person:juan cole

Pompeo, Big Oil and the attack on Iran Deal | Informed Comment
▻https://www.juancole.com/2018/03/pompeo-attack-iran.html

By Juan Cole | (Informed Comment) | – –
All you need to know about Mike Pompeo, the four-term congressman from Kansas who is actually from California, is that most of his life he has been in business with the Koch brothers. His appointment as Secretary of State puts a seal on Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris climate accords.
More dangerously, Trump was straightforward that he put Pompeo in to replace Rex Tillerson in order to destroy the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action treaty between the United Nations Security Council and Iran.
Pompeo, despite his obvious brilliance, appears to be driven by profound currents of anger, resentment and vindictiveness, and to be unable to feel remorse for purveying falsehoods. His shameful performance at the circus he ran attempting to blame Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for the 2011 Benghazi attack and its aftermath demonstrated a willingness to play fast and loose with the facts and an inquisitorial, McCarthyite mindset.
His lack of a moral compass makes his connection to the Kochs especially dangerous.
Charles and David Koch, the notorious billionaires gnawing like termites at the foundations of American democracy, are all about petroleum. They fund phony climate denialism with a Potemkin village of foundations and expert frauds, to make sure oil keeps its value for as long as possible (even at the cost of visiting catastrophes on our children and grandchildren, since burning oil is causing catastrophic global heating).

WaPo: UAE Hacked Qatar to Invent Pretense for Retaliation – Mother Jones

▻http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/07/wapo-uae-hacked-qatar-to-invent-pretense-for-retaliation

As you know, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries have imposed a blockade on Qatar, allegedly due to concerns over Qatar’s support for various and sundry terrorist groups. The blockade began in May, after Qatar’s official news agency published incendiary remarks from Qatar’s leader, and then claimed they had been hacked:

The fake article quoted Qatar emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani as calling Iran an “Islamic power” and saying Qatar’s relations with Israel were “good” during a military ceremony.

The Qatari state television’s nightly newscast…scrolling ticker…included calling Hamas “the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people,” as well as saying Qatar had “strong relations” with Iran and the United States. “Iran represents a regional and Islamic power that cannot be ignored and it is unwise to face up against it,” the ticker read at one point. “It is a big power in the stabilization of the region.”

Hacked? Get serious. Does anyone seriously believe that—

The United Arab Emirates orchestrated the hacking of Qatari government news and social media sites in order to post incendiary false quotes attributed to Qatar’s emir, Sheikh Tamim Bin Hamad al-Thani, in late May that sparked the ongoing upheaval between Qatar and its neighbors, according to U.S. intelligence officials.

Officials became aware last week that newly analyzed information gathered by U.S. intelligence agencies confirmed that on May 23, senior members of the UAE government discussed the plan and its implementation. The officials said it remains unclear whether the UAE carried out the hacks itself or contracted to have them done.

That’s from the Washington Post. The UAE denies everything, of course.

This is a very big deal. For starters, what are the odds that the UAE did this alone? Pretty slim, I think. Saudi Arabia was almost certainly involved too. And what does President Trump do now? He’s taken the Saudi side of this dispute, but now his own intelligence agencies are telling him that other Arab countries conducted the hack as a deliberate way of giving themselves an excuse to create the blockade. In fact, he probably learned this a week ago.

Someone in the intelligence community apparently decided that (a) Trump was never going to go public with this, and (b) it really needed to become public. But who? And why?

Un élément peu commenté en France, c’est l’embauche par le New York Times d’un éditorialiste climato-sceptique. C’est très remarquable : l’un des plus grands fleurons de la presse libre du monde libre, qui se présentait comme un indispensable bastion de la résistance aux élucubrations fake-news de Trump, dès lors que la nouvelle administration américaine est ouvertement climato-sceptique, s’empresse d’embaucher un éditorialiste climat-sceptique (dans le but prétendu de présenter à ses lecteurs une plus grande diversité de point de vue).

Juan Cole, d’ailleurs, est un des rares à clairement faire le lien entre cette soudaine complaisance avec un précédent épisode de compromission qui allaient dans le sens (dangereux) de l’administration en place :
▻https://www.juancole.com/2017/04/millions-march-climate.html

Bret Stephens at the NYT is the essence of fake news.

The New York Times gave us the Iraq War with phony stories about aluminum tubes and Iraqi nuclear bomb projects, and biological weapons on bumpy Winnebagos on Iraq’s potholed roads. The paper has a lot of great and honest reporters, but a little bit of arsenic can ruin an otherwise fine meal.

U.S.-Led Coalition Confirms Strikes Hit Mosul Site Where Civilians Died - The New York Times
▻https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/25/us/politics/us-led-coalition-confirms-strikes-hit-mosul-site-where-civilians-died.html?

Où l’on constate sans surprise, au regard de l’extrême indifférence générale, que Moussoul n’est pas Alep.

The American-led military coalition in Iraq said Saturday that an initial review of recent airstrikes in Mosul, the Islamic State’s last stronghold in Iraq, had confirmed that the strikes hit a site where scores of civilians were killed.

The inquiry, military officials said, found that a building had collapsed a few days after strikes by American forces. United States officials are seeking to determine whether the airstrikes brought down the building, leaving many Iraqis dead, or the Islamic State used the strikes as an opportunity to detonate an explosive in the building.

(...)

The March 17 airstrikes — which Iraqis said had led to the deaths of possibly 200 people — could have produced among the highest civilian death tolls in an American air mission since the United States invaded Iraq in 2003.

Hard Truth: Aleppo Rebels weren’t defeated by Main Force but b/c they alienated Syrians - Juan Cole
▻http://www.juancole.com/2016/12/defeated-alienated-syrians.html

Syria is a very diverse society. Here are some guesstimates for its ethnic and sectarian make-up.
Alawite Shiites: 14%
Christians: 7%
Druze: 3%
Ismailis: 1%
Twelver Shiites: 0.5%
Kurds: 10%
Secular Sunni Arabs: 30%
Religious Sunni Arabs: 34.5%

[…]

So as the Syrian opposition ratcheted farther and farther to the Sunni religious right, and as the most effective fighters came to be drawn from that sector, they lost the good will and support of most Syrians.

The secular-minded Sunni Arab majority didn’t want to be ruled by people imitating the Saudi Wahhabis. The Christians didn’t want that. The Druze didn’t want it. The Kurds didn’t want it. The Alawites certainly didn’t want it.

So you get 70% of the people in the country who, having been given the unpalatable choice between the Baath regime of al-Assad and being ruled by Salafi Jihadis, reluctantly chose al-Assad.

That is why the Aleppo pocket fell. There had been 250,000 Sunni Arabs of a more religious mindset and from a working class background living there under rebel control since 2012. But next door in West Aleppo, which our television stations won’t talk about, were 800,000 to a million people who much preferred to be under the rule of the regime. This numerous and relatively well off population took occasional mortar fire from the slums of East Aleppo. They weren’t in the least interested in saving the rebels from the Russians or the Iraqi Shiite militias or from the regime itself.

#Made_in_america (compilation uniquement à partir de sources MSM)

The world’s best cyber army doesn’t belong to Russia
▻https://seenthis.net/messages/515937

The long history of the U.S. interfering with elections elsewhere
▻https://seenthis.net/messages/532933

Juan Cole dans The Nation pose la question que l’on se pose depuis 5 ans :

Why Is Washington Supporting Fundamentalist Jihadis in Syria ?
A CIA-backed rebel group has joined with Al Qaeda in attacking another rebel force—the one leading negotiations in Geneva.
▻http://www.thenation.com/article/why-is-washington-supporting-fundamentalist-jihadis-in-syria
Résumé : l’article part des combats récents entre différents groupes dominant la Ghouta orientale (est de la région de Damas). Pour une vue d’ensemble et ses probables implication étrangères on pourra lire ce récent article d’Aron Lund : ▻http://carnegieendowment.org/syriaincrisis/?fa=63512 .
En gros des combats très violents ont opposé Jaych al-Islam, d’une part, et d’autre part un groupe lié à l’ASL, Faylaq al-Rahman, ainsi que la coalition menée par al-Nousra dans la région : Jaych al-Foustat (JAN + Ahrar + Fajr al-Oumma). Enjeu : le contrôle de zones et des taxes sur les tunnels et du leadership sur la Ghouta orientale.
Donc d’un côté le wahhabisme de JAI, soutenu par les Saoudiens, et dont un des commandants, Mohammed Alloush, est le chef des négociateurs de du HCN à Genève. Et de l’autre un groupe théoriquement lié à l’ASL, recevant l’aide des USA (dont des missiles TOW), et qui s’est allié avec la coalition salafiste comprenant la branche syrienne d’al-Qaïda le premier :

Now there is a problem. In the past month the Rahman Corps has flipped, joined with Al Qaeda, and begun attacking Alloush’s group, the Army of Islam.
That’s right: The leader of the negotiating team at Geneva on behalf of the rebels is now besieged by one of his own US-backed constituents, which is likely using CIA-provided weapons against him. And it is doing so in a battlefield alliance with Al Qaeda.
In the East Ghouta pocket, Nusra ally the Rahman Corps and the Fustat Army Operations Room (led by Al Qaeda) have been ranged against the Army of Islam. Fighting between the fundamentalists intensified Saturday night, but it has been raging for twenty days and has killed 300. Most of the dead were members of the Army of Islam and Al Qaeda, though dozens were from the Rahman Corps. The preachers of Al Qaeda, or the Nusra Front, were said to be inciting the killing of members of the Army of Islam.

A cela il faut ajouter le récent massacre de civils du village alaouite de Zaraa par al-Nousra mais aussi Ahrar, dont JAI est aussi un allié :

On Thursday, the Nusra Front, along with its ally, the Freemen of Syria (Ahrar al-Sham), also attacked in another part of Syria, the Alawite Shiite village of Zara, south of Hama. There, they stand accused of butchering at least 19 civilians and of desecrating the bodies of the dead Alawites, who mostly support the government of Assad (himself an Alawite). The villagers maintain that the invading insurgents slit the throats of their victims in their homes, and that those killed included children, women, and the aged. The Freemen of Syria denied targeting civilians. The Alawites comprise some 10 to 14 percent of Syria’s population. Remember that the Army of Islam of Mohammad Alloush, the lead negotiator in Geneva, is allied with the Freemen of Syria and that Alloush’s family has been vitriolic against Syrian Shiites.

Ceci amène Juan Cole à la conclusion suivante :

The Assad regime is guilty of crimes against humanity, and many of the groups that took up arms against it were fired by a desire for a more just society. But many of the supposed friends of the United States in Syria’s opposition have an unsavory ideology, unsavory friends, or are themselves guilty of war crimes. Washington has to stop arming these groups if there is ever to be peace in Syria, and it needs to pressure Saudi Arabia to cease trying to push Syria to the far right. The weaponry sent in by Saudi Arabia on Washington’s behalf in any case often makes its way to Al Qaeda or ISIS. The Army of Islam shouldn’t be the lead negotiator in Geneva! The leftist Kurds need to be brought into the negotiations if the northeast is to remain part of Syria, and their voice on the opposition side is important to offset the powerful megaphone of the minority Salafis.

Comme le note angry arab, tandis que les médias rapportent à juste titre que les bombardements aériens des forces du régime tuent des civils, notamment à Alep sous contrôle rebelle, les médias occultent complètement les morts civils dans la zone d’Alep tenue par le régime, où les rebelles bombardent au mortier et avec les « canons de l’enfer », et qui ont fait une vingtaine de morts depuis quelques jours :
▻http://angryarab.blogspot.fr/2016/04/like-i-have-been-telling-you-syrian.html

Like i have been telling you, Syrian rebels have been bombing the shit out of Aleppo residents but not a word about that
Only when Syrian regime forces kills civilians it is news. Killing of civilians in the territories under the control of the regime does not warrant coverage.

Lien vers article NYT en exemple :
▻http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/29/world/middleeast/aleppo-syria-strikes.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share

Obama annonce l’envoi de 250 membres des forces spéciales américaines en addition des 50 officiellement déjà présents, et ce en appui des SDF (YPG + brigades arabes) afin, selon ses déclarations, de prendre Raqqa :
▻http://www.cbsnews.com/news/behind-president-obama-decision-to-deploy-250-additional-u-s-troops-to-syri

The president’s decision expands the American military footprint in Syria,m from 50 commandos to 300 — something the president has been very reluctant to do. But this is an attempt to squeeze ISIS as much as he can before leaving office, reports CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan.
The additional U.S. troops will intensify pressure on ISIS inside their Syrian stronghold. They will provide intelligence, support and logistics to Kurdish and Arab forces who are fighting to recapture Raqqa, the de facto capital of the Islamic State.

#course_vers_Raqqa

Comme prévu après la prise de Palmyre, Qaryatayn vient d’être reprise par les forces du régime à Da’ich :
▻http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20160403/1037410323/syria-al-qaryataynin.html
Qaryatayn c’est là : ▻https://www.google.fr/maps/@34.2285857,37.1677565,9z
La question maintenant est vers quel objectif le régime va-t-il allouer ses forces disponibles : briser le siège de Deïr az-Zor ou bien couper en 2 le territoire syrien de Da’ich en prenant Tabaqah sur la route de Raqqa ?
La question est en fait politique. Elle dépend de deux autres questions :
1° - D’abord la cessation des hostilités va-t-elle tenir malgré les offensives conjointes des « rebelles » et d’al-Nousra/Ahrar al-Cham au sud d’Alep et dans la province de Lattaquieh et permettre de continuer l’offensive anti-Da’ich, ou bien le régime va-t-il devoir délaisser sa poussée vers l’est et se reconcentrer sur la « Syrie utile » ?
2° - Qu’est-ce que le régime considère comme la menace la plus crédible : l’impossibilité de s’entendre avec les SDF/YPG si leurs avancées les mettaient en position de force alors qu’ils s’approchent de Raqqah (et viennent de pénétrer dans la mouhafaza de Deïr ez-Zor), menaçant alors le régime d’une fédéralisation forcée, ou bien un plan de Sunnistan dans le désert que concocteraient les Saoudiens (et d’autres) ?
Et quel est le degré d’entente russo-américain ?
Et quelles sont les priorités des Iraniens : pas de fédéralisation ou bien réouvrir des voies de communication entre le Liban et l’Iran via Deïr az-Zor et l’Irak ?

#course_vers_Raqqa

The Many Mideast Solutions - The New York Times
▻http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/10/opinion/the-many-mideast-solutions.html?smid=nytcore-ipad-share

Tout arrive, signalé par Juan Cole je renvoie directement à l’article de Thomas Friedman, qu’il faut prendre pour ce qu’il est naturellement, un homme dont les avis sur la région sont marqués au coin d’un indéfectible soutien à Israël. Avis qui, justement pour cette raison, sont intéressants à connaître. Ses prévisions sont juste apocalyptiques. Et en cette fin de journée, je partage, non pas ses idées, ni même ses analyses mais sa noirceur qui ajoute aux nombreuses craintes qu’on se formule depuis longtemps.

Tout de même, constater que même Friedman ne fait plus semblant de croire à la solution à deux Etats, c’est un signe à prendre en compte... Pour le reste, c’est terrifiant à lire parce que cela représente l’opinion d’une élite US qui s’intéresse aux questions internationales (par le biais israélo-US of course).

... with candidates spouting the usual platitudes about standing with our Israeli and Sunni Arab allies. Here’s a news flash: You can retire those platitudes. Whoever becomes the next president will have to deal with a totally different Middle East.

It will be a Middle East shaped by struggle over a one-state solution, a no-state solution, a non-state solution and a rogue-state solution.

That is, a one-state solution in Israel, a no-state solution in Syria, Yemen and Libya, a non-state solution offered by the Islamic caliphate and a rogue-state solution offered by Iran.

Start with Israel. The peace process is dead. It’s over, folks, so please stop sending the New York Times Op-Ed page editor your proposals for a two-state solution between Israelis and Palestinians. The next U.S. president will have to deal with an Israel determined to permanently occupy all the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, including where 2.5 million West Bank Palestinians live.

(...)

So my advice to all the candidates is: Keep talking about the fantasy Middle East. I can always use a good bedtime story to fall asleep. But get ready for the real thing. This is not your grandfather’s Israel anymore, it’s not your oil company’s Saudi Arabia anymore, it’s not your NATO’s Turkey anymore, it’s not your cabdriver’s Iran anymore and it’s not your radical chic college professor’s Palestine anymore. It’s a wholly different beast now, slouching toward Bethlehem.

Quel journaliste scandalisé par les événements d’Alep a-t-il daigné t’informer de ce que dit Juan Cole ?

▻http://www.juancole.com/2016/02/syria-rebels-face-collapse-as-thousands-flee-north-aleppo.html

They were apparently mainly fighting al-Qaeda, which had a stronghold in the city of Ratyan.

Le « Y » syrien : Damas-Alep, Homs-Lattaquié par Juan Cole.
Un résumé à ma sauce : pour assurer sa viabilité, l’Etat syrien ne doit pas perdre le contrôle de la dorsale : Damas-Homs-Hama-Alep et de la côte. Sans quoi, les jeux sont faits. L’intervention russe a permis, en partie, à l’armée syrienne de reprendre le contrôle de ce Y.
Top 5 Ways Putin has won big in Syria and why Europe is embracing him
▻http://www.juancole.com/2016/01/top-5-ways-putin-has-won-big-in-syria-and-is-being-embraced-by-europe.html

So what has the Russian air force accomplished?
1. It allowed the reopening of the road from Hama to West Aleppo, ending the siege of that regime-held part of the city and pushing back the rebels from it.
2. It retook most of Latakia Province, safeguarding the port. Yesterday came the news that the major northern al-Qaeda-held town of Rabia had fallen to the government forces, meaning that Latakia is nearly 100% in government control. These advances into northern Latakia involved hitting Turkmen proxies of Turkey, which is why Turkey shot down a Russian plane last fall. Likely the next step will be to take back cities in Idlib like Jisr al-Shughour, which fell last spring to an al-Qaeda-led coalition, and which could be used as a launching pad for the taking of Latakia port.
3. It strengthened regime control of Hama and Homs, ensuring the supply routes south to Damascus.
4. It hit the Army of Islam as well as al-Qaeda and Daesh around Damascus, forcing the latter two to withdraw from part of the capital and killing Zahran Alloush, leader of the Army of Islam.
5. It hit al-Qaeda and FSA forces in Deraa Province and yesterday the key town of al-Sheikh Miskin fell to the Syrian Arab Army. This is a Deraa crossroads and its loss affects the rebels ability to maneuver in this province.

Iran Unleashed : Rouhani’s Triumphant European Tour | Informed Comment
▻http://www.juancole.com/2016/01/iran-unleashed-rouhanis-triumphant-european-tour.html

C’est peu de dire que le point de vue de Juan Cole nous change des longs commentaires sur les statues voilées et les menus halal...

These passages underline the ways in which Iran is now seen as increasingly an important partner for Europe, not only economically, but also strategically. Shiite Iran is positioned as the most effective bulwark against Daesh (ISIS, ISIL). It is also seen as a power broker in Iraq and Lebanon, both countries important to Italy.

#iran #syrie

Avec beaucoup de pincettes… Une question commence à circuler sur Twitter parmi ceux qui se réjouissent de la mort d’Allouche : comment l’aviation syrienne a-t-elle obtenu l’information précise de l’heure et du lieu de la réunion des rebelles ? (J’insiste sur les « pincettes » : c’est typiquement le genre d’information qui ne sortira certainement jamais, et on est donc dans le domaine de la pure conjecture.)

L’idée qui circule alors consiste à supposer qu’Allouche a été « donné » par un service pro-Otan, la plupart prétendant qu’il s’agirait des services de renseignement jordaniens. (Encore une fois : c’est une conjecture.) En clair : dans cette idée, les services jordaniens auraient donné Allouche aux Syriens pour se débarrasser de lui.

Pourquoi cette « contre-narrative » maintenant ? Parce que chez les propagandistes de l’opposition pro-saoudienne, il y a cette communication organisée autour de l’idée que la mort d’Allouche prouverait que le régime ne veut pas réellement ouvrir de processus politique avec l’opposition. À l’inverse, affirmer qu’Allouche aurait été donné au régime syrien s’inscrit dans une explication qui, elle, affirme qu’Allouche (au même titre qu’Ahrar ash-Sham) était devenu un obstacle aux pourparlers prévus pour fin-janvier : la logique serait qu’il ne pourra pas y avoir de consensus sur la liste des organisations terroristes que la Jordanie devait établir, notamment parce qu’Allouche est soutenu par les Saoudiens et considéré comme terroriste par le régime et les Russes, et qu’il n’y aura pas de compromis sur cette question. D’où sa liquidation.

Je signale cette conjecture parce qu’elle devrait certainement refaire surface plus largement dans les prochains jours, et parce qu’une fois de plus, si nos médias vont nous présenter une analyse unilatérale (« la mort d’Allouche démontre que le régime syrien ne veut pas de processus politique »), il y a en réalité une autre histoire qui se raconte, de plus en plus populaire, sur les réseaux arabes et qui affirme exactement le contraire.

Des fois, Juan Cole, c’est le roi de la déconne : In “Spectre”, James Bond becomes Edward Snowden
▻http://www.juancole.com/2015/11/spectre-becomes-snowden.html

The latest entry in the Daniel Craig reboot of the James Bond film franchise, Spectre , turns Bond into more muscular version of Edward Snowden, as he takes down a vast 9-nation attempt at electronic surveillance and information-sharing that would also benefit a criminal cartel.

Tooling around the reviews, it strikes me as remarkable that this theme seems to be being ignored.

How the Washington Post got Taken in by Syria’s Taliban | Informed Comment
▻http://www.juancole.com/2015/07/washington-syrias-taliban.html

Les commentaires de Juan Cole sur la tribune donnée par le WP aux combattants et mercenaires de Ahrar al-sham (▻http://seenthis.net/messages/389336)

Here’s what’s wrong with that scenario:

The Free Men want to see Syria become what they call an Islamic state, just as the Taliban wanted Afghanistan to be their idea of an Islamic state. Islam is an old and diverse religious tradition, but these people don’t mean any old “Islam.” They have a rigid fundamentalist interpretation of it that makes no room for people who disagree with them. They say they will accept some sort of pluralism, but this is frankly a lie and can be shown to be so.

The Free Men are closely allied with the open al-Qaeda affiliate, the Support Front (Jabhat al-Nusra). This is not a mere alliance of convenience. They have formed joint operation offices. They coordinate closely militarily. They have a common rubric in Idlib Province of the Army of Conquest (Jaysh al-Fath).

When the two groups of holy warriors and their allies took over the city of Idlib this summer, they conquered 18 villages north of that city largely inhabited by members of the esoteric Shiite Druze religion. The Free Men leadership gave control of the Druze villages to al-Qaeda, which promptly began stealing their property and killing them when they objected. Some 23 were massacred.

(...) Sa conclusion : The al-Assad regime is evil and genocidal. But not all of its enemies are worthy allies for the US. Friends of al-Qaeda are no friends of ours.

Je t’avais dit que les gens de bon goût allaient t’en faire une théorie du complot : ici au sujet des documents de Judicial Watch, voici comment Juan Cole introduit son traitement :
▻http://www.juancole.com/2015/05/strategic-against-assad.html

Did the US DIA see ISIL as a strategic Ally against al-Assad in 2012?

The answer, in a word, is “no.” Fabius Maximus is right that this is just a clickbait story or an unfounded conspiracy theory.

Le lecteur (lui-même de bon goût) s’arrêtera certainement à ce jugement définitif (pourquoi j’irais perdre mon temps à lire une théorie du complot de plus ?).

Or, le texte de « Fabius Maximus » explique qu’il y a 3 choses à noter :
– le traitement qualifié de « clickbait »,
– le « bon traitement journalistique (pas une fiction pour attirer les clicks) », donnant ici en exemple l’article de Nafeez Ahmed (amusant : souvent considéré comme borderline) :
▻https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/secret-pentagon-report-reveals-west-saw-isis-as-strategic-asset-b99ad7a29092
– le véritable document.

Pourquoi Juan Cole – qui n’est pas un média mainstream – ressent-il le besoin de titrer son article et de le commencer avec la théorie la plus parodique, introduisant illico l’accusation de complotisme, et pas l’autre version ? L’effet, c’est que le lecteur a toutes les chances de ne pas se rendre compte, alors, qu’il n’est pas nécessaire de recourir à la théorie maximaliste pour avoir une info déjà absolument explosive (que Cole reproduit d’ailleurs dans la suite de son article, mais à ce moment on se dit que c’est un document très banal). La citation de Nafeez Ahmed :

The document reveals that in coordination with the Gulf states and Turkey, the West intentionally sponsored violent Islamist groups to destabilize Assad, and that these “supporting powers” desired the emergence of a “Salafist Principality” in Syria to “isolate the Syrian regime.”

According to the newly declassified US document, the Pentagon foresaw the likely rise of the ‘Islamic State’ as a direct consequence of this strategy, and warned that it could destabilize Iraq. Despite anticipating that Western, Gulf state and Turkish support for the “Syrian opposition” — which included al-Qaeda in Iraq  —  could lead to the emergence of an ‘Islamic State’ in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), the document provides no indication of any decision to reverse the policy of support to the Syrian rebels. On the contrary, the emergence of an al-Qaeda affiliated “Salafist Principality” as a result is described as a strategic opportunity to isolate Assad.

On découvre ainsi un document interne de l’Agence du renseignement de la défense étasunienne, qui montre que celle-ci, mi-2012, a grosso modo la même analyse de la situation que… la Russie (et pas très éloignée finalement du discours officiel du régime syrien). Laquelle analyse nous était présentée comme totalement hérétique à l’époque. Par ailleurs, ce document invalide largement la grande thèse selon laquelle c’est le comportement (répression et/ou magouilles) du régime syrien qui a provoqué la « radicalisation » de l’opposition.

Vraiment, je ne comprends pas. Pourquoi même quelqu’un comme Juan Cole aborde-t-il un sujet aussi important en commençant par la dénonciation d’une « théorie du complot » hors-sujet ? Le sujet est déjà assez énorme par lui-même, manque cruellement de reprise médiatique, et je ne vois pas pourquoi consacrer le titre et le premier paragraphe à une théorie qui n’est justement pas le document original, et dont je n’ai rigoureusement rien à cogner ? Tu m’étonnes qu’ensuite les journaux mainstream n’approchent plus de tels sujets.

Après avoir ainsi massacré un sujet important, bien entendu, tu viendras pleurnicher sur l’influence des complotistes…

La question-qu’elle-est-bonne de Juan Cole :
▻http://www.juancole.com/2015/05/beheaded-palmyra-strategic.html

The big question is how Daesh, supposedly being bombed by coalition aircraft, was allowed to send out a substantial convoy down desert roads to Palmyra from Raqqa. The Pentagon has been issuing statistics on so many bombing raids etc. for months, but unless the bombing is degrading Daesh’s capabilities then it is a waste of taxpayer money.

Comment évolueront les relations tuniso-américaines si Hillary Clinton parvenait à l’investiture suprême en 2016 ? | Nawaat - Tunisia
▻http://nawaat.org/portail/2015/04/19/comment-evolueront-les-relations-tuniso-americaines-si-hillary-clinton-parve

Pour Juan Cole, la politique étrangère d’Hillary Clinton sera très proche de celle de Barack Obama, même s’il admet qu’elle peut être bien plus interventionniste. Selon lui, son vote pour la guerre en Irak sous le mandat de Georges W. Bush en dit long sur sa vision de la politique étrangère américaine. Son côté belliciste pourrait mener les USA à être militairement plus présents dans la région.
Cette idée de Juan Cole est partagée par beaucoup de monde. Mohamed Malouche, président du Conseil d’administration de l’Association des Jeunes Tunisiens Américains professionnels nous le confirme :

La politique étrangère américaine du second mandat d’Obama est entrain de rééquilibrer les forces dans la région. Le président ne se soucie plus d’une réélection mais pense à son rôle historique. Il prend donc des risques sur le dossier Iranien, j’espère aussi sur la cause Palestinienne. Mais son non-interventionnisme (pour trancher avec la politique Bush) reste de mise. Je pense que Mme Clinton va continuer sur à peu près la même ligne. Elle maîtrise les dossiers beaucoup plus qu’Obama, et pourra probablement être plus à même d’agir ; c’est ce qu’on reproche le plus à Obama : la lenteur de ses décisions en matière de politique étrangère.

Today’s Top 7 Myths about Daesh/ ISIL | Informed Comment
▻http://www.juancole.com/2015/02/todays-about-daesh.html

Via Angry Arab : Juan Cole, toujours très bien. Résumé :
1) Daesh is a fringe cult. There is nothing in formal Islam that would authorize summarily executing 21 Christians.
2) They are criminals and sociopaths. Lots of religious cults authorize criminality.
3) British PM David Cameron ominously warned that 400 British Muslim youth had gone off to fight in Syria. But there are like 3.7 million Muslims in the UK now! So .01 percent .000027 of the community volunteered.
4. Ibrahim Samarra’i’s ‘caliphate’ is widely taken seriously. No, it isn’t.
5) Daesh is just a brand, not an organization.
6) Why in the world would anybody assume that another round of US military occupation of Iraq would work, given the disaster that was the last one?
7) Daesh is said to have 9 million subjects. I don’t understand where this number comes from.

MEI Editor’s Blog : Juan Cole on France and « Sharpening Contradictions »
▻http://mideasti.blogspot.fr/2015/01/juan-on-france-and-sharpening.html

–"Aiguiser les contradictions" : en très gros, provoquer le clash/pogrom contre les populations musulmanes pour lancer - grâce à la bêtise consommée ou cynique - de nos têtes pensantes et dirigeantes, le vrai début de la « guerre des civilisations ». Repris de chez Michael Dunn (qui donne le lien vers l’original). Je viens de voir que la traduction est là : ►http://blogs.mediapart.fr/blog/maurice-audin/080115/aiguiser-les-contradictions-pourquoi-al-qaida-attaque-les-caricaturi.

The operatives who carried out this attack exhibit signs of professional training. They spoke unaccented French, and so certainly know that they are playing into the hands of Marine LePen and the Islamophobic French Right wing. They may have been French, but they appear to have been battle hardened. This horrific murder was not a pious protest against the defamation of a religious icon. It was an attempt to provoke European society into pogroms against French Muslims, at which point al-Qaeda recruitment would suddenly exhibit some successes instead of faltering in the face of lively Beur youth culture (French Arabs playfully call themselves by this anagram term deriving from wordplay involving scrambling of letters). Ironically, there are reports that one of the two policemen they killed was a Muslim.

On D-Day: Remembering the Muslim Troops who Fought the Axis | Informed Comment, Juan Cole

▻http://www.juancole.com/2014/06/remembering-muslim-fought.html

While a few Muslims did support the Axis out of resentment of Western colonialism and hopes that the rise of an alternative power center would aid their quest for independence, they were tiny in their numbers compared to the Muslims who not just supported the Allies (as almost all did if you go back and read the newspapers) but actively fought on their behalf, on the battlefield. Nor was it only Muslims– Hindus in the British Indian Army captured by the Japanese sometimes were willing to join the latter’s puppet Indian forces and fight against British colonialism. But if you think about it, most Muslims would have realized that a Nazi-dominated world would not exactly be good for groups categorized as lesser and degenerate races.
Senegalese troops fought in the Free French army of Charles De Gaulle in the invasion of India and in the liberation of southern France. German officers, steeped in Nazi racism, were surprised and outraged to have to fight Africans on European soil. Imagine their further dismay as the African troops turned out to be in the winning side. The Senegalese were called Tirailleurs or Riflemen.

Iraq’s first Post-American Elections by the Numbers | Informed Comment
▻http://www.juancole.com/2014/05/american-elections-numbers.html

(By Juan Cole)
Iraqis went to the polls on Wednesday in the first national parliamentary elections since US troops pulled out of the country completely (in late 2011). The results won’t be in for a while, but here are some early statistics:
1. Preliminary estimate of turnout: 60%
2. Number of people who died in attacks on polling stations: 14
3. Number of polling stations: 8,075
4. Number of polling booths: 48,852
5. Number of seats for which candidates are running: 328
6. Size of electorate: roughly 20 million
7. Population of Iraq: 31 million
8. Number of candidates running: 9039
9. Percentage of seats set aside for women: 25%
10. Number of women candidates for these 82 seats: 2,607
11. Active frontline personnel in security forces: 271,000
12. Number of people killed in attacks on voting booths during early voting by members of the armed forces in previous two days: 80
13. Number of top politicians claiming their party won, as of 3 hours after the closing of the vote: 2 (Nouri al-Maliki of the Da`wa-led State of Law coalition and Ammar al-Hakim of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, both Shiite religious parties)
14. Number of registered international observers: 1249
15. Number of registered Iraqi observers: 37,509
16. Number of registered foreign journalists covering the election: 278
17. Number of registered local journalists covering the elections: 1915
18. Iraqi petroleum production daily: roughly 3 million barrels/day
19. Saudi petroleum production daily: roughly 10 million barrels/ day
The numbers don’t support the idea that Iraq can’t hold these elections without US troops in country. The death toll in the 2010 election, which US soldiers provided security, was three times as large.
The numbers also don’t support the allegation that the high monthly death toll in political violence, about 800 a month, would make it impossible to have a proper election. (The death toll in Iraq is horrible, but it is smaller than that in Mexico in recent years).

Did Religious Extremism drive 2 Million Egyptian youth to Unbelief ? | Informed Comment, Juan Cole, 13th February

Les chiffres sont à prendre avec des pincettes, mais l’article est intéressant

▻http://www.juancole.com/2014/02/religious-extremism-unbelief.html

Egyptian journalist Hilmy al-Namnam said last fall that some researchers had concluded that there were 2 million Egyptian atheists. He blamed the rapid increase in unbelief among young people on the period of Muslim Brotherhood rule and the hypocrisy of television preachers. Educated young women are especially dismayed at the discourse on women apparent in clerical sermons. He wrote:
“A number of young people went to the Constitution Drafting Committee and asked to meet with some of its members. These young people called themselves “atheists,” but, unfortunately, none of the committee members met with them, to find out what their ideas were, what were their aspirations and desires with regard to the constitution, which was then being amended. Perhaps time constraints prevented the Commission from meeting these potential interviewees, or perhaps they declined because of the charges of Sheikh Yasser Burhamy that the drafters opposed the Islamic project.
Apparently it was the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood [June 2012-July 2013] that caused these groups of young people to pop up and which increased their numbers. It was suggested that I meet with a number of them last April, and I heard then from a young woman who says that she forsook religion, and when I discussed with them I did not find exactly what you could call a atheism, but a great deal of anger and protest at prevailing actions and behavior, and even many believers will share their anger and protest at the glaring contradiction between words and deeds of some of the preachers on television.”
Sociologist Mansour Moaddel has found that Egyptians wanting to see Islamic law implemented as the law of the land have fallen to 28% from a majority a decade ago, and half of Egyptians now say they see themselves as Egyptian nationals first and Muslims second.
Related video:
BBC: Atheism in Egypt: The challenges facing non-believers?