Tweet
AMERICA'S KEY OBJECTIVE IS TO PIT RUSSIA AGAINST IRAN
Russia Today
http://rt.com/Politics/2010-09-14/dzhemal-terrorism-iran-caucasus.html
Sept 14 2010
In an exclusive interview to RT POLITICS, Chairman of the Islamic
Committee of Russia Geydar Dzhemal discusses the possible roots and
hidden agenda of the recent terrorist attacks in the Caucasus.
On September 9 a powerful car bomb attack hit the central market in the
city of Vladikavkaz , the capital of the republic of North Ossetia. The
blast killed 17 people, over 190 were wounded. Russia's president
Dmitry Medvedev promised "the state will do everything to find the
organizers of the terrorist act and punish them according to the law."
RT: The blast in Vladikavkaz took place on the opening day of the
Global Policy Forum in Yaroslavl, which the Russian president attended
the next day. Is this a coincidence?
Geydar Dzhemal: I don't think so. The timing of the bombing indicates
that the militants had nothing to do with it, because those people
don't coordinate their activities with the agenda and schedule of
such events. Events like this one are interesting to other forces. I
don't rule out that Tbilisi may be behind this bombing.
RT: The bombing happened on the last day of Ramadan. How likely is a
Muslim to participate intentionally in such an attack, given the fact
that this is the market where the Muslims of Ingushetia and Ossetia
buy groceries for the holiday?
GD: The bomb could have been detonated remotely, and there is evidence
pointing in this direction. This means that the driver may not have
been aware of the plan. Remote detonation means this wasn't a typical
case of suicide bombing.
Had the attack been organized by the Ingush militants, they would
have taken steps to ensure that the car doesn't run into problems
while on its way in Ossetia. But the car had Ingush license plates,
leaving no doubt as to where the car was from. Usually, the Ingush
prefer traveling to Ossetia in cars with Ossetian license plates.
RT: What makes this bombing different from other terrorist attacks
in the Caucasus?
GD: There are two types of attacks. Some attacks target security
forces, with which the militants are in conflict. Other attacks target
civilians. There were all kinds of people at that market-Ingush,
Chechens, Ossetians, an accidental mix, just like in the Moscow Metro
bombings. Such blasts don't help the militants achieve their tactical
or operational objectives.
Read more
RT: A week before the attack, Major General Nikolay Simakov spoke
about training camps in Georgia that recruit people with criminal
records and send them to Russia. He said those camps have been very
active lately. Who is running those camps and what is their goal?
GD: I think we are seeing preparations for another round of armed
confrontation here. Saakashvili said recently he expects an attack
from Russia. He is preparing public opinion for a big explosion in the
South Caucasus that will involve Russia. There are two ways Russia
can be involved: either as an ally of Armenia in case a military
conflict breaks out in Karabakh, or through Georgia - the same way
it happened in 2008. The goal is not to repeat the 2008 scenario,
but to obtain a result that is more important to the United States -
namely to pit Russia against Iran.
RT: Georgia had refrained from such activities for quite a long time.
What made it reconsider?
GD: The Georgian leadership received a strict order directly from
Washington. The US today is pushing through policies that may result
in a great firestorm in the South Caucasus and Central Asia, i.e.,
regions adjacent to Russia.
RT: Why, then, does the US administration treat Saakashvili somewhat
neglectfully?
GD: President Obama is not so simple. He is adept in hypocrisy
and deceit. Don't be deceived by his gestures towards Georgia;
his principle is that the language of diplomacy exists to disguise
one's thoughts. In reality, the United States considers Georgia as
an instrument to start a fire in the South Caucasus. So, consciously
or unconsciously, the Georgian leadership serves America's political
interests.
RT: Why does NATO open an office in Georgia if Georgia is not going
to join the alliance any time soon?
GD: The NATO office will be used mostly against Iran. It is like a
forward headquarters close to the frontline. You don't need an office
to use Georgia against Russia. The US wants to lure Russia into the
trap of the South Caucasus and force it into a conflict with Iran.
America has gone to great lengths to put Russia at odds with Iran.
RT: Is this why NATO Secretary General Rasmussen publicly suggested
that Russia join the NATO missile shield in Europe against some
hypothetical threats from Iran?
GD: This is in line with America's key objective today, to pit Russia
against Iran. The US leadership studied the situation and realized
that public opinion and US allies don't support their plans to attack
Iran. America cannot afford to attack Iran first. After America's
failure in Iraq, where they failed to provide proof of weapons of
mass destruction, nobody believes it.
Iran has far more supporters and sympathizers than Saddam Hussein's
Iraq. After all, Hussein had a long-standing reputation of a villain.
As for Iran's image, it's rather positive and, what's important,
Iran has a strong lobby among Europe's aristocracy and clergy. So,
it's difficult to attack Iran head-on.
So, the United States is looking for a way to avoid being accused of
aggression. If the US joins the war in its final stage, as was the
case with World Wars I and II in Europe, it will appear not as an
aggressor, but as an arbiter who steps in to settle chaos.
The US wants to unleash a conflict between two big countries like
Russia and Iran. The consequences for the region will be devastating.
It is the political collapse of the entire region and multiple
conflicts throughout the Old World that the US is seeking.
RT: Why would the United States want such a catastrophe?
GD: This is a way to survive as the only center of a monopolar world.
Hillary Clinton has unambiguously stated that the US wants to preserve
world leadership and control global processes, whether someone likes
that or not. The only way to achieve that is to instigate conflicts
between various parts of the world, in which the United States will
act like an arbiter. The United States will be able to carry out
the transformations it has prepared only in the situation of global
instability or war.
RT: How can Russia counter these plans?
GD: Russia needs a clear realization of what's going on and a clear
political will to strengthen its alliance with Iran and the Islamic
world.
RT: In case Russia builds an alliance with the Islamic world, will
that increase or decrease the number of terrorist attacks in Russia?
GD: Russia will have to accept a lot of bitter truths about the West's
strategy. If that really happens, it would be possible to outwit
the forces who are stepping up terrorist activity in Russia. Russia
should broaden its contacts with informal Islamic movements. That
would allow to achieve fantastic success and to greatly reduce the
risk of terrorist attacks.
What Russia really needs is to radically revise its relations with
Islam and the Islamic factor, not only at the level of diplomatic
contacts with national leaders, but also with the grass roots of Islam,
which are still quite positive towards Russia. But that would require a
fundamental revision of the philosophy and objectives of big politics.
RT: Why are the websites of the militants and various Islamic forums
setting young Muslims in Russia against Iran, against political Islam
and also against solidarity with Palestine?
GD: Many of those websites are controlled by the West, they are
tools in the hands of the enemies of Islam. Their editors live in
Europe or the United States. Some of the materials that appear on
those websites carry clear evidence that biased experts trained by
the West and Israel helped produce them.
Historically, Muslims in the former Soviet Union, just like the rest
of the Soviet people, had no contact with their fellow-believers
abroad. When the Iron Curtain fell in 1991, Saudi emissaries were the
first to fill in the ideological vacuum. They acted primarily in the
interests of the Saudi dynasty and its Western partners.
Historically Saudi Arabia is a country that is particularly active
in inciting anti-Iranian sentiment.
People who look for information in the North Caucasus get just some
shallow teachings of Saudi theologians and their associates among
other Arabs. They don't even suspect what ideological, scientific and
theological life is thriving in the rest of the Islamic world. Those
people are oblivious to serious Islamic philosophers of Britain,
Malaysia, Turkey and certainly Iran, one of the most intellectually
advanced Islamic countries.
RT: Some say that the goal of Islam is to build a universal Caliphate
and that terror is a method used to build it.
GD: That's a classical misleading statement. I won't go now into the
relationship between the Caliphate and political Islam. This strategy
has been used already in the history of modern Israel. That's the
strategy that Zionist paramilitary organizations used: terrorist
attacks on Palestinians, Arabs and British troops and assassinations of
those whom they considered a hindrance to the cause of building Israel.
Today, analysts have taken up this idea and inflated it, replacing
actual goals with invented ones: mass terror everywhere and horrible
slogans proclaimed by dummies.
But this logic does not agree with Muslim policies, tasks and goals.
The very logic of mass terror as an instrument to build a Caliphate
is not an Islamic logic.
RT: Let's return to the Caucasus. Some people in the West believe
that, having suppressed terrorist activities in Chechnya, Russia
caused terrorism to spread throughout the Caucasus. What do you think?
GD: This is a very naïve assessment of Western analysts. They regard
Kadyrov as another Ivan the Terrible who has forced destabilization
out of Chechnya. Terrorist attacks in Chechnya continue. Just recently,
there was a clash between militants and Kadyrov's guards.
Kadyrov is not a self-sufficient figure, and Chechnya cannot be
isolated from the rest of the Caucasus. Moreover, the North Caucasus
cannot be isolated from the rest of Russia, both at the grass-roots
level, because Caucasian communities exist throughout Russia, and
at the top, because the federal authorities have close ties with
local leaders.
From: A. Papazian
Russia Today
http://rt.com/Politics/2010-09-14/dzhemal-terrorism-iran-caucasus.html
Sept 14 2010
In an exclusive interview to RT POLITICS, Chairman of the Islamic
Committee of Russia Geydar Dzhemal discusses the possible roots and
hidden agenda of the recent terrorist attacks in the Caucasus.
On September 9 a powerful car bomb attack hit the central market in the
city of Vladikavkaz , the capital of the republic of North Ossetia. The
blast killed 17 people, over 190 were wounded. Russia's president
Dmitry Medvedev promised "the state will do everything to find the
organizers of the terrorist act and punish them according to the law."
RT: The blast in Vladikavkaz took place on the opening day of the
Global Policy Forum in Yaroslavl, which the Russian president attended
the next day. Is this a coincidence?
Geydar Dzhemal: I don't think so. The timing of the bombing indicates
that the militants had nothing to do with it, because those people
don't coordinate their activities with the agenda and schedule of
such events. Events like this one are interesting to other forces. I
don't rule out that Tbilisi may be behind this bombing.
RT: The bombing happened on the last day of Ramadan. How likely is a
Muslim to participate intentionally in such an attack, given the fact
that this is the market where the Muslims of Ingushetia and Ossetia
buy groceries for the holiday?
GD: The bomb could have been detonated remotely, and there is evidence
pointing in this direction. This means that the driver may not have
been aware of the plan. Remote detonation means this wasn't a typical
case of suicide bombing.
Had the attack been organized by the Ingush militants, they would
have taken steps to ensure that the car doesn't run into problems
while on its way in Ossetia. But the car had Ingush license plates,
leaving no doubt as to where the car was from. Usually, the Ingush
prefer traveling to Ossetia in cars with Ossetian license plates.
RT: What makes this bombing different from other terrorist attacks
in the Caucasus?
GD: There are two types of attacks. Some attacks target security
forces, with which the militants are in conflict. Other attacks target
civilians. There were all kinds of people at that market-Ingush,
Chechens, Ossetians, an accidental mix, just like in the Moscow Metro
bombings. Such blasts don't help the militants achieve their tactical
or operational objectives.
Read more
RT: A week before the attack, Major General Nikolay Simakov spoke
about training camps in Georgia that recruit people with criminal
records and send them to Russia. He said those camps have been very
active lately. Who is running those camps and what is their goal?
GD: I think we are seeing preparations for another round of armed
confrontation here. Saakashvili said recently he expects an attack
from Russia. He is preparing public opinion for a big explosion in the
South Caucasus that will involve Russia. There are two ways Russia
can be involved: either as an ally of Armenia in case a military
conflict breaks out in Karabakh, or through Georgia - the same way
it happened in 2008. The goal is not to repeat the 2008 scenario,
but to obtain a result that is more important to the United States -
namely to pit Russia against Iran.
RT: Georgia had refrained from such activities for quite a long time.
What made it reconsider?
GD: The Georgian leadership received a strict order directly from
Washington. The US today is pushing through policies that may result
in a great firestorm in the South Caucasus and Central Asia, i.e.,
regions adjacent to Russia.
RT: Why, then, does the US administration treat Saakashvili somewhat
neglectfully?
GD: President Obama is not so simple. He is adept in hypocrisy
and deceit. Don't be deceived by his gestures towards Georgia;
his principle is that the language of diplomacy exists to disguise
one's thoughts. In reality, the United States considers Georgia as
an instrument to start a fire in the South Caucasus. So, consciously
or unconsciously, the Georgian leadership serves America's political
interests.
RT: Why does NATO open an office in Georgia if Georgia is not going
to join the alliance any time soon?
GD: The NATO office will be used mostly against Iran. It is like a
forward headquarters close to the frontline. You don't need an office
to use Georgia against Russia. The US wants to lure Russia into the
trap of the South Caucasus and force it into a conflict with Iran.
America has gone to great lengths to put Russia at odds with Iran.
RT: Is this why NATO Secretary General Rasmussen publicly suggested
that Russia join the NATO missile shield in Europe against some
hypothetical threats from Iran?
GD: This is in line with America's key objective today, to pit Russia
against Iran. The US leadership studied the situation and realized
that public opinion and US allies don't support their plans to attack
Iran. America cannot afford to attack Iran first. After America's
failure in Iraq, where they failed to provide proof of weapons of
mass destruction, nobody believes it.
Iran has far more supporters and sympathizers than Saddam Hussein's
Iraq. After all, Hussein had a long-standing reputation of a villain.
As for Iran's image, it's rather positive and, what's important,
Iran has a strong lobby among Europe's aristocracy and clergy. So,
it's difficult to attack Iran head-on.
So, the United States is looking for a way to avoid being accused of
aggression. If the US joins the war in its final stage, as was the
case with World Wars I and II in Europe, it will appear not as an
aggressor, but as an arbiter who steps in to settle chaos.
The US wants to unleash a conflict between two big countries like
Russia and Iran. The consequences for the region will be devastating.
It is the political collapse of the entire region and multiple
conflicts throughout the Old World that the US is seeking.
RT: Why would the United States want such a catastrophe?
GD: This is a way to survive as the only center of a monopolar world.
Hillary Clinton has unambiguously stated that the US wants to preserve
world leadership and control global processes, whether someone likes
that or not. The only way to achieve that is to instigate conflicts
between various parts of the world, in which the United States will
act like an arbiter. The United States will be able to carry out
the transformations it has prepared only in the situation of global
instability or war.
RT: How can Russia counter these plans?
GD: Russia needs a clear realization of what's going on and a clear
political will to strengthen its alliance with Iran and the Islamic
world.
RT: In case Russia builds an alliance with the Islamic world, will
that increase or decrease the number of terrorist attacks in Russia?
GD: Russia will have to accept a lot of bitter truths about the West's
strategy. If that really happens, it would be possible to outwit
the forces who are stepping up terrorist activity in Russia. Russia
should broaden its contacts with informal Islamic movements. That
would allow to achieve fantastic success and to greatly reduce the
risk of terrorist attacks.
What Russia really needs is to radically revise its relations with
Islam and the Islamic factor, not only at the level of diplomatic
contacts with national leaders, but also with the grass roots of Islam,
which are still quite positive towards Russia. But that would require a
fundamental revision of the philosophy and objectives of big politics.
RT: Why are the websites of the militants and various Islamic forums
setting young Muslims in Russia against Iran, against political Islam
and also against solidarity with Palestine?
GD: Many of those websites are controlled by the West, they are
tools in the hands of the enemies of Islam. Their editors live in
Europe or the United States. Some of the materials that appear on
those websites carry clear evidence that biased experts trained by
the West and Israel helped produce them.
Historically, Muslims in the former Soviet Union, just like the rest
of the Soviet people, had no contact with their fellow-believers
abroad. When the Iron Curtain fell in 1991, Saudi emissaries were the
first to fill in the ideological vacuum. They acted primarily in the
interests of the Saudi dynasty and its Western partners.
Historically Saudi Arabia is a country that is particularly active
in inciting anti-Iranian sentiment.
People who look for information in the North Caucasus get just some
shallow teachings of Saudi theologians and their associates among
other Arabs. They don't even suspect what ideological, scientific and
theological life is thriving in the rest of the Islamic world. Those
people are oblivious to serious Islamic philosophers of Britain,
Malaysia, Turkey and certainly Iran, one of the most intellectually
advanced Islamic countries.
RT: Some say that the goal of Islam is to build a universal Caliphate
and that terror is a method used to build it.
GD: That's a classical misleading statement. I won't go now into the
relationship between the Caliphate and political Islam. This strategy
has been used already in the history of modern Israel. That's the
strategy that Zionist paramilitary organizations used: terrorist
attacks on Palestinians, Arabs and British troops and assassinations of
those whom they considered a hindrance to the cause of building Israel.
Today, analysts have taken up this idea and inflated it, replacing
actual goals with invented ones: mass terror everywhere and horrible
slogans proclaimed by dummies.
But this logic does not agree with Muslim policies, tasks and goals.
The very logic of mass terror as an instrument to build a Caliphate
is not an Islamic logic.
RT: Let's return to the Caucasus. Some people in the West believe
that, having suppressed terrorist activities in Chechnya, Russia
caused terrorism to spread throughout the Caucasus. What do you think?
GD: This is a very naïve assessment of Western analysts. They regard
Kadyrov as another Ivan the Terrible who has forced destabilization
out of Chechnya. Terrorist attacks in Chechnya continue. Just recently,
there was a clash between militants and Kadyrov's guards.
Kadyrov is not a self-sufficient figure, and Chechnya cannot be
isolated from the rest of the Caucasus. Moreover, the North Caucasus
cannot be isolated from the rest of Russia, both at the grass-roots
level, because Caucasian communities exist throughout Russia, and
at the top, because the federal authorities have close ties with
local leaders.
From: A. Papazian