by Abid Ullah Jan
“It is necessary to understand the links between the present day monetary system, American dominance and fascism. Many of us do not realize the way “Islamism” is used to avoid the global depression on the pattern of the Wall Street crash in 1929. The impending depression is directly linked to the supremacy of the United States.”
“Islamic fundamentalism” was blown out of proportion after the withdrawal of the Soviet Union from Afghanistan. By late 1990s, this term was turning into a cliché without enough impact to generate the required amount of fear of Islam. Islamophobes, thus, invented the term “Islamism” to add new dimensions to presenting Islam as a threatening menace.
Eight years down the road, the one-line definitions of “Islamism” and “Islamists” have flooded the corporate media. Most reporters and analysts are frequently using these terms without realizing that they are promoting the myth of “Islamism” and serving sinister objectives which they may not necessarily support.
Irrespective of the deceptive definitions, “Islamism” is used to keep the image of an enemy alive. It is used as a glue to hold the crumbling American empire and associated alliance together. “Islamism” scares non-Muslims and keeps the European Union and others at bay from thinking outside the box for initiatives such as, coming up with an alternative to the present monetary system or taking an independent course to economic development. The never-ending repetition of “Islamism,” however, cannot fool a majority of Muslims.
Muslims know that Islamism, as defined by Islamophobes, is nothing but Islam. This is the best way in which they can demonize Islam, present its core teachings as a threat to civilization and, at the same time, maintain the façade of being neutral. Many opportunist Muslims justify the associated new versions of Islam with different justifications. However, most debates and usage of these terms is taking place without the broader realization that the myth of Islamism is used to support the crumbling empire’s futile struggle for survival.
In the struggle for protecting and expanding the American empire, both religious and secular forces are complementing each other. If it were just the totalitarian, corporate forces – determined to sustain the dollar dominance in the global market – they would not have considered invasion and occupation of Afghanistan as a productive step forward. But the secular totalitarians were obliged to overthrow the Taliban because the religiously motivated figures in military, media, politics and academia could not see emergence of an alternative to the status quo.
Remember, for sustaining the global dominance of petro-dollar, as we will discuss below, political status quo in the Muslim world is as much important as taking measures to not allow others to trade in euros for oil. Not allowing Muslims to exercise their right to self-determination and to free themselves from de facto colonization is part of the broader strategy aimed at maintaining the status quo of the global monetary and economic order. A Muslim world, free from the remaining clutches of colonialism and puppet regimes, is a far greater threat than the Iranian or Iraqi oil bourse for trading oil in euros. An interest-free monetary system and economic order will be the first priority of an Islamic states or a single Islamic entity. This will be a direct challenge to what the United States is desperately saving through spreading the fear of “Islamism” waging the twenty-first century wars and occupations.
That is why the secular totalitarians had no option but to proceed and dislodge the Taliban, who were becoming an inspiration for greater movements for self-determination and self-rule in the Muslim world. At the same time, the corporate-extremists had to send a message to the Muslim world that the only accessible way for it is to exist was to submit to the de facto colonization.
Intentions of the forces struggling to sustain the U.S. economic power through protecting petro-dollar are understandable. Many, however, do not realize that checking the fall of petro-dollar was not possible without creating the myth of a common enemy. The history of the U.S. economic dominance and its efforts to sustain it is as clear as ABC to most of us. To further simplify the issue, Steve Masterson presented an impressive analysis at Indymedia UK to show how the secular, corporate powers have allied to save the crumbling U.S. Empire through saving petro-dollar. The only leftover aspect to add to this analysis is the way “Islamism” is used to save modern-day fascism.
It is necessary to understand the links between the present day monetary system, American dominance and fascism. Many of us do not realize the way “Islamism” is used to avoid the global depression on the pattern of the Wall Street crash in 1929. The impending depression is directly linked to the supremacy of the United States.
Looking at the financial aspect of modern-day fascism, many researchers are coming to the conclusion that capitalism itself is an advanced form of fascism. Others declare the United States a fascist state. To get at the roots of the reality, Nelson Hultberg, founder and executive director of Americans for a Free Republic, puts the terms fascism and capitalism in perspective with his clarifying remarks in parentheses):
Fascism – a political philosophy, movement or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual, and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition. [The state has power over every aspect of the economy to plan and regulate its workings. The factors of production are owned privately, but controlled by the governing authorities as to what and how they are to produce, and what level of profits they are to retain.]
Capitalism – an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision rather than by state control, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market. [The state is neither to own nor operate the factors of production, nor to interfere in the peaceful decisions of their operation, leaving them to be controlled by the natural laws such as supply and demand that operate within the marketplace.]
Hultberg explains that the two systems are obviously different in the fact that fascism advocates state control over the factors of production and their profits, while capitalism advocates private control over those factors.
Thus, capitalism is a system of economic organization without government involvement. The descriptive adjective of “laissez-faire” means to leave alone. Theoretically, the government’s job is basically to preserve the peace and perform those few limited functions granted by the Constitution. Otherwise, private enterprise is free enterprise. Individual owners of private businesses make the decisions of hiring, pricing, wage determination, production levels, policy planning, profit disposal, etc. Government is divorced from these economic decisions.
Under fascism, the government’s job is to intervene into the marketplace to control all the various economic interactions of its participants. Its role is to manipulate the economic interactions through regulations and the conveyance of special privileges. Government assumes this power because it is felt that this is the only way stability and order can be maintained in society. The government confiscates much of the businesses’ profit and uses them as the government sees fit. The term “private” is still used within the context of government-business “cooperation.” However, government simply tells businesses what it wants done and legally mandates that it be done. There is no choice in the matter. Those who do not do as the government says are imprisoned or fined egregiously.
Hultberg concludes that fascism is thus a command economy where massive centralized government is developed to regulate its citizens’ lives. The major power centers of society – government, corporations, and banks – form a triad to monopolize and manipulate the economy according to their liking, their aggrandizement, and their profit at the expense of the individual and his rights.
After equating capitalism to fascism, analysts turn around and have a look at the United States. They conclude that the United States is a “classic example” of modern day fascism. “The essence of fascism,” writes Thomas J. DiLorenzo of Loyola College, “is that government should be the master, not the servant, of the people. Think about this. Does anyone in America really believe that this is not what we have now? Are Internal Revenue Service agents really our ‘servants’? Is compulsory ‘national service’ for young people[…]not a classic example of coercing individuals to serve the state? Isn’t the whole idea behind the massive regulation and regimentation of American industry and society the notion that individuals should be forced to behave in ways defined by a small governmental elite?”
“Virtually all of the specific economic policies advocated by the Italian and German fascists of the 1930′s,” says DiLorenzo, “have also been adopted in the United States in some form, and continue to be adopted to this day. Sixty years ago, those who adopted these interventionist policies in Italy and Germany did so because they wanted to destroy economic liberty, free enterprise, and individualism. Only if these institutions were abolished could they hope to achieve the kind of totalitarian state they had in mind.”
A recent film by Aaron Russo, “America: Freedom to Fascism,” explains how over a period of time, America has become a fascist state indeed. Using interviews with U.S. Congressmen, the former IRS Commissioner, former IRS and FBI agents, tax attorneys and authors Russo proves conclusively that Americans are living in a fascist state.
To understand how the American fascism overshadowed the global capitalist order, one has to review the history of Federal Reserve Bank (FED), a private company, playing the central role in keeping the U.S. alive as a paper tiger. Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution states that Congress shall have the power to coin (create) money and regulate the value thereof. Today however, the FED controls and profits by printing money through the Treasury, and regulating its value not only for the Americans but also the rest of the world.
The FED began with approximately 300 people and a few banks that became owners in the Federal Reserve Banking System. They make up an international banking cartel of wealth beyond comparison. The FED banking system collects billions of dollars in interest annually and distributes the profits to its shareholders. The Congress gave the FED the right to print money (through the Treasury) at no interest to the FED. The FED creates money from nothing, and loans it back to people through banks, and charges interest on people’s currency. The FED also buys Government debt with money printed on a printing press and charges U.S. taxpayers’ interest.
One of the reasons for the Anglo-American alliance for terrorizing the world, as we will see below, is that bankers of the 12 Central banks of the Federal Reserve are connected to London Banking Houses which ultimately control the FED. When England lost the Revolutionary War with America, it planned to control the U.S. by controlling its banking system, the printing of dollar, and its debt. The same bankers who own the FED control the media. They also give huge political contributions to sympathetic members of Congress. Eustace Mullins shows in his book, The Secrets of the Federal Reserve, how England, through the Bankers, controls the U.S. Congress.
The Federal Reserve came to being when a group of bankers funded and staffed Woodrow Wilson’s campaign for President, who had committed to sign the act. President Wilson, who reportedly received $85,000 bribe from bankers, pushed the Federal Reserve Act through Congress just before Christmas. Much of Congress was on vacation. Later, Wilson remorsefully admitted while referring to the FED:
“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world – no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.”
Presidents Lincoln, Jackson, and Kennedy tried to stop this family of bankers by printing U.S. dollars without charging the taxpayers interest. Today, if the government runs a deficit, the FED prints dollars through the U.S. Treasury, buys the debt, and the dollars are circulated into the economy. In 1992, taxpayers paid the FED banking system $286 billion in interest on debt the FED purchased by printing money virtually cost free. Recent statistics would be far more shocking. Forty percent of personal federal income taxes of Americans go to pay this interest. The FED’s books are not open to the public. Congress has yet to audit it.
Referring to the Federal Reserve banks, Congressman Louis T. McFadden said in 1932:
“We have, in this country, one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board. This evil institution has impoverished the people of the United States and has practically bankrupted our government. It has done this through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it.”
The corporate media that is quick to generate the fear of “Islamism” and “Islamist terrorism” has hardly discussed FED. The reason is that the bankers behind the scene own the corporate media. In July 1968, the House Banking Subcommittee reported that Rockefeller, through Chase Manhattan Bank, controlled 5.9 percent of the stock in CBS. The bank had gained interlocking directorates with ABC as well. In 1974, Congress issued a report stating that the Chase Manhattan Bank’s stake in CBS rose to 14.1 percent and NBC to 4.5 percent (through RCA, the parent company of NBC). The same report said that the Chase Manhattan Bank held stock in 28 broadcasting firms. After this report, the Chase Manhattan Bank obtained 6.7 percent of ABC, and today the percentage could be much greater. It only requires 5 percent ownership to significantly influence the media. This is only one of 300 wealthy shareholders of the FED. It is believed other FED owners have similar holdings in the corporate media. Pat Robertson explains in his book, The New World Order, writes that to control the media, FED bankers call in their loans if the media disagrees with them. He also suggests the United States must abolish the FED.
In 1983, 50 corporations controlled the vast majority of all news media in the U.S. At the time, Ben Bagdikian was called “alarmist” for pointing this out in his book, The Media Monopoly. In his 4th edition, published in 1992, he wrote “in the U.S., fewer than two dozen of these extraordinary creatures own and operate 90% of the mass media” – controlling almost all of America’s newspapers, magazines, TV and radio stations, books, records, movies, videos, wire services and photo agencies. He predicted then that eventually this number would fall to about half a dozen companies. This was greeted with skepticism at the time. When the 6th edition of The Media Monopoly was published in 2000, the number had fallen to six. Since then, there have been more mergers and the scope has expanded to include new media like the Internet market. More than 1 in 4 Internet users in the U.S. now log in with AOL Time-Warner, the world’s largest media corporation.
In 2004, Bagdikian’s revised and expanded book, The New Media Monopoly, shows that only 5 huge corporations – Time Warner, Disney, Murdoch’s News Corporation, Bertelsmann of Germany, and Viacom (formerly CBS) – now control most of the media industry in the U.S. General Electric’s NBC is a close sixth.
These media giants have very high stakes involved in global business. That’s why they have to look at the international relations and political developments from the perspective of corporate interest. The global commercial system is a very recent development. Until the 1980s, media systems were generally national in scope. While there have been imports of books, films, music and TV shows for decades, the basic broadcasting systems and newspaper industries were domestically owned and regulated. Beginning in the 1980s, pressure from the IMF, World Bank and U.S. government to deregulate and privatize media and communication systems coincided with new satellite and digital technologies, resulting in the rise of transnational media giants.
How quickly has the global media system emerged? The two largest media firms in the world, Time Warner and Disney, generated around 15 percent of their income outside of the United States in 1990. By 1997, that figure was in the 30 percent to 35 percent range. Both firms expect to do a majority of their business abroad at some point in the next decade.
Rockefeller also controls the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the sole purpose of which is to aid in stimulating greater interest in foreign affairs. Nearly every major newscaster belongs to the Council on Foreign Relations. The Council on Foreign Relations controls many major newspapers and magazines. Additionally, major corporations owned by FED shareholders are the source of huge advertising revenues, which surely would influence the media.
With Congress allowing the constitutionally illegal FED to continue, much of taxes go to the shareholders of the FED and their bankers. The people, who enacted the FED, started the IRS, within months of the FED’s inception. The FED buys U.S. debt with money they printed from nothing, then charges the U.S. taxpayers interest. The government had to create income tax to pay the interest expense to the FED’s shareholders, but the income tax was never legally passed. In his book, The Law That Never Was, Bill Benson gives details, state-by-state, showing why it was not legally passed.
The above-mentioned description only described the ways to systematic looting of the middle class and the trend towards corporatism as being the core of present day fascism. Of course, there are other trends of fascism today. The most disturbing trend is controlling citizens and militarization of the society. With the advent of the crazy war on drugs and now the “war on terrorism,” we see a very disturbing trend towards increased intrusion into privacy of individuals, violence by law enforcement officials, human rights abuses and usurpation of civil liberties. International laws and standards of human rights have become meaningless. Americans have witnessed the illegal introduction of the military into civil law enforcement in the war on drugs in Texas. For example, Americans must not have forgotten murder of a teenage sheepherder or the film clips of the Humboldt County’s goon squad applying pepper mace directly into the eyes of peaceful protestors. We have reports of FBI involvement in the bombing of Earth First activist Judy Bari and the Earth First office in Arizona. With the introduction of Patriot Act, the “war on terrorism,” racial profiling, and electronic surveillance the situation has gone from bad to worse in the United States.
“People are more afraid of terror than having their privacy violated,” says Tomasso, chair of the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance. “For so long the rhetoric has been about fear, not hope and more traditional American values.” Actually, when a live frog is boiled slowly, it doesn’t know it’s in deep trouble until it is too late. The American public has been so collectively ‘slowly boiled’ with fear mongering rhetoric that the vast majority cannot even articulate the civil liberties which have been hacked away by this administration.
At international level, there is already an undemocratic world government in place. One set of people can change the future of others who are not involved in decision-making both in the West and those who are still reeling under de facto colonization in the Muslim world. Its objective is to put all human activity in the market, including education, culture, and health, and to maintain the status quo at home and abroad. Global fascism – a combination of capitalism and pseudo democracy – is responsible for pushing wealth upward both between countries and within countries. Since 1980, every country has experienced increasing inequalities. Eighty-five percent of people live in countries where inequalities are increasing and this includes China, Russia, E. Europe and West Europe and the United States, and at the same time inequalities are increasing between North and South.
The top 20 percent of humanity is capturing 82 percent of the wealth, while the bottom 80 percent of the graph must get along with 1.3 percent of the world’s wealth. These inequalities are becoming more extreme. There are now about 485 billionaires in the world, who control the equivalent of the wealth of half the world. Only three of those billionaires control wealth equalling the national production of 48 countries. All these people have a great stake in sustaining the status quo. That is why the world’s military spending has surged back up to $1 trillion (U.S.) a year, the old Cold War level, thanks chiefly to the fear of “Islamism” and the “war on terrorism” That is $200 billion more than in 2000, before the 9/11 attacks. It is money the United States and its allies could have put to far better use helping the world’s poorest by meeting the United Nations target of spending 0.7 per cent of their wealth on aid. The league of fascists is not even halfway there. Since 2000, military spending per person in the G-7 has jumped by $168. Aid spending has risen by $11.
A quick review is necessary to see how the situation came to this point; what role did the United States play into it and how the wars and occupations are directly related to the same phenomenon. This will also give us a clear idea as to how “Islamism” is being used to consolidate the worst form of fascism human beings have ever seen.
We know that World War II followed the global depression. Eustace Mullins gives evidence in his book to prove that the FED knowingly created the Great Depression for their gain. During that war, the United States supplied provisions and munitions to all its allies, refusing currency and demanding gold payments in exchange.
Masterson explains that by 1945, 80 percent of the world’s gold was sitting in U.S. vaults. The dollar became the one undisputed global reserve currency – it was treated worldwide as ‘safer than gold’. The Bretton Woods agreement was established. The chief features of the Bretton Woods system were an obligation for each country to adopt a monetary policy that maintained the exchange rate of its currency within a fixed value – plus or minus one percent – in terms of gold; and the ability of the IMF to bridge temporary imbalances of payments. In the face of increasing strain, the system collapsed in 1971, following the United States’ suspension of convertibility from dollars to gold.
On August 15, 1971, without prior warning to the leaders of the other major capitalist powers, U.S. president Nixon announced in a Sunday evening televised address to the nation that the United States was removing the gold backing from the dollar. The commitment by the United States to redeem international dollar holdings at the rate of $35 per ounce had formed the central foundation of the post-war international financial system set in place at the Bretton Woods conference of 1944. Nixon’s unilateral announcement dealt it a fatal blow.
The United States took full advantage of the period between 1944 and 1971, printed huge amount of dollars, exported and paid for ever-increasing amounts of commodities, tax cuts for the rich, many wars, mercenaries, spies and politicians the world over.
In 1971, several countries simultaneously tried to sell a small portion of their dollars to the United States for gold. Finally, the United States refused to exchange dollars for gold. Masterson quotes Krassimir Petrov, Ph. D. in Economics at Ohio University, who recently wrote, “The U.S. Government defaulted on its payment on August 15, 1971. While popular spin told the story of ‘severing the link between the dollar and gold’, in reality the denial to pay back in gold was an act of bankruptcy by the U.S. Government.”
The dollar and U.S. economy were on a precipice resembling Germany in 1929. The United States now had to find a way for the rest of the world to believe and have faith in the paper dollar. The solution was in oil, in the petrodollar. The United States viciously bullied first Saudi Arabia and then OPEC to sell oil for dollars only – it worked, the dollar was saved. Now countries had to keep dollars to buy much needed oil. And the United States could buy oil all over the world, free of charge. What a Houdini for the United States! Oil replaced gold as the new foundation to stop the paper dollar sinking.
Since 1971, the United States printed even more dollars to spend abroad. The trade deficit grew and the United States cheaply sucked-in much of the world’s products. Meanwhile, more vaults were built.
Masterson shows the reason for the U.S. paranoia when it comes to protecting the dollar. He cites expert, Cóilínn Nunan, from his 2003 work. According to Nunan, “The dollar is the de facto world reserve currency: the U.S. currency accounts for approximately two thirds of all official exchange reserves. More than four-fifths of all foreign exchange transactions and half of all world exports are denominated in dollars. In addition, all IMF loans are denominated in dollars.”
Dr Bulent Gukay of Keele University recently wrote, “This system of the U.S. dollar acting as global reserve currency in oil trade keeps the demand for the dollar ‘artificially’ high. This enables the U.S. to carry out printing dollars at the price of next to nothing to fund increased military spending and consumer spending on imports. There is no theoretical limit to the amount of dollars that can be printed. As long as the U.S. has no serious challengers, and the other states have confidence in the U.S. dollar, the system functions.”
This analysis shows that until 1990s, the U.S.-dollar was safe. This is when the Soviet demise became a reality. This is the time, when propaganda about Islamic fundamentalism began to unite the ranks against a common enemy. The ranks began to split around the same time. Since 1990, Western Europe has been busy growing, swallowing up central and Eastern Europe. French and German bosses were jealous of the U.S. ability to buy goods and people the world over for nothing. They wanted a slice of the free cake too.
Propaganda about “Islamic fundamentalism” intensified and the mantra of “Islamism” and “Islamists” was introduced around the time when the totalitarians in the United States noticed that French and Germans had the power and established the euro in late 1999 against massive U.S.-inspired opposition across Europe, especially from Britain – paid for in dollars of course. But the euro succeeded.
Only months after the euro-launch in January 2002, Saddam’s Iraq announced it was switching from selling oil in dollars only, to euros only – breaking the OPEC agreement. Iran, Russia, Venezuela, Libya, all began talking openly of switching too – were the floodgates about to be opened? Saddam Hussein had started insisting in 2000 that Iraq’s oil be sold for euros.
William R. Clark, the author of Petrodollar Warfare: Oil, Iraq and the Future of the Dollar, wrote in January 2003:
“Well, I’m going to give their game away – the core driver for toppling Saddam is actually the euro currency. Although completely suppressed in the U.S. media, the answer to the Iraq enigma is simple yet shocking. The upcoming war in Iraq war is mostly about how the ruling class at Langley and the Bush oligarchy view hydrocarbons at the geo-strategic level, and the overarching macroeconomic threats to the U.S. dollar from the euro. The Real Reason for this upcoming war is this administration’s goal of preventing further OPEC momentum towards the euro as an oil transaction currency standard. However, in order to pre-empt OPEC, they need to gain geo-strategic control of Iraq along with its 2nd largest proven oil reserves.”
In 2000, Iraq began selling oil in euros. In 2002, Iraq changed all their petro-dollars in their vaults into euros. A few months later, the United States began their invasion of Iraq. This makes perfect sense. However, the question is: Was 9/11 another Houdini chance to save the United States petro-dollar and the biggest financial/economic crash in history? Were Taliban also changing to selling petrol in euros? This is the point where the alliance between Islamophobes and the corporate extremists (colonialists) is exposed. They are dependable on each other.
The June 16, 2006 vote in the U.S. House of Representatives and the resolution that wrapped the Iraq conflict into the “war on terrorism” and rejected a deadline for U.S. troop withdrawal is yet another evidence that without the bogeyman of Islamism (terrorism), the totalitarians cannot take a single step forward. They could never start this war on the pretext of terrorism. So how can they justify it in the name of addressing the problem of terrorism? The reason is that the propaganda has now substantially made up public mind, the whole House of Representatives are hiding behind the pretext of ‘terrorism.” Bush, Rumsfeld and their British counterparts already declared that the war in Iraq is to avoid an “Islamic empire” from coming into being.
In 2003, the whole world was watching: very few were aware that the United States was engaging in the first oil currency or petrodollar war, fuelled by religious motivation and fully supported by religious extremists. Religious motivation behind the war is a proven case. One of the sings is that after occupying Iraq and Afghanistan, the focus was on constitutions and debates about Islam and democracy and Islamic Shari’ah. Simultaneously, after the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the United States secured oil areas first.
Their first oil sales in August were, of course, in dollars, again. The only government building in Baghdad not bombed was the Oil Ministry! It does not matter how many people are murdered – for the corporate fascists, the petrodollar and U.S. Federal Reserve must be saved as the only way to save dollar and the economic meltdown – otherwise the U.S. economy will crash, and much more besides. At the same time, the religious terrorists have fully ensured to wrap the war in religious colors. Bush, Rumsfeld and others have been calling since a while that the war is to save an Islamic empire from coming into being. The House last week passed a resolution, which equated and justified the war of aggression for sustaining the empire with war on terrorism.
The fascists in the United States know that they cannot fight this war all alone. Furthermore, the challenger to the U.S. economic dominance is not rial, dinar or dirham. The challenger is euro. If the glue of “Islamism” is not there, what will keep the Western alliance scared, bonded and tied to the U.S. dollar?
So the religious fanatics and colonial-corporatists are working hand in glove to sustain the myth of Islamism to save the crumbling empire. In early 2003, Hugo Chavez, President of Venezuela talked openly of selling half of its oil in euros (the other half is bought by the United States). On April 12, 2003, the U.S.-supported business leaders and some generals in Venezuela kidnapped Chavez and attempted a coup. The masses rose against this and the Army followed suit. The coup failed and the real face of the totalitarian fascists was exposed. Still the mass awareness has a long way to go, because most people are simply convinced that something in the name of “Islamism” exists. At the most, many only reach the stage of realization that the war is for oil. This, however, is not as simple as this.
A one-dimensional analysis tells us that in November 2000, the euro/dollar was at $0.82 dollars, its lowest ever, and still diving, but when Iraq started selling oil in euros, the euro dive was halted. In April 2002, senior OPEC reps talked about trading in euros and the euro shot up. In June 2003, the U.S. occupiers of Iraq switched trading back to dollars and the euro fell against the dollar again. It is a good analysis from the economic perspective; however, one has to see the other side of the coin as well.
The other side of the issue shows that the fascists in the United States are not scared of the mythical “Islamism.” That is their creation. They are scared of losing ground to Europeans who are also closely monitoring the situation in which the crumbling empire strives to maintain its monopoly. According to Masterson, in August 2003, Iran started to sell oil in euros to some European countries and the euro rose sharply. In the winter of 2003, Russian and OPEC politicians talked seriously of switching oil/gas sales to the euro and the euro rose. In February 2004, OPEC met and made no decision to turn to the euro – and yes, the euro fell against the dollar.
In June 2004, Iran announced it would build an oil bourse to rival London and New York, and again, the euro rose. The euro stands at $1.27 and has been climbing of late. So the need is to engage Europe in other matters so that an alternative to dollar dominance does not take root. The only thing that can force Europeans to follow the totalitarians in the United States blindly are terrorist attacks, such as those in Madrid and London, and planting blasphemous cartoons in the press with the help of neo-cons in the United States, so that public lose patience with the rise of “Islamism” – a perfect distraction for erecting an alternative to the crumbling American empire.
The empire, nevertheless, faces a serious dilemma. Although most of the non-Muslims have yet to see and recognize that “Islamism” is an invention to distract the public from the real war for sustaining de facto colonization of the Muslim world and, at the same time, keeping Europe at bay for gaining economic dominance. Nevertheless, the empire’s dilemma is not hidden from anyone. On May 5, 2006, Iran registered its own Oil Bourse, the IOB. Not only are they now selling oil in euros from abroad – they have established an actual Oil Bourse, a global trading centre for all countries to buy and sell their oil!
In his recent visit to London, Chavez talked openly about supporting the Iranian Oil Bourse, and selling oil in euros. When asked in London about the new arms embargo imposed by the United States against Venezuela, Chavez prophetically dismissed the United States as “a paper tiger”.
According to Masterson’s analysis, almost the entire world’s oil is presently sold on either the NYMEX, New York Mercantile Exchange, or the IPE, London’s International Petroleum Exchange. Both are owned by U.S. citizens and both sell and buy only in U.S. dollars. The success of the Iran Oil Bourse makes sense to Europe, which buys 70 percent of Iran’s oil. It makes sense for Russia, which sells 66 percent of its oil to Europe. But the U.S. faces a dilemma which further execrates when China and India stated that they are very interested in the new Iranian Oil Bourse. And worse still for the totalitarian fascists in the United States, it makes sense for Europe, China, India and Japan – as well as all the other countries mentioned above – to buy and sell oil in euros. They will certainly have to stock-up on euros now, and they will sell dollars to do so. The euro is far more stable than the debt-ridden dollar. The IMF has recently highlighted U.S. economic difficulties and the trade deficit strangling the United States – there is no way out. The U.S. House of Representatives’ recent decision to present the Iraq war in the wrapper of a “war on terrorism” is the sign of desperation and depression already settling in the hearts and minds in Washington.
The reason Britain is the staunchest ally of the United States in the “war on terrorism” and promotion of the myth of Islamism is that it faces the same fate with the collapse of present monetary system, as we discussed earlier. Of course, the problem for so many countries now is, how to get rid of their vaults full of dollars before it crashes? Furthermore, the United States has bullied so many countries for so many decades around the world, that many will see a chance to kick the bully back. Britain remains in a precarious position because the United States cannot accept even 5 percent of the world’s dollars. If it happened, it would not only crash the U.S. economy, but also drag Britain with it in particular and much of the world in General. Therefore, it must not sound strange when Blair talks about “poisonous misinterpretation” of Islam in his fear mongering speeches. It is not surprising that Britain was the first to issue a dossier of evidence on 9/11 to hold Osama and company responsible. Interestingly, the FBI says after five years, it has “no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.” In 2001, however, British government was quicker than the U.S. officials, who were still not sure how to present the inside job of 9/11 as a terrorist attack by Muslim fanatics, inspired by Islamism.
Promoting the myth of a powerful enemy, bent on challenging the status quo – ”our way of life” – is necessary. Without these myths, the empire has no option to check the economic depression in case the rest of the world has time to relax from the worries of “Islamism” and focus on the right economic approaches to get rid of the United States’ monopoly. In that case, the United States will have to general trade surplus to survive. Masterson quotes the Scottish Socialist Voice article, which states, “the U.S., needs to generate a trade surplus to get out of this one. Problem is it can’t.” To do that they must force U.S. workers into near slavery, to get paid less than Chinese or Indian workers. We all know that this will not happen.
In the post 9/11 period in which most of the official lies are exposed on public, it would invite chaos for sure. Maybe a workers’ revolution. The protests in the wake of recent, controversial immigration bill in the United States are an eye opener. But looking at the situation as it is now, it is more likely to be a re-run of Germany post-1929, and some form of extreme-right mass movement will emerge.
The Muslim world is paying the price for the dilemma faced by the United States, Europe and China alike. Unfortunately, the new enemy of choice is Islam and most of the oil resources are also in the Middle East. Europe, China and the rest of Asia still have no economic independence and strength to stop the whole world’s economies collapsing with the United States. Presently, their vaults are full to the brim with dollars.
The United States is at the end of the tether. It has to find a way to pay for its dollar-imperialist exploitation of the world since 1945. It can never sustain the shaky alliances with the morbid dread of “Islamism” and Islamists taking over the world. Somehow, eventually, it has to account for every dollar in every vault in the world. “Islamism” cannot save the United States. “Islamism” is a myth, created to conceal real motives of the religious and secular totalitarians in the West in general and the United States in particular. Promoting this myth was not possible without a collaborative approach on the part of those who wanted to sustain the United States’ economic dominance and those who wanted to Christianize the whole world and establish the “dominion of God.”
The extremist neo-cons and their corporate colonialist buddies have no option than declaring a war on the world like Hitler. They know that bombing Iran could backfire tremendously. It would bring Iran openly into the war in Iraq, behind the Shiite majority. The United States cannot cope even now with the much smaller Iraqi insurgency. Perhaps the United States will follow the present course of feeding into the Sunni vs Shiite conflict and turn it into a wider Middle-East civil-war. However, this is so dangerous for global oil supplies and associated petro-dollar. Further, they know that this would be temporary, as Masterson suggests, “some country somewhere else, will establish a euro-oil-exchange. Perhaps in Brussels.”
The United States cannot scrap the dollar and print a whole new currency. This will destroy 66 percent of the rest of the world’s savings and reserves in one swoop. Imagine the implications? The fanatical approach to resolve every issue through military force is because of such desperation in the White House, Wall Street and Pentagon. Otherwise who could expect the nonsense of equating the war in Iraq with the “war on terrorism” from the U.S. House of Representatives three years after invasion and occupation of Iraq.
The United States has already done the way Germany did. It staged 9/11 attacks. The U.S. president and other top officials lied through their teeth to invade and occupy Iraq. The Nazis also put Reichstag on fire and filmed a mock Polish Army attack on Germany to win hearts and minds at home just before invading Poland in 1938. But these measures are short lived as well. So, how is the United States going to escape this time? The only global arena of total superiority left is military. The only solution to the inflated fear of “Islamism” is a twenty-first century Final Solution at home and abroad. Who knows what horrors lie ahead. A greater world war is the only tool by which the United States could discipline its ‘allies’ into keeping the dollar in their vaults and maintaining the status-quo of “our way of life.”
We need to understand that the looming Greater War is not because of “Islamism” or “Islamist terrorism.” The coming crisis belongs purely to capitalism, (dollar) imperialism and the colonial fascists’ zeal to continue de facto colonization.
The above is an excerpt from Abid Ullah Jan’s latest book, “After Fascism: Muslims and the Struggle for Self-determination.”
© 2006 Abid Ullah Jan.