A New Tool
Published in Vzgliad
(Russia) on 25 June 2013
by Anatoliy El-Murid (link to original)
(Russia) on 25 June 2013
by Anatoliy El-Murid (link to original)
Translated from
by Maryna Laurynovich.
Edited by Bora Mici.
In Qatar, there was a transition of power from Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani to his fourth son, Tamim. A formal reason, not once mentioned, is Emir Hamad’s poor health, which bears actual truth. A severe form of diabetes and an ineffective liposuction in 2011 that aggravated the disease are quite sufficient reasons.
In neighboring Saudi Arabia, however, kings quite often rule even while unconscious; it does not stop them from being on the throne until they die. In other Arab monarchies, a voluntary transition of power is something unreal. In general, it is not typical in the Middle East. Even with presidents, it is easier to kill them than to make them hand over power.
Most likely, poor health as a reason to hand over power is just a cover for more serious reasons that have led to it. So the question is: What are those reasons?
There exist two ways of explaining the Arab Spring. The first one is subjective. The Arab Spring is a creative development of “color technologies,” launched by the U.S. in order to change the unsuitable regional order there. The second one is objective. The Arab Spring is a result of solving contradictions, accumulated over the last decades, that Middle Eastern leaders were unable to overcome. The West and the U.S. are just trying to “engage” in these processes and to use them for their own purposes with different degrees of success.
Both versions are quite general and most likely do not explain completely what is actually going on. However, the transition of power in Qatar is definitely a “project” and cannot be explained through just the monarch's poor health.
Drained from its reckless wasting of power right after the collapse of the USSR, the U.S. has switched to a far more economic strategy of indirect influence in all significant regions of the world. The U.S. cannot dominate everywhere anymore; however, it understands that its main rival is China. There are different opinions on this subject. However, the 2020-2025 period is considered a borderline, after which, if it maintains the same dynamics of development, China will reach the same level of power as the U.S. China has two critical issues today, which were openly announced during the 18th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party: social stratification and a technological gap. The congress has determined ways to overcome these issues.
The U.S. has no choices but to solve three quite difficult tasks in the meantime. First is to focus on its power vis-a-vis China; second is to slow down China’s development speed as much as possible; and third is to re-industrialize and switch to a new technological mode, while China tries to gain leading positions in the current mode. The U.S. has used the Arab Spring events to solve all these tasks at once. In order to have its full military power concentrated on China, the U.S. has to quit involvement in other world regions to the maximum, while creating a maximum amount of problems there. This will prevent the emerging new rival.
Slowing down China’s development pace is not an easy task but could be achieved by creating problems in all the regions important to China, particularly those kinds of problems that will require China either to deal with them at the expense of its own domestic resources or go away from there, slowing down its development pace.
The U.S. is working on its own development right now, pouring money into the economy to establish conditions so major areas will function smoothly at a pace impossible in any other situation. The shale revolution is one of the examples, when knowingly unprofitable production of shale gas keeps booming despite ugly performance reports and experts’ rational thinking. Besides that, it sets record low prices for energy resources in the U.S. domestic market, giving its own economy an advantage on others. The next thing is shale oil.
So what does this have to do with Qatar’s emir? The chaotic processes in the Middle East are only good for the U.S. when it can manipulate them. Nobody needs an uncontrollable chaos. Even al-Qaida Islamic militants are tools when they are under control, but they become a threat when out of control. Now al-Qaida has gotten out of control.
Overall, a lot has been missed during the past three years. Conclusions have been made that led to changing the whole foreign policy staff block in Obama’s new administration. Previous policy had been called unfit for the current political reality.
Besides that, the new politicians responsible for foreign policy are specialists in the Middle East, which also proves that right now, the region is a priority for Obama.
It makes sense to ask, then, if Obama had no mercy for his own people, why would he need to have mercy for some savage Bedouins? Their time has come. Loyal servants are out of need. Erdogan has already reached the line to be called a bloody dictator. Emir Hamad Al-Thani will be changed for a submissive nobody like Tamim. The king of Saudi Arabia is about to die; it is clear that the U.S. will do everything possible to bring back to life this disappearing dynasty, torn apart by contradictions even at the cost of the kingdom’s unity.
New tasks require new tools. There is choice, but not a lot.
In neighboring Saudi Arabia, however, kings quite often rule even while unconscious; it does not stop them from being on the throne until they die. In other Arab monarchies, a voluntary transition of power is something unreal. In general, it is not typical in the Middle East. Even with presidents, it is easier to kill them than to make them hand over power.
Most likely, poor health as a reason to hand over power is just a cover for more serious reasons that have led to it. So the question is: What are those reasons?
There exist two ways of explaining the Arab Spring. The first one is subjective. The Arab Spring is a creative development of “color technologies,” launched by the U.S. in order to change the unsuitable regional order there. The second one is objective. The Arab Spring is a result of solving contradictions, accumulated over the last decades, that Middle Eastern leaders were unable to overcome. The West and the U.S. are just trying to “engage” in these processes and to use them for their own purposes with different degrees of success.
Both versions are quite general and most likely do not explain completely what is actually going on. However, the transition of power in Qatar is definitely a “project” and cannot be explained through just the monarch's poor health.
Drained from its reckless wasting of power right after the collapse of the USSR, the U.S. has switched to a far more economic strategy of indirect influence in all significant regions of the world. The U.S. cannot dominate everywhere anymore; however, it understands that its main rival is China. There are different opinions on this subject. However, the 2020-2025 period is considered a borderline, after which, if it maintains the same dynamics of development, China will reach the same level of power as the U.S. China has two critical issues today, which were openly announced during the 18th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party: social stratification and a technological gap. The congress has determined ways to overcome these issues.
The U.S. has no choices but to solve three quite difficult tasks in the meantime. First is to focus on its power vis-a-vis China; second is to slow down China’s development speed as much as possible; and third is to re-industrialize and switch to a new technological mode, while China tries to gain leading positions in the current mode. The U.S. has used the Arab Spring events to solve all these tasks at once. In order to have its full military power concentrated on China, the U.S. has to quit involvement in other world regions to the maximum, while creating a maximum amount of problems there. This will prevent the emerging new rival.
Slowing down China’s development pace is not an easy task but could be achieved by creating problems in all the regions important to China, particularly those kinds of problems that will require China either to deal with them at the expense of its own domestic resources or go away from there, slowing down its development pace.
The U.S. is working on its own development right now, pouring money into the economy to establish conditions so major areas will function smoothly at a pace impossible in any other situation. The shale revolution is one of the examples, when knowingly unprofitable production of shale gas keeps booming despite ugly performance reports and experts’ rational thinking. Besides that, it sets record low prices for energy resources in the U.S. domestic market, giving its own economy an advantage on others. The next thing is shale oil.
So what does this have to do with Qatar’s emir? The chaotic processes in the Middle East are only good for the U.S. when it can manipulate them. Nobody needs an uncontrollable chaos. Even al-Qaida Islamic militants are tools when they are under control, but they become a threat when out of control. Now al-Qaida has gotten out of control.
Overall, a lot has been missed during the past three years. Conclusions have been made that led to changing the whole foreign policy staff block in Obama’s new administration. Previous policy had been called unfit for the current political reality.
Besides that, the new politicians responsible for foreign policy are specialists in the Middle East, which also proves that right now, the region is a priority for Obama.
It makes sense to ask, then, if Obama had no mercy for his own people, why would he need to have mercy for some savage Bedouins? Their time has come. Loyal servants are out of need. Erdogan has already reached the line to be called a bloody dictator. Emir Hamad Al-Thani will be changed for a submissive nobody like Tamim. The king of Saudi Arabia is about to die; it is clear that the U.S. will do everything possible to bring back to life this disappearing dynasty, torn apart by contradictions even at the cost of the kingdom’s unity.
New tasks require new tools. There is choice, but not a lot.