What kind of Middle East do we want?

Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State, August 2007:”Iran constitutes the single most important single country strategic challenge to the Unites States and to the kind of Middle East that we want to see.”

What kind of Middle East do we want? The present Republican administration contends that above all, a nation like Iran would not fit into our picture. The Iranian government would not accept our administration policy as the sole policy for the Middle East. The administration wants the natural resources of the area and a market where our corporations would sell our hardware and second-class arsenals.

Iranian potential to develop nuclear arsenals would be of minimum consequence to our national defense; after all we faced Soviet’s fully developed nuclear arsenals. Iran, a third class nation, is more of nuisance than a real threat. Iran could be a threat to our satellite Arabic nations, not by shear military force, but by example of defying our Middle Eastern policy. The satellite nations, like Iran under Shah, have a tenuous existence. One way or another, the people of these nations will free themselves from the yoke of their despotic masters. The administration finds it much easier to deal with a single ruler than to deal with a whole nation. We just pretend to desire the concept of messy democracy for these nations, knowing well the hostility of the regional population to our American foreign policy.

Are we trying to make an example of Iran? Iran under Shah was incapable to produce a sewing needle; in contrast, Iran today is developing a strong population of educated men and women, a solid industrial base and national pride. Iranian democracy must develop from the Iranian base, a brand of democracy suited to the historical and cultural sense of the population. Like our American Republic, democracy in Iran will nurture with time, experiencing up and down until the Bill of Rights of Iran will be established.

What do we, the people of this great Republic, demand from our Administration for the Middle East?

MyAmerica the beautiful

Breeding of al Qaeda and Taliban

Our United States government created the Radical Islam. It is the product of our foreign policies since 1979. Our government decided to train Mujahideen to defeat Soviets in Afghanistan. Reagan administration provided Pakistan with resources to create madrassas and educate Afghans into Islamic radicals. From 1982 to 1992, 35,000 radical Muslims from 43 Islamic countries were brought to Pakistan; our government trained these young men in the art of terrorism against the Soviets.
Our U.S. government recruited Osama bin Laden and his 4,000 volunteers in 1984. With our knowledge, bin Laden created al-Qaeda in 1988. CIA provided highly sophisticated equipment and training to Bin Laden. We ignored when bin Laden opened terrorist cells in some 26 countries.
After the Soviets left Afghanistan in 1989, the U.S. supported Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, an Islamic fundamentalist, and the Taliban. In 1998, bin Laden master minded the bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. It was then too late. In 2001, the people of the United States were the next victim of al-Qaeda. Iranian people were victim of the same vicious people when the entire members of the Iranian mission in Afghanistan were killed by Taliban.
Today, August 6, 2007, the fist meeting between the technical staff of United States and Iran toward stabilizing Iraq, is a baby step toward normalization between these two countries. It is the first step toward normalizing the regional status of the Near East. Both the United States and Iran would be at greater risks if their activities would fail.

Iran would greatly benefit from a stable Iraq. Failure of the United States in managing al-Qaeda would not only harm US, but also would put at risk the satellite Arab countries, such as Egypt, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Jordan. These US satellite countries are the primary targets of al-Qaeda.

MyAmerica the beautiful