Symposium, The Geopolitics of Terrorism

Thursday, December 11, 2014-National Assembly
The Paris Academy of Geopolitics, as part of its analysis of contemporary world issues and continuing its work of multidisciplinary approach in total independence of current challenges, has appealed to the best specialists on terrorism, via several communications to evoke the dramatic evolution of this modern phenomenon.
This conference has looked primarily at background forces of terrorism, at sectarian ideologies that mobilize them and their new mode of expression. It also discussed the profound nature of these movements and networks, operational characteristics, their new procedures, their widespread hybridization between criminalization and ideology as well as underlying state and non-state strategies.
In the presence of several members of the diplomatic corps, of which their Excellencies the ambassadors of Albania, Bolivia, Egypt, Georgia, Iraq, Iran and Macedonia, but also secretaries, advisers and heads of mission and business managers of the German embassy in Argentina, Burkina Faso, Canada, Central Africa, Chile, China, Finland, Guatemala, India, Iraq, Iran, Lithuania, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Sudan, Turkey and Ukraine, the conference sought the careful analysis of many experts (researchers, officials, soldiers, diplomats, journalists, etc.) who also tried to elucidate the new terrorism phenomenon and its very recent territoriality, that fundamentally change all the traditional approaches to the issue. Finally, the exchanges took into account the involvement at all geographic scales and in all nuances of local powers influence and of regional and global subjects.

First panel
Moderator: Doctor Ali RASTBEEN, President of the Paris Academy of Geopolitics

Mr. Mayor Jacques Myard, Member of Parliament
The issue of terrorism is not seen unanimously! It is even a very delicate topic. It is difficult to define terrorism: Americans in 1988 identified a hundred definitions for this word.
We need to investigate the origin of this word; well, it is a French invention! Since the first use of “terrorist” was attested in November 1794 to designate supporters of terror, referring principally to Robespierre and Saint-Just. This etymology is interesting because it highlights a key factor in the logic of terrorism, as the asymmetry from weak to strong. At the time, in 1794, the revolution was threatened, and therefore imposed, as Marx would have said a hundred years later, the diktat of the revolution. It was necessary to resort to violence in order to subdue the enemy of the revolution. Actually, when you think about it, we often use this term to designate ”the Other”, that is to say, the one we combat.
Just refer to the history of France: let us remember when the Germans posted on the walls that they had shot down in Chateaubriant, in Lyon and Vercors twenty or a hundred terrorists, and through posters, these same “terrorists” in 1944-1945 were renamed heros of the Resistance.
So finally, are the terrorists, as Sartre would say, always ”the Others”? So are terrorists always the “the Otjher’s” criminal? In a crisis that we know well, that of the Middle East, I have always been struck by the fact that one is still the terror of the other, there is always an early history in the conflict that never ends. Are we now, with the case of fundamentalist drifts, facing the same logic? The same logic is at work to impose an ideology, that of fundamentalism on a people who don’t want it, and which leads to the use of terror. There certainly is something really comparable. The problem is that terrorism hurts and kills innocent people, it cannot be acceptable.
France condemns it as do many states in the world that criminalize terrorist action.
Actually it is necessary to overcome this unacceptable situation, because terrorism is not only our acknowledgment of failure, it is a reality that reveals the crises on the international scene. Where there is terrorism regardless of fanaticism, it is an indicator of our collective failure to ensure the resolution of persistent conflicts that lead some people to despair. Without wishing to apologize for terrorism, we must understand that – even when we are dealing with terrorist movements in Europe, I think of Northern Ireland, it is the incapacity of a State, even within the democratic framework, to resolve a political issue. In this case terrorism, that is to say, blind and impersonal violence coming from a sub-state movement must certainly be dismissed as rightful political means, rather it reveals our inability to solve endless global crises. The speaker concluded by saluting the courage for trying to resolve this endless issue, thereby exposing that we live in a world Oh how imperfect.

Opening remarks by Ali RASTBEEN
On the geopolitics of terrorism
Terrorism is not a new phenomenon, it is common to all societies and all times. But at present it is reinforced by globalization, which provides all the necessary technological tools to spread.
Since the first hijacking by Palestinian militants to the attacks of 11 September 2001, the Arab-Muslim world is singled out as the main source of contemporary terrorism.
Return to radical Islam is a modern phenomenon that stretches from Indonesia to Chechenya. However, if radical Islam has diverse faces in different countries, it is nevertheless born in the 70s resulting from the despair due to the failure of development for all, because Islam is not only a reaction against the modernization of Muslim societies, it is also a product of this modernization, with its failures.
The Middle East has seen in recent years a series of events that have changed the regional order: the Iranian revolution of 1979, the economic crisis of the Arab countries in 1982-1986, the unresolved issue between Palestinians and Israelis, the fragmentation of the Regional Arab system, the weakening of the legitimacy of regimes, the crushing of civil society by the State and the increase of imbalanced exchange between the Arab world and the industrial countries.
Islamism has thus developed into a period of disillusionment, appearing as a last resort, an obsessive search for identity, a tendency to refer any action to a mythified autochtonous history. Most fanatical supporters then invoke the radicalism of desperate anarchists during the last century in Europe. This type of terrorism is exacerbated by poverty, unemployment and injustice. Especially as culturally, globalization tends to impose western culture and to marginalize local traditions, resulting humiliation breeding outbreaks of fundamentalism that find no other way to challenge that except by violence and terrorism.
Moreover, the failure of Pashtun army officers and Pakistani agencies in controlling the situation in Afghanistan and Kashmir; American foreign policy which has abandoned the Islamists mercenary groups from the 1990s in Afghanistan and that is accused of consistently exploiting Muslim fundamentalists for strategic purposes such as reversal of alliances when only prevails the obsession to war for petroleum.
This policy is accused of despising Muslims, and of training, equipping and supporting the economic and strategic power of the State of Israel. The nature of some Arab countries on the one hand, extremist thinking which has its source in the conceptual diversity of the various Muslim communities on the other, the ties of allegiance between Muslim leaders, autocrats and the West, thereby not defending the proper interests of their peoples.
The foreign policy of some Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia, is unable to control Sunni fundamentalism they have been encouraging since the 80s. Qatar’s policy has become one of the platforms of radical terrorist movements today rivaling with Saudi Arabia in the export of extremism. Indeed, Qatar and Saudi Arabia have heavily financed and powerfully armed extremists in Syria, paving the way for the emergence of Daesh. Both support the Afghan Talibans, and extremist terrorists. They have contributed to the transformation of Libya to its checked statehood. Thus, all these states have played the sorcerer’s apprentice, breeding radical groups that eventually turn against them.
In other words, if Bin Laden was hired by the US and its Saudi ally to defeat the Soviet Union, he finally “turned against his patrons” with the purpose of provoking a historical rupture between the Muslim World and the West. All these changes have given rise to fundamentalist groups such as Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and the Islamic Maghreb in Mali and Algeria, BokoHaram in Niger, Al-Shabab in Somalia, the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Ansar al-Sharia in Libya and Tunisia, Jamatee Eslami in Indonesia, Abu Sayyaf in the Philippines, Ansar din In Mali, Ansar Bitalmoghadas in Egypt, and finally Daesh in Iraq and Syria.
Unlike other terrorist groups who see the West as the enemy of Islam and Muslims, Daesh requests the submission of all personalities and all Muslims and non-Muslim countries in the world to its self-proclaimed caliphate.
Furthermore Daesh defies the established boundaries, sets specific regions that allow it to establish control and to strengthen its financial and logistical support. Thus in Iraq and Syria, taking advantage of the existing anarchy, it has made remarkable progress. Then, thanks to its efficiency in occupying social networks, it has managed to defy most countries of the world. Daesh is equipped with tanks, aircraft and missiles. It holds eight functioning oil wells, banks and a government; it recently managed to get its hands on 40 kilos of uranium stolen from the University of Mosul. It’s a government that shrinks from no form of violence against any opposing ideology.
In the face of this sudden danger that threatens the balance of the world today, the United States finally attempted to create a coalition of more than 40 countries against Daesh.
In this regard, it should be noted that if the United States is skillful in creating and governing coalitions, the Arab countries are adept of adherence to coalitions and participation in the struggles of others, neglecting the interests of the Arabs. Even today, they joined the coalition assembled by the United States to fight a group they were originally supporting.
From the above data, it follows that the West, or at least Europe must stop the tub-thumping and expansion of the Salafist movement throughout the world. The defense of fundamental human rights must take a universal character, without excessive differentiation between Western man the Muslim.
Muslim countries should organize scientific conferences, seminars, exchange trips, cultural awareness of civil society structures, schools, universities, mosques and associations, about the danger of extremism, so that scholars from different communities can discuss fundamentalist thought and that of modern Islam, in harmony with evolving human rights, citizens’ rights and democratic freedoms.
In this field, countries such as Iran, Morocco and Malaysia can take the initiative.
The West and the Muslim world must abandon all the theory of the clash of civilizations and the end of the history of the West, and turn to dialogue with evolving civilizations, cultures and religions to better know their foundations and their differences, to better accept and facilitate living together. The West must move in favour of a desire for dialogue and flawless collaboration.
And, finally, it is the duty of peoples of the region to conduct an ongoing battle for political liberties in the strict respect of human rights. With the very option for detente policies around the world and in the region, defusing rising clashes between differing religious currents. Otherwise, we might in the near future, witness religious conflicts, with its attendant horrific massacres.
We hope that, as part of this symposium on these important issues in the news, the personalities, diplomats, academicians and specialists convened today, will, thanks to their participation and exchange of ideas, enlighten us more about these subjects.

The genealogy of modern terrorism-Laurent Ladouce
Laurent Ladouce is conducting research in the Universal Peace Federation. He was in charge of the commission on the African Dream and is currently the director of Espace Culture et Paix, working on a Peace Encyclopedia. He is also the author of the book, The Pakxe Project, a contribution of the Laotian people to the unity in South-East Asia and world peace.
Terrorism is mostly fueled by resentment, and grows in situations of despair, disillusion, disgrace and dishonor. The terrorist feels that his humanity was denied and will destroy the humanity of others. But behind the desperate drive which guides the thought and action of the terrorist, there is also a temptation to act like God, to take the place of the Almighty, which goes beyond vengeful resentment. Therefore, the temptation of terrorism can be curbed in some cases by a strong spiritual resolve which offers a non-violent alternative. Mahatma Gandhi advocated non-violence to liberate India from colonialism and preferred to inflict suffering on himself, rather than causing attrition to the enemy. In the sixties, Malxolm X advocated terrorism to fin racial segregation in the USA, but Martin Luther King convincingly opted for non-violence.
Terrorism is seducing nowadays, because the character of Cain was rehabilitated. In the wake of the French revolution which invented terror and terrorism, artists and thinkers started to vilify Abel and to exalt Cain as a dispenser of justice through violent purge. Lord Byron, Baudelaire, Karl Marx were among the leading artists or thinkers who advocated the legitimacy of Cain’s violence.
The answer to terrorism cannot remain political or military. Behind the criminal dimension of terrorism, there is a spiritual temptation which cannot be overcome without tapping in spiritual and moral resources. The answer to despair, dishonor and disgrace lies in real hope, real honor, real grace.

Bernard Wicht

The role of Saudi Arabia in 9/11

THE STRUGGLE TO DECLASSIFY THE 28 PAGES OF THE U.S. JOINT BI-PARTISAN COMMISSION ON 9/11

Since always, major terrorist attacks, those whose consequences overturn the world order, or plunge nations into the horrors of war, are either orchestrated by States, or by powerful institutional forces which control the policies of States.
In the recent period, going from the war waged by the West against the USSR in Afghanistan (1979 – 1989), to today, international terrorism has been dominated in large part by djihadist elements, bankrolled essentially by two immensely rich godfathers, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and by their Western controllers, the United Kingdom, the United States, and their lackeys.
It’s notably the case of the terror attacks against New York’s Twin Towers on September 11th, of the djihadists deployed against Syria beginning March 2011, and of Daesh today. For the time being however, these are informed rumors, or information circulating only among specialists.
Yet, the report of the “Bi-partisan congressional investigation commission on the failure of American intelligence before and after the 9/11 attacks”, co-presided by former senator Bob Graham, a democrat from Florida who at that time was heading the prestigious Select Intelligence Commission, contains a 28 page section which establishes more than troubling links between the 9/11 airplane hijackers and high level Saudi officials exerting diplomatic functions in the United States at that time. While nearly the whole report was made public in 2002, the 28 page section remains classified.
Conscious that the publication of those 28 pages, accessible today only to elected officials, but on condition of total secrecy, could provoke a surge in the American people, leading the United States to bring an end to their alliance with States that finance Islamic extremism, former Senator Bob Graham is pursuing his national campaign and lobbying to get the declassification of those pages.
He has since been joined by deputies Walter Jones (Republican from North Carolina), Stephen Lynch (Democrat from Massachusetts), and Thomas Massie (Republican from Kentucky). On December 2nd 2013, they introduced House Concurrent Resolution HCR 428 demanding the declassification of the 28 pages. All of them are convinced that the American people has the right to know about this, and that Barack Obama, must be held accountable for not keeping his campaign promise to make them public, something that former president George W. Bush had refused to do.
Motivated by the conviction that only the publication of those pages can stop more and more violent groups, like Daesh, from emerging; strengthened by the determination of the Association of families of victims of 9 /11, co-presided by Terry Strada, 20 congressmen have joined resolution HCR 428.
Christine Bierre has presented the nature of the “proofs” contained in those pages, following the numerous elements revealed by Senator Bob Graham himself and by the investigators active in this struggle, against the very causes of international terrorism.

Who are those “European mercenaries of Jihad”? What are the consequences of these movements destabilizing the entire world?
Mr Elie Hatem, Avocat à la Cour (Barrister at Paris Bar Association), Doctor of Law and lecturer at the Free Faculty of Law and Economics of Paris, has tried to describe their profile and to answer these questions, by joining his professional experience to its geopolitical analysis. Mr Elie HATEM has treated files relating to “mercenaries” and was also the lawyer of the famous mercenary Bob DENARD) to its geopolitical analysis.
At the end of what the French call it the “bi-polarization” of the world, after the fall of Communism and the breakup of the former Soviet Union, the world witnessed a new phenomenon that allows the maintenance of tension in various parts of the planet and which is the consequence of the manipulation and the use of religion, especially Islam, for political purposes, and the emergence of terrorist groups claiming for Islam.
This phenomenon is the result of a series of experiments, carried out since the 70s: in 1974 in Cyprus leading the division of the island, in 1975 in Lebanon (with a failure of this experience due to the confusion generated by the dissensions within each Lebanese community), in 1979 with the Islamic Revolution in Iran (which has positively evolved in a progressive way, taking on no more radical character), in 1982 in Syria with the Muslim Brotherhood who were stopped by former President Hafez Assad, then in Afghanistan where Talibans who were trained and armed by the American CIA and Saudi intelligence services defeated Soviet troops, then in Bosnia – Herzegovina and Chechnya where Islamists movements respectively destabilized former Yugoslavia and Russia, but also Dagestan and Kyrgyzstan.
The gradual islamization of the Arab-Muslim societies within a propaganda carefully orchestrated by media (like for example Al Jazeera) and socio-political movements led, after the collapse of the “Arab Spring”, the emergence of Islamist movements using violence and terrorism, affecting Europe, Asia and Africa.
Thousands of Europeans are driven by these movements, under the banner of “Jihad”. Either they go to fight on the battlefield in the Middle – East, or they wish to destabilize European countries both in Eastern Europe and the Balkans and Western Europe.
Those fighters are mercenaries. Some of them are driven by the financial profit they gain out of their mercenary profession, others are mentally deranged who take advantage of this situation to realize their fantasy warrior on the battelfield. Others are fanatics or “fanaticized” by the Islamist propaganda. They are either originally muslims beleiver or recently converted to a “political Islam”, breaking with the precepts of this religion.

The islamo-business as a breeding ground for islamic radical fundamentalism.
Islamo-business is a new concept which is often used with misinterpretation by the media which make many confusions between islam and islamism. As I have explained it in one of my last books (La Croisade Islamiste Pascal Galodé december 2011), this term, « islamo-business », refers to a specific behaviour of youngs muslims or recent converts to the muslim faith who particularly live in the suburbs of Paris or in others foreign capitals or big towns.
These young men, mostly unemployed or social workers, try to make money in touch with every field of the informal economy : drug traffic, traffic in arms, in animals, in rare plants, in arts and crafts, in human organs, prostitution and procuring. They are also involved in many kinds of juvenile deliquency : : housebreaking, carjacking, pocket picking, shoplifting, robbery, racket, blackmail, fraudulent imitation, hacking…
All these misconducts were originally acted for the unique profit of those who transgress rules and law.
The main goal of the islamo-business is to change that individual criminal process into a radical collective protest against our christian western civilization. Imams and propagandists as Said Ramadan explain that the robber is not guilty when his act intends to weaken a social and political system he is fighting against. In that case they justify their conducts and lead some of these young men, either to quit their homeland and make the jihad in foreign countries where radical muslim organisations try to overthrow the governments, or to introduce terrorism in their own countries following the examples of Mohammed Merah or Mehdi Nemmouche.
The success of islamo-business can be explained by that new legitimacy of violence but also by the fact of giving to the converts a touch of heroism, which turn them into leaders when they succeed and into martyrs for Islam when they die.
Howewer that may be, the western countries are actually blind, powerless and unable to take the sting out of that kind of soft terrorism which appears like a plan B when radical fundamentalism did not manage to endanger the institutions of our precarious western civilization.

Bassam Tahhan, Professor of Geostrategy at the National School of Advanced Technologies (Ensta),
The Jihad according to the Muslim brothers Founder.
Is the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization?
To answer this question we will limit ourselves to the study of the concept of jihad, or holy war, fighting in the founding texts namely the Epistles of Hassan Al Banna, particularly the epistle devoted to it. To understand the place of the jihad ideology or system of thought of the founder, let us make a rough sketch of this comprehension of Islam, rather special and very simplistic.
Jihad is for the Muslim Brotherhood an obligation for every Muslim, missing it is considered as cardinal sin. The overall Islamization is the ultimate goal of the Muslim Brotherhood. The company starts with Islamization from below, first the individual who rediscovers firstly religion, true, as understood by Al Banna, then family, society, government, country, Muslim neighbors other Muslim countries, former Muslim colonies of the time of the great conquest of Poitiers to the Indus and finally the rest of the world. Within the organization there are fighters whose job it is to be jihadists, to them the epistle entitled jihad has been written in 1936, and it is now a kind of military wing.
In the western Islamic literature we have pseudo-scientific summaries of this epistle trying to polish the warlike dogmatism of Al Banna, voluntarily concealing part of essential elements. We will expose here elements these propagandists have omitted, in order to picture the Muslim Brotherhood as pacifists.
The Epistle begins with a religious innovation by adding the name of the Prophet in the prayer, by dedicating to him the title of Lord of the Mujahidin, and closing by including all those who are fighting for its Sharia until doomsday. Then, with an introduction that states that jihad is a necessary and inescapable obligation; do not respond or flee the battle is one of the seven mortal sins deserving Hell. We will not fail to emphasize in the sixth point among eight quoted that Jihad means fight against the People of the Book. – Christians and Jews, or anyone who has a revealed book-. It then passes the status of Muslim jurisprudence jihad relying mainly on late lawyers to tell us that the Muslim community has lost the commandments of religion if not calling for jihad.
A lengthy portion of citations of tradition, thirty one quotes in all, is following, a sign of the importance of the Sunnah and Elders for Al Banna.
Then, according to a supposed Muslim jurisprudence, he explains that Jihad is a duty, absolute or relative. As an absolute supposed law, it is called Charia. When it is a relative obligation, if among the faithful there are fighters who do, the others must commit in case of lack, this means that it still necessary to get Muslims mobilized,a kind of army fighting instead of others. He concludes that “given that Muslims today are humiliated as you know, ruled by the wicked, their land is trampled, their sacred violated; their cases are heard by their enemies. Plus, they are forbidden to worship in their own countries, in addition, they cannot spread their message; the obligation is absolute, every Muslim must prepare and dissimulate the intention of the holy war … waiting to seize the opportunity, and so God will be fulfilled. ”
In conclusion to this jihad epistle he confirms that the true jihad is the struggle and the conquest against the unbelievers, and not the personal fight against bad instincts as some Muslims claim saying: “It is common among many Muslims that fighting against the enemy is the lesser jihad, while the greater jihad is that of the soul”, and many of them cite as evidence which is said “we returned from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad and what the great jihad he said of the heart and soul “.
Al Banna criticizes Muslims who divert the faithful of the holy war by this precept, which for him is weak or completely inauthentic.

Symposium, The Geopolitics of Terrorism-2

Second panel
Moderator: Armel Pécheul Rector, Associate Professor of Public Law


Already foreseen in 2004 by the National Intelligence Council, the advent of Daesh is not a surprise for everyone. Its nature is double. In effect, this organisation is altogether a political construction and a dream of revenge against the armies that defeated the Caliphate in the 13th century. ISIS is a religious overbid in response to the secularism of the Baathist regime and the pietistic attitude of the Iraqi Shias. However, ISIS remains a fragile construction, rooted on the opportunistic game of the Iraqi tribes. Its leaders, who are essentially former officers, play for their own opportunistic game: namely the re-conquest of their lost power. In these circumstances, how can we explain the swift expansion of the Islamic state? The economic disorganisation it brings about clearly benefits the Saudi petrol interests while impairing those of China. The reason why a continued flow of jihadists fuels its expansion can be explained by the fact that ISIS is a response to a humiliation: since the 13th century, the Arabic world has lost the control of its political destiny. Rational and totalitarian organisation, ISIS has gained the support of the populations by avoiding chaos in the conquered territories. Al-Qaeda was soluble into globalization, whereas ISIS has had the intuition that the future world would be marked by identities. By re-connecting to the past it has paradoxically taken a step forward. In order to vanquish it, the western coalition will be forced to find a sustainable political situation. If it fails to do so, the war will go on.

Frederic Pichon, Research Associate Team Arab World Mediterranean University François Rabelais (Tours),
Frederic Pichon is graduated from Arabic and PhD in Contemporary History. Former student of the IEP Paris, he lived in Beirut and regularly stayed in the Middle East since 2002, especially in Syria. He teaches Geopolitics in preparatory classes. Author of a thesis on Syria, it is associate researcher at the Arab World Team Mediterranean University François Rabelais (Tours).

The eschatological dimension of Jihad in Syria and Iraq.
The recent victories of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria are questioning the US ability to stabilize the region and will probably question their regional alliance policy, based on the Sunni powers of the Gulf. The gray area under construction along the Euphrates valley has serious threats to the region and for Europe. But, beyond strategic, military and political considerations of this event, it is necessary to measure the psychological dimension, in the point, religious, which refers to the Muslim eschatology and to a Will of regenerating Islam.

Indeed, the proclamation of Al Baghdadi as a Caliph seems obsolete, but is in fact a great breath of utopia as much as territories coveted by the proto-state have some eschatological resonance. This dimension has an echoing effect on some local Sunni Muslim populations or from abroad: for the latter, they are the way to a form of “regeneration” through the land. Geography is playing here a major role: you have just to check out the jihadist literature to see how particular the reference to “Sham” in “Iraq” are preponderant: remember they were location of the earliest heartbreaks of Islam (Hussein, son of Ali, was defeated and killed in Karbala) and will be those of the final battle against Shaytan, the Devil? at the end of time (Damascus or Sham).

AHANI HE Ali, Ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Paris

“The Islamic Republic of Iran strategies against the terrorist threat.”
Today, the phenomenon of terrorism, coupled with violence and extremism, has turned into one of the concerns of the international community. This phenomenon is no longer a purely regional issue that would threaten the peoples of the Middle East, but it is from now on an international concern. Of course, strategic miscalculations of certain major powers and governments in the region have played a key role in the development of this serious international problem.
The experience and the complexity of the situation after the emergence of Al Qaeda and new terrorist groups like DAESH demonstrate that it is impossible to exploit such groups to destabilize and overthrow some governments who are not on the same line as some great powers, because nobody can be immune to the consequences of the eruption and strengthening of this type of group.
The Islamic Republic of Iran condemns violence, extremism and terrorism in all its forms, and has already shown its seriousness in the fight against the scourge of terrorism for its sincere cooperation with the Iraqi and Syrian governments in the fight against Daesh. Iran believes that the approach to the fight against terrorism and extremism must be built on interaction, cooperation and long term trust between regional countries actors.
On the other hand, opt for a unique and non-discriminatory approach can be the key element for the success of the efforts of the international community to fight against terrorism, violence and extremism. Such an approach should be based on two foundations:
-Firstly, states must recognize that terrorism, violence and extremism are common threats to all who encounter no geographical limitation. Therefore, the citizens of all countries in the world can potentially be a victim of violent and terrorist acts. Countries and peoples can be encouraged to fight against terrorism, violence and extremism, if they are quite confident of enjoying the rights and obligations identical to the others and having a common interest.
-On the other hand, it is essential to demonstrate a non-discriminatory reaction to this dangerous phenomenon. Such an approach makes it essential to consider the roots of terrorism.
Of course, the roots of the development of violence, extremism and terrorism in different parts of the world, are the result of in increasing military interventions in other countries, an undemocratic nature of the management of the world and of the breach of the right to development for developing countries. Unfortunately, the current approach of the international community to terrorism phenomenon remains passive and does not give much importance to the true roots of evil.

From “Euromaïdan” to the civil war, terror and terrorism in Ukraina (2013-2014)
In April 2014, an antiterrorist operation (ATO) was launched in the East of Ukraine by Kiev’s authorities. This operation, according to the Uno’s counting, has soon made more than 4000 casualties among civilians, including several hundred after the signature of Minsk’s agreement on the 5th of September. French medias and political class keep silence about these crimes. Why ?
The “narrative” about “pro-European revolution” in Kiev would tell that president Yanoukovitch, after he reversed his decision to sign the association’s agreement with the EU at the Vilnius Summit on the 28th and 29th of september, provoked the mobilisation of the population, who was tired of a corrupted regime. After three months of increasing confrontation, people shot on the Maïdan – fact which was imputed to Yanoukovitch – provoked his run away and his substitution by a pro-occidental provisional government which put back Ukraina on the right way of the association’s agreement. Russia then annexed Crimea and provoked the surge of russian-speaking Donbass’ population. All this obliged the Ukrainian provisional government to trigger an ATO, the NATO to strengthen its forces in the east of its display zone and occidental States to impose sanctions on Russia.
But in the unconscious of the french mediatico-politic class there is also a reference to the French revolution, the Terror and its casualties, the price that must be paid in order to push back foreigners’ intervention, to subdue the “vendéenne” insurrection and to found the “Republic” against “Tyranny”. Donbass would be the ukrainan “Vendée” and the terror exercised there by National gard and nationalists battalions would be thus legitimated.
There is here a serious misinterpretation which shows a tragic ignorance and ideological blinkers.
Actually president Yanoukovitch, thinking that integration of Ukraine in the Custom Union together with the Russian Federation , Bielorussia and Kazakhstan would be better for his country, was objected of a real enterprise of subversion from neo-banderist ultra-right who exploited the mobilization of the people from the first demonstration during the night following the end of Vilnius’ summit. Well organized commandos, paid and directed by american embassy’s services in Kiev, put a constant pressure while US and EU leaders came to Kiev to poke up the mobilization, which drove to coup d’ Etat on the 22nd of February and laid down the constitutional order. A succession of massacres staked out the period which drove to the war in Donbass : the snipers’ shooting on the Maïdan on the 20th of February, which led to the coup d’Etat, the Odessa’s massacre on the 2nd of May, the Marioupol’s one on the 9th of May,not forgetting as well the crash of Malaysian airlines’ Boeing on the 17th of July. Each time, the responsibility of ultra-right commandos and mobilization’s leaders is questioned. The pogrom of anti-Maïdan demonstrators at the Crimea’s border on the 19th of February and the threats to the Russian language status in the regions’ law showed clearly the neo-banderist orientation of the new power. All this drove the Russian-speaking population, already tired of twenty-year brutal “ukrainisation”, to vote in their great majority for their linking up to the Russian federation in Crimea, and for their independence in Donbass , where they created groups of people’s militia.
So the ATO launched by Kiev in April and confirmed by president Porochenko after his election in May turns out to be a real enterprise of genocide acted by national gard and battalions which enlisted the most radicalised elements, impregnated by neo-banderist idelogy. Xenophobe but mainly anti-Russian, this ideology was developed by Stefan Bandera, one of the founders of the OUN-UPA, collaborationist during the World War II. These battalions are financed by oligarchs, among which is the powerful Dniepropietrovsk’s governor, Igor Kolomoïski. Their anti-communism, privileged by the Westerners who share it, actually hides an atavistic russophobia. Beyond this idealogical aspect, the east of Ukraine is rich in oil shale, in which the own son of american vice-president Biden – who is much involved in the Ukrainian crisis – is very concerned.
The continuation of the civil war and the establishment of a nationalist power in Kiev that violates the rights of the Russian-speaking population in Ukraine – actually the rights of the majority of the Ukranians – and that engages a confrontation with Russia, threatens the peace and the security of the continent. The mainstream’s disinformation putting forward that the ultra-right would have only realized 2% in the elections, lies on a false view on facts. The Radical party (7,5%) and the Selfhelp (11%) are managed by the fascists Liachko and Sadovy. Some of the ministers of the new government come from neo-nazi ultra-right and threaten the rights of the Russian-speaking population. Intolerance, censure, prohibition and intimidation of the opposition heavily weigh in the current climate, when Porochenko himself claims that 100% of the Ukrainians are against federalisation and threatens the Donbass’ population that he will start a “total war” against them, which is actually already in progress now. Leaders of neo-nazi battalions appeared on all the electoral lists and made their entrance in the Rada. Among them: Dimitri Yarosh, Pravy Sektor’s leader, whose members took part in the islamist guerilla in Tchetchnia. Fighters of the “Caucasian Califat” joined the Islamic state and threaten the Russian Federation with terrorist acts.
Developing the politic of confrontation with Russia under the influence of the american project of unipolar western global domination (TAFTA), the EU and France will finish to lose the rest of their sovereignty and will put themselves to great dangers. A new direction of the EU’s and French politics is thus necessary to remove the sanctions against Russia and to retake quickly the cooperation, of course in the economy, but also in the struggle against terrorism and totalitarian ideologies such as neo-nazism.

The British roots of international terrorism
It is essential today to understand that the roots of international terrorism are British, in order to avoid devastating errors of assessment in the midst of the current political and strategic storms. This does not concern the responsibility of the United Kingdom per se, but of the British imperial matrix which has taken on different forms over its history. Today, reality is better understood in remembering the phrase used by John Maynard Keynes: American money and British brains.
This imperial matrix of domination is based on a combination of economic influence, irregular warfare and global warfare, while terrorism is the leverage allowing that combination to function at the highest level of destructive effectiveness. Terrorism is neither an accident nor an isolated weapon, but a key element on a full chessboard. It should not be thought of mainly as state terrorism, although it may appear in that form, but in terms of an Empire which was maritime and colonial in the past, and has now become offshore, beginning with the City of London, Wall Street and their tax havens.
Guy Debord, in his preface to the 4th Italian edition of “The Society of the Spectacle” in 1979, speaks of “a peripheral layer of sincere small-time terrorism that is temporarily tolerated, like a fish tank in which some culprits can always be fished out in order to be displayed on a platter.” That description is right, but we also have to examine the geographical locations and the matrix of these deeds, to understand the criminal logic and deal with it.
The British have operated in conjunction with terrorism in South-West Asia, manipulating both Wahabite and Zionist networks, in the Eastern Europe “color revolutions”, and in the manipulations that created the conditions for September 11, and in China. They left traces.
In the Near and Middle East, one finds the networks of Cecil Rhodes and of two of its main operators, Lord Alfred Milner and Lord Stennet Amery. They financed both Arab nationalistic networks, particularly around the Wahhabi movement, and the revisionist Zionist networks of Vladimir Ze’ev Jabotinsky and Chaim Weizmann. Beginning with the Nebi Musa riots back in 1920, they have created a controlled environment promoting permanent instability benefitting their financial interests. Thus, Arab terrorist anti-Semitism is mounted against anti-Arab racism, with the aim of eliminating all reasonable movements on all sides and promoting a war of all against all.
The color revolutions in Eastern European countries, combining fake pacifism with fascist violence, as in Ukraine, were organized on the basis of Gene Sharp’s ideas, as taken up and applied by Adam Roberts and Timothy Garton. They all are associated with Oxford University. The National Endowment for Democracy and the USAID simply applied those recipes, by tagging terrorist violence onto “civil disobedience”.
The September 11 attacks, using money from the Saudi-British contracts for military equipment in exchange for oil (Al Yamamah, signed in 1985 by BAE Systems and the Saudi Kingdom), represented the transition to this violent terrorist phase. Evidence proves that Prince Bandar and his wife financed terrorists who were directly involved in the attacks. This is the Prince Bandar, who studied at Sandhurst and was close to Margaret Thatcher and to the British intelligence. Today, in Hong Kong, British authorities have done their best to provoke out-of-control disorders, by helping the activists and demanding the right to investigate on the spot.
Finally, the Tavistock Institute of London is the place where studies were conducted to measure the breaking points of human beings when subject to unbearable tension. Sir Rawling Rees assured us that “it is possible to induce an emotional state in an adult population equivalent to that of neurotic children”. Kurt Lewin, the director of Tavistock as of 1932, specialized in “programming” and “de-programming”, before moving into his practical work. He studied how it is possible to create “an environment which breaks the psychological resistance of individuals and makes them accept tasks which they otherwise would have refused to perform” This misused Freudianism spread to all English and American intelligence agencies and formed the useful idiots of terrorism by using their “identity terror” and the “divide and conquer” principle.
Until we put an end to the conception of human beings as defined by perceptions and submitted to manipulative experiments, we will not end terrorism. Red ants will continue to attack black ants, without being able to rediscover the will to live together in peace, harmony and cooperation. Let us hope that the BRICS countries have opened the way to such a will to live together, and that we will be able to become their partners.

Mikhail Remizov, President of the Institute of National Strategy and advisor to the Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin,
“Radical Islamism in Russia and risks in Central Asia.”
The diplomat and British researcher Robert Cooper proposes to divide the world into three zones, not geopolitical, but rather “political clock”, ” modern pre ” world, the “modern” world and” the postmodern” world.
“Pre modern world, for the regions of the world where state structures well completed and their monopoly of legitimate violence are not yet formed, where urbanization has not progressed etc. The “modern” world, for the States that operate according to the classic modern agenda, based on industrialization principles of national sovereignty and on the geopolitical balance of power. The “ postmodern “world, according to Cooper, is Europe, the space of the European Union when national selfishness gives way to a constructive mutual dependence, where the factors of political power no longer play the key role.
Today we often hear that the events in Ukraine have shaken the very concept of postmodern Europe, demilitarized and pacifist. This is why Europe is furious against Russia. Now this is neither the time nor the appropriate place to discuss the question: Who has the most responsibility in the Ukrainian crisis? Both parts are implicated. But we can certainly say that Russia is not responsible for the deterioration of the design of the pacifist Europe, post-historic Europe, geopolitical and post-postmodern.
Because from the beginning, this concept was invalid. Considered as an absolute the uniqueness of this historical situation, the European reality was impossible thanks to the Soviet-American bipolarity. Quoting Hubert Védrine, former Foreign Affairs French Ministry: “This is not Europe that made peace getting possible, but it is peace that made possible the existence of Europe”. This means that the European model for integration is “first all the heritage of the geopolitical situation and not making a moral and exceptional European project”.
After radically changes in geopolitical situation – when the bipolar world has become unipolar almost – many dogmas of this model remained in the past, including the hope of overcoming violent relationships in politics and geopolitics.
The 90s and 2000s rose on the European continent under the sign of the revival of political violence. The 90s were marked by ethnic conflicts and separatist movements (with the dismantling of the USSR and Yugoslavia). The year 2000s correspond to the Islamic renaissance. During the decade 2001-2011, terrorist acts in Europe and North America have led to the death of 4,900 people (the maximum throughout the history of mankind). Without even including the attacks against the United States in September 2011, 90 percent of all victims were murdered by Islamists. In total, during the 2000s, about 40 terrorist acts were committed, which doubles the number of terrorist attacks over the previous decade.
From 1999, 59 acts of terrorism with massive civilian casualties have been committed in Russia, including 58 by Islamists. For the year 2013, the number of victims was 1667 people. However, these figures do not include local acts of aggression against the forces of national security in the North Caucasus. In 2004 alone, the number has increased to 265 attacks.
The last major incident happened last week in Grozny. According to the data received, the damage could have been much more damaging because the extremists had prepared the operation similar to Beslan. The episode with the criminal gang, which was this summer along highways near Moscow, is very suggestive. This band was bursting tires of the passing cars and shooting drivers and passengers with no obvious motivation. They killed twenty people. Following the arrest of the bandits, it was reported that they were all immigrants from Central Asia, probably Islamists. That is the reason why their action could be interpreted as a terrorist activity.
Terrorism is not just a crime but an act of communication. As I have already said, the role of communicating people goes to Islamists. Now the society, as the recipient of the messages, is trying to cover them. It’s hard to make an assessment of the situation in Europe, but I think it is the same as in Russia: When talking of terrorist acts, we attempt to reduce the ideological and religious motivation. This intention is justified; if terrorists are trying to speak for Islam, it should not help them. But it does not work that way. Terrorism is an “under constraint” communication. It is carried out even though we strive to remain silent in response. War dialectic is in this too: we must recognize and designate the enemy in order to defeat him.
The gap between Islam – Worldwide religion – and Islamic fundamentalism – Global political ideology – is becoming increasingly important. Every religion in the contemporary world hides behind the next excuse: it can not be outlawed; ideology, meanwhile, has not this kind of alibi. Religion is one thing, radical forms of its political manipulation, it is another thing.
Given the original political nature of Islam, it is difficult to draw the line between the one and the other. From a purely historical point of view, it becomes almost impossible. However, this is not a study that we need, but rather an international agreement demarcating the boundaries between religion and ideology.
It is necessary to define specific tags in the legislation so that they can indicate where the border passes:
Dedication to the idea of a global caliphate;
Rejection of the legislation and the civil power, justified by standards-based Islamic law;
Use of coercive methods in the mission;
Imposition of territorial and economic requirements in the name of Islam etc.
Despite the diversity of movements within Islam, one can identify promising ideas, which produce increase of political violence and declare these ideas outlawed.

http://www.idc-europe.org/fr/-La-force-de-l-islamisme-est-la-reverberation-de-la-faiblesse-de-notre-propre-projet-national-

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here