La doctrina del Caos Controlado

Imperdible artículo del blogger ruso autodenominado "Colonel Cassad", en relación con Medio Oriente y los aprendices de brujo de Washington. El artículo original, en ruso, puede leerse en: http://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/1798763.html.

Título: New Barbarians

Texto: This situation with ISIS is actually the best proof of imperfection of the controlled chaos doctrine, within which the Americans pursued "colored revolutions". It would seem that there's nothing more straightforward: take your dissatisfied islamists, hook them up with "democratic democrats" and here is a convenient tandem for overthrowing yet another autocratic regime, which used to be respectable only yesterday, but today became inconvenient and unnecessary.

But a significant issue of this conception turned out to be the fact that the potential puppets seek to obtain political subjectness by hook or by crook. And if "democratic democrats" in general hang on the threads of economic, political, and military control, then islamic radicals don't dream of being American puppets at all. Instead, they dream of being the next founders of Great Caliphate, which will start rolling on all sides to conquer the lands of infidels. And it would seem that the Taliban experience, against which the USA fought unsuccessfully for 10 years, would teach the Americans something, but no – they made a clear bet on Islamic fundamentalists as an instrument of liquidating inconvenient regimes during the second wave of "colored revolutions" in the Middle East and North Africa. The results turned out to be impressive.

In Mali the local "islamists" got so brazen that France had to invade it, with the tacit approval of the USA, in order to prevent the overthrow of the local puppet regime and support the local colonial order.

In Lybia the islamists broke the country. They effectively separated from it along with the oil wells and terminals, selling oil on the black market to even such clear mutual enemies as the USA and North Korea. The local government, which was fully controlled by the Americans, impotently threatens to punish the wretches, but instead of following up on this threat it got stuck in arguments with other groups. At odd moments they even sometimes capture U.S. embassies.

In Egypt, after the "Muslim Brotherhood" came to power, the USA were forced to support a military coup and mass murder only to get rid of the "Brotherhood" (whom they perfectly well supported in Tahrir). This brought back the very same military that were deposed in Tahrir.

In the Persian Gulf countries they altogether had to close their eyes at bloody suppression of islamist protests, which Saudi Arabia also helped to crush.

In Syria the situation altogether ended up being characteristic: the islamists who were supplied to fight Assad first decided to bring down the "democratic democrats" along with "undemocratic democrats" of Assad and then they went after "bearded men with Quran and AK-47" which from the point of view of their interpretation of Islam were insufficiently pure. In the end they bit off a piece of Syria and then a piece of Iraq, which was ruled by American puppets, creating the very same Caliphate about which there were warnings since a long time ago.

It would seem that within the framework of the "controlled chaos doctrine", which tends to explain all U.S. motions with the presence of some "clever plan" (well, you already know about Yanukovich and Putin clever plans, so you think that Obama and Pentagon don't have their own "clever plan"?), this would be beneficial to the USA, because ISIS, even after going rogue, ruined existing states according to the famous map of 2007.

But the paradox is actually that the USA, instead of observing how ISIS solves problems that were posed in 2007, currently build a coalition against ISIS and openly announce that they won't allow any Caliphates. That is, they impede achieving those goals that ISIS actually solves by ruining the neighboring states. Well, of course they cannot allow this to happen, the events clearly went out of control and the reconfiguration of the Middle East may not happen the way Washington sees it but rather it may happen the way the bearded men with Quran see it. A hasty attempt to get Iran involved in puncturing the Caliphate ulcer was unsuccesful. Iran is in no rush to pull chestnuts out of the fire for the Americans. So, the Americans hung back for a while for propriety, but in the end they were forced to relent to the pressure of their local satellites, which yell that the USA must protect them from the Caliphate for six months now. Roughly speaking, they demand the USA to clean after themselves, saying that "You made this ISIS mess, now clean it". Americans aren't looking to get involved in yet another war right now (in the very same poor Iraq), so they assembled a coalition for this matter, started to arm the Iraqi army (even Russia participated, which is not surprising because the Caliphate already threatened that after finishing off the American hirelings and bloody Assad they'll take the fight to the Caucasus), and even started to carry out airstrikes, effectively pulling into a war against the Caliphate. Meanwhile, they had to contact even the hated Assad behind the scenes, who peculiarly became a situational ally of the USA in the fight against ISIS even despite the fact that the two sides continue to publicly denounce each other. The "Free Syrian Army" now altogether has to be armed not even against Assad but against ISIS.

In general, the next "clever plan" led to unintended consequences, the former political instrument attained political subjectness and started to build its "miraculous" future with severed heads and mass murder. Now they are convulsivly trying to close this project, because you may laugh at it but if the Caliphate will gain strength and grow its army using the impoverished population and materiel that it captured from armies of local autocrats, then the announced campaigns under black or green banner against the neighboring countries will become pretty much the rough reality. And everyone will suffer, starting from Assad, who is hostile to the USA, and ending with Persian Gulf sheikhs who are locked on the USA. For the characters that fight under ISIS black banners, all of them are infidels or infidel accomplices. So, they will kill foreign journalists, "democratic democrats", Assad soldiers, local Christians, or insufficiently radical islamists with equal zeal. Just because they impede achieving the goal: building an Islamic superpower on Shariah principles with a nuclear bomb in its embrace.

The term "new nomads" was very popular among the corporatocracy and globalists, which reflected the genesis of a separate human sub-species of a "global human". Within the framework of this theory, the Caliphate is "new barbarians", which consciously destroy civilization in its Western meaning and are in essence a polar anthisesis of American concept of world order. That is why they were actually forced to get involved in yet another war (the war that is clearly a dead-end, because this is exactly struggle against consequences) in the same place from which they recently had bid a hasty retreat. Of course, all of those who like to explain everything from the positions of "clever planning" will find their logic here too, buidling some sort of constructs in the spirit of "USA purposefully built ISIS in order to fight ISIS later on Iraq territory, which was already controlled by the USA". Actually, the USA could break Iraq even without ISIS. The Caliphate fans weren't required for creating Kurdistan in order to split Iraq, Turkey, and Syria. But in its stubborn attempts to depose Assad the USA clearly overplayed its hand and now they face the consequences, when a clever and a fine game that is so typical for the USA with its "global chessboards" was replaced by a rough game of Chapayev, when the opponents primitively sweep all pieces from the board – black or white – instead of carefully moving the pieces with manicured hands. The chaos became uncontrollable. Instead of fine manipulations the USA are foced to crudely, in the glorious spirit of W, assemble a coalition for yet another war.

Overall, the current story of the Caliphate (which is far from over yet – it is not guaranteed at all that the USA et al. will be able to crush the Caliphate) nicely shows that the omnipotence of American strategists shouldn't be exaggerated. Also, it is not required to wet one's pants at the mention of "controlled chaos doctrine". Americans screw up. They screw up big time. The latest story of Crimea, which went missing, is also a characteristic indicator of this fact.