The Passionate Attachment

America's entanglement with Israel

Balochistan: The Next Pro-Israel ‘Humanitarian’ Project?

with 4 comments

With the House Foreign Affairs’ Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations beginning a hearing on human rights abuses in Balochistan, could Pakistan’s resource-rich largest province be the next target of “humanitarian intervention”?

On the website “Big Government,” Reps. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) and Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) recently suggested:

Perhaps we should even consider support for a Balochistan carved out of Pakistan to diminish radical power there also.

Andrew Breitbart, the self-described “biased journalist” who runs Big Government, spoke at the Republican Jewish Coalition’s Summer Bash last June:

“I just don’t understand how an inherently decent and free people could be ‘the bad guy,’” Breitbart said of Israel. “I’m glad I’ve become a journalist, because I want to fight on behalf of the Israeli people.”

Those genuinely concerned with the interests of the United States and Pakistan need to be asking whether publishing calls for the secession of Balochistan is part of that “fight on behalf of the Israeli people.”

Advertisements

Written by Maidhc Ó Cathail

February 9, 2012 at 6:56 am

Posted in Uncategorized

4 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. As with Iraq, you don’t need regime change or secession to be able to exploit Baluchistan’s resources. The present regime in Islamabad is quite negotiable.

    However, breaking the nation into smaller entities does fit with the Oded Yinon strategy for Israeli dominance over the region.

    We are also now seeing a new drive to relieve Pakistan of its “Islamic” bomb.

    aletho

    February 9, 2012 at 4:51 pm

  2. Absolutely, Aletho.

    See my article “Max Puts the Boot into Pakistan.

    Maidhc Ó Cathail

    February 11, 2012 at 11:10 am

  3. Aletho: As with Iraq, you don’t need regime change or secession to be able to exploit Baluchistan’s resources. The present regime in Islamabad is quite negotiable.

    No, but a “free” [malleable] Baluchistan would put an end to Iran’s ability to export its oil to the East, via the Iran / Pakistan / India [IPI] pipeline project, in which China has expressed a keen interest.

    A controlled, bribed Baluchistan would also likely result in the expulsion of the Chinese from its considerable investments in Gwadar port, a strategic ‘pearl’ on China’s import / shipping ‘string’.

    In addition, the Baluch people straddles the Pakistan / Iran border. Stir up trouble on both sides of the border [eg Jundallah], a “liberated” Baluchistan would provide its eventual Masters key control of the Gulf of Oman and Strait of Hormuz.

    Now that the Zionist mafia has managed to suck the last drop of blood out of the US [and EU], Israel is in the process of setting itself up as a regional hub for petroleum exports, among other.

    — Recall how quickly Israeli firms had rushed in, pushing competitors aside, way before discoveries of Cyprus’s offshore oil and gas fields were made public.

    — Israel has expressed its preparedness to attack Lebanon, for the Nth time, if Lebanon continues to claim its legal share of common Israeli-Lebanese offshore natural gas fields.

    — Israel made sure that negotiations between the Palestinian Authority and British Gas, towards the development of the two Gaza Marine natgas fields, would fail. BG gave up.

    — Israel has announced its intention to reoccupy the Sinai, a back-burner project since the days of Yinon [what does anyone suppose the 12 recent incidents of Sinai pipeline sabotage have been about?].

    Take or leave the political commentary contained in the following, but look at this map.

    Imagine a subservient Iran, prevented from exporting its oil eastward, and China / Russia which will have lost influence in oil-rich Central Asian ‘Stans’, who stands to benefit?

    Those who maintain that oil-related issues are NOT central to Zionist hegemonic ambitions simply aren’t considering the evidence.
    .

    Hyssop

    February 12, 2012 at 1:51 pm

  4. Hyssop,

    The point about separating Iran from Pakistan is a good one.

    However, I don’t see the US needing any extra dominance over the sea lanes. And I don’t see the Gwadar port as running counter to US/Nato interests since the shipping traffic benefits Western industry and commerce in and with China. I don’t subscribe to the “theory” which is endlessly promoted by certain Marxists that the US/Nato are surrounding China and depriving it of access to resources. I find that almost every piece of evidence runs counter to that.

    Also, vast new gas resources are now becoming available in Poland and France among many other formerly gas poor nations, even China.

    At the outer optimistic estimates Israel will never eclipse the importance of the major oil and gas producers. The future production areas for energy are really very dispersed; Canada, Venezuela, Russia, the S. Atlantic…

    Israel did try to make the M.E. energy exports obsolete by expending huge bets on electric car technology which was to be mandated for use under the AGW paradigm. However this gambit has failed on multiple levels.

    Israel’s bullying of its neighbors regarding offshore gas is more likely motivated by wanting to deprive their opponents of the economic benefit. Keeping them poor as well as dependent on imports. The earnings or lack of earnings has a greater impact on Lebanon or Gaza than it would on Israel.

    aletho

    February 12, 2012 at 6:12 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: