Political Observation - American Supremacy - Turkey - Britain - the Deep State
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Political Observation - American Supremacy – Turkey – Britain – the Deep State
1- The United States has been leading the international situation since 1990. However, it is facing real difficulties and fresh developments in administration and implementation. Being the unrivalled leader in the international situation does not necessarily mean that countries would be hasting to execute it's decisions, but rather that it is the leading authority and the influential power in international affairs.
The United States faces civilisational and value challenges and a very serious threat emanating from the Ummah of Islam. Therefore, it has built from these challenges a basis on which it has been managing international relations, and fighting Islam under the pretext of terrorism, using it as a cover to implement her policies without objection from the other major powers as they share the same values. In this regard, it has no ideological issues with the conventional major powers since their policies intersect with those of America and they tend to cooperate in their implementation. But America has been facing a host of economic challenges from China and Europe. Yet, it is not a trade war between China or Europe and the United States as much as it is about Europe’s and China’s desire to ensure their societal and economic security and to enhance their political distinction.
This is the reason why the United States occasionally allows other major powers to play a role in their own spheres of influence or directs them to fulfil a specific role, as is the case for Russia in Syria, France in Libya, and the UK in Sudan, in order to either topple the ruler and prevent the regime from collapse and falling into the hands of the masses, or to prevent the rulers from relying on their people to resist their pressures, or to implicate the major powers and stir differences and competition among them as is the case in Africa, Ukraine and the Baltic states.
This also includes the United States' provocation of China in relation to the demands of the pro-US democratic opposition in Hong Kong justifying further sanctions against China, dragging Europe into the mix and cementing sanctions against Russia, internationalising the once US unilateral sanctions, and perpetuating tensions among the major powers and hence their constant need for the US. And should they attempt to evade US pressure and devices, they will face discontent from inside their borders such as the deepening divergence of the British political powers and the internal unrest in France in response to their stance on the relationship with Russia as well as NATO.
As for the satellite regimes, their survival hinges on them continuing to play the role entrusted to them; therefore, each regime is eager to have credentials to present to the international sponsor, which may lead it to cross the line, as was the case with Iran exceeding its mandate that required deterrence.
Finally, we must pause here to consider the fact that the US is not a unified entity as it claims to be, or how it wants the world to see it. It is currently facing friction between the financial and religious political faction on the one hand (such as the Mercer & Koch with Trump faction) and the money capital factions (such as George Soros, Bill Gates and Apple) which are exacerbated by Washington’s reluctance to tame countries like India and Saudi Arabia to open their markets and remove obstacles to free trade, and thus, their differences on how the White House should deal with Saudi Arabia rise to the surface, as well as the contradicting practice of imposing liberalism on Muslims in order to dominate them intellectually and economically, and their reluctance to embrace it at home, opting for populism and right-wing ideas while encouraging Europeans towards this course to justify their own political extremism.
2- It is true that Erdogan has freed Turkey from its dependency on the US, however, he hardly initiates any action that may provoke the US unless in defence of Turkey’s security and interests; and because he recognizes the rules of the political game and knows the extent of his own political weight, he only engages in actions that achieve his interests, even if he notes a consistency with the American approach, an example of which is his position supporting NATO, and his response to Macron’s “brain death” of the alliance comment, and another is his support of Malaysia, Pakistan, Qatar and Indonesia in forming an Islamic league outside the framework of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, which intersects with the interests of the US administration in completely stripping Saudi Arabia of its status as the patron of the Islamic world as a means of tightening its strings under the pretext of openness and change, as well as transferring the initiative from the Arab Muslims, weakening their position as the centre of the Islamic ummah, due to how they are regarded by the non-Arab Muslims, as well as weakening Arabic as a central component in understanding Islam and its impact on the development of the Islamic world. Preventing the rise of the Islamic ummah and containing Turkey and Erdogan's moves is among the interests of the West that it seeks to protect.
The maritime boundary treaty between Turkey and Libya can be explained within these lines; it exacerbates the conflict between Egypt and Turkey and dwarfs Egypt's stature in the region.
3- It is impossible to understand the UK’s conduct in the region before reviewing information on the dependency of the regimes in the region, which clearly became servants to the US during the “Arab Spring”, especially the Gulf states. It is also necessary to understand the longstanding “special relationship” between the US and the UK and the resulting breach of the UK political circle leading to the British intelligence services working side by side, shoulder to shoulder, with the American intelligence services in what became known as the Gladio Organization in Europe, and subsequently, in Syria since the beginning of the uprising. Furthermore, it is necessary to consider the actual magnitude of the UK, which some of its politicians have literally described as the UK has become completely dependent on the United States” after conceding the right to launch its ballistic weapons unless US preapproval was accorded, and after documents from Margaret Thatcher’s era revealed that she sought the help of the then American President Ronald Reagan in the Falklands crisis, as well as how the UK did whatever the US directed her to do in the era of Tony Blair whom the British press nicknamed George Bush's poodle.
Furthermore, US control over European security through NATO and its military bases as well as its control over the British economy, particularly through the investment of more than $500 billion providing millions of jobs for UK citizens, and through ownership of shares in the most important British and French oil companies, in addition to the US’s overt intervention in the British political scene such as Trump's support for Boris Johnson as prime minister of the UK, or US interference in the recent UK elections, which the Conservatives won, and files on US plans to demonise Labour Party leader Corbyn were leaked. This explains the stance of The Times newspaper against Corbyn, whose board includes the former head of MI6, the British Secret Intelligence Service, Sir John Scarlett, and main supporter of Tony Blair, the US accomplice in its war in Iraq. All of this makes the UK’s sovereignty and Europe’s independence a fantasy.
It should also be noted that there is no UK project that is independent from US projects in the region, or that the UK has a say in international affairs except as a consultant, or that it acts except in the context of implementing US directives or joint cooperation, such as Tony Blair’s assumption of the role of the international envoy for peace of the Quartet on the Middle East after his resignation from his post as the UK prime minister.
It should also be noted that the British/American policy in Europe itself is identical such as Margaret Thatcher’s support of NATO’s continued existence despite the end of what justified it in the first place, and despite the US utilizing it as a tool of domination over Europe, Thatcher justified the necessity of the alliance by telling the Europeans in 1990 that "you do not cancel your home insurance policy just because there have been fewer burglaries in your street in the last twelve months”, as well as Brexit which received strong support from the US President Trump.
4- The Deep State is a political term that denotes the body that controls or influences decisions, and its existence is real and it is a natural state in all governing regimes in the world, even in the Islamic states, despite its different shapes, goals and mechanisms. The deep state is the political parties, security services, financial factions, and similar entities, such as commercial, industrial and military stakeholders, and needless to say, it exerts great influence on the security, military, media, and parliamentary institutions of the state. It is noteworthy that rulers tend to take advantage of the concept of the deep state to direct popular ire towards an abstract enemy that the people are not able to identify and oppose, therefore, their arrows have no target. As for the opposition, they take advantage of the concept of the deep state to justify their failure or their collusion with the regime, and make of the deep state a wailing wall justifying their weaknesses and negligence while rationalising their integration into the regime and their reconciliation with the opponents of their popular base. Therefore, exposing political figures and unmasking them through the political fight has always been the effective ideological approach in undermining the governments and political circles, competing with them, overthrowing them, uprooting the deep state and attempting to wrestle leadership of the ummah and march it towards its goals.
17 Rabi’ al-Akhir 1441h
14 December 2019