|
|
|
|
Blowback! 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 was shelved.
The US maintained order during its tenure of hegemony through use of
both covert and overt operations that helped signal the very blowback we
witnessed on the 11th. In 1953 Allen Dulles, brother of Secretary of State
John Foster Dulles, thought it clever to maintain order in Iran by overthrowing
its democratically elected leader, Mohammed Mossadegh. The popular Mossadegh
“erred” when he decided Iran’s oil belonged to Iran and not the multi-national
corporations who held “rights” to it. He nationalized Iran’s oil. Allen
Dulles sent in the CIA with suitcases full of money (the CIA had no oversight
and so could spend liberally) to 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 him—no,
not the General we all know who commanded US forces in the Persian Gulf
war, but his father. Schwarzkopf trained the Shah of Iran’s secret police
in all 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 40%, the
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, yesterday’s 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 a 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 Iraq’s electric, water, and health infrastructure
in tatters. Saddam Hussein remains in power, but millions live in abject
misery, and the United Nations’ own data shows over 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 Hussein’s
bloody fist too. Yet, Iraq did 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 blowback.
America will make many choices in the near future regarding how to engage
the US. Let’s 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. We 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.
|