Globalist Fueled Color Revolutions are Attempting to Transform Entire Regions - First the Middle East and Then the World
February 18, 2011
Beginning in North Africa, now unfolding in the Middle East and Iran, and soon to spread to Eastern Europe and Asia, the globalist fueled color revolutions are attempting to profoundly transform entire regions of the planet in one sweeping move. It is an ambitious gambit, perhaps even one born of desperation, with the globalists' depravity and betrayal on full display to the world with no opportunity to turn back now.
To understand the globalists' reasoning behind such a bold move, it helps to understand their ultimate end game and the obstacles standing between them and their achieving it.
The End Game
The end game of course is a world spanning system of global governance. This is a system controlled by Anglo-American financiers and their network of global institutions ensuring the world's consolidated nations conform to a singular system they can then perpetually fleece. As megalomaniacal oligarchs, their singular obsession is the consolidation and preservation of their power. This will be achieved through a system of population control, industrial control, and monetary control, which together form the foundation of their Malthusian policies.
These policies are on full display in the UN's "Agenda 21," and by policy wonks like the current White House Science Adviser John Holdren in his book titled "Ecoscience."
Malthusian as their policies may be, they surely do not believe the world is in danger due to over-population or the environmental hazards posed by industrial progress. Instead, like all tyrants in history, they are establishing a convincing narrative to defend the immense concentration of undue power within their elitist hands and the implementation of measures to ensure such power stays in their hands indefinitely.
The immediate dangers posed to their plans are numerous, including an alternative media increasingly exposing the true nature of their agenda, and thus awakening a vast number of people who simply refuse to go along with it. There is also national sovereignty, where nations are openly challenging this Anglo-American centric world order and refusing to implement the conditions of their own enslavement.
These sweeping color revolutions, and coordinated military operations, both overt and covert, are dealing with the latter of these two challenges, while censorship, cognitive infiltration, and a tightening police state spanning the Western world under the very false premise of a "War on Terror" confronts the former.
China's oil and seaways are all covered.
The Middle East
With the globalist fueled destabilization in progress, concessions and regime changes are being made from Jordan to Egypt, all in the name of "democratization." The protesters' calls are verbatim repeats of the their local US funded NGOs' mission statements. Skeptical as many may be that all of this is being orchestrated by the West, one needs only read the RAND Corporation's 2007 report titled "Building Moderate Muslim Networks" where breathtaking confessions are made to not only reorder the Muslim world according to the West's interests, but how they would follow the same model of "civil society networks" they have already used for decades during the Cold War.
Egypt's recent "transition" played out as a direct translation of RAND's blueprint for meddling in the Muslim world. From the protest organizers and NGOs to the protest leaders, to the behind-the-scenes meddling by America's military leadership, the Egyptian uprising was entirely a US production. Even the drafting of the new Egyptian Constitution is being carried out by organizations funded by George Soros and the US National Endowment for Democracy.
The regional destabilization is resetting the geopolitical board in favor for a renewed effort to affect regime change in Iran. It has been extensively covered that the globalists have intricate and extensive plans, in the form of Brookings Institute's "Which Path to Persia?" report, to fund color revolutions, support terrorism inside of the Islamic Republic and even provoke war with a nation they concede would rather avoid conflict. No sooner did North African and Arab regimes begin to crumble did the "Green Revolution" in Iran start up again. As if reiterating the summation of Brookings' report, the globalist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has recently and overtly called on the US to back the "Green Revolution."
Iran's fall to the globalists, the extraction of its wealth, and the end of its support for Chinese and Russian economic and military ambitions would isolate the so-called Shanghai Cooperative Organization further.
Russia, along with China appear to be the two biggest blocs of opposition to the Anglo-American establishment. Indeed there are plenty of people and organizations within each nation gladly working hand-in-hand with the globalists, who in turn, are overtly trying to tempt and coerce the two nations to integrate themselves into their global world order.
Men like Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who rose to power in Russia amongst an era of immense corruption, began building networks of NGOs modeled directly after those of the Anglo-Americans in the West, even naming this network the "Open Russian Foundation" after George Soros' Open Society Foundation. According to geopolitical researcher William Engdahl, this Open Russian Foundation included Henry Kissinger and Lord Jacob Rothschild on its board of directors and its goal was to transform Russia from a sovereign state and into something more palatable for globalist consumption.
Whatever Khdorkovsky's early successes may have been, they were cut short by Russian Prime Minister Vladamir Putin, who has safely confined Khodorkovsky behind the bars of a Siberian prison. Today, Khdorkovsky receives lobbying and legal services from notorious globalist lawyer Robert Amsterdam who leads international efforts to vilify Russia and justify the nation's encirclement by NATO.
After Tunisia fell and protests began brewing in Egypt, Foreign Policy magazine published the Freedom House's list of "Who's Next?" On the list was Belarus' Aleksandr Lukashenko, leader of a European nation directly bordering Russia's western border, staring Moscow in the face. NATO itself admits the reluctance of Belarus to join its now unjustified organization, while the mainstream media berates the Belarusian government for putting down protests launched after the results of recent elections that saw the Western-backed opposition defeated.
Looking at a map of Russia, not a nation touching its borders has been spared the globalist treatment, from the Ukraine and their US-backed Orange Revolution, to Georgia and its US-backed invasion of South Ossetia. For Russia, they seem more than prepared to fight back, humiliating the US-trained and equipped Georgian military on the battlefield and overseeing the results of the US-funded Orange Revolution overturned, with Ukrainian talks to join NATO halted.
By targeting the Middle East, and in particular Iran, which both China and Russia have been using to check the West's world domineering ambitions, the globalists' hope is to renew political unrest in Russia's satellite regions and complete its campaign of encircling Russia, thus forcing it to concede to its place amongst the new global order.
China's String of Pearls
It is no secret China depends on oil imports to not only keep its economy growing, but to keep its vast population busy and prosperous, thus keeping the ruling government in power. This has been a long known realism by both China and the West. For China's part, they have begun building a presence on continental Africa, especially in Sudan where they have established a 1,000 mile oil pipeline from the vast nation's heartland to Port Sudan on the Red Sea. They have also provided relief to the country from UN sanctions and buys the majority of Sudan's oil exports.
China also imports an immense amount of oil from Iran. In fact, the Islamic Republic represents the world's second largest exporter of oil to China, behind Saudi Arabia.
From Sudan and Iran, across the Indian Ocean, and back to China's shores in the South China Sea, represents a "String of Pearls," or a series of geopolitical assets China is developing to protect this vital logistical route. This "String" includes a Chinese port in Pakistan's Baluchistan region, another facility in Myanmar (Burma), and expanded facilities in the South China Sea off the coast of Vietnam. China is also building up the size and capabilities of its fleet, including submarines which now shadow America's carrier groups, and the outfitting of their first aircraft carrier which is nearing completion.
The term "String of Pearls" was used as the title of the US Strategic Studies Institute's (SSI) 2006 report "String of Pearls: Meeting the challenge of China’s rising power across the Asian littoral." In this report, China's ambitions to project its power along this route is viewed as a direct challenge to American supremacy as well as a threat to the West's unipolar vision of a "new world order."
While China may not be a champion of human freedom, they do appear to favor a multipolar world where sovereign nations coexist instead of the Anglo-American unipolar world where, unsurprisingly, the British and American oligarchs dominate the planet.
To prevent such a multipolar world from coming into existence, the SSI report suggests several strategies regarding China, from engaging and enticing it to become what globalist pusher Robert Zoellick calls a "responsible stakeholder" in the "international system," to outright military confrontation and containment.
Of course this report was written in July 2006, and the ink hadn't even dried before Israel suffered a humiliating defeat in its war with Lebanon, the war with Iran stalled, and globalist minion Thaksin Shinawtra was ousted from power in Thailand in a display of jealously defended sovereignty in Southeast Asia.
It appears that the globalists, over the following years, would present China with a flattering role to play in their global order while simultaneously destabilizing nearly every nation along the "String of Pearls." The US has expanded its war in Afghanistan and is attempting to balkanize Pakistan in the process, specifically the Baluchistan region where China is establishing a naval presence. Pakistan's Baluchistan region is also the seaside starting point of an energy and logistical conduit running northward through the Himalayas and into Chinese territory. The US is also heavily involved in destabilizing Myanmar (Burma) to affect regime change and subsequently establishing a Washington dependent government.
Thailand neighbors Myanmar to the east and possesses the narrow Kra Isthmus China would like to develop into a Suez/Panama Canal-like project to shorten trips for its oil laden, China-bound tankers. Thailand also serves as an overland conduit, running north and south as in Pakistan, with a developed rail system connecting Singapore's shipping yards to Laos' capital of Vientiane. China has begun the development of a rail system through Laos and the upgrading of Thailand's rail system. Thailand also is one of the world's largest rice exporters, which makes the nation vital to China's future growth.
It is no surprise then, that Thailand, like Myanmar, has suffered multiple attempts by the US to affect regime change. Their man, Thaksin Shinawatra is an overt globalist, having formally served as an adviser to the Carlyle Group, and since his ousting from power in 2006, has been lobbied for by everyone from James Baker's Baker Botts, to ICG's Kenneth Adelman and the Edelman PR firm, to his current lobbyist and lawyer, Robert Amsterdam.
It is quite clear that Washington is using its control of the Middle East and its control of the seas, albeit challenged control, to check China's vastly superior financial and economic position. It is also clear that Washington is investing a great amount of military resources and intelligence assets to destabilize the entire "String of Pearls" to confound, contain, and leverage concessions from China, with the ultimate goal of folding the emerging Asian giant into the unipolar Anglo-American global order.
How well this strategy is working is debatable, however, the US military is politically hobbled, strategically stretched, and led by vastly incompetent leaders in Washington who have lost the faith and trust of their own population, not to mention the world. The bold and perhaps desperate gambit the US is playing out in the Middle East could be a bid to rectify years of failure against China and the Shanghai Cooperative since the SSI wrote their report in 2006. Regime change in Iran is still the linchpin in making this latest bid a success.
Even South America is not spared. There has been a lull in overt American meddling, allowing South America to become a bastion of sorts against the agents of globalization, however, covert operations and staging has been ongoing.
Troubling reports coming from South America's Argentina, no stranger to the ire of Anglo-American ambitions, indicate that tension is building up between Buenos Aires and Washington. It has culminated in a diplomatic row over a recently seized US C-17 transport chalk full of suspicious equipment and an even more suspicious explanation. This is leading many, including the government of Argentina, to believe the US is staging another round of destabilization efforts in South America.
Venezuela and Bolivia have been overtly targeted by the West in recent years by efforts to undermine and even overthrow their respective governments. The muted-confused response over the coup in Honduras also raises suspicions that America has begun striking back against the wave of regional nationalism sweeping South America. A visit over to Movements.org reveals that the US State Department/corporate funded organization is backing dissidents in Venezuela and encouraging the spread of "civil society," gleefully noting the insidious effects it is having on bolstering the anti-Chavez opposition.
The recent US-backed wave of revolution sweeping the Middle East is just the beginning of a greater move to dislodge Iran and begin regaining ground against Russia and China after several years of disappointing results geopolitically. The ultimate goal in mind is to force Russia and China to accept their role as "responsible stakeholders" in the unipolar Anglo-American "new world order." The unipolar world of Anglo-American financier domination requires that all competition be eliminated, all nations become interdependent, and most importantly, all governments conform to the globalists' model of "civil society" which in turn answers to centralized global institutions.
Understanding the overarching plan reveals the danger of being apathetic or complacent about the current unrest in the Middle East. It will surely spread, and depending on the Shanghai Cooperative's response and their determination to remain the masters of their own destiny, greater confrontation may ensue. For the United States and its dwindling power, its meaningless offers to the world's nations to join their bankrupt, one-sided model of world governance, and their growing economic mire, there is no telling what their desperation may transform into. This unpredictability and desperation may be perhaps the only card they have left in their hand worth playing, and one that should trouble us all.
February 12, 2011
Hosni Mubarak has resigned. The Egyptian "color" revolution (ie: a peaceable one), carried out by heroic people risking life and limb, has been apparently been a success. I only wish it were that simple. But there is ample evidence the revolution has been manipulated and that the Anglo-American elite plans to replicate the Egyptian revolution not just in the Middle East but worldwide via the use of the Internet and swelling youth demographics.
The latest and most astonishing global gambit is called AYM and Wikipedia provides us some information about the group, as follows:
"The Alliance for Youth Movements (AYM) began with a December 2008 summit in New York City to identify, convene, and engage 21st century movements online for the first time in history. The United States Department of State partnered with Facebook, Howcast, MTV, Google, YouTube, AT&T, JetBlue, Gen-Next, Access 360 Media, and Columbia Law School to launch a global network and empower young people mobilizing against violence and oppression."According to Wikipedia,
"Founders of AYM include Jared Cohen, former advisor to both Secretaries of State Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton and now Director of Google Ideas at Google, Jason Liebman, CEO and co-founder of Howcast and Roman Tsunder, co-founder of Access 360 Media. Speakers at the 2008 summit included actress Whoopi Goldberg, Facebook Co-Founder Dustin Moskovitz, The Obama Campaign's New Media Team, and then-current Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs of the United States James K. Glassman."A 2010 article at Wired.com covers a recent AYM summit in breathless detail, as follows:
"I'm at the Alliance for Youth Movements (AYM) summit in London, at the Intercontinental Hotel. The two-day summit, which ends tomorrow, is an impressive gathering of youth activists from more than 18 countries, NGOs and tech giants, here to learn more about using online tools to promote their extraordinary range of social movements and promote non-violent change."The Wired article, entitled "AYM summit: A meetup for the world's youth activists," then further explains the transformative changes that the "world's youth" are capable of making:
At the opening reception last night, hosted at Google's headquarters, I met a smart bunch of people from organizations such as Blue State Digital (which ran Obama's online campaign), Howcast, Middle East peace activists One Voice, and the East London-based Young Foundation. But the highlight is an A-list bunch of conference speakers at the conference today and tomorrow – including Jack Dorsey of Twitter, Sir Martin Sorrell of WPP, Scott Heiferman of MeetUp, as well as top people from Google, YouTube and the World Bank. Other keynote speakers include Jeremy Gilley, the former actor who founded Peace One Day, and Joe Rospars, who was the new-media director for Obama for America.
There's strong representation here from Washington DC. This morning, Jared Cohen, of the US State Department, moderated a session titled Seizing the Moment: Responding to Crises and Mobilizing Around Key Events. That had speakers from Mobile Accord, Ushahidi, Mazahery Law, AccessNow and the Censorship Research Center. I'm now sitting in a session called Turning Video into Tangible Action, featuring experts such as Ramya Raghaven of YouTube, Levi Felix of Causecast, and Chris Sarette, Invisible Children ...The above was a report on the third AYM Summit in 2010. Online you can find a transcription of Hillary Clinton's "Video Message for Alliance of Youth Movements Summit" that was apparently a keynote for the second AYM Summit in Mexico City, October 16, 2009. Here's an excerpt:
It's an inspiring event, geared towards helping activists share top-level information and making connections that lead to significant change. You can sense the scale of their practical ambition from the title of some of the sessions: one is called Tech Solutions to Repressive Regimes; another is titled Effective Strategies for Mobile Content to Increase Empowerment.
I want to congratulate all of you who have come to Mexico City, in person and online, to be a part of this groundbreaking summit. You are the vanguard of a rising generation of citizen activists who are using the latest technological tools to catalyze change, build movements, and transform lives. And I hope this conference provides an opportunity for you to learn from each other and discover tools and techniques that will open new doors for activism and empowerment when you return home. All over the world, young people like you are driving progress.Of course what came next apparently was Africa and the Middle East: first Tunisia, now Egypt and surely other countries to come. It would seem, then, that Mubarak never attended an AYM meeting. But certainly he and his supporters have in fact discovered the limits of Western Anglo-American elite loyalties: One is useful until one is not.
In Colombia, two young college graduates, fed up with the violence in their country, used Facebook to organize 14 million people into the largest antiterrorism demonstrations in history. In Iran, we saw young people using twitter and YouTube to communicate with each other and the world despite a government crackdown designed to keep them silent. And in India, a 14-year old high school student from Mumbai used social networking to link together half a million people who sought solidarity and support in the aftermath of the November 2008 terrorist attacks ...
Governments can't do it alone. Citizens, organizations, businesses, universities – everyone with a stake in our shared future must take responsibility for shaping it. That's what we call 21st century statecraft. So thank you for being on the front lines of progress, and I can't wait to see what all of you do next.
So here's my supposition: Despots throughout the Middle East, Africa, Asia and South America (those who have gotten used to billion-dollar annual handouts from the US to "sustain stability" via the use of torture, famine and censorship) are probably online just this minute investigating timeshares in Lear Jets. Hillary's keynote speech is quite clear. Each AYM Summit is like a tolling of a bell. And it tolls for 20th-century thugs that cast their lot with the Anglosphere.
It's not exactly an original story. During the era of the initial Gutenberg press and the Renaissance, the Great Venetian banking families of the day suppposedly set out to destroy the power of the Catholic church. The Venetians may have funded Martin Luther and his Reformation to split the Church, and further funded other schisms. Of course it didn't work out quite as planned. The Reformation seems to have spun out of control and numerous free-thinking sects (the results of the Reformation and Protestant revolution) ended up in America, creating anarchical, horizontal societies that took Western elites centuries to stamp out. In fact, the elites ended up with one good century – the 20th. The 21st we speculate will be a far bumpier ride thanks to the next iteration of the Gutenberg press – the Internet.
Because of the Internet, it's hard to be cynical about the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions. It would be my hope that these revolutions would usher in some real change. But that is not what the revolution's handlers want.
The Anglosphere's operations are being carried out in two phases.
- First comes the revolution.
- Then comes "aftermath" that must inevitably resolve itself into Western-centric regulatory democracies, including manipulative central banks, endless, intrusive, brand-intensive corporatism and, generally, spirit-sapping regulatory democracy.
The process is already at work in Tunisia. The mainstream media is not covering ongoing (considerable) unrest in Tunisia anymore because the dominant social theme – the agreed upon narrative – is that the Tunisians had their "color" revolution and now that a "unity" government is in charge, the revolution has run its course. Reform is on the way; a consensus will be reached and Western-style regulatory democracy will be installed in that small, bleeding country – unless of course militant Islam shoulders it aside.
As incredible as it is to contemplate, these manipulations apparently run even beyond the arrogance of inciting worldwide revolution. Another dominant social theme that's been launched seems to involve Julian Assange and his psyops WikiLeaks program, if that's what it is. We recently explained WikiLeaks operations as follows:
Each WikiLeaks "release" only seems to confirm the dreary conclusion that the entire enterprise is a kind of concoction intended to facilitate Western intelligence interests and further reinforce Western messaging. Is this so farfetched? It is a well-documented fact that Wall Street funds were funneled overseas (via the Red Cross) to help gain victory for the Red communist factions (and Lenin) during the Russian Revolution. And it is just as certain that Anglo-American elites created the economic conditions that allowed for the rise of Adolf Hitler – and then provided massive industrial funding as well. The American Bush family was directly involved in this latter transaction.WikiLeaks has been in play for nearly a year. The gambit of "color" revolutions has been revitalized only recently. But they may have the same roots. Consider, please, Egyptian heroic rebel Wael Ghonim, conveniently of Google, an American Internet corporation that has close ties to American intel. Just yesterday, Ghonim tweeted,
For this reason we identified Assange as a key figure in an upcoming global, elite promotion almost from the very beginning when we wrote a fictionalized speculation called "Comes a Blond Stranger." We weren't positive then and we won't make a definitive statement now, but the evidence continues to pile up. If we are correct, it may be in fact almost impossible to overstate the importance of Julian Assange and his role in the "history" that the elites are now busily creating. He could end up being the first leader of a world government – a six-foot-four (or five or six) inch blond rebel with an electronic cause and a commitment to global transparency (see below).
"Dear Western Governments, You've been silent for 30 years supporting the regime that was oppressing us. Please don't get involved now".This sounds quite admirable. But let's take a further look at Google's Ghonim. A summary from alternative news website Infowars:
"Having been living abroad in Dubai, [Ghonim's] Facebook page didn't pop-up overnight, it was actually created nearly a year ago in tandem with Mohamed ElBaradei's arrival in Egypt during February 2010. Ghonim also created ElBaradei's official campaign website. Ghonim and ElBaradei then concurrently campaigned for the coming November 2010 Egyptian election and built up an opposition network in support for ElBaradei. This network included the April 6 Movement, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the independent labor unions now making up the bulk of the protests."Infowars informs us of information that is readily available all over the ‘Net – that the Egyptian protests were planned by Western operatives and that Ghonim and the "Revolutionary Youth Movement," were intimately involved along with an "opposition network ElBaradei had been busy building since early 2010." This information has been reported by the mainstream media as well. The UK Telegraph reported on US involvement in training Egyptian youth protests more than a week ago. The Wall Street Journal recently reported how organizers selected places for the protests and even walked the routes to figure out timelines.
More from Infowars:
"Perhaps Wael Ghonim ... doesn't know who ElBaradei really works for and that he consorts with the very men making the US policy he feigns to deplore. Perhaps he is unaware of what designs such men have for his "new" Egypt and has no clue that everyone involved in his protest has been networked, funded, backed, and even directed by foreigners with nothing but exploitation in mind for Egypt's future."And who is Mohamed ElBaradei? According to Tony Cartalucci at alternative-news site landdestroyer.blogspot.com, "ElBaradei, the self-proclaimed leader of the unfolding Egyptian protests, is actually sitting on the Board of Trustees of the Zbigniew Brzezinski/George Soros globalist think-tank, the International Crisis Group." Cartalucci adds:
The mainstream media has been backing ElBaradei's ownership of the protests, hailing this Nobel Laurette and former UN IAEA director as the potential next president of Egypt and the "hero" of the protests. The New York Times refers to him as the "Nobelist" portraying him as standing "toe-to-toe" with hundreds of riot police and promising to run for president if and only if elections were "free and fair." While ElBaradei poses as a critic of the United States, it is not because of their meddling with Middle Eastern affairs, it is because they are not meddling enough. ElBaradei berates the United States for not intervening in what he calls "social disintegration, economic stagnation, and political repression" in Egypt.Cartalucci eventually goes off the tracks. He is convinced that the color revolutions are being fomented by the West to encircle Iran and ensure that Iran does not create nuclear devices. However as we've pointed out before there is considerably controversy over the origins of the Iranian revolution. Khomeini's father may have been a British agent (so some reports speculate) and Khomeini himself may have been trained by MI5/MI6. On the flight back to Iran, Khomeini reportedly said some nasty things about Iranians and generally didn't sound as if he was very happy about returning there. Finally, Khomeini apparently redrew various oil contracts in favor of the West when he arrived back in Iran – hard as that sounds to fathom.
It is not always clear what the Anglosphere is doing or why. But as usual in this world nothing is as it seems. I would advise those who wish to follow such things generally, (the continuing war between the Anglosphere and the Internet) to wait and see how events play out. Over time the reasons for what's happening will start to come clear. It may even happen sooner than later as the elite seems increasingly rushed.
It seems increasingly clear: Instead of taking 20 or 30 years to unpack a promotion, it is implementing them in three or four years. This leads to sloppiness. Julian Assange apparently provides us with a key to the modern-day promotions that the elite wants to emphasize. The Youth Movements may offer us insights into how the elite intends to build a new world order, one regulatory democracy at a time. For the most part, one may need pliable candidates in seats of power. And certainly the elite wants to be seen as participating in the transformative power of the 'Net. It may even be that they've realized the inevitability of convulsive change and are trying to get out ahead of it and to control it via such artifices as AYM.
The strategies of Western powers-that-be are always startling in their intricacy and boldness. But I will end this essay by pointing out that many of these global schemes were plotted, apparently, as long as a century ago, or even more. The Internet was not a consideration, then, though it surely is now. And given the haste with which the PE is operating at every level, I would argue that the Internet is exposing these plans in an intolerable way. The elites will continue with their business plan of global consolidation but much now militates against it. In the era of the Internet, it is easier to implement such plans than it is to bring them to a successful conclusion. I stand with the Egyptians in their heroic struggle and wish them well, though the hard part may be yet to come.
The Struggle for Self-Determination in the Arab World: The Alliance between Arab Dictators and Global CapitalGlobal Research
February 14, 2011
...The U.S. is trying to play a two-sided game. The New York Times, which is highly supportive of U.S. foreign policy, suggests that the U.S. government seeks a form of stage-managed democratization in Egypt. Ross Douthat states:
"[L]ook closer, and it's clear that the [Obama] administration's real goal has been to dispense with Mubarak while keeping the dictator's military subordinates very much in charge. If the Obama White House has its way, any opening to democracy will be carefully stage-managed by an insider like Omar Suleiman [the current vice-president of Egypt], the former general and Egyptian intelligence chief who's best known in Washington for his cooperation with the C.I.A.'s rendition program. This isn't softheaded peacenik dithering. It's cold blooded realpolitik."As long as the current structure of the Egyptian regime remains unchanged in the wake of Mubarak's departure, neo-colonial interests will continue to be served. As long as their interests are secured, they would have sacrifice Mubarak. The face of a regime does not matter; it is the interests that it serves.
Whether correct or incorrect, the Mubarak regime has claimed that the U.S. and Israel have been behind the mass protests throughout Egypt. Iran, Hezbollah, Qatar, and Hamas have also been accused of helping orchestrate the protests alongside the U.S. and Israel by Cairo. These accusations by Mubarak's regime are meant to demonize and delegitimize the protest movement as foreign ploys and to divide the Egyptian protesters.
The U.S. government seeks to maintain the same kleptocratic status quo in place in Egypt and Tunisia, either under continued dictatorship or under an outwardly appearing democratic political system. In other words, the aim is to keep the same substance, but to change the form. Kleptocracy can work under dictatorship or "managed" democracy.
As the protests across the Arab World gain momentum, the U.S. and its allies are working to "try" to mix their own "opposition" figures amongst the protest movements and to bring their "agents" into power. In other words, the U.S. is politically hedging its bets. If the Arab protest movements are not attentive to this process of infiltration, the emerging wave of so-called democratization in the Arab World could end up being a manipulated process which retains the control of foreign powers...