by Harun Yahya
YPG/PYD are being used to divide Syria
Once the ostensible reasons of the war that caused the death and displacement of hundreds of thousands of people in Syria are set aside we need to look 200 years back in order to understand what has actually happened. The main target of the "Big Game" that had gradually developed by the onset of 19th century was to disintegrate and weaken Russia and the Ottoman Empire, the two great powers of the North Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Caucasus.
The main play-maker of the time when the USA was not around as a super power and colonialist wars were still raging across the world was Britain. Behind this "Big Game" phrased as "Consolidation of Britain's domination over her colonies and their routes" in books and courses on international politics, there remained a much deeper and longer-term strategy rather than relationships based on daily interests and short-term plans.
Russia and the Ottoman Empire were systematically turned against one another and drifted into perpetual wars and the peoples of the two giant empires were provoked and incited to riots. Had Russia and the Ottoman Empire allied with each other, they would have probably been the greatest perennial power to oppose Britain. On the contrary both countries were gradually degraded both by external pressures as well as internal turmoil orchestrated by Britain. The result was a fragmented map of the Balkans, Central Asia and the Middle East.WWI which cost more than 10 million lives according to official figures ended in the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire and Russia. As a result, there emerged a geography with hundreds of thousands of deterritorialized people, communities with shared histories separated by barbed wires, and myriads of warring sides that only served to feed terror. In line with this 200-year-old-plan, what rendered this system to gain strength were the pawns employed to tyrannize the innocent nations of this geography. These pawns pitted the indigenous nations against one another, established states or demolished them, drew new borders leading to changes in maps.
The pawns in question were either treacherous weaklings or those attracted to the flow of divisive ideologies. They were Darwinist, materialist communists that sought an armed struggle, racists or those who remained under the influence of radicalism. They were all organized, trained, and empowered by the same hand, and then cast aside once their services were over.
An analysis into the four-year Syrian war in light of these historical facts would reveal that the same parties who agreed on the Sykes Picot Treaty - which was disclosed by Russia at the time - are again at work today. That is to say, this is another attempt to restore the 200 year old project of the British deep state of disintegrating and dividing the countries of the Middle East. The new map would consist of many small fragmented countries serving its interests. Today with artificial borders drawn on new maps, fragmentation of the countries of the region has commenced concentrating foremost on the division Syria, Iran, Iraq, and Turkey.
Undoubtedly the most convenient elements to use for such operations intending to disintegrate countries are terror organizations. The British deep state led the USA into the occupation of Iraq with deliberate inducements the result of which American foreign policy left Iraq in complete disarray. One of the most horrible organizations, which emanated from this wreckage is ISIS. Guided by the British deep state, the US paved the way for ISIS to emerge as a power in the region. It isn't coincidental that the British recruits of ISIS outnumber other nationalities or that its notorious cold-blooded killers are fluent English-speakers. It is also noteworthy that its members mostly use British-made weapons. In brief, the British deep state, the main actor in Syria and Iraq, holds ISIS as a pawn in one hand. Which pawn does it hold in its other hand?
In its other hand there exists the Marxist, Leninist terror organization, the YPG/PYD that caused the lives of 40 thousand people in four decades. The YPG/PYD trained the members of all other terror organizations about spreading terror, massacring and becoming suicide bombers. As will be exhibited in the following pages, the British deep state straddles both ISIS and the YPG/PYD. ISIS is a terror organization that spreads terror with the most vulgar practices of radical teachings. YPG/PYD, on the other hand, an organization with mostly homosexual members, is presented by the Western media as the so-called "freedom warriors" and "the power against ISIS."
Now let's go back a little, and see how the British deep state has manipulated the Kurdish people in the region, similar to other nations in the past, for its own benefits.
The British deep state's Plan to use Kurds against Russia and the Ottoman Empire
The British historian Stuart Laycock analyzed the histories of the almost 200 countries in the world to conclude that only 22 countries never experienced a "partial or total" invasion by Britain. Mr. Laycock compiled his analysis in his book, "All the Countries We've Ever Invaded: And the Few We Never Got Round To." He stated that Britain did not invade countries such as Andorra, Chad, Uzbekistan, Mongolia, a small list she thought she would not benefit from.
Beginning by the 17th century, the British started to spread to Asia and Africa, and invaded many countries with India, China, Afghanistan, South Africa being the foremost. To the countries it invaded, the British deep state brought nothing but bloodshed, violence, enslavement, and poverty. Furthermore, the peoples of these countries were sent to battlefields they had no relevance to, in order to fight for the British Empire.
Please go to Katehon to read the remaining portion of this excellent analysis by Harun Yahya
Source: The National Interest
Why Iran Fears an Independent Kurdistan
"Tehran's fears about Iraqi Kurdish intentions are rooted in deeper fears about Iraq imploding as a nation-state." Alex VatankaJuly 25, 2014
by Alex Vantanka
Tehran is increasingly nervous about a potential bid by Iraq's Kurds for independence. First, an independent Kurdish state next door could incite Iran's own Kurdish minority, setting a dangerous precedent in the multi-ethnic country. Second, the two countries likely to have the most leverage over an independent Kurdistan would be Turkey and Israel, Iran's regional rivals. From Tehran's perspective, a Kurdish blowback inside Iran and a Turkish and Israeli geopolitical win at its expense has to be thwarted.
Reading Barzani's Game
Tehran's fears about Iraqi Kurdish intentions are rooted in deeper fears about Iraq imploding as a nation-state. In recent weeks, the president of the Kurdish region in Iraq, Massoud Barzani, has been feeding speculation about his people breaking away from Iraq. He announced on June 30 that he intends to hold a referendum on independence "within months." Barzani has since been arguing that such a step is a mere formality, as Iraq is already effectively partitioned into Shia, Sunni and Kurdish regions. In the meantime, he has been gauging the regional and international community's reception of his plans.
In Tehran, where reading Kurdish tea leaves is the latest trend, opinion is split between those who see Barzani as engaging in the theatrics of brinkmanship and those who take him at his word. The skeptics, who are in the minority, say Barzani is playing a political game with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, raising the prospect of independence in order to secure territorial and political concessions from a beleaguered central government in Baghdad. In other words, they suspect that Barzani is mainly an opportunist, not necessarily a separatist.
The majority of Iranian officials, however, sees Barzani as strongly committed to Kurdish independence, and sees him maneuvering to take advantage of the politically fluid circumstances in Iraq and in the Middle East to launch such a bid. Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, Iran's deputy foreign minister in charge of Arab and African affairs, even felt it necessary to publicly warn that "all Iraqi factions should respect the country's constitution . . . to prevent the country from breaking up." In Abdollahian's words, Iraq's Kurds should "face reality." In this case, facing reality means accepting that Tehran will do what it can to prevent an independent Kurdistan carved out of northern Iraq.
Why Fear Kurdistan?
At the heart of Tehran's anxieties lies a decades-old fear of spillover of the Kurdish self-determination movement, and an independent and secular Kurdistan becoming a geopolitical and ideological liability.
Militant Kurds in Iran previously established independent regions around the time of the First and Second World Wars, while the central authorities in Tehran were too weak to resist. Kurdish militancy continued to simmer throughout the reign of the Shah, and they took up arms against Tehran immediately after the Iranian revolution in 1979. This became a full-fledged insurgency that took a number of years to quell.
Please go to The National Interest to read the entire article.
The British behind manipulating the Kurdish people:
Further related reading:
Pepe Escobar: Daesh, Creature Of The West
The World's Next Country: The Kurds are on the verge of getting a homeland of their own. If they do, the Middle East will never be the same
Iraqi Kurdistan: Mosul and beyond
Kurdistan President Barzani - Speech at Brookings Institution
Brookings' "Which Path to Persia?"
The U.S. military has started blocking the Syrian Arab Army from entering Raqqa by blocking the main road. This is the beginning of the partition of Syria.
US Forces Block Syrian Army Advance in Preparation For Syria Partition