18/06/2013 23:49 18/06/2013 23:12
Since the start of the Syrian conflict, I have seen and read many opinions condemning Basher Al Asad regime for the brutal killings of the opposition, suppression of democracy and dictatorship. As usual, majority of the Arab country have had or have been under continuous autocratic rule since the break up of the Ottoman Empire. How and in what process Ottoman Khilafah was broken, a little understanding of its background will give us some clues to the ongoing crisis in the Muslim world. Whether 1/11 in Bangladesh or Iraq Iran war, Palestinian conflict, green revolution. Orange revolution, you name it; our friend, the British or the Americans have had some form of involvement. I will not take you through a long history to make my point, but give you a brief picture of my understanding of their involvement.
Back in 1997, I read a book written by a Palestinian Arab, titled ‘The House of Sauds.’ In it, the author explains that the British before the 1st World War had various problems with the Ottoman: Especially as regards to their trade route to India. So the British decided to adopt their tested strategy, and that was, ‘divide and Rule’ they sent their best man, an army officer to make contacts with Arab tribal leaders. After some searching, he found one man by the name Abdul Aziz Al Saud. He was a tall well built Arab tribal leader who had a long family history of conflict with the Ottoman governors of Riyadh. The British took advantage that hostility of Al Saud and had offered Al Saud 70 thousand pound a year loyalty money, as well as promise to provide arms to oust Ottoman from Arab land if he begins a war. Mr Saud took that offer gracefully and eventually, when the 1st world war had begun to take shape as planned by the British and the French, Al Saud began his campaign and the result was the break up of the Ottoman Khilafat.
Before the much talked about event of 1/11, I had the opportunity to meet with Mr Sultan Muhammad Monsur in a Restaurant in Chingford, London. I was then only an onlooker, not much interested with Bangladesh Politics. He, in his private talk with fellow colleagues had said something that later on I realized matched perfectly with the word of DR Kamal Hussain who had said the same thing to a friend journalist some two year before 1/11. They both said, “Bangladesh will see a surprise in the next election in 2007. It had been said with so much stress and surety that one can not ignore their knowledge of the outcome. This could be a probable reason for Mr Sultan Muhammad Monsurs political wilderness. What did they know and who had they been talking to is now clear from the active involvement of the Americans and the Bangladeshi born British diplomat Anwar Choudhury. One eleven was their creation to bring the army government to power, and install Mr Younus to power so that Americans and the British could have their way in their plan for south East Asia. Mr Younus had talked a lot about having a deep sea port, transhipments facility, opening up Bangladesh to International trade. All familiar things that Mr Mozina had been talking about in the past few years. And to this end, with the draft signing of TICFA, they probably are not far off from realizing their dream.
I had mentioned earlier that the British had a hand in the break up of the Ottoman Khilafah which they had planned long before the First World War. It seems their past habit have not changed even to this day. On 16th of June 2013, I read an article in Press TV website which really surprised me, because I had no idea that the British had planned the war in Syria long before the present unrest in the Arab country. It was reported that a former French foreign minister Mr Dumas had said in an interview with a French Parliamentary TV network,
“I’m going to tell you something. I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business. I met with top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria.” He continued by saying, “This was in Britain not in America. Britain was organizing an invasion of rebels into Syria. They even asked me, although I was no longer minister for foreign affairs, if I would like to participate.” When asked what was the motive behind inciting violence in Syria, he said, , "Very simple! With the very simple aim! To overthrow the Syrian government, because in the region, it's important to understand, that the Syrian regime makes anti-Israeli talk,”
The former foreign minister added that he had been told by an Israeli prime minister a long time ago that Tel Aviv would seek to “destroy” any country that did not “get along” with it in the region. From this interview it is clear, who are the culprit behind many of the arm conflict and political foreplay in the Muslim world today. I do not in anyway support Basher Al Asad, he is the same despot as other dictators in the region, but my question is to do with understanding the wider scheme of foreign players, and should we not solve our problem by our selves rather than inviting foreign powers who have other agendas in their mind. Just look back at Iraq, Afghanistan and Lybia; what are the consequences of foreign involvements? If our politician and leaders are able to understand who benefits most from our disunity, half of our problems will be solved.
10404 views 0 comments