English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest world news

Fair Is Foul And Foul Is Fair In Syria

Published

9 years ago

on

Fair Is Foul And Foul Is Fair In Syria

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

By Saeed Naqvi

 Like Henry Kissinger, New York Times columnist, Thomas L Friedman, belongs to a growing tribe of strategists who insist that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has been overshadowed, indeed overwhelmed, by a much bigger, Shia-Sunni faultline.

 Even though Osama bin Laden, the 9/11 hijackers, Wahabism, Salafism, are all traced to Saudi Arabia, the US, Israel and the West in general have developed a high comfort level with Saudi Arabia regardless. In this framework, the West has placed the Shia world in opposition to it.

 Was it always like this? Consider this recent historical perspective.

 “As we approach the season of the Nobel Peace Prize, I would like to nominate the spiritual leader of Iraq’s Shiites, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, for this year’s medal.” The recommendation came from NYT ace columnist, Friedman. For emphasis, he added: “I’m serious.”

 This was in 2005. Friedman, was “in” with George W. Bush. In ecstatic pieces for the world’s most powerful newspaper, the NYT, he repeatedly described the occupation of Iraq as history’s greatest effort at democratization.

 Americans had come against Saddam Hussain, a tough Baathist and atheist by belief and a manufacturer of weapons of mass destruction. Remember Saddam invoked “Allah” for political mobilization only after the 1992 operation Desert Storm. He had Allah o Akbar inscribed on an otherwise secular emblem as an afterthought.

The eclipse of Saddam brought great relief to Shias in the South – around the holy cities of Najaf, Karbala and oil rich enclaves neighbouring Basra. For the first time the world realized that Shias were an overwhelming majority in all of Iraq.

 A triangular situation had emerged – the occupying Americans, Sunni (plus Kurdish) minority and the Shia majority. The Shias, led by Ayatollah Sistani, played a straight political hand. Once occupation had taken place, he encouraged the occupiers against his tormentor, Saddam Hussain.

 That is when Friedman was moved to write:

“If some kind of democracy takes root here (Iraq), it will also be due in large measure to the instincts and directives of the dominant Iraqi Shiite communal leader, Ayatollah Sistani.”

 “It was Sistani who insisted that the elections not be postponed in the face of the Baathist-fascist insurgency. And it was Sistani who ordered Shiites not to retaliate for the Sunni Baathist and Jihadist attempts to drag them into civil war by attacking Shiite mosques and massacring Shiite civilians.”

 Friedman proceeded to compare the Ayatollah with other icons who helped bring democracy to their respective countries – Nelson Mandela and Mikhail Gorbachev.  The quality of democracy that obtains in Russia, Iraq and South must be left for Friedman to applaud.

 Rightly or wrongly, Friedman extrapolated from his experience in Iraq. This is at a variance from the fraud Bush’s Defence Secretary, Dick Cheney sought to perpetrate on April 9, 2003, when he had the marines pull down Saddam Hussain’s state at Firdous square and attributed the event to a popular uprising.

Friedman zigzagged along shifting convictions, until by August 2015, he began to show the first signs of tolerating something so totally different from Sistani as to take one’s breath away. In a conversation with Barack Obama he appeared to be nodding agreement on a kind of positive ambiguity about the ISIS.

Sudden and exponential growth of the Islamic State was something of a mystery. It is in the nature of the post colonial media that the views of Developing country elites particularly in the Arab world (except allies like Saudi Arabia, other GCC countries and Jordan) never get reflected in the media. How did the elites in Iraq, Oman, Yemen, Syria, Egypt, Iran and other Muslim countries view the IS phenomenon. Without exception, they described it as an American, French, British, Saudi, Qatari and Turkish cooperative effort. I know first hand. Ask the ambassadors in New Delhi.

If this is what they thought, why were they silent? They were not silent, but their protestations were ignored by the global networks. So hopelessly one sided is the global media, that even shining stars of independent journalism like Seymour Hersh and Robert Fisk are killed by a simple trick of being ignored.

 Writing on Donald Trump’s proposed visit to the centres of semitic religions, Riyadh, the Vatican and Jerusalem, Fisk satirically speculates: “Trump will be able to ask Netanyahu for help against the IS without – presumably – realizing that Israel bombs only the Syrian army and the Shia Hezbollah in Syria but has never – ever – bombed IS in Syria. In fact, the Israelis have given medical aid to fighters from Jabhat al Nusra which is part of Al Qaeda which attacked the US on 9/11.”

 By universal consent, Fisk is among the most knowledgeable journalist who has lived in West Asia for decades. But the Imperial Information order keeps him outside the ken.

Truth however has a way of surfacing. Let us revert to Friedman’s interview with Obama. Friedman asked Obama why he delayed taking action against the IS when it was in its nascent stages?

Obama replies: “That we did not just start taking a bunch of airstrikes all across Iraq as soon as the IS came in was because that would have taken the pressure off Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al Maliki.”

 In other words, by the US President’s own admission, the IS at that stage worked as an asset to apply pressure on Maliki who was in bad adour with the US because he had refused to sign the Status of Forces Agreement with the US ironically on the advice of exactly the person Friedman was recommending for a Nobel Peace Prize in 2005 – Sistani.

Lo and behold, in his recent column, Friedman is advising Trump to give up the pretense of fighting IS – because that is not in the US (and presumably Israel’s) national interest.

 He wants “Trump to be Trump – utterly cynical and unpredictable. ISIS right now is the biggest threat to Iran, Hezbollah, Russia and pro-Shiite Iranian militias.”

 “In Syria” Friedman recommends, “Trump should let ISIS be Assad’s, Iran’s Hezbollah’s and Russia’s headache.” In other words, let the IS be a western asset.

 A recent cartoon with a most succinct message shows one Saudi ask another:

“We finance wars all around us, when shall we bomb the Jewish state?”

 “When it becomes Shia.”

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Latest world news

India envoy Dinesh Trivedi meets PM Modi after talks with Bangladesh PM Tarique Rahman 

India’s High Commissioner to Bangladesh Dinesh Trivedi met PM Modi after talks with Bangladesh PM Tarique Rahman amid diplomatic tensions.

Published

4 days ago

on

August 12, 2026

By

India’s High Commissioner to Bangladesh Dinesh Trivedi met Prime Minister Narendra Modi in New Delhi on Tuesday, a day after his meeting with Bangladesh Prime Minister Tarique Rahman in Dhaka.

According to the High Commission of India in Bangladesh, Trivedi sought PM Modi’s guidance on further strengthening the bilateral relationship between India and Bangladesh through a constructive and people-centric approach.

The meeting came a day after Trivedi held discussions with Tarique Rahman on matters of mutual interest and ways to advance ties between the two neighbouring countries.

Dinesh Trivedi Meets Bangladesh PM

During his meeting with Tarique Rahman on Monday, Trivedi conveyed greetings from Prime Minister Modi and reiterated India’s commitment to working with the Bangladeshi administration and its people in a positive, constructive and forward-looking manner.

The two sides discussed issues of mutual interest and explored avenues for strengthening India-Bangladesh relations with a people-centric approach.

The engagement took place at the Prime Minister’s Office in the Cabinet Division at the Bangladesh Secretariat. Trivedi also shared his experience of serving in Dhaka over the previous two months.

Sheikh Hasina Extradition Request

The meeting assumed significance as Bangladesh has expressed hope that India will expedite the extradition process involving former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who was ousted following a student-led uprising in 2024.

According to a statement issued by the Bangladesh Prime Minister’s Office, Dhaka also reiterated its request for India to return individuals it alleges were involved in the killing of Shahid Osman Hadi, a prominent figure associated with the July uprising who was shot on December 12, 2025.

Tarique Rahman stressed the need to create a suitable environment to take forward relations between Bangladesh and India.

Bangladesh Foreign Minister Khalilur Rahman, Prime Minister’s Foreign Affairs Adviser Humayun Kabir and other officials attended the meeting.

India-Bangladesh Ties Amid Diplomatic Friction

The latest high-level engagements come amid diplomatic tensions between the two countries following a virtual press interaction by Sheikh Hasina in New Delhi on August 5.

The event, organised by the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of South Asia to mark the second anniversary of her ouster, prompted strong objections from Dhaka.

During the interaction, Hasina said she remained determined to return to Bangladesh in December and restore democracy, while acknowledging the possibility of imprisonment or a death sentence upon her return.

Bangladesh’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs subsequently registered a strong protest and said the development had affected public sentiment and complicated efforts to strengthen bilateral cooperation.

India has said the government had no involvement in the event. Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said it was organised by a private media entity and clarified that New Delhi did not endorse views expressed at the forum.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Trump, PM Modi will resolve tariff issue over Russian oil trade, says US official

White House Trade Adviser Peter Navarro said Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi will resolve the issue over US tariff threats linked to India’s Russian oil trade.

Published

4 days ago

on

August 12, 2026

By

Modi trump

US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi will resolve the issue surrounding the threat of US tariffs linked to India’s purchase of Russian oil, White House Trade Adviser Peter Navarro said on Tuesday.

Navarro’s remarks came days after the US Senate passed a bill authorising the US President to impose tariffs of up to 100 per cent on the top five purchasers of Russian oil. The measure argues that such purchases directly contribute to financing Russia’s war in Ukraine.

Navarro comments on India’s Russian oil trade

Speaking to reporters at the White House, Navarro said India was not involved in the oil trade with Russia before the Ukraine war began in 2022.

He alleged that India became heavily involved in the trade after Russia’s invasion and sold refined products on behalf of Russia, which he said helped support the Russian war effort.

“Prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, India was not involved in the oil trade with Russia, but afterwards it got heavily involved,” Navarro said.

The White House adviser also claimed that the issue had since been resolved and attributed some of the shift in India’s Russian oil trade to an opinion article he recently wrote in the Financial Times.

Trump and Modi will resolve issue, Navarro says

Navarro said the relationship between Trump and Modi would help address the tariff-related issue.

“The president and your prime minister have a very good working relationship. They are going to work that out amongst themselves,” he said, adding that it was not his place to intervene.

His comments come amid US concerns over countries purchasing Russian oil and proposed measures aimed at imposing additional tariffs on major buyers.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

US Senate passes Russia sanctions bill, India-China face 100% tariff risk

The US Senate has passed a Russia sanctions bill that could allow 100% tariffs on major buyers of Russian oil and gas, including India and China.

Published

1 week ago

on

August 8, 2026

By

Donald Trump

The US Senate has approved a bipartisan Russia sanctions bill that could allow President Donald Trump to impose tariffs of up to 100% on major buyers of Russian oil or natural gas, including India and China.

The legislation was passed by an 86-11 vote and will now move to the US House of Representatives, which is scheduled to reconvene on August 31.

The bill is named in honour of Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a strong supporter of Ukraine who died on July 11. Graham had pushed for tougher sanctions against Russia over its war in Ukraine.

India and China among major Russian energy buyers

The legislation gives the US president the power to impose tariffs on the world’s top five purchasers of Russian oil or natural gas.

India and China are among those countries, along with Azerbaijan, Hungary and Slovakia.

The bill also contains an exception for countries importing less than 15% of their natural gas from Russia and taking steps to reduce their dependence on Russian supplies.

What does the Russia sanctions bill contain?

Apart from the proposed tariffs, the legislation includes sanctions targeting Russian President Vladimir Putin, senior Russian political and military officials, financial institutions and energy projects.

The bill would also expand US sanctions to older and reflagged oil tankers allegedly used by Moscow to bypass existing restrictions on Russian oil and energy revenues.

At the same time, the White House would have the option to waive sanctions or restrictions if the president certifies to Congress that doing so is in the national interest.

Bill also extends Iran sanctions law

The legislation also contains a provision related to Iran. It would extend the expiration date of the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 until 2031.

The law penalises companies that invest in Iran’s energy sector.

The bill’s passage in the Senate marks the next step in the US legislative process, but it still needs approval from the House of Representatives before it can move forward.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com