Archive for the ‘UN’ Category

Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan: Interview with Taliban spokesman regarding the current situation in Afghanistan

February 23, 2011 Comments off

The text of the following interview is an official media release from the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (Taliban). Reprinted with permission.

Interview with the spokesperson of Islamic Emirate Zabihullah Mujahid regarding Afghanistan’s current political and military situation
Source:  Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan
February 23, 2011  07:41

Question:  Mr. Mujahid, after months of disputes, Hamid Karzai finally announced the so-called ‘peoples congregation’ (Jargah), could you please share with us your view regarding it?

Zabihullah Mujahid:  Yes, in Afghanistan the foreign invaders and their puppets, like before, are trying to put into practice various processes in order to cover up the invasion of Afghanistan, and enforce their ‘prescription’ of so-called democracy. Once again they repeated their misleading efforts and conducted a parliamentary election. From the beginning the Islamic Emirate considered this particular election as ‘a demand and process set by foreigners’. The invaders covered the expenses of the election so that they can benefit from it.

Through this ‘show’ of election, the invaders wanted to deceive the Afghan Nation and the world that they have achieved their objectives, and [that] now there is a popular, elected government and parliament, hence no one has the right to continue their struggle against the elected government.

The foreigners believed that through such staged and corrupt elections they can easily put in place their purchased puppet individuals and appoint them in the fake parliament, through which they thought that they can continue their occupation and from such a parliament they will be able to easily get their hands on a long term strategic alliance contract.

In addition to this the invaders also had the intentions of appointing in the parliament those individuals who do not believe in a united Afghanistan. Through these puppets the foreign invaders will try on a high level to divide Afghanistan and cultivate mistrust amongst different ethnic groups.

From the beginning the Islamic Emirate had considered this process a struggle by foreign invaders and detrimental to the Afghan Nation and Muslims, and the results of this process reveals the same truth about the invaders’ deceptive upcoming plans and efforts.

Question:  The United States of America, her allies and also the United Nations had a warm welcoming response towards the parliamentary elections, how do you view their particular response?

Zabihullah Mujahid:  I made it clear that the parliament in Kabul and the elections that were held are not conducted in order to serve the legislative needs of the country; instead it was part of the invaders military strategy. As we know NATO is a military alliance, and it must be noticed that Rasmussen was compelling Hamid Karzai to bring about a new parliament, thus instead of government diplomats the ceremony of the new parliament was conducted by the military commanders of different countries, which shows that the new parliament was a strategic military need of the American invading forces that ought to be completed. In reality the Americans want to use this parliament in order to fulfill their military strategy in the region. As far as the United Nations’ warm welcoming of the new parliament is concerned, then it is apparent that the U.N. cannot take any step against America and that is a known fact.

Question:  Do you think that the new parliament will have any effect on the current situation in Afghanistan?

Zabihullah Mujahid:  No not at all, because this parliament like the earlier ones is neither an Afghani parliament nor legitimate, most of its members are elected on the basis of ethnicity by the invaders and their puppets, so like the earlier parliaments, it will only be limited to pocketing salaries and will not have any evident effect on the current circumstances.

Question:  Can you describe briefly the view of the Islamic Emirate regarding this parliament?

Zabihullah Mujahid:  The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan does not give any importance to the existence or absence of such parliaments; most of its members are accountable for crimes and corruption which is part of this puppet regime. We see the so-called newly ‘elected’ parliament as a part of the continuous stage show, which the Americans want to benefit from by using it as propaganda in order to deceive the populace.

Question:  Coming to other issues Mr.Mujahid, recently the American General Petraeus claimed that they have some evident progress in Afghanistan, how do you view these claims?

Zabihullah Mujahid:  Yes, we hear this propaganda circulating in the media which is very astonishing. Our nation witnesses that the invaders are under more pressure than ever before. From one side, despite the increase in the number of invading forces they are under continuous attacks of Mujahideen all over the country which results in high casualties on a daily basis. From the other side, the invading forces – particularly their leaders and army generals – are under great political pressure of their country’s general public, that despite great expenses, enormous cost of life and public wealth, why have they not been able to fulfill their promises, which was to bring stability and a countable progress in Afghanistan. It is a known fact that the invaders have been defeated in Afghanistan, but they continue their propaganda through which they want to compel the world to believe in their so-called progress in Afghanistan. As far as General Petraeus’s claim is concerned, we have been following his claims from the past couple of months which in reality are politically motivated. For instance, when Obama was preparing scenario of his yearly speech for the Nation, according to a report General Petraeus was obliged to make new claims of progress in Afghanistan which had no authenticity. These claims were only made so that Barack Obama can refer to it and mention them as a proof in his speech. Therefore, in order to know the current situation in Afghanistan and the fantasy of progress in Afghanistan, we can refer to the many surveys that were recently conducted by some media sources, for instance the survey that was conducted by Reuters news agency at the expense of the European Union which exposes to some extent the fantasy of progress in Afghanistan.

According to a report by Reuters news agency, an European security firm which is responsible for the security of NGOs in Afghanistan has mentioned in their investigative report that the claims made by the American military Generals about the military progress in Afghanistan is contradictory to the reality on the ground. According to the report there is no doubt that in 2010 there was 2/3 increase in armed resistance compared to 2009, and in some northern provinces there is a threefold increase in armed resistance. Furthermore it is mentioned that the American president Barack Obama pointed towards the war in Afghanistan very differently, by saying that there was military progress on the ground and activities of Taliban have been limited in many parts of the country, whereas the progress that has been made is not secure enough and might fall back into the hands of Taliban. According to the report, the American general Mike Mullen’s visit to Afghanistan one day after the publicizing of the White House review of the Afghan war strategy where the General claimed about the progress in Afghanistan, however these claims had clear motives behind it, which was to influence the views and thoughts of the American and European public, and to prepare the situation in Afghanistan prior to the withdrawal of their forces from Afghanistan. It is also mentioned in the report that in 2010 there was a 64 percent increase in the attacks by Taliban.

The above mentioned reports are according to a western media firm and I believe that if we make an even independent survey it will be more damaging to the invading forces.

Question:  General Petraeus has been claiming for a couple of months that they have detained or martyred the majority of Mujahideen leaders in different parts of the country. Can you please give our readers some information about the reality of these incidents?

Zabihullah Mujahid:  I can only say that our virtuous Jihad will indeed require sacrifice from us, and whether it be a leader or an ordinary Talib, sacrifice in this sacred path is our pride, and we believe that martyrdom for the sake of God Almighty is not death, but it is a life with dignity for us. However, as far as the enemy’s claim of martyring or capturing alive of a majority of our leaders, it is very far from reality, because we can see that day by day there is an increase in our Jihadi activities, and our armed forces are more disciplined than ever before. We are countering the enemy and opening new Jihadi fronts, we occupy more and more territory day by day. This in itself is a proof, praise be to Allah there is no such grave harm caused to our Jihadi leadership, and God forbid if these claims were to be true then we wouldn’t be having all these victories in the battlefields, and I believe that this is one-sided propaganda of our enemy, and right now there is totally an opposite situation on the ground. A general belief is that compared to the previous years, this winter there are more attacks of Mujahideen, which unveils the fake propaganda of our enemy.

Question:  Recently Karzai’s government has been reported claiming that in some northern provinces a number of Mujahideen have surrendered to the government and the process is gaining momentum, can you please give us some information regarding it?

Zabihullah Mujahid:  We believe that such claims are part of organized misleading propaganda. As a matter of fact even our enemy believes that the Jihad and resistance is gaining momentum in the north. So in order to reduce the resistance in the north, the Kabul government with the help and guidance of foreign intelligence agencies are trying to introduce some warlords as Taliban who in fact have no connection with the Taliban, then through their propaganda they claim that the government have invited the so-called Taliban and they have surrendered and are working with us now. We have always condemned such baseless reports, and we believe that these individuals are not Mujahideen but in fact they are planning against the Mujahideen. The puppet government in Kabul is trying to magnetize [polarize] the audacious Mujahideen of the north by means of money and governmental positions, but our enemy must comprehend that we have abandoned the short lived pleasures of this life for the sake of Allah and our Islam is more beloved to us than their money. Hence this propaganda is part of a planned intelligence process and praise be to Allah, Mujahideen are fully aware of it and God willing our Mujahideen will not fall prey to such indecent attempts of our enemy.

Question:  Recently in many different parts of Afghanistan the American forces are conducting unexpected raids during night and may be day time, and they consider these raids very effective. Are these tactics really that much effective?

Zabihullah Mujahid:  Our Mujahideen are totally capable and are very experienced in prevention of any such raids, and they have been trained well enough to counter these tactics of our enemy, and also in numerous occasions the enemy had a number of casualties during the raid. However as far as the night raids are concerned, they are mostly conducted on ordinary populace on the basis of wrong information, and also sometimes these raids are conducted on religious schools and many students and Imams have been martyred and imprisoned. These brutal acts of the invaders will further add to the fury of our nation, so eventually more and more people will stand in the ranks of Mujahideen. Similarly the Soviets made the same mistake of agonizing our nation, which resulted in their defeat. Furthermore our nation see’s these acts of the invaders as anti-Islamic and against the humanity, the invaders bomb our mosques, kill the religious imams and students or imprison and torture the innocent people without any trial, therefore our nation will continue to fulfill their responsibility of protecting this sacred land from their mischief.

Question:  As you know, the enemy forces are recently targeting ordinary public properties in different parts of our country, for example cutting down thousands of fruit-bearing trees in Ghazni province’s Band-e-Sarda area, and annihilation of many villages during Helmand and Kandahar operations. What do you think is the invaders objective behind it, and what have they earned so far from it?

Zabihullah Mujahid:  We believe that we must take every possible step to protect the crops, dwellings, villages and markets of ordinary public, and no one has the right to destroy ordinary public possessions. As for the reasons behind these aggressions, firstly the human rights or other similar regulations are for some reason not applicable to our enemy although they consider themselves human rights preachers or activists. Secondly they want to take revenge from ordinary public, who are fulfilling their religious duties of supporting and standing with the Mujahideen. The foreigners are forcing and deliberately killing the ordinary public in order to stop them from siding with or supporting the Mujahideen, and they have pursued these failed attempts since ten long years and still they do not understand that at no price will Afghans accept the invasion of their country or live under foreign occupation, no matter how many atrocities they commit in Afghanistan. It will only shorten the time of their invasion and more people will join the ranks of Mujahideen as I mentioned earlier was the case during the Soviets invasion. We are very satisfied with the efforts and sacrifice of our brave nation and we consider stepping up in attacks and preparations against our enemy.

Question:  In connection to the previous question, if I may ask about the general political and military situation of Afghanistan, we have noticed many differences and disagreements between the political and military leaders of western countries, to an extent that they keep on changing their view in a very short period of time and moreover they give contradictory speeches, what might be the main reason behind all this?

Zabihullah Mujahid:  We believe that when the western invader countries were planning to invade Afghanistan, they had very significant objectives and they wanted to attain them through their longer stay in Afghanistan, which previously the west and especially America were competing on with the Soviet Union. Fortunately, they were faced with distressing resistance and for 10 long years they have been trapped in a ruinous war, as a result the coalition countries particularly America are suffering a terrible economic depression. On the other hand, now they have lost what I would call another ‘upsetting depression’, which is, how to pull out from this long-lasting, and ‘patience consuming’ war which was started by America, in such a manner that Her (America) global trust and political authority remains established. Furthermore the western ‘unaware’ public is becoming more sensitive to the continuation of war; therefore it is very obvious that the ordinary public will recognize the ongoing lies of their country’s leadership, and certainly the western politicians – particularly the American politicians – remain wavering. They have many different views which results in contradictory changes on a daily basis. From another side, the lengthening of this particular war is getting more and more disturbing for the western leaders, because they have not been involved in very lengthy warfares. America has only been involved in the Vietnam War, where they had dreadful experiences and even up until today every American has a particular sense of fear and terror about it, hence in such a situation the invasion and overrunning of a war-torn small Afghanistan which seemed very easy and almost costless to them, turned out to be very difficult and enormously expensive. So, of course they will be altering their views and changing their mindset on an everyday basis. We see that today they speak against what they had spoken and done earlier, this all appears to be due to the intensive pressure of ongoing war which arises in non-Muslim and faithless societies.

_____ Thanks a lot Mr. Mujahid for giving us your precious time despite of being very busy.

_____ and thanks to you, may Allah make you successful.


IntelTrends republishes selected resistance statements so that readers can access different perspectives on current affairs, political and military issues.

Share:          Delicious     Add this page to Mister Wong  


Taliban statement regarding Afghan civilian deaths caused by U.S. bombardment in Ghazi Abad District, Kunar Province

February 22, 2011 Comments off

The following statement is an official media release from the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (Taliban). Reprinted with permission.

Statement of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan Regarding the Martyrdom of Innocent Afghan Civilians as a Result of American Merciless Bombardment in Ghazi Abad District, Kunar Province
Source:  Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan
February 22, 2011  05:11

Five days ago, the invading forces in Afghanistan led by America launched brutal aerial attacks against civilian houses in Adargol, Chowki and Wigal areas of Ghazi Abad district, Kunar province, resulting in martyrdom of 70 common people. The victims were comprised of old men, women and innocent children who embraced martyrdom. Similarly, numerous civilians have been wounded.

According to substantiated reports, the bestial American soldiers have totally looted people’s houses, taking all valuable items. About 50 houses have been destroyed (in the raid), which belonged to people who had no link of militancy whatsoever with any faction. They were common miserable people. The Americans made bombardment during the night when people were sleeping. Officials of the Kabul Administration in Kunar have also confirmed reports of the civilian casualties.

The civilian casualties perpetrated in a brutal manner at the hands of the Americans have been committed at the time that, the United Nations in its report had claimed a few days ago that civilian casualties had greatly decreased during operations by Americans and their Allies. One week has not elapsed since the issuance of the report by UNO that the callous Americans once again resorted to committing genocide. They made many innocent Afghans to mourn and grieve over (their kith and kin).

The so-called advocates of human rights have not raised their voice about this horrendous event as yet. But usually, these so-called protectors of human rights and the apparently free media which have share in the colonialist goals, usually put the blame of civilian casualties on the Islamic Emirate when they arrange figures of civilian casualties. They try to launch negative propaganda against the Islamic Emirate through every possible means with full strength and fanfare. Meanwhile, they cover up the crimes of foreign invaders. Thus they endeavor to manipulate the views of the common man.

We strongly condemn the merciless bombardment by the Americans in Ghazi Abad district, Kunar province. We believe it is an unforgivable crime. In the meantime, we assure our miserable people and families of the martyrs that your Mujahid brothers will avenge the blood of the martyrs on the enemy in the battle fields. Also, we tell the invading America and her murderous Allies, if you think that you are going to weaken the determination of the Afghans by martyring innocent Afghans or that you will put terror into their hearts, it only displays flaws of your guesswork. You have not realized this nation as yet. Your brutal actions will further speed up the pace of the Jihadic momentum.

Soon. you will be wiped out in the imminent cyclone brought about by your atrocity, arrogance, brutality and other merciless actions. The tempest, if God willing, is approaching destination, with its ever outspreading waves.

It is not a hard task for Allah to accomplish.

The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan


IntelTrends republishes selected resistance statements so that readers can access different perspectives on current affairs, political and military issues.

Share:          Delicious     Add this page to Mister Wong  

Former PLO spokesman accuses U.S. of diplomatic terrorism

February 20, 2011 Comments off

The following article is reprinted with permission from Ma’an News Agency, Bethlehem.

Ghassan Al-Masri:  U.S. veto ‘diplomatic terrorism’
©  Ma’an News Agency
February 20, 2011  14:38

NABLUS (Ma’an) — The U.S. veto of a U.N. anti-settlement resolution was “diplomatic terrorism,” former PLO spokesman Ghassan Al-Masri said Sunday.

The U.S. on Friday torpedoed a Palestinian bid for a U.N. resolution condemning Israel’s settlement activity. The other 14 member states of the Security Council voted in favor of the motion.

President Mahmoud Abbas pursued the resolution despite a last-minute personal appeal from U.S. President Barack Obama urging him to abandon the bid.

Al-Masri said both the veto of the resolution and Obama’s attempt to dissuade the Palestinians from pursuing international law were forms of diplomatic terrorism, both of which failed, he added.

The veto revealed the true intentions of U.S. foreign policy, and undermined what remained of Washington’s credibility as a sponsor of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, Al-Masri said.

Further, he said it highlighted that Obama was strategically allied with the settlement policies of Israel’s occupation, and demonstrated that the president’s declared support for a two-state solution was false.

The move would increase hostility toward the U.S. on the Arab street, which is rising up for freedom and democracy, Al-Masri said.

The former PLO official appealed to Abbas to reassess his approach to negotiations, and to reconsider the Palestinian people’s demands, which he said called for restructuring the components of national unity within the internationally recognized PLO.

He also called for the PLO to have a greater role in leading the people, and to form more strategic relations within the Arab world.

He also said the PLO should take the lead and seek strategic relations between the Palestinians and the Arab world, as well as taking advantage of the changes sweeping the region.


Share:          Delicious     Add this page to Mister Wong  

Categories: ISR, PAL, UN, USA, WORLD

Response of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan in Reaction to the UN Report on Civilian and Children’s Casualties in Afghanistan

February 17, 2011 Comments off

The following statement is an official media release from the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (Taliban). Reprinted with permission.

Response of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan in Reaction to the UN Report on Civilian and Children’s Casualties in Afghanistan
Source:  Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan
February 17, 2011  16:45

Banki Moon, Secretary General, UNO, has said that 1,795 children have been killed or injured during attacks of Mujahideen and operations of Americans in the past two years. But as usual, he has blamed Mujahideen for the most part of the casualties.

The UNO report also mentions an unsubstantiated incident which was circulated by some colonialism-related media outlets in June last year, claiming that the Taliban had executed a 7 year old boy on charges of spying in Sangin district of Helmand province.

While leveling these charges against the Mujahideen, Banki Moon, has claimed that a reduction has been witnessed in civilian and children casualties during the Americans’ operations. Furthermore, he has applauded the signing of an action plan with the Kabul stooge administration against recruitment of children in army and police.

We strongly condemn the two-faced policy of the UNO which is clear from its above-mentioned assertions. Meanwhile, we support any action aimed at protecting the life of civilians, old men, women and children. We also remind Banki Moon, UN Secretary General that we are followers of an order and a law which was bestowed on humanity as a great gift of the mercy of God through the Holy and beloved Prophet of God Mohammad (peace be upon him) at the occasion of Haj-ul-Widaa 1400 years ago. Then darkness was prevalent all over the world and man hardly knew the word of human rights.

It is a pity that this world body is playing politics now in this 21st century under the name of protection of human rights and distorts facts in order to please Washington. Therefore, to elucidate the matter further, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan wants to present the following points before the UNO and the international community:

1.  Who attacked the wedding ceremony in Dehrawood, Uruzgan: a funeral in Azizabad, Herat; a wedding ceremony in Shinwar, Ningarhar; a shrine’s visitors in Paktika; passengers in Paktia and a congregation of attendees in Zadran? Were they the Taliban or the invading Americans who did this? Haven’t hundreds of children and civilians lost their lives in these gruesome events? Have you raised this issue?

2.  Has the Islamic Emirate not announced its readiness to the world in clear terms that let’s constitute a joint commission to pinpoint the perpetrators and then punish them. Why are you still silent on this issue and are dodging to shoulder the task?

3.  Did not the American National Intelligence Council dropped the existing ground realities in Afghanistan to include them in their revised estimate report which published in December on demand of General Petraeus, fearing it will contradict his claims of success against Taliban and that the Mujahideen were responsible for civilian casualties? Are your remarks not part and parcel of this policy and do not they support this trend?

4.  Isn’t your assertion part of the general policy devised by James Clapper, director of the American National Intelligence, CIA and General Petreaus last year, which emphasizes that American troops’ casualties be reported much less than the actual number and their human rights violations be kept secret from the knowledge of the public? Contrarily, the casualties of Mujahideen should be exaggerated and various blames of human rights violations should be leveled against them. Following this, the criticisms by Human Rights Watch in New York, World Amnesty International and the so-called human rights commission of Afghanistan, leveling charges of civilian and children casualties against Mujahideen are a clear indicator that those entities are working for the American colonialism under the umbrella of protection of human rights.

5.  Why your good self don’t bother to raise the issue of murder of 150 civilians in Kunduz 1.5 years ago who lost their lives as a result of bombardment of American jet fighters? Why do you not condemn the incident? All people are aware of the perpetrators.

6.  The UN report also has pointed to a claim that Taliban executed a seven year old boy in Sangin district of Helmand province in June last year. At that time, the Islamic Emirate sent an investigation team to the area which reported after a complete investigation that no event of that kind had ever happened in the said locality i.e. Sarwan Kalla. Neither had the enemy carried out any operation or bombardment which would have necessitated the arrest of any one on suspicion of spying. Furthermore, we would like to point out that as per the prevailing laws of the Islamic Emirate, no commander or a judge is allowed to execute any one by themselves. Complete investigation and approval of the leadership is a must in such cases. Is this claim not similar to the claim of the Time Magazine which published a picture of a young Afghan girl whose nose had been cut off? The magazine claimed, Taliban had done this but later it was proved that Taliban had no role in the incident. Even the reporter who reported it first says it was a family criminal case. Similarly, the family of the girl says, Taliban are not involved but America politicized the issue for attainment of well-known goals.

7.  During the reign of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, the esteemed Amirul Momineen (may Allah protect him) instructed the ministry of defense and home affairs to take action against recruitment of children in their units and contingements and do not use them at the front line of war. These instructions are still operative. But it is a pity and ironic that you signed an agreement with the Kabul Stooge Administration against recruitment of children in the army after the passage of one decade of war in Afghanistan. It raises the question that why you so-called protectors of human rights postponed this crucial issue of human rights for ten years to sign?

8.  The UNO report has also said that Mujahideen should respect the principles of the Geneva Convention about war. We have been urging from the beginning that all parties of the war should abide by the recognized laws of the war. But again which principle of the Geneva Convention allows America to keep thousands of innocent detainees in Bagram, Kandahar and Guantanamo? Which law of human rights says to deprive them of access to self-defense and keep them imprisoned without trial? Have the Special Forces not established brutal cells of detainment in every military base where they brutally torture them and many of them have succumbed to the torture and lost their lives. Did the famous Jihadi personality Moalim Awal Gul not die in Guantanamo this month because of torture? Which human rights law was that to keep him in Guantanamo without trial for the past nine years?

9.  The Afghans are awake now. They can tell the White from the Black. The people witnessed the essence of years of slogans of democracy, women’s and children’s rights, freedom of speech with their own eyes. Repetitions of these slogans only damage you. Put an end to this drama. Leave the land of the Afghans to the Afghans.

The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan


IntelTrends republishes selected resistance statements so that readers can access different perspectives on current affairs, political and military issues.

Share:          Delicious     Add this page to Mister Wong  

The Balkanization of Sudan: The Redrawing of the Middle East and North Africa

January 16, 2011 Comments off

The following commentary is reprinted with permission from Global Research.

The Balkanization of Sudan:  The Redrawing of the Middle East and North Africa
©  Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
Source:  Global Research
January 16, 2011

Sudan is a diverse nation and a country that represents the plurality of Africa through various tribes, clans, ethnicities, and religious groups. Yet the unity of Sudan is in question, while there is talk of unifying nations and of one day creating a United States of Africa through the African Union.

The limelight is on the January 2011 referendum in South Sudan. The Obama Administration has formally announced that it supports the separation of South Sudan from the rest of Sudan.

The balkanization of Sudan is what is really at stake. For years the leaders and officials of South Sudan have been supported by America and the European Union.

The Politically-Motivated Demonization of Sudan

A major demonization campaign has been underway against Sudan and its government. True, the Sudanese government in Khartoum has had a bad track record in regards to human rights and state corruption, and nothing could justify this.

In regards to Sudan, selective or targeted condemnation has been at work. One should, nonetheless, ask why the Sudanese leadership has been targeted by the U.S. and E.U., while the human rights records of several U.S. sponsored client states including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the U.A.E., and Ethiopia are casually ignored.

Khartoum has been vilified as a autocratic oligarchy guilty of targeted genocide in both Darfour and South Sudan. This deliberate focus on the bloodshed and instability in Darfour and South Sudan is political and motivated by Khartoum’s ties to Chinese oil interests.

Sudan supplies China with a substantial amount of oil. The geo-political rivalry between China and the U.S. for control of African and global energy supplies is the real reason for the chastisement of Sudan and the strong support shown by the U.S., the E.U., and Israeli officials for the seccession of South Sudan.

It is in this context that Chinese interests have been attacked. This includes the October 2006 attack on the Greater Nile Petroleum Company in Defra, Kordofan by the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) militia.

Distorting the Violence in Sudan

While there is a humanitarian crisis in Darfour and a surge in regional nationalism in South Sudan, the underlying causes of the conflict have been manipulated and distorted.

The underlying causes for the humanitarian crisis in Darfour and the regionalism in South Sudan are intimately related to economic and strategic interests. If anything, lawlessness and economic woes are the real issues, which have been fuelled by outside forces.

Either directly or through proxies in Africa, the U.S., the E.U., and Israel are the main architects behind the fighting and instability in both Darfour and South Sudan. These outside powers have assisted in the training, financing, and arming of the militias and forces opposed to the Sudanese government within Sudan. They lay the blame squarely on Khartoum’s shoulders for any violence while they themselves fuel conflict in order to move in and control the energy resources of Sudan. The division of Sudan into several states is part of this objective. Support of the JEM, the South Sudan Liberation Army (SSLA), and other militias opposed to the Sudanese government by the U.S., the E.U., and Israel has been geared towards achieving the objective of dividing Sudan.

It is also no coincidence that for years the U.S., Britain, France, and the entire E.U. under the pretext of humanitarianism have been pushing for the deployment of foreign troops in Sudan. They have actively pushed for the deployment of NATO troops in Sudan under the cover of a U.N. peacekeeping mandate.

This is a re-enactment of the same procedures used by the U.S. and E.U. in other regions where countries have either formally or informally been divided and their economies restructured by foreign-installed proxy governments under the presence of foreign troops. This is what happened in the former Yugoslavia (through the creation of several new republics) and in Anglo-American occupied Iraq (through soft balkanization via a calculated form of federalism aimed at establishing a weak and de-centralized state). Foreign troops and a foreign presence have provided the cloud for state dismantlement and the foreign takeover of state infrastructure, resources, and economies.

The Question of Identity in Sudan

While the Sudanese state has been portrayed as being oppressive towards the people in South Sudan, it should be noted that both the referendum and the power sharing structure of the Sudanese government portray something else. The power sharing agreement in Khartoum between Omar Al-Basher, the president of Sudan, includes the SPLM. The leader of the SPLM, Salva Kiir Mayardit, is the First Vice-President of Sudan and the President of South Sudan.

The issue of ethnicity has also been brought to the forefront of the regional or ethno-regional nationalism that has been cultivated in South Sudan. The cleavage in Sudan between so-called Arab Sudanese and so-called African Sudanese has been presented to the outside world as the major force for the regional nationalism motivating calls for statehood in South Sudan. Over the years this self-differentiation has been diffused and socialized into the collective psyche of the people of South Sudan.

Yet, the difference between so-called Arab Sudanese and so-called African Sudanese are not that great. The Arab identity of so-called Sudanese Arabs is based primarily on their use of the Arabic language. Let us even assume that both Sudanese ethnic identities are totally separate. It is still widely known in Sudan that both groups are very mixed. The other difference between South Sudan and the rest of Sudan is that Islam predominates in the rest of Sudan and not in South Sudan. Both groups are still deeply tied to one another, except for a sense of self-identification, which they are well in their rights to have. Yet, it is these different identities that have been played upon by local leaders and outside powers.

Neglect of the local population of different regions by the elites of Sudan is what the root cause of anxiety or animosity between people in South Sudan and the Khartoum government are really based on and not differences between so-called Arab and so-called African Sudanese.

Regional favouritism has been at work in South Sudan.

The issue is also compounded by social class. The people of South Sudan believe that their economic status and standards of living will improve if they form a new republic. The government in Khartoum and non-Southerner Sudanese have been used as the scapegoats for the economic miseries of the people of South Sudan and their perceptions of relative poverty by the local leadership of South Sudan. In reality, the local officials of South Sudan will not improve the living standards of the people of South Sudan, but maintain a klepocratic status quo. [1]

The Long-Standing Project to Balkanize Sudan and its links to the Arab World

In reality, the balkanization project in Sudan has been going on since the end of British colonial rule in Anglo-Egyptian Sudan. Sudan and Egypt were one country during many different periods. Both Egypt and Sudan were also one country in practice until 1956.

Up until the independence of Sudan, there was a strong movement to keep Egypt and Sudan united as a single Arab state, which was struggling against British interests. London, however, fuelled Sudanese regionalism against Egypt in the same manner that regionalism has been at work in South Sudan against the rest of Sudan. The Egyptian government was depicted in the same way as present-day Khartoum. Egyptians were portrayed as exploiting the Sudanese just as how the non-Southern Sudanese have been portrayed as exploiting the South Sudanese.

After the British invasion of Egypt and Sudan, the British also managed to keep their troops stationed in Sudan. Even while working to divide Sudan from Egypt, the British worked to create internal differentations between South Sudan and the rest of Sudan. This was done through the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium, from 1899 to 1956, which forced Egypt to share Sudan with Britain after the Mahdist Revolts. Eventually the Egyptian government would come to refuse to recognize the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium as legal. Cairo would continously ask the British to end their illegal military occupation of Sudan and to stop preventing the re-integration of Egypt and Sudan, but the British would refuse.

It would be under the presence of British troops that Sudan would declare itself independent. This is what lead to the emergence of Sudan as a separate Arab and African state from Egypt. Thus, the balkanization process started with the division of Sudan from Egypt.

The Yinon Plan at work in Sudan and the Middle East

The balkanization of Sudan is also tied to the Yinon Plan, which is a continuation of British stratagem. The strategic objective of the Yinon Plan is to ensure Israeli superority through the balkanization of the Middle Eastern and Arab states into smaller and weaker states. It is in this context that Israel has been deeply involved in Sudan.

Israeli strategists viewed Iraq as their biggest strategic challenge from an Arab state. This is why Iraq was outlined as the centre piece to the balkanization of the Middle East and the Arab World. The Atlantic in this context published an article in 2008 by Jeffrey Goldberg called “After Iraq: What Will the Middle East Look Like?” [2] In the Goldberg article a map of the Middle East was presented that closely followed the outline of the Yinon Plan and the map of a future Middle East presented by Lieutentant-Colonel (retired) Ralph Peters in the U.S military’s Armed Forces Journal in 2006.

It is also no coincidence that aside from a divided Iraq a divided Sudan was shown on the map. Lebanon, Iran, Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Somalia, Pakistan, and Afghanistan were also presented as divided nations too. Of importance to East Africa in the map, illustrated by Holly Lindem for Goldberg’s article, Eriteria is occupied by Ethiopia, which is a U.S. and Israeli ally, and Somalia is divided into Somaliland, Puntland, and a smaller Somalia.

In Iraq, on the basis of the concepts of the Yinon Plan, Israeli strategists have called for the division of Iraq into a Kurdish state and two Arab states, one for Shiite Muslims and the other for Sunni Muslims. This has been achieved through the soft balkanization of federalism in Iraq, which has allowed the Kurdistan Regional Government to negotiate with foreign oil corporations on its own. The first step towards establishing this was a war between Iraq and Iran, which is discussed in the Yinon Plan.

In Lebanon, Israel has been working to exasparate sectarian tensions between the various Christian and Muslim factions as well as the Druze. The division of Lebanon into several states is also seen as a means of balkanizing Syria into several smaller sectarian Arab states. The objectives of the Yinon Plan is to divide Lebanon and Syria into several states on the basis of religious and sectarian identities for Sunni Muslims, Shiite Muslims, Christians, and the Druze.

In this regard, the Hariri Assasination and the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) have been playing out to the favour of Israel in creating internal divisions within Lebanon and fuelling politically-motivated sectarianism. This is why Tel Aviv has been very vocal about the STL and very supportive of it. In a clear sign of the politized nature of the STL and its ties to geo-politics, the U.S. and Britain have also given the STL millions of dollars.

The Links between the Attacks on the Egyptian Copts and the South Sudan Referendum

From Iraq to Egypt, Christians in the Middle East have been under attack, while tensions between Shiite Muslims and Sunni Muslims are being fuelled. The attack on a Coptic Church in Alexandria on January 1, 2011 or the subsequent Coptic protests and riots should not be looked at in isolation. [3] Nor should the subsequent fury of Coptic Christians expressed towards Muslims and the Egyptian government. These attacks on Christians are tied to the broader geo-political goals of the U.S., Britain, Israel, and NATO in the Middle East and Arab World.

The Yinon Plan stipulates that if Egypt were divided that Sudan and Libya would also be balkanized and weakened. In this context, there is a link between Sudan and Egypt. According to the Yinon Plan, the Copts or Christians of Egypt, which are a large minority in Egypt, are the key to the balkanization of the Arab states in North Africa. Thus, the Yinon Plan states that the creation of a Coptic state in Upper Egypt (South Egypt) and Christian-Muslim tensions within Egyptian are vital steps to balkanizing Sudan and North Africa.

The attacks on Christians in the Middle East are part of intelligence operations intended to divide the Middle East and North Africa. The timing of the mounting attacks on Coptic Christians in Egypt and the build-up to the referendum in South Sudan are no coincidence. The events in Sudan and Egypt are linked to one another and are part of the project to balkanize the Arab World and the Middle East. They must also be studied in conjunction with the Yinon Plan and with the events in Lebanon and Iraq, as well as in relation to the efforts to create a Shiite-Sunni divide.

The Outside Connections of the SPLM, SSLA, and Militias in Darfour

As in the case of Sudan, outside interference or intervention has been used to justify the oppression of domestic opposition. Despite its corruption, Khartoum has been under siege for refusing to merely be a proxy.

Sudan is justified in suspecting foreign troops and accusing the U.S., Britain, and Israel of eroding the national solidarity of Sudan. For example, Israel has sent arms to the opposition groups and separatist movements in Sudan. This was done through Ethiopia for years until Eritrea became independent from Ethiopia, which made Ethiopia lose its Red Sea coast, and bad relations developed between the Ethiopians and Eritreans. Afterwards Israeli weapons entered South Sudan from Kenya. From South Sudan, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), which is the political arm of the SSLA, would transfer weapons to the militias in Darfur. The governments of Ethiopia and Kenya, as well as the the Uganda People’s Defence Force (UPDF), have also been working closely with the U.S., Britain, and Israel in East Africa.

The extent of Israeli influence with Sudanese opposition and separatist groups is significant. The SPLM has strong ties with Israel and its members and supporters regularly visit Israel. It is due to this that Khartoum capitulated and removed the Sudanese passport restriction on visiting Israel in late-2009 to satisfy the SPLM. [4] Salva Kiir Mayardit has also said that South Sudan will recognize Israel when it separates from Sudan.

The Sudan Tribune reported on March 5, 2008 that separatist groups in Darfur and Southern Sudan had offices in Israel:

[Sudan People’s Liberation Movement] supporters in Israel announced establishment of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement office in Israel, a press release said today.

“After consultation with the leadership of SPLM in Juba, the supporters of SPLM in Israel have decided to establish the office of SPLM in Israel.” Said [sic.] a statement received by email from Tel Aviv signed by the SLMP secretariat in Israel.

The statement said that SPLM office would promote the policies and the vision of the SPLM in the region. It further added that in accordance with the Comprehensive Peace Agreement the SPLM has the right to open in any country including Israel. It also indicated that there are around 400 SPLM supporters in Israel. Darfur rebel leader Abdel Wahid al-Nur said last week he opened an office in Tel Aviv. [5]

The Hijacking of the 2011 Referendum in South Sudan

What happened to the dreams of a united Africa or a united Arab World? Pan-Arabism, a movement to unit all Arabic-speaking peoples, has taken heavy losses as has African unity. The Arab World and Africa have consistenly been balkanized.

Secession and balkanization in East Africa and the Arab World are on the U.S., Israeli, and NATO drawing board.

The SSLA insurgency has been covertly supported by the U.S., Britain, and Israel since the 1980s. The formation of a new state in the Sudan is not intended to serve the interests of the people of South Sudan. It has been part of a broader geo-strategic agenda aimed at controlling North Africa and the Middle East.

The resulting process of “democratization” leading up to the January 2011 referendum serves the interests of the Anglo-American oil companies and the rivalry against China. This comes at the cost of the detriment of true national sovereignty in South Sudan.


[1]  A kleptocracy is a government or/and state that works to protect, extend, deepen, continue, and entrench the wealth of the ruling class.
[2]  Jeffrey Goldberg, “After Iraq: What Will The Middle East Look Like?” The Atlantic, January/February 2008.
[3]  William Maclean, “Copts on global Christmas alert after Egypt bombing”, Reuters, January 5, 2011.
[4]  “Sudan removes Israel travel ban from new passport”, Sudan Tribune, October 3, 2009:
[5]  “Sudan’s SPLM reportedly opens an office in Israel – statement”, Sudan Tribune, March 5, 2008:


Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Share:          Delicious     Add this page to Mister Wong  


Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan: Response to the UNO Recent Report on Civilian Casualties

December 23, 2010 Comments off

The following is an official statement from the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (Taliban). Reprinted with permission. This is the English version of yesterday’s media release.

Response of the Islamic Emirate in Reaction to the UNO Recent Report on Civilian Casualties
Source:  Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan
December 23, 2010  05:15

The United Nations Organization has claimed in its recent report that, the graph of civilian casualties in Afghanistan has spiraled up by 20% in the first ten months of the current year in comparison to the same period last year. The report is one among a series of reports released in this regard.

The UN has not given information about the credibility of the original sources of the data but added that in the current year, 2412 civilians have been killed in battles in Afghanistan, 76% by Mujahideen of the Islamic Emirate (as per their claim).

This partial and politically-motivated report of the United Nations has been published in a time that the UNO is yet to respond to the reservations and concerns raised by the Islamic Emirate regarding the UN reports on civilian casualties. Ironically, the UNO has been continuing to publish such reports for the past years, accusing Mujahideen of having committed civilian casualties. The Islamic Emirate believes, these repots are politically-motivated and tailored to meet the interests of America. So it has demanded an investigation to find out the veracity of the reports. Unfortunately, the UNO has constantly been publishing baseless reports and is not ready to take steps to substantiate their credibility and trustworthiness.

Once again, the so-called advocates of human rights have raised the issue of civilian casualties for achievement of political and propaganda points but are not ready to tackle the issue practically and conduct an investigation in this respect. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan believes, the recent report of the United Nation is based on figures, being their own guesswork, and, therefore, categorically refutes them.

The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan is of the opinion that the release of the report is a propaganda stint aimed at concealing American brutalities. In the past nine years, the invaders have killed tens of thousands of civilians which tantamount to a genocide, which is still under way at the hands of the merciless Americans as per a well-laid out plan, particularly, it has been going on in far-fetched rural localities and villages in the past few years to terrorize people so that they will have to abstain from struggling against the foreign invasion and occupation of Afghanistan for the obtainment of their legitimate rights and independence. The operations by the enemy in Kandahar and the night raids strategy of the American general Petraeus is an example on hand. As a result, thousands of civilian Afghans have been martyred, wounded, made homeless and detained. A great number of common people have lost their lives, as a result of cruise missiles attacks, carpet bombing and armed encounters during the Kandahar operations by the enemy. Whole villages have been razed to the ground. Almost 50% of inhabitants of Dand, Panjwai, Zeray and Arghandab districts have been displaced from their homes and hearths and from their plantation fields. The Islamic Emirate is intending to release a video film in the near future about all these civilian casualties. This is an iceberg of the crimes which are being perpetrated by the American invaders in all parts of the country around the clock. Undoubtedly, the UNO authors of the civilian casualties report may not have bothered to have an inkling of what have actually happened.

We openly tell the UN, your report will be effective only in misleading those who are not interested in knowing the ground realities in Afghanistan. But the people Afghanistan have been witnessing the realities with their own eyes. They know pretty well the identity of those who are notoriously and historically known as murderers at world level; those who have built the walls of their empire on the skulls and blood of the masses; those who have pushed the people of Iraq and Afghanistan and all miserable and peace-loving people of the globe into the oven of war.

The Islamic Emirate believes, the release of these partial reports will only damage the credibility of the UNO. They have already harmed the World Body and it will further lose its veracity in the eyes of the people.

Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan


IntelTrends republishes selected resistance statements so that readers can access different perspectives on current affairs, political and military issues.

Share:          Delicious     Add this page to Mister Wong

Islamic Jihad says Israel planning new war

November 21, 2010 Comments off

The following article is reprinted with permission from Ma’an News Agency, Bethlehem.

Islamic Jihad says Israel planning new war
©  Ma’an News Agency
November 21, 2010  (updated)

GAZA CITY (Ma’an) — Islamic Jihad said Saturday that Israeli media campaigns and drills carried out by Israeli forces suggest Israel is planning a new military offensive on the Gaza Strip.

Jihad spokesman Daoud Shehab said Israel was using the media to transmit false information linking militant factions in Gaza with Al-Qaeda, in an effort to recruit regional support for an attack on the coastal enclave.

The Israeli news site Ynet reported Saturday that Israel’s Ambassador to the United Nations Meron Reuven filed an official complaint with the U.N. that projectiles fired from Gaza were endangering regional stability. The letter further said that Israel would use all means necessary to protect its security, the report added.

Shehab said the recent escalation of Israeli attacks on the Strip was not new but followed a long series of offensives which affected all aspects of life in Gaza.

Following Israeli air strikes on Friday and Saturday, a spokesman for Popular Resistance Committees’ armed wing said the intensive shelling was clear evidence that Israel was preparing for a comprehensive offensive on the Strip. In a statement issued Saturday, the An-Nasser Brigades spokesman said the escalation in attacks was a declaration of war, adding that recent strikes had targeted civilians.

Israeli forces launched three airstrikes on the central and southern Gaza Strip on Friday afternoon, injuring six residents including two women and a child, medics said. Shelling continued to target southern Gaza overnight.

The Israeli military said the attacks were in response to a series of projectiles launched from Gaza into southern Israel on Thursday and Friday, and a Grad rocket fired into the Negev desert on Friday morning. The rocket was launched hours after local police said Israeli warplanes bombed the shoreline south of Gaza City. No injuries were reported in Israel.

On Thursday, the An-Nasser Brigades claimed responsibility for firing three mortar shells towards an Israeli intelligence headquarters along the Gaza border.

In a statement, the PRC said the operation was in response to Wednesday’s assassination of two brothers who were members of the radical Army of Islam group. An Israeli drone targeted a car carrying the brothers, Islam and Muhammad Yassin, in the center of Gaza City. Israel claimed they were plotting to attack Israeli citizens in Egypt’s Sinai.

The Jihad spokesman said the objective of firing home-made projectiles was “to warn Israel of the consequences of waging any offensives on Gaza.”

While the resistance had only modest capabilities compared to the huge arsenal possessed by Israel, Palestinians were strengthened by their resolve to confront every offense, Shehab said. The resistance would fire not only at the settlements close to Gaza, but deep into Israel, he added.

Shehab condemned the recent proposal by the U.S. offering Israel military and political incentives in exchange for a one-off, temporary freeze on construction in some settlements. The deal is said to include 20 war planes, worth $3 billion, and a guarantee that the U.S. will veto Palestinian attempts to declare a state at the U.N. Security Council.

The offer was a “bribe to the occupation” from which Palestinians would gain nothing but Israel would benefit twice, Shehab said. The proposal would enforce the occupation and legitimize the resumption of settlement expansion after 90 days he said, adding that Israel would also gain financially and militarily from the deal.


Share:          Delicious     Add this page to Mister Wong

Categories: ISR, PAL, UN