadly nothing new, the continent-spanning network of military installations that the U.S. has been building is.   

Since 2007, the Pentagon has constructed the beginnings of a massive framework of military and spy bases, as many as twelve airfields stretching from the Indian to Atlantic Oceans.[2]  Camp Lemonnier, in tiny Djibouti on the mouth of the Red Sea, is the biggest node in the network, a 500-acre compound housing 3,200 troops, civilians, contractors, as well a large fleet of aircraft and drones.[3]  Moving across Africa, other installations used by the U.S. military as of June 2012 are located in the Seychelles archipelago in the Indian Ocean, Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Burkina Faso, and Mauritania.[4]  From these locations, the U.S. operates a fleet of spy aircraft and drones, participates in small-scale military operations, and leads training exercises with numerous African states.

Credit: Washington Post 

The Pentagon bureaucracy in control of this network—the African Command, or AFRICOM—is itself a relative baby, announced by George W. Bush in February 2007 and officially formed in October 2008.[5]  But despite its youth, it is following the historical precedent set by other regional commands and immediately fighting a war in its new domain.  For a comparison, the Pentagon created its Pacific Command in 1947 and within three years U.S. troops were fighting on the ground in Korea.  Central Command was officially formed in 1983, and within seven years hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops were invading Iraq.  In 1999, when Central Command expanded its scope to include the formerly Soviet Central Asian Republics, it took only two years for the U.S. to invade Afghanistan.  AFRICOM managed to keep the streak alive, providing the manpower, surveillance, and logistical backbone for the 2011 war in Libya.  According to NATO’s own numbers, the U.S. led militaries flew over 26,000 sorties during the eight-month campaign, averaging 120 flights a day from February through October, and deployed 8,000 troops in support (as well as an unknown number of special forces and intelligence operatives and trainers on the ground).[6]  It was no Korean War, but a start nonetheless for AFRICOM.    

Most recently, the Pentagon has also announced that it is planning to build a large drone base in Northwest Africa, most likely in the deserts of Niger.  While the Pentagon explains that the new base is related to the conflict in Mali that erupted earlier this year, military officials openly admit that the base will also serve to give Africa Command a more "enduring presence" on the continent.[7]  As no government other than the tiny Djibouti will agree to openly host a permanent U.S. base, the Pentagon has been forced to run its new African operations from a headquarters in Germany.  Although it is unlikely that a new drone base in the Niger desert will become a dystopian AFRICOM headquarters, the ever-increasing U.S. military footprint makes further efforts to increase control inevitable.        

Tellingly, a large expansion is being planned for Camp Lemonnier.  What started as a 1,500 person Special Forces base in 2002, operated by the “Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa,” has doubled in size since then, and is growing still.  In the eyes of the Pentagon, Lemonnier is “an essential regional power projection base,” as General Carter Ham, head of AFRICOM at the time, testified before the House Armed Services Committee in March 2012.[8]  Nick Turse, a researcher and editor for the website Tomdispatch, wrote in a July 2012 article that:

Military contracting documents reveal plans for an investment of up to $180 million or more in construction at Camp Lemonnier alone.  Chief among the projects will be the laying of 54,500 square meters of taxiways “to support medium-load aircraft” and the construction of a 185,000 square meter Combat Aircraft Loading Area.  In addition, plans are in the works to erect modular maintenance structures, hangers, and ammunition storage facilities, all needed for an expanding set of secret wars in Africa.[9]

To truly understand the neo-colonial nature of Djibouti, a French colony until 1977, it has to be compared to its neighbors.  The Republic of Djibouti covers just 9,000 square miles, roughly the size of New Jersey.  Its neighbor, Eritrea, equally as remote in popular imagination, is five times as large.  Somalia and Yemen, the two nearby states being bombed from Camp Lemonnier, both cover over 200,000 square miles, and have coastlines nearly as long as the entire U.S. littoral along the Gulf of Mexico.  Ethiopia is twice as big as these, one quarter the size of the contiguous U.S.      

In population terms, the differences are even starker.  Ethiopia, with 86 million people, is the second most populated state in Africa.  Djibouti, with fewer than one million people, is 49^th.  The only states on mainland Africa with less people are Equatorial Guinea and the Western Sahara.  Such a low population means that roughly one out of every three hundred people in the country is an employee of the U.S. military, and not subject to local law. 

While Mr. Whitlock and the Washington Post have been doing an excellent job over the past years in tracking the new additions to the U.S. empire of bases in Africa, they have missed the bigger story.  The "Asia Pivot" and the "Africa Shift" are not separate but part of the same long-term strategy, an attempt to dominate Zbignew Bryzinski's great arc of crisis across the underbelly of Eurasia.  The routes running from Asia to Africa and Europe--both over land and sea--must be examined as one great exercise in power projection, with the energy deposits in the Persian Gulf and the Caspian Sea regions located smack-dab in the middle.  From this perspective, one can see the orientations of todays, and tomorrows, world; flows of natural resources, manufactured goods, and people crossing the planets greatest potential marketplace.  Empires throughout history have always understood this, from Alexander the Great's Macedonian kingdom to the Mongol Empire, from the Ottomans to the British.  Since the 1970's, attempting to control this massive global corridor through war and military engagements has also been the principal aim of U.S. foreign policy.  

In a telling sign of the full circle nature that this policy has reached, the Indian Ocean Island of the Seychelles has now felt a double dipping of U.S. imperialism.  Between 1971 and 1973, when the U.S. and British colluded to establish a military base at Diego Garcia, another island in the Indian Ocean, they forcibly expelled the 1,500 Chagossians inhabitants of the island, as recounted by anthropologist David Vine in his book Island of Shame.  The Chagossians were sent 1,200 miles across the ocean in cramped boats to the Seychelles, only halfway to their eventual destination of Mauritius, where they were dumped at the dock on Port Louis.  Spread out over the islands between the Seychelles and Mauritius, the Chagossians have been campaigning for reparations over Diego Garcia ever since.  

Now, however, the U.S. military is back, and since 2009 a drone base has been operational on the Seychelles.  In a state department cable from September 2009 revealed by Wikileaks, State Department Charge d’Affaires Virginia Blaser reported that 77 American personnel would be stationed on the islands, and that U.S. drones would conduct intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance flights over the Horn of Africa.[10]  And while these drones were not to be armed at that point, it was noted that “should the desire ever arise, the USG would seek discrete, specific discussions with appropriate GOS officials.”[11]    Besides the usual trouble that military bases bring along with them, there have been two drone crashes at the Seychelles, in December 2011 and April 2012.[12]  As such, the Chagossian population of the Seychelles has seen the full scope of modern imperialism, from a British colonial governor executing their dogs with car exhaust to the threat of American military robots crashing down on their heads.  They are poignant examples of the "unpeople," to steal a phrase from George Orwell, who are the passive victims of U.S. militarization, and there are thousands more like them, from Mauritania to Guam.

---

[1] Craig Whitlock, “At Pentagon ‘Pivot to Asia’ Becomes “Shift to Africa’,” Washington Post, Feb 15^th, 2013. 

[2] Craig Whitlock, “U.S. expands secret intelligence operations in Africa,” Washington Post, June 13^th, 2012.

[3] Craig Whitlock, “Remote U.S. Base at Core of Secret Operations,” Washington Post, October 25^th, 2012.

[4] Whitlock, “U.S. expands secret intelligence operations in Africa.”

[5] “The Pentagon’s New Africa Command raises suspicion over U.S. motive,” McClatchey, Sep. 29^th, 2008.

[6] http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_71652.htm

[7] Eric Schmitt, “U.S. Weighs Base for Spy Drones in West Africa,” New York Times, Jan. 28^th, 2013.

[8] “Statement of General Carter Ham before House Armed Services Committee,” March 1^st, 2012.

[9] Nick Turse, “Obama’s Scramble for Africa: Secret Wars, Secret Bases, and the Pentagon’s ‘New Spice Route’ in Africa,” Tomdipatch.com, July 12^th, 2012.

[10] “Seychelles: Open Look tops agenda during Presidential meeting,” Embassy Port Louis, September 22^nd, 2009. (released by wikileaks, accessed through cablegatesearch.net).

[11] Ibid.

[12] “Seychelles become site of another U.S. drone clash,” Christian Science Monitor, Dec. 14^th, 2011; “US suspends Seychelles drone flights after crash,” Reuters, April 10^th, 2012.

Forget about Beijing, Doha (and the rest of the Gulf) follows D.C.'s drumbeat

While my last post examined the growing economic relationship between China and Qatar, the reality is that the U.S. is still a dominant influence in the emirate, especially on matters of security.  Recent revelations about a proposed U.S. "missile shield" to be housed in Qatar, the UAE, and Kuwait are the latest example of the Pentagon's total militarization of the Gulf littoral.  To quote the New York Times on the hellish blitzkrieg of missiles the U.S. and its allies can now "defensively" launch across one of the world's most vital and heavily trafficked waterways:

Three weeks ago the Pentagon announced the newest addition to Persian Gulf missile defense systems, informing Congress of a plan to sell Kuwait $4.2 billion in weaponry, including 60 Patriot Advanced Capability missiles, 20 launching platforms and 4 radars. This will be in addition to Kuwait’s arsenal of 350 Patriot missiles bought between 2007 and 2010.

 The United Arab Emirates acquired more than $12 billion in missile defense systems in the past four years, documents show. In December, the Pentagon announced a contract to provide the Emirates with two advanced missile defense launchers for a system called the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, valued at about $2 billion, including radars and command systems. An accompanying contract to supply an arsenal of interceptor missiles for the system was valued at another $2 billion, according to Pentagon documents.Saudi Arabia also has bought a significant arsenal of Patriot systems, the latest being $1.7 billion in upgrades last year.

The United States’ own military forces provide a core capability for ballistic missile defenses in the Persian Gulf, in particular the American Navy vessels with advanced tracking radars and interceptor missiles. According to Navy officials, these Aegis missile defense systems, carried aboard both cruisers and destroyers, are in the region on continuous deployments.

And the United States has deployed a number of land-based missile defense systems to defend specific American military facilities located around the gulf.

Qatar's role in the new missile defense proposal is to host an X-band radar station, similar to U.S. controlled radars established at Mount Keren, in Israel's Negev Desert, and at Turkey's southeastern city of Malatya.

It is hard not to smirk when one hears the phrase "missile defense," as it has been a Pentagon buzzword for going on thirty years now.  The idea of shooting missiles down with other missiles is compelling--note the fantastical original nickname of "Star-Wars"--so much so that the United States has spent over $200 billion investing in the program over the last 30 years.  Does it work?  The official answer is who knows? (but probably not).  The U.S. system has never been tested under combat conditions.  And "combat conditions" have never occurred because the whole theory was based on defending an attack by the Soviet's that never came.

So why are the Gulf kingdoms now so gung-ho about buying their own missile shield?  The answer is hard to tease out.  A "an attack from Iran" is the official answer, the sheiks quaking in their sandals theory.  But both Iran and the Arab states have too much invested in the Gulf oil trade for this theory to hold much water.  One would think that any conflict that arose in the Gulf would not reach the point where hundreds of interceptor missiles are needed to prevent bombs raining on Dubai and Riyahd.  The Arab families ruling the Gulf care far to much about preserving their power and wealth for total war to break out in the area (war in other Arab states, however, is a different question).

A better answer may be the all-powerful military industrial complex.  Donald Rumsfeld chairing a blue-ribbon committee on a subject, as he did on Missile Defense in the 1990's, is about as close to President Eisenhower's definition of "the acquisition of unwarranted influence" as you can get.  That is how $200 billion gets spent on an experiment, and no one really calls bullshit.  Not mentioned in the New York Times quote above is that Lockheed-Martin produces the Patriot Missile System, and Raytheon the X-band radar.  The oil rich Gulf states have always been the best customer for these mega weapons manufacturers, and the latest purchases could just be a continuation down this path.  And I am sure Lockheed appreciates the continuing business, as the U.S. is currently broke and hoping to reduce its defense budget (either through a managed snipping, or "sequestration"-a top down haircut of many billions that will take effect if a congressional compromise can't be reached).  

China in the Arabian Gulf: Qatar

Introduction: China in the Persian Gulf, the past twenty years

The last decade has seen a major growth in China’s relationship with the oil rich Arab kingdoms west of the Persian Gulf.  On China’s part, this relationship is no doubt born out of their insatiable need for energy supplies.  Starting in 1993, when China became a net importer of energy, the Beijing government has adopted a “go out” strategy in its foreign policy, aiming to secure reliable energy and other resources abroad.  In an April 2011 study for the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Christina Lin writes this has turned “historical routes into a modern grid of pipelines, roads, and railways for its energy supplies.” Lin continues:

This approach stems in part from Beijing’s fears of a U.S. blockade on maritime supplies in the event of hos­tilities over Taiwan. It also reflects the reality of rapidly growing Chinese energy demand.  An August 2010 report showed that China had become the world’s number-one energy consumer, surpassing the United States. In addition, the coun­try has enjoyed double-digit annual growth for most of the past decade, fueled not by consumer demand, but by energy-intensive heavy industry and infra­structure construction as well as growing demand in the transportation sector.[i]

In 1994, the Persian Gulf region supplied barely a quarter of China’s oil imports, all from Oman, with a majority of Chinese oil coming from Indonesia or from domestic productions.  However, by 2001 added oil from Saudi Arabia and Iran began to bring the gulf’s share of Chinese oil deliveries up to 50% of total imports, with Saudi Arabia being China’s largest supplier. [ii]  Since that time, China has become the Gulf’s largest energy customer, and a very important one as recessions slow the west and North America has begun to develop its own domestic shale gas production (replacing imports).  A report by Chris Zambellis lays out the stark new reality of China’s energy appetite in the Gulf:

In 2009, Saudi oil exports to the United States - for the first time in over 20 years - dropped below the 1 million barrels per day (bpd) mark. In contrast, Saudi oil exports to China during the same time frame surpassed 1 million bpd, almost twice the amount of oil exported by Saudi Arabia to China in 2008.  In June 2008, China surpassed Japan as Kuwait's top destination for oil exports. The UAE is another important source of oil for China, which has been the top importer of Omani oil for six years running. With around 10% of its LNG exports heading to China, Qatar has also emerged as an important source of Beijing's growing LNG needs amid stagnant demand in the United States.[iii]

One interesting facet of these energy relationships is that China now runs a trading deficit with the Gulf States, an unusual position for export-giant Beijing to be in.  Except for in the UAE, China is buying more Arab oil and gas than it is exporting goods and services to the Gulf, leaving a large surplus of Chinese payments in Dubai and Doha.    For Beijing, their most recent strategy, which will be explored below, is to make sure that those payments are made in the Chinese national currency, the Renminbi, also known as the Yuan.

Qatar

During this time, the state of Qatar has emerged as in important player in the Gulf across a multitude of matters. Ruled since independence in 1971 by the al-Thani monarchy, Qatar’s capital of Doha now has international heft on matters of Middle East diplomacy, the petrochemical trade, U.S. military posture, international media, and Western intellectual influence in the Arab world.  And in terms of energy reserves, ever important for determining pecking order in the region, Qatar has the world’s third largest supply of natural gas, sharing with Iran territorial rights to a giant offshore deposit, known as North Field in Qatar’s portion and South Pars in Iran’s.  The North Field has turned Qatar’s small population of 800,000 into the wealthiest citizens on earth per capita.

Historically, Qatar has always been under the domain and guidance of the West, whether that be the London Colonial Office or Washington D.C.  Since the 1991 Gulf War, the al-Thanis have eagerly worked with the Pentagon to establishing military bases on the Gulf peninsula. Starting in 1996 the al-Udied airbase was constructed for a Qatari airforce that did not exist, and upon completion was leased out to the Pentagon.  In 2001, the U.S. very quietly began building up al-Udied as a U.S. base, prepositioning materials and handing out construction contracts.  In a March 2001 Department of Defense report to Congress titled “Allied Contributions to the Common Defense,” it was written:

Since November 1995, Bahrain and Qatar have both hosted several Air Expeditionary Force deployments in support of Operation SOUTHERN WATCH, and the United States Air Force recently established a limited prepositioning facility at Qatar’s Al-Udeid Airbase and is investigating moving to the airfield. Qatar also hosts prepositioned U.S. Army assets at As-Saliyah.[iv]

It is important to note the date of this statement, as al-Udeid airbase is often described as being opened as a result of post 9/11 U.S. policy, with the first soldiers flying into a dusty desert airstrip in late September.  However, the above statement and a number of contracts handed out before the September terrorist attacks make clear that the Bush administration was planning a U.S. base at Al-Udeid (and regime change in Iraq) from the moment it took office.[v]  Al-Udeid remained a “secret” base until its buildup became too big to hide in the spring of 2002, when Vice President Cheney made a well-publicized visit to the base.