W R Collier Jr

A Muslim Civil War?

W R Collier Jr March 27, 2015

The Battle for Yemen Gains Steam

The Sunni Coalition Against Iran

Bill Collier- The rise of a Shia Salafist army in Yemen, funded and supplied by Iran, has raised the ire, and the profile, of an emerging Arab coalition against Iran in the Middle East, with the United States absent from any leadership role Indeed, as Yemen, once touted as a success story for American policy, has been vacated by the US. This vacuum appears to have been filled by an Arab coalition led by Saudi Arabia and the UAE. The coalition is attempting to pick up the broken pieces of what has become a failed state.

For more background on the REAL fault line emerging in the Middle East, see author’s News Intelligence Update on News Scope.

The takeover of Yemen by radical Shia Salafists from the Houthi tribe is not complete. Forces still remaining loyal to President Hadi, a Sunni, have been clawing back some lost ground, namely the international airport at Aiden. The fighting is said to be bitter and bloody with no quarter taken or given by either side.

Saudi Arabia has committed 100 warplanes and “150,000 troops” to the fight. They are joined by forces from the UAE, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Pakistan, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan. Whether or not it materializes, this Sunni coalition has made noises that it intends to wage relentless war on the Shia forces in Yemen, and the United States is “absent from the field.”

In short, a major battle is emerging between Iran and her neighbors, with places like Yemen, Iraq, Libya, and Syria being the battleground, although in Iraq and Syria it is more complicated because Iran is fighting the same Sunni Salafists opposed by this emerging Sunni coalition. These powers clearly do not want Iran to advance, and they are not happy about the current negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program. Indeed, current US policy is driving many Arab powers into a closer, if unofficial, level of cooperation with Israel, while driving a wedge between the rest of the Arab world and the leaders who control the Palestinian claimed lands of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem.

It should be noted that the bonds between the Arab world and the Palestinian people have not suffered. What has suffered is the relationships between Hamas and Fatah on one hand and the rest of the Arab world on the other hand.

It is not clear yet how much is being put into this fight. The Saudi military does not possess a high reputation in battle and is largely controlled by tribal groups- but if, as it appears, these tribes are sincerely opposed to Iranian control over Yemen, one might see a far more aggressive, and capable, Saudi military operation than would be otherwise predicted.. It is certainly true that personnel from Jordan, Egypt, and the UAE would be genuinely opposed to this Iranian proxy Army gaining power on the Arabian Peninsula, but so far it would appear that their forces are limited to air force assets and it is not believed that ANY ground forces have entered Yemen.

Any attack on the ground would likely have to come by air and sea, coming overland from Saudi Arabia would be extremely difficult given the desert terrain which must be crossed in great expanses, except via the Saudi town of Jizanon, which lies just north of the Yemeni town of Al Luhayya on the Yemeni west coast. No reports of ground movement in this area have been reported, beyond beefing up of the border areas as a defensive measure.

Make no mistake, this is a full-on war, and if it proceed in a manner consistent with the stated goals of this Sunni coalition, it is likely to become a major conflagration which spill over into Syria, Iraq, and Libya. For instance, a Sunni-led coalition could conceivably seek to enter Iraq and install a Sunni government while chasing the Iranians out of Iraq. It appears on the ground that the US has ceded Iraq to Iranian hegemony.

None of these developments have taken cognizance of American policy or concerns- indeed the US has maintained a distance from events that is stunning to American allies in the region. The precipitous withdrawal from Yemen by US forces was completely unexpected. The operations plan called for reinforcements of those forces, not their withdrawal, the Freedomist has learned.

Attacks against the Shia forces have come from many locations, including air attacks by coalition partners in support of ground attacks by President Hadi’s loyalists, who have also been air dropped weapons and munitions. But those forces have managed to hold their ground, even as precision air attacks targeting individual commanders on the road have caused attrition among their leadership. Iranian arms and supplies are very likely not coming through. Saudi Arabia has essentially declared a Cordon Sanitaire over Yemen and surrounding areas.

It is not known if the US is providing intelligence or any other resource to this coalition of Sunni powers.

Slow Motion Russian Coup

W R Collier Jr March 14, 2015

Bill Collier- Rumors are trending in Russian blogs and forums that President Putin is being removed from power by a military/intelligence services coup orchestrated by oligarchs who see his chauvenistic policies as being bad for Russia, and their wallets.

(more…)

The German States of Europe?

W R Collier Jr February 27, 2015

German dominance over the EU may or may not be “intentional”, but it is very real in the eyes of many.

Bill Collier- Roman Prodi, who was President of the European Commission from 1999 to 2004, had been warning people for some time that the European Union was either an alliance of equal, democratic powers, or it is nothing.

From its inception, the EU was a constellation of states revolving around Britain, France, and Russia. But the dynamics inside the EU have changed. First, the was Britain’s withdrawal from active participation in the EU. As the EU is forging more integration between member states, Britain has resisted those changes, including rejecting adopting the Euro. Second, France has become an economic basket case and has fallen behind Germany and Britain economically. Third, with the inclusion of Eastern European states into the EU, the Germans have utilized their physical proximity and their dominance as a trade partner to great effect.

The emergence of German predominance in the EU means now that the greatest weight in terms of actual EU direction and policy rests in Berlin, not Brussels. The push for “asuterity” among EU members with economic woes (including Spain, Italy, and Greece) has come straight from Berlin. Angela Merkel’s diplomacy in Minsk with Russia over the Ukraine crisis is the deciding factor in EU policy.

The German state is, by American political standards, a secular and left-leaning political entity that pursues both a social libertarianism and an economic program rooted in social democracy. The most “conservative” German political parties of any popularity would be considered center-left by American standard. Stating that you believe there is only one way to get to heaven, questioning whether homosexuality is natural, or even showing much pride and patriotism for your country are offensive to mainstream German culture. The German state reflects secular, libertine social democracy to its core and, as Germany has become the prime move in the EU, that is becoming the policy of the EU itself.

This German tendency to reject “hard lines” about morality, patriotism, or religion even may stem from the German assessment of its own history, not least World War Two, and so talk of any kind of German dominance over the EU is not something most Germans would be proud of. At most, Germans might speak of Germany as the reluctant “hegemon” (dominating power) over the EU by virtue of its geographical position, population, economic strength, and what some call its “political stewardship.”

American policy may be simplified to a certain degree by this development: it is easier to deal with only one power and not go through Brussels. But the Germans, despite their professions, are, by nature, aggressive and not prone much to taking a lesser role given the opportunity. The days of the US being looked to for leadership in Europe and NATO are over. The reluctant hegemon is not going to simply go along with what the US wants, as we see with the Ukraine where the Germans seem to be influenced by their own prior history- they seem determined to avoid a clash with Russia there even if that means Russia achieves all of its goals in Ukraine.

The German culture and mindset is, one might argue, tainted and poisoned by its rejection of the past- they seem to be determined to “prove” they are the opposite of every stereotype. Today’s Germany is not the Germany of the days before Hitler’s rise to power, and whatever one might find worthy of historical German values and culture, for the Germans, those values belong in the past. Today’s Germany is in fact a reluctant hegemon, a left-tilted, internationalist, libertine, and yet greatly centralized state with a very narrow center-left political spectrum that is (reluctantly, some claim) gaining as much dominance over Europe as a power that might have conquered those states by force.

A center-left political reality seems to be working for the Germans. Their economy is strong, it is not soaring, but Germans today value stability over everything else. As one German businessman who is taxed at 56% of his income said, he’d rather pay high taxes and cover free university and health care for all “then be a rich man in a poor country.” For the Germans, the lure of “something better” is not enough to change this sentiment- even if more economic freedom might produce better overall results, it would not, they fear, necessarily produce those results for all or even most people.

So German monetary policy in the EU, and therefore the policy of the EU, is colored by this sentiment, and real pressures are being brought to bear on member states to adopt a similar approach, albeit in a rational and measured manner.

If the Germans, and therefore the EU, are rarely concerned about Christian persecution, this is at least colored by their aversion of any kind of dogma, where one preaches their religion and their God as the only way to heaven. When Christians are persecuted for sharing their faith, a mandate many Christians feel comes from the Bible, they are violating a modern German cultural tradition which makes religion private and which rejects any kind of dogma.

German dogmas do, however, exist. They are dogmatic about the need for degrees and certification as proof of your skill and qualification, almost to the point of absurdity by American standards. They have a school system that determines your future career path by age 13. Unless you are accepted into “gymnasium” at age 13 you are unlikely to be allowed to attend university after you graduate from one of the other two main school types (a fourth, Sonderschule, is for special education). German cultural mores that have nothing to do with morality, such as eating etiquette and always using last names unless invited to use first names, reflect a staunch traditionalism, but where Christian or religious virtues are concerned, the German culture (but not all Germans) leans toward a libertinism.

It may be that the Germans have adopted libertinism, social democracy, and internationalism as an unconscious and reactionary defense against their own aggressive nature. But for all that, German dominance and the emergence of the “German” European Union are all happening seemingly of their own accord.

Land War Looms In Europe

W R Collier Jr February 23, 2015

The Battle for Mariupol Could Spark Greater Land War

Bill Collier- The battle for Mariupol has been replayed at least four times since 1941, and it’s about to start into round 5. The players have changed and so has the dynamic. In October of 1941 it was the Germans taking it from the Soviets, in 1943 it was the Soviets taking it from the Germans, in June of 2014 it was a ragtag army of separatists trying to take it from the Ukrainian “Azov Battallion”, in January of 2015 it was a mix of covert Russian and separatist trying again to take it, and now it would appear that Russian Armored and Artillery Regiments are the real force with so-called “New Russian” separatists, and Cosacks, playing a support role.

What we see happening now is a total commitment of “serious manpower”, as many as 20,000 Russian troops, entering the region near Mariupol with the intention of seizing this strategic city and rolling up the Ukrainian defenders throughout the eastern half of their country. Depsite pledges by the US and Britain to “guarantee” Ukrainian territory if the Ukrainians gave up nuclear arms (which they did), so far neither the US nor NATO are forthcoming with decisive help. Negotiations and rhetoric and declared cease-fires have failed to change the situation on the ground.

Russia wants to create a land bridge to the Crimea, which it seized by a coup de main, extended from Russia through eastern Ukraine. Therefore, Mariupol, a coastal city and strategic rail and road hub, is vital to achieving that aim. It is alleged that the Pro-Russian separatist leaders are mere puppets of Moskow, which is using a classic Soviet tactic to soften an enemy with fifth column sympathizers acting as a front and using proxy fighters as well as their own troops in a covert role while claiming non-involvement.

But Ukraine’s government is hearing none of it, declaring unofficially that they are basically “at war” with Russia. A cease-fire set to take effect on February 15th has not even truly begun as Russian army shells continue to fall on Ukrain positions and as it appears the Russian Army are staging for a large-scale attack “within weeks.” This attack is feared to be brutal in its intent and could embroil the 500,000 civilians who live in Mariupol in the fighting. Currently, the figvhting is only around 5 miles from the city along a front line begining at Shyrokine on the Azov Sea and snaking due northeast to to the town of Krasnoarmyisk.

It is estimated by Ukrainian forces on the ground that a large force of 50,000 Russian troops and over 200 tanks are massing across the border near Ukraine’s Donetsk Oblast- of these, however, as many as 20,000 with 36 tanks and 26 Grad Missile systems were alleged to have already crossed in Ukrainian territory.

Meanwhile, the Ukrainians are digging in with some describing scenes reminiscent of World War One and are rushing combat troops to both Mariupol and Kharkiv, another city thought to be in Russia’s sights. There is no doubt to the intelligent observer that Russian forces are in fact attacking the Ukrainians and shelling continues despite the fact the Ukrainian forces have been ordered to refrain fro returning fire.

A typical Russian tactic is to infiltrate “civilians” into a target area who are really special operations teams or partisan guerillas to cause chaos in the enemy rear prior to an attack, and with that in mind Ukrainian forces have round up over 100 persons thought to be members of such covert attack cells. The government of Ukraine has claimed that many captured “rebels” have Russian military ID’s.

It is not known how large the Ukrainian force is in the area, but it may include 30,000 fighters with only a third of the armor deployed by the Russians. It is not known how high the morale of Ukrainian troops is, it is being lowered by the stand-down order and because they are getting news that all requests by the Ukraine to the US and NATO for defensive arms have so far fallen on deaf ears.

But a full-on land war in which the Ukrainians and Russians formally declare war, forcing the US and NATO to decide whether to aid the Ukraine of not, is in the offing. If it is not answered, some analysts predict, as a worse case scenario we could see the unravelling of NATO as an effective body because various countries will determine that US and NATO backing can guarantee nothing.

This will cause a virtual arms race and a re-alignment of powers, centered on Poland perhaps, who see that unless they arm themselves heavily they have no guarantee against further Russian aggression. It will also continue to undermine US prestige and the value of American diplomacy. For instance, Washington’s insistence on Israeli restraint regarding Iran is predicated on the same kind of guarantee once given to Ukraine. Other US allies, like Egypt and the Gulf States, will draw their own conclusions as well.

It is argued that a failure to demonstrate to Russia NOW that full on war will be met with a like response is what is making full on war increasingly possible.

Hope and Change Hits Israel

W R Collier Jr February 16, 2015

Is President Obama Working Toward Regime Change In Israel?

Bill Collier- A new organization in Israel, manned by Jeremy Bird (who was the field director for President Obama’s 2012 campaign) is causing some to suspect that the President is seeking regime change in Israel. Recently, the White House pushed back on House Speaker Boehner’s invitation to Israel’s current Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to speak before Congress. It was argued by the White House that allowing such a meeting with the Prime Minister, and allowing him to speak before congress, would be “interfering” with Israeli elections.

The emergence of this organization has raised eyebrows about the claims by the Obama administration to be concerned about ‘interfering’ with the Israeli elections. The organization itself is well funded by “wealthy American Jews.” It is staffed in large part (and at the top leadership levels) by top operatives from the President’s Presidential campaigns in 08 and 12. The sole aim of the group is to unseat Prime Minister Netanyahu.

While the White House argued that meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu was wrong because it was close to an election it would appear that, at the very least, many of the US President’s political operatives are actively and openly engaged in an attempt to unseat the sitting Prime Minister. This charge, if true, is far more intrusive to the Israeli election than meeting with Netanyahu at the White House would be.

The organization, V-15 (meaning Victory 2015), is not associated with the main opposition party, Labor, and is solely focused on working against the current Prime Minister. As its source of funding is foreign, by its own admission, Likud, the party in power, is seeking to ban it from any further activities.

Netanyahu has also been accused of trying to unseat President Obama. During the 2012 election, an ad by Romney showed a picture of Netanyahu, while a voice-over stated, “The world needs American strength, not apologies.”

It was obvious at the time that Netanyahu was warm and cordial with Romney (whom he met with) even as his relationship with the US President was seen as tense, as it remains even more today. During that time, Mark Regev, Netanyahu’s spokesman, said that the TV spot had “not been coordinated with us, we were not consulted and no one asked us for our permission.”

There was not then and is not now, any accusation that either Netanyahu or his supporters provided expertise or funding for President Obama’s opposition.

The mysterious foreign-led and foreign-funded group has no ties to Labor, according to Labor Chairman Eitan Cabel, who said he knows “nothing about the group “ or its activities. But one organization noted to be working with the mysterious group is “OneVoice”.

According to the group- “The OneVoice Movement, founded in 2002, is an international grassroots movement that amplifies the voice of Israelis and Palestinians, empowering them to propel their elected representatives toward the two-state solution.”

Until November of 2014, the US State Department admitted that they were providing funding to this organization, which observers note “has a clear and partisan political bias” in favor of the left. Funding of this organization by the US has itself been considered to be an act of “interference” in Israeli elections. The group notoriously targets the Israeli political process while doing nothing to promote a “two-state solution” among Arab politicians who lead Gaza and the West bank (Judea and Samaria) and who have consistently espoused a “one state” solution in which the State of Israel ceases to exist.

These assertions, that OneVoice is essentially an anti-Israel movement, have not prevented Palestinian groups from accusing the group of being a mere faux peace movement meant to serve the interests of the Jewish State. A Pro-Palestinian group called “Another Voice” accused OneVoice of being a front for American and Israeli interests back in 2007. But its track record of supporting leftist causes and being led by leftists puts it in the category of being more about promoting liberalism in Israel than peace between Arabs and Jews, in the eyes of many.

But Another Voice said this about OneVoice- “We did not care to demonize the individuals behind OneVoice, nor did we assume bad intentions on their part. However, we were, and continue to be concerned with simplistic, high profile initiatives that equate the occupier with the occupied, and that do not recognize Israel’s ongoing violations of international law, including gross violations of Palestinian human rights, which are the reasons behind the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian “conflict.”

According to Haaretz, “V15 is partnering with the pro-peace organization OneVoice. Its goal is to recruit thousands of volunteers who will go door to door before the election to persuade as many as one million people to vote to change the government.”

“Two candidates for the Knesset are among the heads of OneVoice – Yoel Hasson and Danny Atar,” said David Shimron, a lawyer and close confidant of the Israeli Prime Minister, at a recent press conference.

“Both of them are candidates of the Zionist Camp for the Knesset. OneVoice is financing V15. There is a clear political affiliation here. We can see a clear criminal act whose purpose is to buy the election with money that may not be used,” Shimron stated.

While State Department funding for OneVoice may have ended, as of last November, the amount of money has not been disclosed and, it is argued, that money is only now being deployed to support this electioneering.

V15 countered in its own statement, “Since Likud’s campaign staff has accepted the fact that Netanyahu has lost the field and the street, the party’s lawyers are trying to stop the energy and buzz around Victory 2015. We are bringing in innovative work plans learned from successful campaigns overseas. Obama’s ‘recruitment’ to the campaign exists only in the fevered brains of right-wingers and Likud. The Likud’s panic and paranoia from the right’s loss of the street to the V15 field operatives is not a reason for fantastic delusions such as a connection and cooperation with one of the parties or the American administration. We will continue to win and they will continue to whine.”

Regardless of this statement, it is clear that many of the President’s allies are engaged, that US taxpayer dollars went to OneVoice, and that the US President has done all he can to diminish the Israeli Prime Minister, especially regarding his upcoming speech before the US Congress. That speech is now being boycotted by the same American left who are so deeply involved in the organization seeking his ouster.

Meanwhile, US Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State John Kerry met with Isaac Herzog, the Israeli opposition leader, while the Secretary of State, John Kerry, took the time to be photographed with Herzog. This occurred during an international security conference in Munich, Germany. Of note, this meeting, which Herzog claimed was not “scheduled” by either American official, also took place a month before the March 17 elections in Israel.

Engaging in regime change is not really a new thing for any state in the world, especially powerful states. It can be claimed that both the American and Israeli governments are active in trying to engage in each other’s political process. What has ruffled feathers among some is the denial by the current American President that this is not currently the case in the face of the overwhelming, if under-reported, facts on the ground.

France Under Attack- Leaders Equivocate On Enemy

W R Collier Jr January 9, 2015

While the people of France face a violent insurgency aimed at toppling their democracy and conquering France from within for the Salafist cause, the leaders of France continue to equivocate about who this enemy is and what the nature and ideology of this enemy is. Salafism is taking root among Muslims worldwide, but France’s Muslim population is leaning more strongly toward the Salafist ideology than most Muslim populations in the West.

Even as the leaders, including Prime Minister Hollande, equivocate and refuse to name, confront, and marginalize the Salafist ideology, the Salafist vanguard is being emboldened in France to attack the civilian population.

While two of the attackers who murdered the staff at Charlie Hebdo, a satirical and anti-religious weekly newspaper, were holed up with hostages at a printing plant 25 miles north of Paris, a second attack and hostage situation took place in Paris.

Authorities say Amedy Coulibaly stormed a kosher market, patronized by Jewish citizens, and, after either killing or wounding numerous individuals, took hostages at around the same time as the first hostage situation unfolded. Amedy and his girlfriend, Hayat Boumediene, a couple who are cadres in the Salafist cause, are believed to have murdered Paris Police Officer Clarissa Jean-Philippe while she was handling a minor traffic accident. Hayat is not on site and is at large in Paris. Officials fear a third attack is being planned. She is believed to have helped Amedy in some material way. Amedy, meanwhile, has stated that if the French police forces storm the site of the first attack he will kill the hostages he was holding. (There are mixed reports that Hayat was also involved.)

Police stormed both locations at around the same time and there are reports that the hostage takers were killed and all of the hostages were freed. However, there were also reports that 4 hostages were killed at the kosher grocery store and two police officers were wounded in that assualt.

It should be noted that while the Salafist cadres are armed, the French population have no legally protected right to self-defense and are therefore disarmed. This means that while the aggressors from within, operating out of Muslim-controlled “no-go zones”, where French law is not enforced, can choose any civilian target and be assured that they will not faced armed resistance.

The existence of these no-go zones throughout Paris and in some areas of France is considered in and of itself a key factor for the planning of Salafist attacks which cannot be detected by intelligence agencies. The unwillingness of the French government to identify, let alone investigate those who espouse, the Salafist jihad ideology or its increasing dominance of Muslim groups and the Muslim population have effectively tied the hands of security forces.

This problem is endemic throughout the West and is symptomatic of a civilization in its winter phase of decline and fall. Similarly US leaders and many media are reacting just as the French leadership are. In fact, individuals who are suspected of espousing Salafist ideology are feared to be in the employ of the American Department of Homeland Security and it is alleged they are among the Muslims who are considered counselors of the American President, who also refuses to name the ideology of the worldwide Islamic Salafist movement. It is not verified that these accusations are true, but the fact that the American government refuses to openly name and counter the Salafist jihad ideology and its proponents as enemies only raises suspicion, even if it is unfounded.

America’s ally, Saudi Arabia, not only espouses Salafism but plants Mosques abroad, including in the US, which teach and promote this imperialistic, authoritarian, and intolerant ideology to Muslims everywhere. Meanwhile, the Council on American Islamic Relations, which some terrorism experts consider to be a Salafist front group, is favored by the current American administration even as other Arab and non-Salafist countries have labeled it as a terrorist organization.

It is not known whether these attacks by Salafist militants will change the view of the French regarding the influx of Muslim populations which have been radicalized by Salafist ideology, but many predict a rise in anti-Islamic sentiment which may target both Salafist and non-Salafist Muslims alike. This is owing to a refusal to name the Salafist ideology is a distinct and dangerous sub-set of the Muslim faith which is not necessarily shared by most people of the Muslim faith. However, in France, a significant minority, perhaps even a majority, of Muslims have shown sympathy for Salafist positions and most French Muslim institutions are controlled by Salafist or Salafist leaning leaders.

As noted, the hostage taker in the second attack was demanding that the two suspects of the Charlie Hebdo attack be freed as a condition of releasing their hostages and had threatened to kill hostages if police storm the print plant. Police opted to storm both sites at the same time. It has been posited that the second two attackers are part of the same group, a cell with a support base of dozens who provide supplies and safe houses. Over a dozen Salafists associated with this group have been captured by French forces.

Cherif and Said Kouachi, suspects in the attack on Charlie Hebdo, stormed the CTF Creation Tendance Decouverte, a printing plant, and had an unknown number of hostages.

Meanwhile, another incident near the Eiffel Tower at Trocadero Square involved police at both the Eiffel Tower and near a subway entrance with weapons at the ready clearing people off. The French Interior Ministry (which handles policing for the entire French state) denies that there was an incident, but Twitter users on scene tweeted the following pictures:

Pictured- French Police at Trocadero Square with drawn weapons. From @Steiner1776

Pictured: police swarm Trocadero Square near the Eiffel Tower. Photo: @NationFMike

Pictured: police on scene at the Eiffel Tower, seen clearing people from the site. Photo: @mutiezo

All or most of these attackers have a long criminal record and have been apprehended for terrorism related activities but subsequently released. Many Muslims in France who become incarcerated for non-terrorism related crimes are radicalized because France’s prisons allow Salafist Muslim Imams to enter the prison and openly preach and recruit from among the population of Muslim prisoners, this all in the name of free speech and freedom of religion.

Meanwhile Andrew Parker, head of Britain’s MI5, used a rare speech at MI5 headquarters in London to warn that, “A group of core al Qaeda terrorists in Syria is planning mass casualty attacks against the West.”

These attacks in France also raise questions about New York City Mayor Bill De Blasio’s cessation of a previous policy by the NYPD of tracking and monitoring Salafist ideology in New York’s mosques. Currently, the proliferation of that ideology and the organizing of Salafist cells in New York continue apace without any real monitoring let alone counter-actions by authorities. The likelihood of such attacks in the US is calculated to be “inevitable” by most security and terrorism experts.

Why Boehner and McConnell Should Step Aside

W R Collier Jr January 7, 2015

By Bill Collier Jr- The conservative base of the GOP wants Boehner and McConnell, the respective GOP heads of the House and Senate, to go. They want them to go because the base believe these men, indeed the entire leadership of the GOP, are quislings at the helm selling their soul to special interests on a number of issues, including the Affordable Care Act (so-called Obamacare) and “Immigration Reform”. The conservative base feel un-represented in DC and they are, as Democratic pollster Pat Cadell has claimed, “ready to bolt the party.”

Average Americans do not closely follow the minutae and nuances of the political scene and do not have an in-depth working knowledge of the American political process. This does not mean they lack the acumen to understand these things, it’s only a matter of how much time they have: and understanding these things to the granular level takes time.

The truth is, as I see it anyway, that “realpolitik”, the art of the possible in the political process set before you, is not very simple or straightfoward. One might argue convincingly that in many ways Boehner and McConnell are masters of the art of realpolitik. Their ceaseless manuevering cannot be discounted as a factor in their party’s stunning successes in the last election cycle, though they’d be mistaken to assume they take the sole credit for those successes. They are indeed playing chess while it seems the President is still playing checkers, or at least that is the argument.

Some would counter that Americans are fed up with “realpolitik”, that they are becoming incresingly anti-establishment, regardless of their political persuasion. They want politics to be up front and simple, and people-powered instead of being driven by elites and special interests who buy access and influence. All this is grist for the populist mill on both sides of the political spectrum, but it is not entirely true that this sentiment drives dissatisfaction with leaders.

Far from populist sentiment driving dissatisfaction with leaders who master realpolitik, I would argue that dissatisfaction with leaders drives populist sentiment. And I say this as someone who, on principle, embraces a more populist politics driven by consensus of the People, especially at the local level.

The real problem is not whether or not Boehner and McConnell understand realpolitik, the real problem is whether they can be both masters of that art and dynamic leaders of their own potential supporters. We should, I propose, take it as a given that if 60% or more of members of the Republican Party, this according to Pat Caddell’s polling, reject their own leaders then there is a leadership problem. When leaders must take to sniping their own allies and friends who demonstrate a lack of confidence in their leadership, then those leaders should step aside. When your own support base canot stand you then you cannot blame them and call them names in a petulant act of whining.

Already, Boehner is retaliating against those 25 House members of his own party who voted against him. And it is remarkable to see the number of House members who voted for him trying to excuse their vote to angry constituents who have been raising royal hell on the phone lines for the past few days. It would seem to the average American conservative that the GOP are far more afraid of harsh editorials by the New York Times than they are of angry constituents who have lost confidence in their ability to lead.

I am not arguing that Boehner and McConnell are in fact liberals in disguise plotting with the Democrats to move American down the road to socialism, as many angry conservatives are. I actually believe they are playing realpolitik in a skilled manner that will ultimately unravel the plans of their opponents on the left. I do not believe these men are not conservatives. But the reality is that these two men are focused on the traditional roles of leading a caucus of elected Republicans, a role that, arguably, is what their positions have normally entailed, and not on also being the leaders of PEOPLE on the street level who are looking for a symbol of their values and their opposition to their political opponents on the left.

The traditional role of merely being the leader of a Party Caucus is just not sufficient in the 21st century. In times past, people barely knew who these party leaders were, but not so today. Everything they do and say is published and broadcast to the Party base without any party filter- it is transmitted by bloggers and conservative news sites who are constantly looking for re-assurance that their leaders are towing their line. That those leaders have tended to just assume that if you tell your own base about the nuances required in realpolitik while assuring them of your shared goals that the base won’t get it is unfortunate.

The conservative base, up to 60% of the Republican party, no longer believes party leadership have the same vision or represent the same values they hold dear. This is not the fault of the followers, it is the fault of the leaders. And for this reason alone Boehner and McConnell should step aside from leadership and help find leaders who know how to both master realpolitik AND rally and inspire their Party’s core of supporters- and they should do this before that base just up and walks away.

SPECULATION- Obama May Recognize Palestinian State

W R Collier Jr December 19, 2014

Bill Collier- Rumors are circulating that President Obama may unilaterally authorize the State Department to extend “some level of recognition” of a Palestinian State in a move not unlike the sudden reversal of US policy regarding Cuba.

In that move, the President worked for over a year without disclosing his intentions to ANY member of Congress and it is believed that a similar approach is being taken with regard to the Palestinian bid for statehood. This effort would receive the blessings of John Kerry although many Democrats, who receive millions of dollars in campaign donations from Jewish sources, could face a backlash from those same sources if such a poicy shift were to materialize.

It is known that the US has threatened to use a UN veto if the UN Gernal Assembly votes to recognize the Palestinian State, however in recent statements the US has indicated this would be based on “the language of the resolution.” This seeming backpeddle has led to speculation that a policy reversal is in the offing.

While this move seems unlikely, so too did the Cuban move, which has already caused outrage in the Cuban expat community. It would appear that the President, mindful that he has no more elections to endure and determined to use executive authority to what he perceives its limits to be, a line some feel has already gone too far beyond the legal norm, wants to push as much of his true ideological agenda as possible. It is calculated by some that his (alleged) vision for totally transforming America into what must objectively be defined as a leftwing presidential state that is led by technocrats with centralized authority supercedes all other considerations.

What is certain is that the President is swinging for the fences, determined to stay in control of the agenda and determined to keep his political opponents in reaction mode as he pursues initiative after initiative without consulting anyone but his own intuation.

Recognition of a Palestinian State while Congress is in recess, in between the recess of the old Congress and the swearing in of the new Congress, would be a fait accompli which the President may believe his political opponents could do little about, but it would also be extremely unpopular among all but the hard core leftist base. It would throw Israel into the arms of China and Russia and increase the likelihood of Israel taking Iran’s threats and potential of obtaining nuclear weapons into its own hands, and it would undercut Arab efforts to begin a process of moving toward an understanding with Israel. Finally, it would result in a Hamas controlled “proto-state” and place Israel at direct varience with US policy.

We will be watching events closely and while we cannot confirm that such rumors are true, the recent backtracking on statements about a UN resolution recognizing a Palestinian State and the recent move regarding Cuba seem to bolster such speculations.

Cuba Normalization Blindsides Congress

W R Collier Jr December 17, 2014

Normalization of Cuban-American Relations A Major Policy Shift

China Could Be Hard Hit By Cheap Cuban Labor

Bill Collier- While there has been bipartisan discussions about a new push to normalize relationships with the Cuban Communist regime in the interest of trade, the sudden and unexpected move has blindsided Congress. Only recently, Congress was assured that no such dramatic change in the US diplomatic stance regarding the Cuban Communist regime was in the offing, but in reality this promise was untrue. Plans to embark on this path of normalization had been conceived and were being worked since early summer of 2014.

Once again, a Presidential policy move is seen as undermining US law, which states that normalization of relationships and a lifting of the embargo against trade with Cuba must be presaged by Cuba adopting democratic reforms. The main purposes of this policy had been to marginalize Cuba in the region and to prevent Cuba from becoming economically powerful enough to finance a serious military threat to the US. After all, Cuba is only some 90 miles off the coast of Florida.

The move, if it goes through by Congressional support or by alleged executive fiat that is unchallenged, would also be a challenge to China. In short, US companies would have access to Cuba’s cheap labor market and one might expect to see “Made In Cuba” competing with “Made In China.”

While the President has not explicitly ended the embargo, it does expand the amount and type of agricultural products that can be exported, it allows for a higher amount of money that individuals can send to Cuban relatives from the US, and it allows for greater tourism travel. The President is expected to request that Congress ends the embargo. It is not known whether he will use the device of prosecutorial discretion to refrain from prosecuting individuals and entities which might violate the embargo.

On the diplomatic side, the State Department is being instructed to move towards establishing diplomatic relations and removing Cuba from a State Department list of nations that support terrorism.

On the Cuban side, the number of concessions appears to be limited to releasing an American prisoner who has been incarcerated in Cuba for 5 years and possibly another American who has been incarcerated for 20 years. There is no promise or agreement to institute any free market or democracy reforms, to do more to guarantee religious freedom and end the persecution of Christians, to allow freedom of the press, or any move away from totalitarianism. The entire purpose of the embargo was to encourage the Cubans to institute such reforms, whereupon the embargo would end.

The argument being made in support of this move is that such normalization will result in Cuban reforms, but this argument was used regarding China. In the case of China, the normalization of diplomacy and trade added legitimacy to the regime, gave the Chinese access to Western technology, and allowed them to grow their economy. The result of this normalization of relations with China has produced no noticeable liberalization of their political environment. Aside from purely cosmetic changes, the Chinese regime remains wholly undemocratic and continues to persecute ethnic minorities, especially Christians.

In short, there is no objective and clear evidence that President Nixon’s change in policy with China has come anywhere close to the goals which were given at the time the U.S declared this policy shift. In fact, it is argued, China has gained much more and the US and the West have lost much more out of the normalization process that occurred.

The Chinese, however, look on this development with some trepidation, though not through official channels. Cuban labor could substantially eat into their economic position. What is more, Cuban control over oil deposits in the Gulf which they are unable to exploit could result in more oil production in the Western Hemisphere to further erode the price of oil and undercut Middle Eastern suppliers and Russia.

What remains to be seen is whether or not the initiative announced by the President will succeed. Will Congress back the policy and even lift the trade embargo, and who will that benefit? Will the President use executive orders and executive memorandum to essentially gut the 1959 law that created the embargo by not enforcing it and, if so, will it be allowed to stand by what observers refer to as a supine Congress?

Salafist Gains In Global War

W R Collier Jr December 15, 2014

Islamic Salafist Is Winning Battles Against Freedom

The West Refuses To Fight An Ideological War

By Bill Collier- The Salafist forces, united on the Shia side around Iran and on the Sunni side by Al Qaeda and Saudi Arabia, continue their ongoing war against modern Muslim states and the states in the West, including America and the United Kingdom, with unrelenting fury. The Islamic Salafist war on freedom is being waged on every continent- it has resulted in numerous (and often misnamed0 acts of terror in the US and elsewhere, and has most recently raised its ugly head in a chocolate shop in Sydney, Asutralia.

Salafism, for those who are not familiar with the term, is a world-conquering pseudo-socialist and authoritarian ideology that utilizes only the earliest writings of the Islamic Prophet Muhammad as the basis for a worldwide revolution, or “Jihad”, against all non-Salafist states. The Salafist the modern Islamic notion of a more moderate and reformed religion in which later writers, or Surahs, which carry more weight in terms of interpreting Islamic law and doctrine than the earliest writing, This view of an “unfolding revelation” of Islam is the reason why some of the seemingly “bloody” texts of the Koran in its earliest sections are interpreted today by many Muslim scholars as having a more spiritual meaning. For instance, modern “Jihad” is viewed as an inner struggle to become more righteous and pure in the yes of Allah, not as a war against anyone on the outside.

The forces of Salafism, however, are in the ascent, not only in terms of their geopolitical and their propaganda gains, but also among rank and file Muslims, For instance, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Hamas and Fatah in the Palestinian territories, the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Turkey, and Islamic State (or ISIS) are all Salafist regimes of varuying degrees and of different types.

Among many Muslims around the world, the Salafist version of Islam is in fact gaining in popularity, it is no longer possible to say that “most Muslims do not agree with that” when it comes to Salafist ideology. Even in America, Abu Mujahid Fareed Abdullah of the Islamic Center of Connecticut is a Salafist scholar with a growing following among American Muslims. He was recently hosted at a seminar at The University of Southern California, espousing his Salafist ideology to an Islamist organization on campus that has over 350 members.

As Salafism grows in popularity, there remains no effective ideological response from the West, however Muslim states are beginning to push back and counter with their own ideological response, emphasizing that Salafism is a violation of Muslim teachings and ethics, for instance focusing people to convert or penalizing those who refuse. One Muslim state, the United Arab Emirates is quite vocal in its efforts to present a counter-ideology and Salafism remains largely unpopular among Muslims who live there.

Salafist gains on the battlefield in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan have humiliated Muslim and Western States, which had portrayed their Salafist foes as on the fringe and on the run. It turns out they are no longer a “fringe” group among most Muslims around the world and they are certainly not “on the run.”

The recent release of a party-line Senate report, pushed by Democrats, attacking the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” and disclosing information some have argued is useful for our enemies and not helpful in any debate regarding these techniques, has provided the Salafists with much propaganda material, especially in view of the fact that the West remains fixated on refusing to deal with Salafism on ideological terms. Some argue that it also provided actionable intelligence for Salafist forces and that it makes foreign governments extremely hesitant to share intelligence with the US in light of these disclosures regarding their prior and top secret collaboration.

During the recent hostage taking in Sydney, Australia, for instance, police refuse to acknowledge the motive of the hostage taker or the terrorist nature of the incident, despite the attacker forcing hostages to display a Salafist flag and demanding an ISIS flag be provided, thus clearly indicating that this was an act of Salafist terrorism.

Even the use of the term “Salafism” and information detailing the clear and undeniable difference between modern Islamic doctrines and Salafism has yet to be presented by most media or governments to the general public. There is no question of waging war on Islam, as such, but the lack of an effort to wage ideological war with Salafism, and the confusion caused by conflating modern Islam and Salafist Islam has caused many to withdraw from even criticizing Salafism for fear of being called “Islamophobic.”

When the American President said that ISIS was not “Islamic” his comments sounded absurd to most observers, after all ISIS calls itself the Islamic State, but his real failure was to not explain WHY one should refrain from calling ISIS “Islamic”: because “Islamic” is a broad term that is used to include both Salafist and non-Salafist Muslims. Not noting thatISIS does have an ideology, Islamic Salafism, obscures the difference between modern Islam and Salafist Islam and it fails to deal with the war against this Salafist aggressor on ideological terms.

Islamic Salafist forces are not united, which is likely a good thing given that, even in their disunited state, they continue to advance militarily, politically, and in their popular appeal to Muslims who are increasingly turning their back on modern Islam and embracing this dangerous ideology. A failure to confront Islamic Salafism head on as an ideology by both undermining its legitimacy claims and presenting a contrary ideology will see the continued advance of this dangerous and violent movement.

The attack in Sydney by an Islamic Salafist is only just the beginning of what is in store for many states, both Muslim and non-Muslim, which refuse to go along with Islamic Salafism but which also refuse to confront it on an ideological level.