Libya, Syria...Who is Next?
The Middle East is once again becoming the arena of confrontation between two most powerful forces. Emmanuel Le Roy, a famous French political scientist, president of the humanitarian movement "Save the Children of Donbass," gave us an interview and told who is inflaming a war in the Middle East and who benefits from terrorist attacks against civilians.
K.- The war in Syria, as well as numerous terrorist attacks in civilian cities, continues. America is again adding fuel to the fire: this time it claims that the Syrian government is allegedly preparing chemical attacks. However, the White House, of course, refused to provide any proof. What do you think how today’s struggle against terrorism is effective in France?
E.L.- The situation with terrorism is extremely complicated. Last year I was invited to Moscow to take part in the RISI (Russian Institute for Strategic Studies) Conference on terrorism issues. There, they discussed the article of The New York Times dated to April 23, 2016. It said that the roots of terrorism came from America. In this article, the author saidthat the CIA and Saudi Arabiaprepared a conspiracy plan in the 1970s to support terrorists and Osama bin Laden, provoke a split and terrorist actions in Afghanistan and displace the Soviet presence there.
Nothing has changed since that time. America and Saudi Arabia continue tocooperate with each other in this area. The main "engine" of world terrorism is the Anglo-Saxon forces.
The terror that affected Russia and the West is different. For example, what happened in Chechnya, Dagestan, Ingushetia, is the actions of Wahhabi networks, which were pushed by the Anglo-Saxons. They wanted to destabilize Russia.
And the terrorism that we have been fighting since September 11, 2001 (there were a series of four coordinated terrorist attacks in the United States, including the destruction of the twin towers on that day) is the outcome of attempts to create chaos in Western societies. The goal is to beat until they change the legal status of the country and lose finally their freedom.
The second option, which is being realized today, is to provoke a conflict in Western Europe between the Muslim population (who arrives and arrives) and local. And this, in its turn, also leads to chaos.
This is already the Americans’ interests. The aim is to create a conflict situation, in which Europe will be deprived of competitiveness and will not be able to create an alliance with Russia against the thalassocracy.
Orwell’s state is already here
Therefore, the first type is an artificially created terror against Russia and its interests. This is the same plan that is happening in Syria: the same people, the same weapons, the same funding that are used against Syria of Bashar Assad. This is the terrorism of destruction that is needed to undermine Russia.
And the second type of terrorism is calmer and less intensive. Its goal is to create a situation of controlled chaos. It means getting rid of 10 people at one place, then 15 more people at another one. This is necessary forkeeping the population in a state of terror and maintaining an emergency situation. And it has been going on for more than a year in France.
The situation of control is similar to the state of Orwell in his novel "1984". Today, we see Europe as a totalitarian state, and the USSR of the Brezhnev era compering to today’s Europe is a paradise.
Confrontation of two forces has escalated
K.- Libya is destroyed. Now, as we see, they are finishing off Syria. Where can we wait for the continuation?
E.L. - Those, who I call archae-mondialists, protect powerful dollar and the Deep state. They provoked this crisis in Libya to plan further destruction and to reshape the Middle East.
But it seems that there have been attempts to fight back the archaeo-mondialists in the recent years, especially, since Brexit. Today, in this globalist system, London is also involved, which is trying to play out the Chinese map ... The strategy is exclusively English, and it is not in the interests of the U.S.
I think Brexit was a kind of war between London City and Wall Street, and the competition for the presidential post between Clinton and Trump was a continuation of this serious confrontation.
The French elections also became an illustration of the confrontation between two forces. I suppose that the archaeo-mondialists, including Clinton, bet on Alain Juppé, who was an ideal candidate for them and could become the equivalent of Clinton. But Trump's friends and Brexit supporters decided on François Fillon, who was more in favor of Russian-French relations. But they realized in time that there was one more substitute - Macron ...
Iran is next, and then it is Russia
Getting back to the question of Libya and Syria (all of this is one line). This is an attempt of some of the archaeo-mondialists to continue the policy of destabilizing the secular states of the Middle East. But this war is not just to reframe the Muslim world, but to prepare a future goal - Iran, which is a way to the Caucasus.
And Russia goes after Iran. This is a geopolitical war, which passes unnoticed.
To better understand the situation, let us recall the exclusion of Qatar from the Council of Cooperation of the Arab States of the Persian Gulf. Although there were the interests of Mr. Rockefeller, still Qatar was under the British protectorate. And Mr. Trump negotiated with Saudi Arabia in order to tell Qatar to "stop," and stop funding the "Muslim brothers" who are also subordinate to Britain (the "Muslim brothers" is a terrorist organization banned in Russia). Even though Clinton brought their representatives to her circle, they are still more under control of Britain.
So, the situation is complicated. I think there is competition in the system itself. Qatar's crisis, Brexit or French elections show that the battle was not for life, but for death in the U.S. and France.
This is a very deep confrontation of different concepts. I think that Britain is replaying its unique map, as it was on the eve of the First World War. Meanwhile, the first task of the U.S. is to preserve the power of the dollar. Without the dollar, America cannot do anything ...