Center for Strategic Assessment and forecasts

Autonomous non-profit organization

Home / Politics and Geopolitics / Great Arab Revolution / Articles
Algeria - a new target?
Material posted: Publication date: 29-09-2011

Algerian militants are closely connected with special services of some countries of the Gulf, pursuing their own interests. Quiet time for Algeria to an end. This is indirectly confirmed and talkative Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi, who announced his intention in the near future to replace the Libyan Algerian gas. And despite the fact that Algeria, as a country-supplier, never gave reason for criticism.

The process, dubbed the "Arab spring", less meet this definition. This applies both to the semantic load of metaphors, and the chronology of events. The NATO operation in Libya was prolonged until the New Year, due to Libya's "spring" turned into "winter", and relatively peaceful revolutions in Egypt showed a tendency to move into a phase of military confrontation.

Not seem an idle question — who is next? And under what sauce new dish "democratic feast" will "serve"? Thanks to the efforts of a number of countries, the middle East turned into a highly unstable and explosive structure, and this condition only worsens. Emerging, threatening potential war crises, for example — in the relations of Turkey with Cyprus and Israel.

Almost inevitable attempt to repeat the Libyan scenario in Syria. "It is time for the UN Security Council to announce sanctions against the Syrian regime and to stand on the side of the Syrian people," said Barack Obama. And French President Sarkozy during the recent visit to Tripoli, once again stressed that the events in Libya in the first place should be a lesson to Damascus. Almost simultaneously with this move, the U.S. state Department urged its citizens to leave Syria.

Without waiting for a UN security Council decision, the Obama administration, in close relations with Turkey began to develop a detailed regional strategy for the period after the overthrow of the Syrian President, whose fate, therefore, already decided. The main goal of the plan is defined as the prevention of inter-confessional civil war between Sunnis, alawites, Kurds and Christians in Syria. That looks quite a sensible precaution — the war in Libya has shown that the overthrow of the legitimate government and the coming to power of "the people" does not mean the transition to the actual stability and control. At the same time, the fact that demonstrative of developing such a strategy, which, in essence, divides Syria in a kind of "zones of occupation" suggests that the question of intervention in Syria is already solved. The solution adopted regardless of what the new reforms he's going to hold or already holds Bashar al-Assad.

The experience of Libya showed that airstrikes alone successful in war, it is difficult to achieve (especially if the allied "native" troops would not be considered as the standard of combat capability). Ground offensive by the Western armies, of course, conducted, but they had at least the minimum, but an eye on the rest of the world. And this obviously affected their performance. There is reason to believe that in developing Turkey and the United States strategy this fact will be taken into account.

Leviski precedent has shown that the invasion of the territory of a sovereign state need a more valid excuse than the rebellion of a small part of opposition-minded citizens in one of the provinces of the country. And now this preposition seems to appear.

Assistant to the President of the United States on counter-terrorism, John Brennan, during a speech at Harvard law school on September 17, marked a new milestone in international relations. Henceforth, the United States retains the right to limited military operations in every corner of the globe. "As repeatedly stated by the President (Barack Obama), we are at war with "al Qaeda," said Brennan. "Since we are involved in armed conflict, the United States take the position that — in accordance with international law — authorizes action against al-Qaida without having to analyze whether they are dictated by interests of self-defense or not," he said. "We reserve the right to carry out unilateral actions in case if other governments are unwilling or unable to take the necessary measures," said Brennan. The United States, according to Brennan, are "persons who are a danger" for the country. Well, if these, according to the United States, dangerous persons are on the territory of third countries — so much the worse for these countries. If the us President determines that the government of a certain country is not enough fights with anyone who threatens US will be taken "unilateral action". Furthermore, Washington believes that the elimination of dangerous persons "can significantly — even if only temporarily — to disrupt the plans and capabilities of al-Qaida and associated forces".

Thus, according to many American experts, "al-Qaeda" is largely controlled if not by US intelligence, at least intelligence of their closest allies in the Arab world. For Example, Saudi Arabia. Until recently, al-Qaeda was geographically tied to Afghanistan and the Taliban, which allowed to justify the presence of American army. However, in the spring, US officials, particularly Secretary of state Hillary Clinton, made a number of statements, which directly followed the Taliban the Taliban and al-Qaida — is widespread, and because "fight" with her, also in all parts of the globe.

Al-Qaeda and its affiliates often thrive where there is disorder and chaos, and governments are unable to effectively govern the country", — said the assistant to the President Brennan. "Assisting such countries to build up a strong legal system in tandem with the institutions, effectively protecting her, may serve as one of the most successful means of combating groups like al-Qaida. But why, in that case, the U.S. own hands provoke this chaos throughout the Middle East?

Maybe we need to create conditions for strengthening of al-Qaeda, in order to occupy territories in which it "increased" ? This question, alas, does not seem to us far-fetched. As al-Qaida and "associated forces" the most comfortable way feel in all the countries engulfed by the "Arab spring". As military Governor of Tripoli is Abdelhakim Belhaj, formerly governing the Libyan Islamic armed group (LIFG), which, as you know, is a branch of al-Qaeda in Libya and by the United States included in the "terrorist list". The existing ideologist of al Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri described Belhadj as the "Emir of Mujahideen" — "leader of warriors". So fight the U.S. and its allies with "al-Qaeda" looks weird. It is unclear where the line that separates the enemy from the ally.

Maybe that line and not look? Why destroy al-Qaida, if under the pretext of fighting with it, you can invade anywhere? It is even possible with reasonable confidence to predict the future — probably after Libya will come the turn of Algeria. Which, according to common U.S. Embassy reports, al-Qaida is gaining strength.

From the communiqué of the American diplomatic mission indicated that the terrorist network was preparing attacks against Western oil companies operating in Algeria. In turn, the Algerian newspaper "El Khabar" with reference to sources in the U.S. intelligence reported that al Qaeda is preparing to inflict missile strikes on foreign oil firms in the Sahel and North Africa. The U.S. government also warned the Western oil companies operating in Algeria that al-Qaeda may carry out attacks against their personnel and equipment. In another report the state Department States that the speech can go about the planned destruction of militants AKIM aircraft leased by oil producers. To realize these sinister plans of the terrorists got a number of MANPADS, stolen from armories in Libya. Why, however, these MANPADS have appeared now, and does not show during 25,000 flights aviation Alliance over Libya? Another question — unanswered.

Meanwhile, on 26 August there was a terrorist attack at the building of the military Academy in the Algerian city Scherschel, resulting in the deaths and wounding 44 others. The responsibility assumed "al-Qaeda in countries of Islamic Maghrib" (AKIM), which stressed that the attack was carried out in retaliation to Algeria for its support of the Gaddafi regime. Representatives of the Libyan TNC, even before its official approval as the government had to threaten Algeria promises terrible vengeance for the same support Muammar Gaddafi, and in response to constant accusations of Algeria in the fact that uncontrolled proliferation of weapons throughout the region is to blame for the Libyan rebels. If the TNC and al-Qaeda ashamed taking revenge against Algeria for the support to Qaddafi, tell where ends and begins PNS international terrorism?

Meanwhile, Algerian society are the same political processes as in Libya, Syria, Egypt. "Winning" in Libya, the rebels are full supporters of the Algerian militants since the early nineties conducting anti-government diyalnosti on the territory of Algeria. After the split of the Islamic salvation Front (FIS), the defeat of the Armed Islamic group (GIA), the most radical Islamists, who refused to lay down their arms, United in the so-called Salafist group for preaching Jihad, since 2006 inbound into the orbit of al-Qaida. Algerian militants are closely connected with special services of some countries of the Gulf, pursuing their own interests. Quiet time for Algeria is clearly coming to an end. This is indirectly confirmed and talkative Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi, who announced his intention in the near future to replace the Libyan Algerian gas. And despite the fact that Algeria, as a country-supplier, never gave reason for criticism.

Active preparations for rebellion began forces, which rely on the France — Kabyle separatist organization, in 2001-2002 organized several, not peaceful demonstrations. The system of government of Algeria is extremely vulnerable to claims of "Champions of Korea" (according to the Algerian laws, the President can rule the country for life). Algerian opposition Alliance United around the "national coordination for change and democracy" (pcfa), which regularly banned mass March. As in all cases, under his banners gathered virtually the entire spectrum of real opposition from moderate Islamists to socialists.

Thus, to repeat in Algeria is not even Egyptian, and the Libyan scenario is ready. Most likely, in 2012 we are waiting for a new incarnation of the "Arab spring".

Alexander Vishnevsky

Source: http://win.ru/school/8305.phtml

Tags: USA , Europe , NATO , Africa


RELATED MATERIALS: Politics and Geopolitics