By Jeff Sommers
In CIA parlance missions that are successful create
backlashes. The CIA aptly calls this Blowback.
At the end of WW II the US took empire from a weakened Britain and
France. Among the first casualties was East Europe, which was sacrificed
on the mantle of superpower relations. That same deal between
superpowers saw Greece put down by England and the US, with Soviet
compliance. The Soviets and the West also concluded that the people of
both their respective spheres would be put down if necessary in the
interests of stability. Democracy on both sides of the
Cold War divide
The US maintained order during its tenure of hegemony through use of
both covert and overt operations that helped signal the very blowback
witnessed on the 11th. In 1953 Allen Dulles, brother of Secretary of
State John Foster Dulles, thought it clever to maintain order in Iran
overthrowing its democratically elected leader, Mohammed Mossadegh. The popular Mossadegh erred when he decided Irans oil
belonged to Iran
and not the multi-national corporations who held rights to
nationalized Irans oil. Allen Dulles sent in the CIA with suitcases
full of money (the CIA had no oversight and so could spend liberally)
destabilize the government. They sent their agent Kim Roosevelt to
remove Mossadegh. Kim Roosevelt was the grandson of that famous defender of the Spanish American War that brought the US no end of blowback. General H. Norman Schwarzkopf accom panied himno, not the General
we all know who commanded US forces in the Persian Gulf war, but his father. Schwarzkopf trained the Shah of Irans secret police in
sorts and manners of techniques that brutal dictatorships employ against
their citizens. This bought stability and the return of
oil to its
rightful owners. The US oil companies got 40%, the Brits
Dutch 14% and the French 6%. Yet, in overthrowing Mossadegh a
25-year-long period of repression was launched against dissenters in
Iran with significant blowback for all parties concerned. Most
significantly this created a radical Islamic fundamentalist response
that led to the rise of the Ayatollah Khomeni. In part, yesterdays
tragedy is blowback from Washington policies executed 50 years back.
During the 1980s the US found another opportunity for CIA mischief in
the Middle East. In 1978 the Soviet Union frowned upon the more radical
Marxist government that arose on its border in Afghanistan. Given that
the Soviets cynically wielded terms like Marxism in the
same way the
US has often done with democracy, the Soviets felt no compunction
about overthrowing a radical Marxist government with democratic
impulses. As a superpower it sought obedience. The Soviets installed
government in Afghanistan loyal to themselves and would suffer blowback
that in part led to the very dissolution of the USSR.
Coming off its own failed decades long attempt to install and maintain
unpopular governments in Vietnam, the US was bemused by the Soviets
finding themselves in a similar situation in Afghanistan. Among
opponents of the Soviet backed regime in Afghanistan were Islamic
fundamentalists. The CIA fanned the flames of fundamentalist fervor in
order to fuel the ant-Soviet Afghani movement, the Mujahadeen. Yet, here
too there would be blowback. When the Soviet Union collapsed the highly
motivated fundamentalist force the US helped create and train in covert
operations (the stuff of terrorism) they now turned their sights on
their former benefactor. The marriage between Afghani fundamentalists
and the CIA was purely one of convenience. When no longer convenient
these highly-trained militants could now turn on that other source of
misery in the Middle East: the US. Again, this was blowback.
This begs the question of why the US was perceived as a source of evil
by Islamic extremists? We are all familiar with the reasons. A decade
of bombing and embargoes have left Iraqs electric, water, and
infrastructure in tatters. Saddam Hussein remains in power, but millions
live in abject misery, and the United Nations own data shows
700,000 children having died as a consequence of these US measures
against Iraq. The Iraqi leadership has been unaffected. Hussein has
punished the Kurds in the north of Iraq with impunity and the Shiite
Muslims of the south treated to Husseins bloody fist too. Yet,
not dissolve into separate nations. This was the goal of US policy. This
has been achieved at a terrible human cost and is another reason for
blowback against the US.
The specter of US policy toward Israel continues to haunt America.
Copious amounts of aid flows liberally to the Israeli government and
spills out into Palestinian communities in the form of state violence.
But, peace between Israel and Egypt is critical to Middle East
stability. The US gets little of its oil from the Middle East, but US
oil companies are present there and more importantly oil must flow
freely and predictably for the smooth functioning of the global economy
over which the US presides. Palestinians homes are routinely bulldozed
and its people live under military occupation. When the Arabic nations
try and address this matter civilly in the United Nations, as they just
tried last week at the Durban conference, they are rebuffed by the US.
Consequently, Palestinian children greet with delight the news of
thousands of innocent people dying in the US on the 11th. This is
America will make many choices in the near future regarding how to
engage the US. Lets hope it remembers that actions have consequences.
Jingoistic responses can backfire. Blowback might erupt quickly, or
simmer for decades. When it strikes the consequences are devastating.
are poised to escalate the violence or begin to plumb the depths of our
history in ways that might reveal how we can end these cascading series
of tragedies. Hopefully, reason will prevail.
AMERICA - LOVE OR LEAVE?
MORE CIVILIAN DEATHS