Author: Kanayan Tamar

JAPAN MAY USE ARMENIA-DEVELOPED ALTERNATIVE ENERGY TECHNOLOGY

YEREVAN, June 17. / ARKA /. Japan is ready to use alternative energy
technologies, developed by Armenian researchers, Junichi Nakazawa,
the executive director of the Armenian-Japanese Association, said
today in Yerevan.

He said in Armenia he was shown a technology developed by Barva
innovative research center for processing of biomass. He said it
could be used in his country.

Aram Vardanyan, head of Barva innovative research center, said the
technology can produce gas, identical to natural gas, imported from
Russia, from any biomass, but its cost is 10-15 times cheaper.

He said this technology could be used to build small power plants
able to produce up to 1.5 billion cubic meters of gas per year,
as much as consumed by Armenia annually.

According to him, Armenia may build 2-3 thousand small power plants,
each costing about $3,000. He said the cost of one cubic meter of such
gas will be $20-30, and the cost of a kWh electricity -5 drams. He
said this technology is expected to be introduced in Armenia in a year.

Barva research center’s focus is on production of anti-hail systems,
photovoltage power plants, as well as development and production of
equipment to combat early spring frosts. -0-

– See more at:

RICHARD GIRAGOSIAN: AZERBAIJAN NOTES ITS VULNERABILITY TO PIPELINE RELIANCE

June 17, 2014 | 19:12

Armenian analyst Richard Giragosian said Azerbaijan noted its
vulnerability to pipeline reliance and warned of terrorist threat
to pipelines.

Giragorsian, Director of Armenia-based Regional Studies Center,
shared his conclusions on Twitter after participation in the second
day of NATO PA Rose-Roth Seminar that is held in Baku.

During the conference, the analyst said he realized that without
Karabakh conflict, Azerbaijani diplomacy and security would falter,
as it is limited to one-issue based strategy.

Richard Giragosian is participating in the seminar along with the
head of Armenian delegation to NATO PA Koryun Nahapetyan and MP
Tevan Poghosyan.

News from Armenia – NEWS.am

UKRAINIAN APRICOTS BEING SOLD IN ARMENIAN MARKET

Fresh Plaza, Netherlands
June 17 2014

Small apricots from the Ararat Valley are being sold in Yerevan stores
for AMD 2,600-2,700 per kilogram, Haykakan Zhamanak writes. The price
of bigger apricots is AMD 6,000. Apricots from Meghri are being sold
for AMD 4,000.

The newspaper notes that there are also imported apricots in the
Armenian market. In particular, apricots imported from Ukraine are
being sold for AMD 10,000 per kilogram.

DARMIAN PROVIDES ITALY HOPE

Football Italia
June 17 2014

Can Matteo Darmian be a regular starter for Italy? Sam Lewis examines
why the Torino man has hope for the future.

As Matteo Darmian spoke to the Press following his World Cup finals
debut, he was as surprised as many at his inclusion in Cesare
Prandelli’s Italy squad.

“If someone had told me a few months ago that I would be here,
honestly I would have laughed,” the 24-year-old confessed.

What the Torino man refers to is a three month period that would be
represented on a graph as a consistently ascending line. Darmian’s
World Cup selection followed an excellent season for Giampiero
Ventura’s Granata that for the most part flew under the radar – he
played 37 games in a variety of positions including either sides of
midfield, centre-back and as either full-back.

Darmian has now turned into a crucial component of a club side that
finished seventh in Serie A last season and is now, most recently,
a starter for Italy – playing every minute of the Azzurri’s 2-1 win
over England on Saturday night.

However, despite giving the impression he has simply popped out of
the ground, Matteo Darmian will enter his third season as a Serie
A regular after the World Cup. Appearing first as a 16-year-old
substitute for Milan in 2006 before a collection of loan moves –
first to Palermo and later to Torino in 2011 – cemented his status
and first attracted the attentions of the Italy Coach.

Born in the Northern Italian town of Legnano to parents of Armenian
descent, Darmian excelled at youth level for Milan, captaining the
Diavolo’s primavera side at 17.

However, in June 2012 the Rossoneri sold their stake in Darmian’s
contract to Palermo, ending an 11-year relationship with the player.

The decision has proven to be an oversight – Darmian evolving into
a consistent figure in Turin while Milan have struggled for quality
at either full-back position in recent years.

Quick and industrious, Darmian was a constant threat on the right
flank against England with overlapping runs and measured, intelligent
movements. Displaying accurate crossing and incisive, calm passing,
the former Palermo man combined well with Antonio Candreva, including
one occasion that led to the Azzurri’s winning goal in Manaus.

Darmian’s effectiveness led to many lauding the performance, including
Inter and Azzurro icon Sandro Mazzola.

“I didn’t expect Matteo Darmian to be so decisive at these levels
but he really impressed me,” the former midfielder remarked. “England
didn’t realise he was there and it allowed us to punish them.”

Darmian’s Italy involvement is a credit to Cesare Prandelli, who has
once again trusted his instinct to value talent over experience. The
choice of the Torino prospect instead of the more tournament tested
Ignazio Abate and Christian Maggio has proven to be a worthwhile risk
so far, Darmian representing another weapon that provides much-valued
tactical flexibility.

It is only one game for the Torino talent who is very much at the early
stages of a prospective Azzurro career, but the first indications are
promising. With little expectation attached to the chances of finding
a long-term solution at right-back out of either Abate or Maggio,
Darmian has a real opportunity to make the position his own. Although
if he did, it probably wouldn’t much of a surprise anymore.

SYRIAN ARMY CONTINUES CLEAN-UP OPERATIONS IN KASSAB

Press TV, Iran
June 17 2014

Syrian soldiers continue their clean-up operations in Kassab near
the border with Turkey after recapturing the strategic town from
foreign-backed militants, Press TV reports.

According to Press TV, Syrian army engineers have combed through
Kassab, situated in the coastal province of Latakia, and defused a
large amount of explosives and mortars after liberating the town.

“Kassab is in a mountainous border area and close to the Syrian coast.

Militants were trying to establish control over parts of the Syrian
coastal area and create a buffer zone near the Turkish border to
facilitate their movement into Syria. We foiled their scheme,”
a Syrian army official told Press TV.

On June 14, Syrian government forces retook control of Kassab from the
Takfiri groups and reestablished security there. Many terrorists were
killed in the army operation. Kassab’s residents have begun returning
home following the town’s liberation.

The ethnic Armenian-inhabited town had been under siege by extremists
from various militant groups, including the al-Qaeda-affiliated
al-Nusra Front.

Also on June 5, Syrian troops regained control of the town of al-Thawra
in Kiswah district near the capital, Damascus, killing a large number
of militants. Sources said that army forces also destroyed militant
hideouts in the nearby town of Zakia.

Over the past months, Syrian armed forces have achieved major victories
in their battle against the Takfiri groups operating against the
Damascus government.

Syria has been gripped by deadly violence for more than three years.

Some reports say more than 160,000 people have been killed and millions
of others displaced due to the turmoil fueled by the foreign-backed
militants.

ARMENIAN FM MEETS THE PRESIDENT OF BUNDESTAG

11:10 17.06.2014

On June 16 Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian, who pays an official
visit to Germany, met the President of Bundestag Norbert Lammert.

Welcoming Edward Nalbandian, Norbert Lammert recalled with warmth
his visit to Armenia made a year ago and the meetings held with the
leadership of the Republic as well as stressed the subsequent expansion
of the Armenian-German cooperation in political, inter-parliamentary,
economic and cultural areas.

Expressing gratitude for the reception Minister Nalbandian
mentioned that parliamentary cooperation format has major input in
the development of bilateral relations and that active contacts are
established in this framework. “During these very days, in parallel to
my visit, parliamentarians representing various Bundestag Committees
are in Armenia which is an evidence of the efficient cooperation
between the Parliaments”, highlighted the Foreign Minister of Armenia.

The sides attached importance to the collaboration at Parliamentary
Assemblies. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia attached
significance and expressed thanks for the enrollment of the
representatives of Armenia to the Bundestag International Parliamentary
Scholarships (IPS).

During the meeting, the sides touched upon the works towards the
development of the Armenian-German relations, exchanged views on
Armenia-EU affairs, cooperation within the Eastern Partnership. In
this respect, Edward Nalbandian stressed that via joint statement
by the EU and the RA at Vilnius the sides reassured their commitment
to develop and strengthen comprehensive cooperation in all areas of
mutual interest within the Eastern Partnership framework.

Welcoming Armenia’s willingness to expand and deepen the relations with
the EU, the President of Bundestag noted, that it was expedient to
draw up such a framework of cooperation that would take into account
Armenia’s commitments within other integration processes.

Ideas were exchanged over the regional issues. Both sides expressed
satisfaction with the Armenian-German cooperation in International
Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan.

ELECTRIC NETWORKS OF ARMENIA ENSURED PROFIT FOR GAZPROM ON ARMENIANS’ DIME: ZHOGHOVURD

06.17.2014 11:42 epress.am

Electric Networks of Armenia, a subsidiary of the Russian company
Inter RAO UES, preferred to purchase more expensive electricity,
and now it’s unloading that burden on Armenian consumers, reports
local daily Zhoghovurd.

The newspaper notes that the main official reason for raising the
electricity rates in Armenia is that Electric Networks of Armenia (ENA)
had a financial gap to fill, since the power plant ceased operations
for 88 days more than expected last year, and ENA was forced to fill
the gap by purchasing electricity from the Hrazdan Thermal Power Plant
at 49.1 AMD per kWh, suffering a loss of 16.6 billion AMD as a result.

The newspaper, however, claims that ENA could’ve purchased electricity
not from Hrazdan TPP, which runs on Russian gas, but from Yerevan TPP
at 29.1 AMD per kWh, which would be half as expensive as it runs on
Iranian gas.

“But they didn’t do that. And as a result, the Russian Inter RAO UES
subsidiary, giving preference to Hrazdan TPP running on Russian gas,
through internal agreement, simply artificially increased the volume
of Russian gas consumption in Armenia, ensuring profits for Gazprom,”
reports the paper.

KARABAKH PARLIAMENTARY DELEGATION VISITS FRANCE

June 17, 2014 | 11:40

YEREVAN. – The Nagorno-Karabakh Republic–or Artsakh–National Assembly
(NKR NA) delegation, led by NKR NA Speaker Ashot Ghulyan, on Monday
kicked off its two-day visit to Paris.

On the first day of its trip to the French capital city, the
delegation first paid a visit to the Armenian College of Paris
(Tbrotsaser School), informed the NKR NA press service.

On the same day, the delegation visited the Embassy of Armenia in
France, and met with Ambassador Vicken Tchitechian.

Subsequently, the Artsakh MPs laid a wreath, on behalf of the NKR
NA, to the Komitas Monument, which eternalizes the Armenian Genocide
victims.

Next, the Karabakh parliamentary delegation met–at the hall of the
John the Baptist Armenian Church–with members of the Diocesan Council
of the French Diocese of the Armenian Apostolic Church.

On Tuesday, the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic National Assembly delegation
is scheduled to hold talks in the French Senate and the National
Assembly.

News from Armenia – NEWS.am

SPEECHES OF MATTHEW BRYZA AND ARMENIAN MPS CAUSED SCANDAL IN NATO PA SEMINAR

APA, Azerbaijan
June 16 2014

[ 16 Juny 2014 17:19 ]

Baku. Mubariz Aslanov – APA. Speech of Matthew Bryza, former U.S.

co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group and US ambassador to Azerbaijan,
Director of the International Centre for Defence Studies caused
scandal at the NATO PA seminar in Baku.

APA reports that making speech at the second part of the 86th seminar
of the NATO PA on “South Caucasus: Challenges and Opportunities”, M.

Bryza said that Azerbaijani and Armenian Presidents can not reach
necessary level of mutual confidence for compromising and settlement
of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict yet.

Bryza noted that in spite of efforts by the OSCE Minsk Group for
long years, the problem is still remaining unsolved: “It’s needed to
work hard to reduce usage of military version in the settlement of
the conflict”.

Without mentioning reasons of the conflict, M. Bryza called on sides
to compromise generally.

Armenian delegation welcomed Bryza’s speech and asked for speech out
of the program. President of NATO PA Hugh Bayley called on them to
stick to the time-limit. Thereafter, head of Armenian delegation
Koryun Nahapetyan made speech. He demanded Azerbaijani side to
withdraw snipers from frontline. Member of Azerbaijani delegation
to NATO PA Gudrat Hasanguliyev commented on speeches of Bryza and
Armenian delegation: “I always criticized M. Bryza’s position and
have to criticize again. Though, Bryza is an independent expert,
he conducts himself as a worker of the US Department of State and
expresses its position. Mr. Bryza, because of your spouse is Turk,
Armenians did not allow you acting as an ambassador to Azerbaijan
more than a year. Do you expect justice from them?”

Thereafter, G. Hasanguliyev told Armenians delegation: “An agreement
on settlement of the conflict was reached at the end of 1990s between
Azerbaijan and Armenia. However, an execution in Armenian parliament
ruined everything. Armenian’s behavior shows that it is not needed
to conduct negotiations with it. Because Armenia is afraid of Russia
and they move under this fear. It would be better the talks to be
held with Russia, but not Armenia. Since Karabakh war started, you
have destroyed and banished all other nations. You changed Armenia to
monoethnic country. Today, only strange nation in Armenia is servicemen
of Russia’s 102nd military base. What will you say about it?”

Hasanguliyev also responded to Armenia’s accusations on that Turkey
supports Azerbaijan: “During the first years of Karabakh war, President
Abulfaz Elchibey asked Turkey for a helicopter to evacuate people
from Kalbajar in order to prevent second Khojaly massacre.

Turkey did not respond to us. Instead of it, Turkey gave 5 tones of
grain to Armenia. Why don’t Armenian delegation focus on this?”

Member of Armenian delegation Tevan Poghosyan spoke about Ramil
Safarov. He tried to distort the UN resolutions.

Head of Azerbaijani delegation to NATO PA Ziyafet Asgerov asked
questions to Armenian delegation and Matthew Bryza: “Mr. Bryza,
please, tell us what means Karabakh word? You don’t know, let me tell
you. Karabakh word is an original Azerbaijani word consisting of Kara
Bakh (Black Garden). That’s it is not Armenian word. This remained
unchanged in medieval, period of Khanates, even USSR too. Mr. Bryza
and Armenian counterparts where you address it will show that Karabakh
is an Azerbaijani land. The article #1 of the UN SC resolution #822
says: “The UN Security Country condemns occupation of Kalbajar and
neighboring regions by Armenia and demands immediate liberation”. Next
article says: “Occupation of Aghdam and neighboring regions is
condemned and it’s demanded Armenian troops to withdraw from there”.

Resolution #874: “The UN condemns occupation of Zangilan and
neighboring regions by Armenia and demands immediate liberation. Same
documents on other regions include same texts. What do you need more?”

Z.Asgerov criticized international community for being indifferent to
occupation of Azerbaijani territories by Armenians: “The US destroyed
Libya immediately after the UN SC resolutions, Iraq and other regions
faced same policy due to chemical weapon. However, you could not find
anything. Today, Iraqi people suffer torments, you know, I know too,
but world community is not confused. Even, you destroyed Yugoslavia
without any mandate of the UN. This is also your work, in your honest.

Why is your honest so silent? However, the UN has resolutions
regarding Nagorno Karabak for 20 years? Why are these resolutions
still unfulfilled? You apply sanctions on Russia regarding Crimea,
Ukraine. Why don’t you impose sanctions on Armenia for 20 years? our
territories also have been occupied. Mr. Fogh Rasmussen made a speech
on Ukraine crisis at the NATO PA meeting in Lithuania. Why don’t you
make speech about Azerbaijan? Why don’t you adopt resolution regarding
Azerbaijan? Put an end to this double standards. Shame!”

Z. Asgerov also told Armenians who caviled at “enemy” word used by
Azerbaijan: “Armenian delegation says that Azerbaijani president
called Armenia “enemy”. Do we have to call it a friendly country? It
occupied 20% of our territory, we have 1 mln of refugees. Now you
demand us not to call you “enemy”? Mr. Armenian MPs you occupied
Azerbaijan’s lands your posts are in Zangilan, Gubadli, Fuzuli and
other regions. Now you demand us to withdraw the snipers from them.

We’ll withdraw snipers when you ge back to your Armenia-Azerbaijan
border. I defend my territory from my enemy. What does your sniper
do there? What do you do where my snipers are?”

The seminar is going on after break.

The Destruction and Political Fragmentation of Iraq.
Towards the Creation of a US Sponsored Islamist Caliphate

The Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham: An instrument of the Western
Military Alliance

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
June 14, 2014 “ICH ” – “GR”
– – The Western media in chorus have described the unfolding conflict in
Iraq as a “civil war” opposing the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham against
the Armed forces of the Al-Maliki government.

(Also referred to as Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) or Islamic
State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS))

The conflict is casually described as “sectarian warfare” between Radical
Sunni and Shia without addressing “who is behind the various factions”. What
is at stake is a carefully staged US military-intelligence agenda.

Known and documented, Al Qaeda affiliated entities have been used by
US-NATO in numerous conflicts as “intelligence assets” since the heyday of
the Soviet-Afghan war. In Syria, the Al Nusrah and ISIS rebels are the
foot-soldiers of the Western military alliance, which oversees and controls
the recruitment and training of paramilitary forces.

The Al Qaeda affiliated Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) re-emerged in April
2013 with a different name and acronym, commonly referred to as the Islamic
State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). The formation of a terrorist entity
encompassing both Iraq and Syria was part of a US intelligence agenda. It
responded to geopolitical objectives. It also coincided with the advances
of Syrian government forces against the US sponsored insurgency in Syria
and the failures of both the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and its various
“opposition” terror brigades.

The decision was taken by Washington to channel its support (covertly) in
favor of a terrorist entity which operates in both Syria and Iraq and which
has logistical bases in both countries. The ISIS Sunni caliphate project
coincides with a longstanding US agenda to carve up both Iraq and Syria
into three separate territories: A Sunni Islamist Caliphate, an Arab Shia
Republic, and a Republic of Kurdistan.

Whereas the (US proxy) government in Baghdad purchases advanced weapons
systems from the US including F16 fighter jets from Lockheed Martin, the
Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham -which is fighting Iraqi government
forces- is supported covertly by Western intelligence. The objective is to
engineer a civil war in Iraq, in which both sides are controlled indirectly
by US-NATO.

The scenario is to arm and equip them, on both sides, finance them with
advanced weapons systems and then “let them fight”.

US-NATO is involved in the recruitment, training and financing of ISIS
death squads operating in both Iraq and Syria. ISIS operates through
indirect channels in liaison with Western intelligence. In turn,
corroborated by reports on Syria’s insurgency, Western special forces and
mercenaries integrate the ranks of ISIS.

US-NATO support to ISIS is channeled covertly through America’s staunchest
allies: Qatar and Saudi Arabia. According to London’s Daily Express “They
had money and arms supplied by Qatar and Saudi Arabia.”

“through allies such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the West [has] supported
militant rebel groups which have since mutated into ISIS and other
al-Qaeda connected militias. ( Daily Telegraph, June 12, 2014)

While the media acknowledges that the government of Prime Minister Nuri
al-Maliki has accused Saudi Arabia and Qatar of supporting ISIS, it
invariably fails to mention that both Doha and Riyadh are acting on behalf
and in close liaison with Washington.

Under the banner of a civil war, an undercover war of aggression is being
fought which essentially contributes to further destroying an entire
country, its institutions, its economy. The undercover operation is part of
an intelligence agenda, an engineered process which consists in
transforming Iraq into an open territory.

Meanwhile, public opinion is led to believe that what is at stake is
confrontation between Shia and Sunni.

America’s military occupation of Iraq has been replaced by non-conventional
forms of warfare. Realities are blurred. In a bitter irony, the aggressor
nation is portrayed as coming to the rescue of a “sovereign Iraq”.

An internal “civil war” between Shia and Sunni is fomented by US-NATO
support to both the Al-Maliki government as well as to the Sunni ISIS
rebels.

The break up of Iraq along sectarian lines is longstanding policy of the US
and its allies.

“Supporting both Sides”

The “War on Terrorism” consists in creating Al Qaeda terrorist entities as
part of an intelligence operation, as well as also coming to the rescue of
governments which are the target of the terrorist insurgency. This process
is carried out under the banner of counter-terrorism. It creates the
pretext to intervene.

ISIS is a caliphate project of creating a Sunni Islamist state. It is not a
project of the Sunni population of Iraq which is broadly committed to a
secular forms of government. The caliphate project is part of a US
intelligence operation.

In response to the advance of the ISIS rebels, Washington is envisaging the
use of aerial bombings as well as drone attacks in support of the Baghdad
government as part of a counter-terrorism operation. It is all for a good
cause: to fight the terrorists, without of course acknowledging that these
terrorists are the “foot soldiers” of the Western military alliance.

Needless to say, these developments contribute not only to destabilizing
Iraq, but also to weakening the Iraqi resistance movement, which is one of
major objectives of US-NATO.

The Islamic caliphate is supported covertly by the CIA in liaison with
Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkish intelligence. Israel is also involved in
channeling support to both Al Qaeda rebels in Syria (out of the Golan
Heights) as well to the Kurdish separatist movement in Syria and Iraq.

More broadly, the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT) encompasses a consistent
and diabolical logic: both sides -namely the terrorists and the government-
are supported by the same military and intelligence actors, namely US-NATO.

While this pattern describes the current situation in Iraq, the structure
of “supporting both sides” with a view to engineering sectarian conflict
has been implemented time and again in numerous countries. Insurgencies
integrated by Al Qaeda operatives (and supported by Western intelligence)
prevail in a large number of countries including Yemen, Libya, Nigeria,
Somalia, Mali, the Central African Republic, Pakistan. The endgame is to
destabilize sovereign nation states and to transform countries into open
territories (on behalf of so-called foreign investors).

The pretext to intervene on humanitarian grounds (e.g. in Mali, Nigeria or
the Central African Republic) is predicated on the existence of terrorist
forces. Yet these terrorist forces would not exist without covert US-NATO
support.

The Capture of Mosul: US-NATO Covert Support to the Islamic State of Iraq
and Syria (ISIS)

Something unusual occurred in Mosul which cannot be explained in strictly
military terms.

On June 10, the insurgent forces of the Islamic State of Iraq and the
Levant (ISIS) captured Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, with a population
of close to 1.5 million people. While these developments were “unexpected”
according to the Obama administration, they were known to the Pentagon and
US intelligence, which were not only providing weapons, logistics and
financial support to the ISIS rebels, they were also coordinating, behind
the scenes, the ISIS attack on the city of Mosul.

While ISIS is a well equipped and disciplined rebel army when compared to
other Al Qaeda affiliated formations, the capture of Mosul, did not hinge
upon ISIS’s military capabilities. Quite the opposite: Iraqi forces which
outnumbered the rebels by far, equipped with advanced weapons systems could
have easily repelled the ISIS rebels.

There were 30,000 government forces in Mosul as opposed to 1000 ISIS
rebels, according to reports. The Iraqi army chose not to intervene. The
media reports explained without evidence that the decision of the Iraqi
armed forces not to intervene was spontaneous characterized by mass
defections.

Iraqi officials told the Guardian that two divisions of Iraqi soldiers –
roughly 30,000 men – simply turned and ran in the face of the assault by an
insurgent force of just 800 fighters. Isis extremists roamed freely on
Wednesday through the streets of Mosul, openly surprised at the ease with
which they took Iraq’s second largest city after three days of sporadic
fighting. (Guardian, June 12, 2014, emphasis added)

The reports point to the fact that Iraqi military commanders were
sympathetic with the Sunni led ISIS insurgency:

Speaking from the Kurdish city of Erbil, the defectors accused their
officers of cowardice and betrayal, saying generals in Mosul “handed over”
the city over to Sunni insurgents, with whom they shared sectarian and
historical ties. (Daily Telegraph
,
13 June 2014)

What is important to understand, is that both sides, namely the regular
Iraqi forces and the ISIS rebel army are supported by US-NATO. There were
US military advisers and special forces including operatives from private
military companies on location in Mosul working with Iraq’s regular armed
forces. In turn, there are Western special forces or mercenaries within
ISIS (acting on contract to the CIA or the Pentagon) who are in liaison
with US-NATO (e.g. through satellite phones).

Under these circumstances, with US intelligence amply involved, there would
have been routine communication, coordination, logistics and exchange of
intelligence between a US-NATO military and intelligence command center,
US-NATO military advisers forces or private military contractors on the
ground assigned to the Iraqi Army and Western special forces attached to
the ISIS brigades. These Western special forces operating covertly within
the ISIS could have been dispatched by a private security company on
contract to US-NATO.

In this regard, the capture of Mosul appears to have been a carefully
engineered operation, planned well in advance. With the exception of a few
skirmishes, no fighting took place.

Entire divisions of the Iraqi National Army -trained by the US military
with advanced weapons systems at their disposal- could have easily repelled
the ISIS rebels. Reports suggest that they were ordered by their commanders
not to intervene. According to witnesses, “Not a single shot was fired”.

The forces that had been in Mosul have fled — some of which abandoned their
uniforms as well as their posts as the ISIS forces swarmed into the city.

Fighters with the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), an al-Qaeda
offshoot, overran the entire western bank of the city overnight after Iraqi
soldiers and police apparently fled their posts, in some instances
discarding their uniforms as they sought to escape the advance of the
militants.

A contingent of one thousand ISIS rebels take over a city of more than one
million? Without prior knowledge that the US controlled Iraqi Army (30,000
strong) would not intervene, the Mosul operation would have fallen flat,
the rebels would have been decimated.

Who was behind the decision to let the ISIS terrorists take control of
Mosul?

Had the senior Iraqi commanders been instructed by their Western military
advisers to hand over the city to the ISIS terrorists? Were they co-opted?

Source: The Economist

Was the handing over of Mosul to ISIS part of a US intelligence agenda?

Were the Iraqi military commanders manipulated or paid off into allowing
the city to fall into the hands of the ISIS rebels without “a single shot
being fired”.

Shiite General Mehdi Sabih al-Gharawi who was in charge of the Mosul Army
divisions “had left the city”. Al Gharawi had worked hand in glove with the
US military. He took over the command of Mosul in September 2011, from US
Col Scott McKean. Had he been co-opted, instructed by his US counterparts
to abandon his command?

(image left) U.S. Army Col. Scott McKean, right, commander, 4th Advise and
Assist Brigade, 1st Armored Division, talks with Iraqi police Maj. Gen.
Mahdi Sabih al-Gharawi following a transfer of authority ceremony on
September 4, 2011

US forces could have intervened. They had been instructed to let it happen.
It was part of a carefully planned agenda to facilitate the advance of the
ISIS rebel forces and the installation of the ISIS caliphate.

The whole operation appears to have been carefully staged.

In Mosul, government buildings, police stations, schools, hospitals, etc
are formally now under the control of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria
(ISIS). In turn, ISIS has taken control of military hardware including
helicopters and tanks which were abandoned by the Iraqi armed forces.

What is unfolding is the installation of a US sponsored Islamist ISIS
caliphate alongside the rapid demise of the Baghdad government. Meanwhile,
the Northern Kurdistan region has de facto declared its independence from
Baghdad. Kurdish peshmerga rebel forces (which are supported by Israel)
have taken control of the cities of Arbil and Kirkuk. (See map above)

Concluding Remarks

There were no Al Qaeda rebels in Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion. Moreover,
Al Qaeda was non-existent in Syria until the outset of the US-NATO-Israeli
supported insurgency in March 2011.

The ISIS is not an independent entity. It is a creation of US intelligence.
It is a US intelligence asset, an instrument of non-conventional warfare.

The ultimate objective of this ongoing US-NATO engineered conflict opposing
Maliki government forces to the ISIS insurgency is to destroy and
destabilize Iraq as a Nation State. It is part of an intelligence
operation, an engineered process of transforming countries into
territories. The break up of Iraq along sectarian lines is a longstanding
policy of the US and its allies.

The ISIS is a caliphate project of creating a Sunni Islamist state. It is
not a project of the Sunni population of Iraq which historically has been
committed to a secular system of government. The caliphate project is a US
design. The advances of ISIS forces is intended to garnish broad support
within the Sunni population directed against the Al Maliki government

The division of Iraq along sectarian-ethnic lines has been on the drawing
board of the Pentagon for more than 10 years.

The formation of the caliphate may be the first step towards a broader
conflict in the Middle East, bearing in mind that Iran is supportive of
the Al Maliki government and the US ploy may indeed be to encourage the
intervention of Iran.

The proposed redivision of Iraq is broadly modeled on that of the
Federation of Yugoslavia which was split up into seven “independent states”
(Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia (FYRM), Slovenia,
Montenegro, Kosovo).

According to Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, the re division of Iraq into three
separate states is part of a broader process of redrawing the Map of the
Middle East.

The above map was prepared by Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters. It was
published in the Armed Forces Journal in June 2006, Peters is a retired
colonel of the U.S. National War Academy. (Map Copyright Lieutenant-Colonel
Ralph Peters 2006).

Although the map does not officially reflect Pentagon doctrine, it has been
used in a training program at NATO’s Defense College for senior military
officers”. (SeePlans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a “New
Middle East”

ByMahdi Darius Nazemroaya
, Global
Research, November 2006)