Lost in all the sound and the fury raised by the US and its allies (the UK and France primarily) about Iran’s role in propagating terror in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and other points west and east, is that the biggest sponsor of terror in the region may be Saudi Arabia, home to Wahhabism, the most vitriolic brand of fundamentalist Islam.
It’s well known that Al-qaeda (a name by the way invented by US Justice Department lawyers back in the late 1990’s to prosecute among others the bombing of US embassy in Kenya) has its roots in the Saudi oil oligarchy.
The majority of 9/11 terrorists were Saudi citizens and of course the big kahuna himself, Osama, is a Saudi mega rich boy, trained by the CIA back in the “great Jihad” days against the Soviets.
Since the US invasion of Iraq the elephant in the room that everyone refuses to acknowledge is that the Sunni insurgency in Iraq, the same insurgency that has been responsible for the majority of US deaths in the past four years, has been in part bankrolled by the Saudis and aided by their sidekick, the son of Plucky Little King (the PLK, as King Hussein was affectionately known to the Israelis) King Abdullah of Jordan.
These are by the way the same insurgents that have planted bombs in mosques and markets, in funeral processions and religious gatherings killing thousands of Iraqi Shi’a and Kurds in the most savage manner.
The bugaboo term “Shi’a Crescent” is attributed to King Abdullah.
The Shi’a apparently are poised to take over the entire Middle East.
This little bit of demagoguery has been used to mask the illegitimacy of the largely corrupt Arab dictatorships that the US counts among its allies.
Cowered and outclassed by Israel on one hand and humiliated by Hezballah’s defiant battle against Israel’s massive war machine in 2006, it seems that the Arab states, from Egypt to the sheikhdoms of the Persian Gulf are trying to use Iran and the Shi’a as an escape goat.
Just recently the toothless gutless Arab league, in a pathetic parody of the language of Arab-Israeli conflict, called for Iran to leave “Arab occupied land”, meaning the three disputed islands in the Gulf.
The assassination of senior Hezballah commander, Imad Mughnieh, in Damascus has been attributed at least in part to Saudi intelligence1.
And that’s not all of it.
The emergence of Al-Ahvaz movement in Iran’s Khuzestan may very well be inspired and bankrolled by the Saudis and their Gulf friends.
If the reports that have attributed the mosque explosion in Shiraz yesterday to a bomb are proved to be accurate, it’s a good bet that the money and resource trail behind it will lead to the Saudis.
The callous murderous nature of this action with its absolute disregard for the civilians bears all the hallmarks of Sunni extremists’ atrocities against their so-called Moslem brothers from Iraq to Afghanistan and Pakistan. None of this is to absolve the ruling clergy in Iran of their own foreign adventurism or repressive measures against the ordinary Bahais (the preaching Imam in the Shiraz mosque apparently is known for his Bahai baiting) and kneejerk violent mishandling of Sunni grievances that has fed into reactionary movements like al-Ahvaz but it seems that when it comes to “war on terror”, defining terror and terrorism is contingent on the US geopolitical interests.
1.
At least that’s what Iranians are saying.
Although the proposed scenario should be taken with a grain of salt (http://middleeast.foreignpolicyblogs.com/), it sounds quite plausible.
The Saudis’ enmity against Shi’a is no secret.
