- Delivering Truth Around the World
Custom Search

The Arab Civil War

Thierry Meyssan

Smaller Font Larger Font RSS 2.0

FW:  April 4, 2015

JPEG - 22.6 kb
Symbols of Mouamar el-Kadhafi’s resistance to the Islamists, the Libyian Leader had surrounded himself with female body guards. However, after having lynched and buried him, NATO justified its crime for Western public opinion by « revealing » that the amazons were no more than prostitutes in the hands of a sexual predator. This propaganda was relayed by a book, based on one single testimony, by Le Monde « journalist », Annick Coljean.

The West applauds the bombing of Yemen by Saudi Arabia and the taking of Ileb by al-Qaïda. And yet, officially, al-Qaïda is supposed to be an anti-Saudi terrorist organisation responsible for the attacks of September 11. So what has happened to make the disciples of Oussama Ben Laden count among the « freedom fighters », as they were once considered when they were fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, simply because they have taken Idleb from Bachar el-Assad’s Syria?

The ground truth of the situation unfortunately reinforces what I wrote in these columns two weeks ago – the murderous insanity which has gripped the Arab world has nothing to do with social classes nor ideological differences, nor even religious beliefs. Over the last four years, a huge number of people have repositioned themselves, and have changed sides. Little by little, the situation is becoming clearer, and a new dividing line is appearing without the populations being aware of it.

During the 1950’s, the Arab world was divided between the pro-USA camp and the pro-Russian camp. During the 1990’s, it was divided between the pro-Israelis and the Resistance. But the logic of State interests was destroyed by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to the profit of the interests of the oil companies. And today we are reaping the harvest of Barack Obama’s politics.

We are witnessing an explosion of violence by the partisans of polygamy against the supporters of womens’ rights. The Arab monarchies and the Muslim Brotherhood are defending a society dominated by men, while Iran and its allies are defending a new society, in which men and women control their own fertility and enjoy equal rights. We can look at the situation from any angle, and discover that there is almost no other difference between the two camps.

There are two opposing visions of the world.

What do the targets of the Western powers have in common - Zinedine Ben Ali (Tunisia), Hosni Moubarak (Egypt), Mouamar el-Kadhafi (Libya), Bachar el-Assad (Syria), Nouri al-Maliki (Iraq), Sheikh Ali Salman (Bahrein), and Abdul-Malik al-Houthi (Yemen)? Nothing, except that they have all opposed polygamy. What do the supporters of the West have in common - the member States of the Gulf Cooperation Council and the Muslim Brotherhood? They are all in favour of polygamy.

This is the one single dividing line that splits the Arab world today, with the exception of Iraq and Egypt. In the former country, the United States have not yet clearly defined their partners. Officially, they support Haider al-Abadi against Daesh, but the Iranian and Iraqi Press have demonstrated that the US are playing a double game and have deliberately delivered weapons to Daesh and killed Iraqi soldiers. As for Egypt, President al-Sissi is still hesitating between his personal conception in favour of womens’ rights and that of his Saudi sponsor, whose money is indispensable for the economy of his bankrupt country.

Years of propaganda have blinded us.

We think, wrongly, that the dress codes of Iran are the equivalent of those of the Saudis. And yet in Iran, women toook control of their fertility in the first years of the Revolution – in other words, before the women of most European States. They strongly outnumber men in the universities and they also excercise the highest responsibilities. On the other hand, in Saudi Arabia, they have no personal rights.

We think, wrongly, that the Muslim world is divided between Sunnis and Chiites who are locked into a merciless and ongoing war. But in Yemen, the Houthis, who are in the vast majority on the national level, would have been unable to take either Sanaa or Aden without the support of a powerful Sunni force, who were in the majority in these two cities. And here, in Syria, the Syrian Arab Army, supported by Iran against the Takfirists, is composed of more than 70 % Sunnis.

JPEG - 28.8 kb
Youssef al-Qaradâwî, leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and spiritual advisor to the Qatari TV channel Al-Jazeera, has made it his speciality to defend polygamy and the right to beat women. During the electoral campaign of Mohamed Morsi, in Égypt, he spoke at Tahrir Square in Cairo, where he preached that the political priority was not to resist Israel, but to kill homosexuals. Here we see him as the ’guest of honour’ at a meeting of the « Moderate Syrian Opposition ».

We may be understandably shocked to note that the first action of the Tunisian « revolution » - before any legislative decision was made – was to organise the return of Rached Ghannouchi, a Muslim Brother, who, as soon as he arrived, proposed to re-establish polygamy.

We may be astounded when we see members of the Syrian Baas turn against the State, or when Yemeni communists turn against their own party, and all go off to join al-Qaïda. But we only need to observe their families to understand why they have changed sides.

And what can be said about the Libyan victors when they announce that they are re-establishing charia?

Such surprising examples are frequent, but the oscillations between the pro- and anti-Western camps are even more numerous.

As always, the colonial powers are allied with local forces who could not win without their help, particularly the partisans of the old world order. Of course, the United States did not anticipate the consequences of their choices. The US strategists are thinking only of their own short-term imperialist interests. Today they are surfing on the violence that they have provoked, but it is overrunning them, just as it is overrunning the populations concerned.

No-one can put out the fire that is consuming the Arab world because it has changed too fast. No-one can escape the question of womens’ rights.

The West began its industrial production of contraceptives in 1844, but it was not until the AIDS epidemic, a century and a half later, that the Western States authorised their publicity. The diaphragm was invented in 1880, and the IUD coil became widely used in the 1930’s, while the contraceptive pill appeared in the 1950’s.

Control of fertility profoundly changed the life of heterosexual couples. The arranged marriage, which was the Western norm until the First World War, gave way to love marriages after the Second World War. As a result, society accepted homosexuality, which until then had been defined as « unnatural », despite the fact that it had been observed in all mammals and some species of birds [1].

Looking back to the après-May 1968, Western societies – under the influence of the « consumer society » - are now rife with multiple divorces. It is no longer women alone, but both sexes, who are considered simply as throw-away consumer products. For the first time in human history, polygamy has become a societal fact, although it is spread out in time. We can have as many husbands and wives as we like, as long as they follow one another.

At the same time, the feminists, who once fought to liberate women, now very often struggle in order to lock them up once again, but this time in masculine roles. They claim that both sexes, while different, are absolutely identical and deny the existence of inter-sexual persons. (In one case in 700, persons with female genital organs do not carry XX chromosomes, but XXY chromosomes, and in one case in 20,000, they carry XY chromosomes, which are nonetheless considered to be masculine). It is this vision of the world that is incarnated in the USA by the feminist advocate Hillary Clinton, now Secretary of State and major commander of the « Arab springs ». This ideology also triumphs in France, with the Socialist party and its concepts of « marriage for all » and « parity » - during the recent elections, no citizen was allowed to stand alone. It became obligatory to form a « binomial » with another citizen of the opposite legal sex.

What the West has experienced with difficulty over almost two centuries, the Arab world has experienced in one generation.

If, generally speaking, the partisans of Saudi Arabia are Sunni Muslims, while the partisans of Iran belong to all religious communities, there are numerous exceptions which can only be explained by their attitude to contraception.

In the 19th century, the Christian churches were violently opposed to contraception. In 1958, Pope Pius XII condemned the pill, while in 2015, Pope Francis praised « responible parenthood » and denounced Christians who « reproduce like rabbits ». Not so long ago, the Catholic Church taught that homosexuality was a sin against « God’s plan », while today, Pope Francis declares that he would be unable to judge homosexuals.

However, the evolution of mentalities is not yet complete, since many Christians still consider that abortion during the first weeks of pregnancy is a murder, while even Saint Thomas Aquinus, in the 13th century, demonstrated that a fœtus of a few weeks old could not be considered as a human being. And the support offered to Daesh by a few young Western Muslims proves that the battle for « responsible parenthood » is still not won in Europe.

For the last four years, I have been analysing the strategies of different States concerning the « Arab springs », but today I note that the populations no longer obey those who manipulate them. People are moved by another, even stronger force, which takes possession of them without their knowledge, and drives them to rebellion.

From 1936, the Third Reich opened its ’Lebensborn’, establishments which were governed by the Ministry of Agriculture, and charged with the production and raising of young « Aryens » for the use of the SS.

Perhaps we might re-read our own history from the point of view of what is currently happening in the Arab world. We would read, with the same astonishment, that during the Second World War, the Allies (United Kingdom, Free France, the Soviet Union, the United State) were shaken by feminist movements, and offered positions of responsibility to women whose husbands had been killed in combat. Meanwhile, the Axis powers(Germany, Italy, Occupied France, Japan) strictly forbade contraception and persisted in keeping women away from all responsibility, despite necessity.

Thierry Meyssan


Pete Kimberley