The Persian Gulf Deception
(epilogue)

That Saddam continues to provoke the West is inconsistent with Iraq's best interest but is favorable to Western interests. By continuing to aggravate the United Nations and the Western powers, Saddam is reducing the chances for the international sanctions against Iraq to be lifted. Also, he is making it virtually impossible for Iraq to reenter the world community such that Iraqi political, economic, and, eventually, military power can be rebuilt. Lastly, Saddam's troublesome behavior has provided the West reason and support for renewing hostilities and seeking to oust the Iraqi dictator from power.

Saddam's seemingly irrational, self-destructive behavior can be made sense of in the context of a grand strategy by the East to deceive and defeat the West.

In waging a third world war, the East would seek to win popular control of the world along side military control. To do this, the blame for war must be shifted on to the West. This is because whoever is held responsible for causing the immense holocaust of world war three will be the focus of unprecedented popular hate. Thus, if it can be staged such that global war appears to be the West's fault, then people will support, rather than resist, an effort by the East to defeat the Western powers and, in turn, dominate the world.

The exact set-up which could be used to frame the West likely involves a future, unprecedented international crisis or series of crises that will end in global war triggered from the Middle East. The stage for this may currently be under development in the form of persistent Iraqi provocations against the West, Arab/Israeli peace negotiations, a rising tide of nationalism and ethnic warfare-particularly in Yugoslavia and the Caucuses, and increasing political turmoil in Russia.

On several occasions now Saddam has violated United Nations resolutions against Iraq and has brought forth serious confrontations with the Western powers. After a "No-Fly Zone" was established over northern Iraq to protect Iraqi Kurds, Iraq moved missiles and used radar to threaten allied flights. After an ultimatum from the Western powers, Saddam backed down and removed the missiles. Last July, Iraq refused to admit weapons inspectors to its Ministry of Agriculture headquarters. After the Security Council threatened to use force, Iraq allowed the inspectors in. On top of these military confrontations, Saddam has irritated the United Nations and the West by frustrating numerous weapons inspections, failing to fully disclose information about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, apparently hiding SCUD missiles, planting bombs on trucks carrying aid to the Kurds, harassing United Nations officials working inside Iraq, rejecting terms of U.N.-monitored oil sales intended to pay compensation to victims of the Kuwaiti invasion, and boycotting meetings of the Iraq-Kuwait boundary commision and rejecting some of its findings. All in all, Saddam has persistently antagonized the United Nations and the Western powers in ways which may eventually result in renewed hostilities.

On top of provoking confrontations with the United Nations, Saddam's antagonism has led the West to seek an overthrow of the Iraqi dictator. By creating militarily-enforced 'No-Fly Zones', the West has effectively partitioned Iraq into three separate states, thereby cornering Saddam: the Kurd's have the North, the Shiite's have the South, and Saddam is trapped in the middle. Besides cornering Saddam, America and the Western allies have helped organize, and have pledged support for, forces inside Iraq seeking to oust Saddam Hussein from power. For instance, the West has backed the development of the 'Iraqi National Congress', a conglomeration of various groups inside Iraq that are opposed to Saddam. The Congress is currently seeking to replace the government in Baghdad by instigating a popular internal uprising and/or military coup against Saddam Hussein's dictatorship.

The reason Saddam wants the West to resume fighting and/or try and overthrow his regime would most likely have to do with preparing the way for Iraq to trigger war in the Middle East. By provoking Western military intervention and/or staging an overthrow attempt, Saddam creates the perfect excuse for taking seemingly last-resort, kamikazee action against Israel and the West. This would likely involve, at the least, a chemical SCUD attack against Israel {which would 'make fire eat up half of Israel', just as Saddam had threatened to do a few months prior to invading Kuwait (1)}. Because such an attack on Israel would stem from apparently blatant Western aggression against Saddam's Iraq, the 'imperialist' West will be held responsible for the ultimate consequences.

There are numerous indications that the Arabs intend to make war rather than peace. First off, the proposals for comprehensive peace recently put forth by Syria and Jordan, two of Israel's most steadfast enemies, are simply too unprecedented and historically inconsistent. They utterly contradict the long-time stated intentions of Arab leaders, such as Hafez Assad of Syria, to annihilate the Jewish state. They also contradict the decades of extraordinary military investments made by the Arabs to make good on their stated intentions. Recent evidence that the peace talks are a lie comes from Syria's continuing support for terrorist attacks against Israelis in Northern Israel and Southern Lebanon. Furthermore, Syria continues to buy increasingly sophisticated long-range SCUD missiles which can be used for chemical attacks on Israel, and, on top of that, Hafez Assad recently signed a 'weapons cooperation accord' with Russia according to which Syria will receive billions of dollars worth of sophisticated Sukhoi and MiG fighter jets along with top-of-the-line Russian tanks and anti-missile systems (2). If, indeed, Syria were committed to peace rather than war, such activity would have ended long ago.

If the peace negotiations are deceptive, then the ultimate aim most likely involves some form of future Arab surprise attack. The Arabs may very well be planning to reach a comprehensive peace agreement with Israel, but only to secure the element of surprise and to get Israel to drop its guard. Specifically, one important military/strategic aim of an agreement might be an Israeli pullout from the Golan Heights- a mountainous buffer zone which currently blocks a Syrian breakthrough. Such a pullout, along side an Israeli false sense of security, would make the Jewish state as vulnerable as possible to an Arab attack.

To make sure that the East is not blamed for world war three, the Arabs would want to launch an attack against Israel in a way that appears to be provoked by the West and Israel itself.

To start with, current Arab peace efforts, along side increasing violence in Southern Lebanon, may be paving the way for the East to shift blame on to the West for a future Arab/Israeli war. As the Arabs pursue peace, they increasingly appear to be peace-oriented rather than belligerent. Meanwhile, Israel appears to be increasingly belligerent rather than peaceful because stepped-up terrorist attacks have provoked Israeli raids against terrorist factions in Southern Lebanon. By linking a future war to Israeli action in Lebanon, the Arabs could significantly reverse any blame.

As is mentioned above, besides Lebanon, war could be set-off in the Middle East in a way that appears to be the West's fault by having Saddam provoke a crisis with the West and then launch a kamikazee attack against Israel. Following an Iraqi chemical attack against the Jewish state- an action which would revive memories of Hitler's gassing of the Jews- Israeli retaliation will be both assured and severe (3). Israel's military response could, in turn, be used by the Arabs- particularly Syria- as a pretense for war that, due to the current peace efforts, would effectively be a surprise.

All in all, by using Iraq, and possibly Lebanon, to spawn a primary crisis, the Arabs could launch an attack against Israel and have it appear to be the West's and Israel's fault.

In the context of a general strategy involving Russia, the goal of an Arab attack against Israel would be its predictable consequence: to get the West to use nuclear weapons first. It is widely recognized that Israel has a substantial nuclear arsenal which includes nuclear missiles. Upon an Arab breakthrough, it is believed that Israel would launch a nuclear attack against its perceived enemies (4). This, in turn, would give Russia the excuse it needs to launch a nuclear attack against the West and have it appear to be 'retaliation'. Thus, because Israel would be quick to use nuclear weapons, Russia may be planning to use a surprise Arab/Israeli war as a catalyst for surprise nuclear attack against the West.

On a general level, disintegrating the Soviet Union has opened the way for a rising tide of nationalism and ethnic warfare. What's more, the perception of a debilitated and militarily weak Russia opens the way for strong Western military intervention the world over.

By fostering nationalist trends and ethnic conflicts in the Balkans- principally Yugoslavia- and Caucasian countries- such as Armenia and Azerbaijan, Russia may be seeking to provoke Western military intervention that can be linked to the outbreak of world war three. In this way, blame for global war can be shifted as much as possible on to West.

The focus on these regions would likely have to do with the ease of pulling the local NATO members into large-scale war. Both the Yugoslavian and Armenian/Azerbaijan conflicts currently underway can be escalated such that regional war will breakout involving, at the least, Turkey- NATO's critical East-West linchpin. This can easily be used as a pretense for general war between the East and West.

That Moscow is planning to use the Balkan and Caucasian regions for flashpoints is indicated by inconsistent policies and the statements of Russian officials. With regard to Yugoslavia, even though Moscow signed an agreement for an international embargo on arms shipments to Serbia, it is still supplying large quantities of arms to its ex-ally (5) (Serbia is the principal belligerent in the Yugoslavian war). Furthermore, Sergey Yastrzhemskiy, director of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, recently warned that the situation in the Balkans could lead "to a global explosion fraught with the danger of a third world war" (6). In the Caucasus, Moscow's calls for a diplomatic solution to the Armenian/Azerbaijan conflict has been contradicted by policies which have armed the local populations. Also, last May, General Yevgeny Shaposhnikov, commander of the CIS (ex-Soviet) army, warned that foreign intervention in the region "could bring the world into the third world war" (7). More specifically, the mutual security arrangements of the CIS are arranged such that, should Turkey intervene in Armenia- something which Turkey has threatened to do on several occasions, the CIS would be pulled into war against Turkey and, in turn, NATO.

If, indeed, the East has been pursuing a grand deception over the past several years, then it is likely that Gorbachev's rise to power in 1985 entailed a dramatic ideological shift to the political right rather than the left. At first this may seem hard to believe, but, indeed, going into the 1980's, it was well-recognized that a shift to the right was taking place at the top in the Soviet Union {for instance, see: Alexander Yanov's, 'The Russian Challenge and the Year 2000' (8)}.

The Russian Right is the ultimate form of facism. It is centered around an ideology that paints Jews and Westerners as satanic elements conspiring to overtake Russia and the world. Consequently, Russia has a messianic calling to wage a merciless war against Israel and the West before the world is completely controlled by evil "zionist" (Israeli/Jewish) and "freemasonry" (Western/liberal-democratic) forces (purportedly by the year 2000). Through this war Russia will fulfill its destiny of saving (dominating) the world and establishing a global kingdom of god (dictatorship of man). The pseudo-Christian underpinnings of the Russian Right brought about a strong alliance between Rightist elements in the government and leaders in the Russian Orthodox Church. In other words, with the emergence of the Russian Right, the ideology surrounding Russia's historical messianic complex shifted from Communism to Orthodoxy. (9)

There were numerous indications that Gorbachev led a rise to power by the Russian Right. First off, Gorbachev's background in the Komsomols (Young Communists) involved participation in anti-semitic activities under Stalin (10). It was these anti-semitic programs which were the roots from which the Russian Right emerged {especially in the context of Young Guardism (11)}. Since Gorbachev eventually became a leading figure in the Komsomols, there is reason to believe he was involved in the emergence of the Russian Right (12). His remarkably fast rise into the Politburo under Brezhnev (Gorbachev was only 50 when he entered the Politburo whereas the average age of a member was over 70) indicates he was tied to an extremely powerful movement which, at that time, would have most likely been the Right. During the 1970's, the Russian Right was seeking to bring about a top-down revolution. By achieving power at the top, the neo-facist ideology of the Russian Right could be spread downward to the people (13). This is exactly what happened under Gorbachev.

Soon after Gorbachev came to power and initiated his policy of Glasnost, or openess, the neo-facist ideology of the Russian Right began to be introduced to the Russian people through supposedly grassroot organizations which were, in fact, created and financed by the KGB. Probably the ultimate example of this is an organization called 'Pamyat'.

Pamyat was underhandedly created by the Soviet government and the KGB supposedly as an independent organization devoted to renovating and restoring Russian monuments, museums, historical sights, and Orthodox Churches (14). Quickly, however, it transformed into a leading front for the spread of Russian neo-facism. Pamyat and its activities under Gorbachev could be tied to the KGB, high-level elements of the Soviet military, and the Central Committee of the Central Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU). In fact, there were indications that Yegor Ligachev, Gorbachev's right-hand man, and Raisa Gorbachev, Mikhail's wife, were directly involved with Pamyat (15). Furthermore, in 1987, Gorbachev's closest Politburo ally, Boris Yeltsin (!), held an extraordinary meeting with Pamyat leaders (16). Following this meeting Pamyat was permitted to use government buildings for meetings and other activities- an unprecedented privilege. Further indicating Pamyat's connection to the government, at the 1990 Revolution Day parade in Moscow's Red Square the military and police kept all groups of demonstrators at least a mile away from the parade area except for Pamyat (17). Furthermore, that year Gorbachev appointed two people to his 13-member presidential council who were believed to be members of Pamyat (18). One of those individuals, Valentin Rasputin, advocated that Russian Jews ought to be tried collectively for the murder of Jesus (19).

The linkage between Pamyat and the Soviet power structure indicates that the Russian Right came to power with the rise of Mikhail Gorbachev, but an open rise to power by Russian neo-facism and an apocalyptic war launched against the West will likely be carried out by a Vladimir Zhirinovsky. Vladimir Zhirinovsky is the leader of a party misleadingly called the Liberal Democratic Party. He was recently quoted as saying: "I am the Almighty. I am the tyrant. I will follow in Hitler's footsteps." (20) His purported goals are the same as Pamyat's, including the restoration of the Byzantine empire of the East.

Zhirinovsky is evidently an agent of the KGB. A recent outside investigation of the 1990 August coup in Moscow has uncovered documents and evidence which establishes direct links between Zhirinovsky, the KGB, and the CPSU under Gorbachev (21). Furthermore, the evidence indicates that the Liberal Democratic Party effectively does not exist. Since Zhirinovsky supposedly received six million votes and came in third in the Russian presidential elections won by Yeltsin, the indication is that those elections were, in fact, a fraud (22). Overall, the indication is that Zhirinovsky is KGB and Gorbachev and Yeltsin are involved in an unprecedented, global-scale deception.

It appears that Zhirinovsky was created to carry out the dirty work of the Russian Right. He could prove to be the key player in launching an all-out Russian attack against the West. To understand how and why this is so one must first consider the 1991 August coup in Moscow.

There is good reason to believe that the August coup in the Soviet Union was a staged deception. To understand why, simply consider that, during a 'hardline' coup in the largest military dictatorship in world history, it would be unlikely that the supposed main opposition- Boris Yelstin and his counterparts- would go unarrested or unkilled. It is outright absurd to believe that this opposition could get away with making speeches and rallying popular support to undo the coup in the streets of Moscow. Yet, this is supposedly what happened (23). Realistically, however, the main opposition would be the first thing to go in a hardline coup involving the strategically-minded KGB and Soviet military. All in all, the August coup may have been nothing but a deception and Mikhail Gorbachev, Boris Yelstin, and the rest of the 'ex-communist', 'ex-Soviet' leadership, have always been and will likely always be 'hardliners' whose intent is world domination.

The 1991 coup had a notable peculiarity which may portend a future, bogus coup which Moscow may be planning to stage prior to launching an attack against the West. Following the August coup, the Soviet press emphasized how Gorbachev's 'briefcase' fell into the hands of the supposed hardliners who threw the coup. This briefcase reportedly carried the codes which are used to launch the Soviet Union's nuclear missiles. In other words, it was made clear to the world how the coup could have led to a nuclear war launched by radical hardliners. (24)

Prior to launching a third world war, it would be strategic for Moscow to stage a rise to power by the Russian Right. First off, such a move would be necessary to maintain the consistency of the overall deception. Yeltsin's Russia, like Gorbachev's Soviet Union, has been painted as progressive and peace-oriented. Thus, prior to launching a war, Russia would want it to appear that radical hardliners are in power. This way the world won't pick-up on the overall deception that's been underway or the premeditated nature of Russia's attack.

By maintaining the overall deception, Russia's 'true' leaders will be able to sidestep blame and, more importantly, they'll eventually be able to achieve popular world control. Following an all-out offensive against the West and military campaign to dominate the world, Russia would want to stage a bogus 'return' to power by what have been made out to be progressive, peace-oriented leaders- especially Mikhail Gorbachev. This way military control of the world can be reinforced by popular control. Instead of realizing how Gorbachev and his associates were responsible for world destruction, people will believe these leaders saved the world from ultimate destruction by Russian extremists.

It seems clear that Vladimir Zhirinovsky is the openly neo-facist, hardline leader that Moscow is planning to bring to power for launching world war three. The stage is being set so that his rise to power parallels Hitler's rise to power in the Weimar Republic of Germany during the 1930's. Over the past couple of years, Russia has been transformed into a what's supposed to be a fledgling democratic nation with no democratic heritage suffering from increasing political and economic disintegration. This, of course, was what the Weimar Republic of Germany was like. Now, a neo-facist dictator, Vladmir Zhirinovsky, can be carried to power out of popular frustrations. This, of course, was how Hitler found his way to the top. Once Zhirinovsky's is supposedly placed in charge, possibly through some sort of bogus palace coup against Yeltsin (keep in mind it is all staged and Gorbachev, Yeltsin, and the powers that be are simply engaging in large-scale political deception), he then can be used to launch a world war; again, 'following in Hitler's footsteps'.

The reason that Moscow would stage a shift to the right in a manner which parallels the rise of facism in Germany during the 1930's is that it makes the overall deception more believable. Nevertheless, the connections between Gorbachev, Yeltsin, and the Russian Right, as well as the connections between Zhirinovsky, the KGB, and the CPSU as it were, make it clear that neo-facism found its way into the Russian power structure long ago. What's taking place at present and what occurs in the future has been preplanned and is bogus.

That an open rise to power by the extreme right and Vladimir Zhirinovsky will be used to make way for an all-out war against the West is made clear by the super-belligerent threats Zhirinovsky has been making. First off, Zhirinovsky is calling for the forceful reestablishment of the pre-1917 borders of the Czarist Russian empire. Furthermore, he has vowed to wage a third world war against the West in Yugoslavia, the Caucuses, and the Middle East. Lastly, and most importantly, Zhirinovsky recently made his first international diplomatic trip. He went to Baghdad, Iraq. Zhirinovsky has pledged to support Saddam Hussein in waging war against Russia's and Iraq's common enemies of the West, Israel, and Turkey. What is more, Zhirinovsky has stated that he will not hesitate to use weapons of mass destruction in that effort. (25)

As for Saddam Hussein, the reason for his seemingly irrational, self- sacrificial actions thus far would finally become clear. Through his cooperation with Moscow, Saddam may eventually achieve both military and popular dominance in the Moslem world. If events generally proceed as is spelled out above, then, after the dust settles, Saddam would emerge as an ultimate hero of the Arab and Moslem people. Just as it appeared to be all over for him, Saddam managed to completely turn circumstances around such that utter defeat was brought to his 'imperialist' enemies of the West: Israel, America, and the Western allies. Thus, Saddam will be able to establish popular dominion over Persia and possibly the entire Moslem world. Saddam's power will likely be reinforced by his central role in a Russian/Moslem military alliance to be 'openly' forged later on.

2. "Major Russia-Syria Arms Sale Reported". 'The Washington Times': 11/3/92; A2.

3. "U.N. Team Looking for SCUD Missiles that may be Hidden". 'Agence France Presse': 10/18/92.

4. Hersch, Seymour. 'The Samson Option: Israel's Nucler Arsenal and American Foreign Policy'. Randome House; New York, NY: 1991.

5. "Washington Whispers". 'U.S. News and World Report': 8/10/92; 18.

6. "Foreign Ministry Briefing Covers Yugoslavia, Estonia and Lebanon". 'BBC Summary of World Broadcasts': 6/9/92.

7. "The Question of Azerbaijan; Nationalism Unleashed - I". 'The Nation': 9/14/92; 241.

8. Yanov, Alexander. 'The Russian Challenge and the Year 2000'. Basil Blackwell; New York, NY: 1987.

9. See (8).

10. "Moscow's Gorbachev: A New Leader in the Old Mold". 'Heritage Foundation Reports': 8/29/85.

11. See (8).

12. "The Rise and Fall of Gorbachev". 'Los Angeles Times': 12/26/91; A1.

13. To the Russian Right this top-down revolution is in the context of "The Great Transformation". See (8).

14. Bortin, Mary Ellen. "Russian Heritage Group Said to Fan Nationalist Hysteria". 'Reuters': 6/2/87.

15. Simes, Dimitri. "Extremists Flourish in Gorbachev Era". 'Los Angeles Times': 6/25/87; part 2/p5.

16. "Russian Nationalism Spreads; Moscow Group Holds Public Protest". 'The Washington Post': 5/24/87; A25.

17. "Prizewinner's Ways". 'Forbes': 1/7/91; 10.

18. "Gorbachev Appeases Hard-liners, Names 2 Russians to Inner Circle". 'The Washington Times': 4/26/90; A11.

19. "Yeshiva University Should've Known Better". 'The Jerusalem Post': 5/19/92.

20. "Russia: Hardline Communists Take Road to Facism". 'The Independent': 12/1/92; 11.

21. "Accusations by the White House". 'Current Digest of the Soviet Press': 1/29/92; 23.

22. "Communist Losers Offer Excuses for Russian Poll Defeat". 'The Times': 6/15/91.

23. For a comprehensive review of events during the 1991 August coup in Moscow, see: "Three Days That Shook the World". 'U.S. News & World Report': 11/8/91; 52.

24. "Where's was the Black Box?". 'Time': 9/2/91; 43.

25. "In Russia, It's Us vs. Them; Nationalists Preach Hate, Militarism". 'Newsday': 12/29/92; 12.