Sowing the Seeds of Western Terror Threat, Reaping American Military Bases

[American terrorism, in the disguise of “Militant Islam,” has one goal–to advance American foreign policy.  The goal of US foreign policy is to militarize the entire world, on the theory that the American military machine can then dominate all the minor conflicts.  This is only theoretically possible if Western conflict managers can keep all the little wars at manageable levels.  This is where America’s international army of “Islamist” commandos, a.k.a., “al-Qaeda,” comes in handy, for the nefarious purpose of starting small terror wars.  Small terrorist incidents and rumors of incidents have proven sufficient to justify an American military presence in every country of Central Asia, even in Eastern Russia.  In truth, there is no terror threat in Central Asia, except for that artificial threat manufactured by the Pentagon and the CIA.  Rewarding this state terrorism with any sort of American presence, military or otherwise, is totally unjustified and will ultimately prove to do to CA what the Western powers have so far done to the Middle East and North Africa.]

Situation in Central Asia stimulates militarization: Yerlan Karin

Tengri News gain the top

Political expert and Secretary of Nur Otan party Yerlan Karin believes that the situation in Central Asia stimulates militarization in the region and spurs military expenses.

“Escalation of terrorism threat in the world and in Central Asia indirectly promotes militarization. Foreign bases are functioning in the region already. Opening of more bases is possible at the territory of Uzbekistan, not to mention the recurring talks about transfer of a part of the military vehicles and armament to Uzbekistan after withdrawal of NATO troops from Afghanistan in 2014,” Yerlan Karin said.

The political expert gave an example of Russia that allocated over $1 billion for maintenance of the armed forces of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. He also pointed out the sharp growth of military expenses around the world starting from mid 2000s. They have grown by almost a half.

“The global military costs made $1.7 trillion in 2011. Experts relate this growth to the escalating terrorism threat. At least, all governments justify allocation of big money with a need to counter terrorism. What we have is growth of extremist and terrorist activities and growth of military costs. We are all speaking about the economic crisis, insufficiency of resources, but overall the trend is very different,” Yerlan Karin said.

As an example he referred to the data and assessments of foreign institutes and experts that monitor terrorism problems.

“They make annual reports, make forecasts for the coming years. According to one of such institutes, British Maplecroft, in 2010 and 2011 the level of terrorism in Kazakhstan was quite low: 2 in the scale of 5. The level is also indicated in colors. Green stands for a low threat, orange is high threat and red is very high threat. There are intermediate colors, like yellow, as well,” the expert explained.

Political expert Yerlan Karin. Photo by Yaroslav Radlovskiy©

Political expert Yerlan Karin. Photo by Yaroslav Radlovskiy©

According to Karin, in the forecasts of the above British company for 2013 Kazakhstan is marked with orange color and is placed in the group of countries with high terrorism threat level.

“10 data of the U.S. Department of State shows that the total number of terrorist attacks in the world ranged from 200 to 600 attacks a year until the middle of the 2000s. Starting from 2005 their number increased dramatically. Over 10 thousand terrorist attacks happen every year. There was an especially high spike in 2007: 14 thousand terrorist attacks in the world. Last year there were 10 thousand terrorist attacks. Over 60 percent of registered attacks fall on Afghanistan and Pakistan,” Karin added.

Speaking of the planned withdrawal of coalition NATO group from Afghanistan in 2014 the political expert said that it was unclear how this would affect the situation in Central Asia.

“There are certain stereotypes: we are used to believing that the situation is unstable in Kyrgyzstan and in Tajikistan. Normally, we speak about these countries as of the weak parts of the region. In some way it is true, because Kyrgyzstan is ridden by a constant flow of revolutions and conflicts, while no new political system has been formed yet. We see similar things in Tajikistan. The incumbent leader is quite strong there, but there is resistance in some regions and a power struggle among the elite. Summer events in mountains of Badakhshan confirm this,” Yerlan Karin said.

According to him, the countries cannot be divided into stable and unstable and the regional situation has to be viewed as one integral whole.

“In a scenario that involves change of the ruling elites there is no way to predict the course of events in the other countries. The countries should not be divided into weak and stable ones in the region. Central Asian countries have a common problem: not all of these countries have built a stable regime over the 20 years of independence. Not all (regimes) have been tested yet. Kazakhstan is one of these countries to some extent,” Yerlan Karin said.

He said that Kazakhstan was introducing different mechanisms of automatic regulation, the country had formed the institutions and launched political self-regulation mechanisms.

“Speaking of the region in general we can say that the time has not yet shown which of the systems are stable and how stable they are. You know everything that has happened in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. But experts forecast that this decade will be quite a complicated one. It will reveal the extent of instability of the systems. It is hard to say right now,” Yerlan Karin said.

By Baubek Konyrov from