Sun Tzu in the Art of War stated that ‘All war is based on deception.’ We should keep this in mind whenever a major international incident occurs. The application of Occam’s Razor, keeping an open mind and considering a range of possibilities suggests that many of these incidents may have been false flag operations, including the recent attacks on oil tankers in the Persian Gulf.
False flag incidents are covert operations designed to deceive. The deception portrays another group, entity or nation as being responsible for the attack whilst disguising who was actually responsible. False flags have occurred throughout history, a trend that appears to be continuing to this day. The shoot down of MH17, the alleged poisoning of the Skripal’s, alleged chemical weapon attacks by the Syrian Government and the latest incidents in the Persian Gulf are all events which could be false flag incidents committed by Western nations or there proxies to further their geopolitical agenda.
That the shoot down of MH17 is a human tragedy is clear. Russia’s culpability is however not so clear even though it is the Western world’s officially accepted narrative. Not surprisingly, Russia strongly disputes the Western narrative.
A normal investigation would investigate all parties who had the means, motive and opportunity to commit a crime. The Ukrainian military is one such party. It has BUK missile systems (means), they were reportedly in the vicinity of the shoot down location (opportunity) and assigning blame to Russia/the separatists provides a clear motivation. The fact that the investigation has been conducted in secret (excluding both Russia and Malaysia but including Ukraine) and the failure of the US to provide satellite imagery of the launch site raise suspicions that the purpose of the investigation was political, the view of the Malaysian Prime Minister. Other suspicious factors are the apparent reliance upon evidence from the so-called investigative website Bellingcat. Bellingcat’s founder, now a Fellow of the intensely pro-NATO Atlantic Council, whose ‘psuedo-science’ methods have been questioned by multiple experts is hardly unbiased, particularly given the significant US involvement in the preceding coup in Ukraine. The claim that Russia deployed a single BUK launcher into Eastern Ukraine is also highly questionable. Modern Air Defence weapons operate as part of a networked system. It seems improbable that Russia would deploy a single BUK launcher into Eastern Ukraine without the associated radar/targeting and command post systems necessary for effective target acquisition and engagement. Conversely Russia claims that the Ukraine had 17 BUK missile systems including their command and control systems in the area. This would not be the first time that the Ukrainian military had shot down a civilian airliner and given other examples of Ukrainian malfeasance the certainty with which Russia is held accountable in the West seems more based on a geopolitical agenda than a search for justice.
A similar modus operandi, but with even more obvious discrepancies, exists with the British Government’s narrative on the Skripal poisoning. The fact that Russian state responsibility is widely accepted, despite there being so many issues with this narrative as pointed out by multiple commentators such as Craig Murray, Salisbury local Rob Slane and Moon of Alabama, highlights how effective the Western propaganda campaign demonising Russia and Vladimir Putin has been. From the mealy-mouthed phrasing ‘of a type developed by Russia,’ to the neat little coincidences such as the British Army’s Chief Nursing Officer being the first on the scene and links between Sergei Skripal and the author of the thoroughly discredited ‘Steele dossier,’ which helped trigger Russiagate, accepting the British narrative requires a complete abandonment of scepticism. When all of the gaps in logic, British disinformation and political opportunism are considered it appears that the least likely culprit in this instance is the Russian state.
The familiar pattern of an incident occurring, immediate blame being assigned followed by politicians and the mass media only airing ‘evidence’ which supports their self-interested claims continued with the allegations of chemical weapons attacks by the Syrian Government. This is despite there being a number of extremely well credentialed individuals such as Seymour Hersh, Robert Fisk, Scott Ritter and Professor Theodore Postol as well as on the ground reporters such as Vanessa Beeley and Eva Bartlett whose reporting or expertise has been entirely ignored. The failure to consider alternate explanations is extremely dangerous, so dangerous that the illegal 2018 missile strikes by US, UK and French forces on Syria could have led to conflict with Russia. The 2018 Douma incident also highlights the shocking state of the Australian mass media, where to the best of my knowledge, not one Australian media organisation has covered the recently leaked OPCW Engineering Report. This report, the veracity of which has not been questioned, undermines the entire narrative of Syrian Government culpability by concluding that the chlorine gas canisters cannot have been dropped from a helicopter but were rather placed there by hand. This suggests of course that the attacks were staged by terrorists (or moderate rebels in Western doublespeak) and there was no justification for the missile strikes by our allies.
And now we have oil tankers being damaged in the Persian Gulf. The US, whose belligerence towards Iran knows no bounds, predictably blames Iran. Why should this evidence free accusation be accepted? After all Secretary of State Mike Pompeo brags about being responsible for ‘lying, cheating and stealing’ for the benefit of the US when he was the head of the CIA. There are multiple parties who have both the motive and capability to conduct attacks of this nature including the US, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel or proxies of any of these nations. Perhaps Iran is sending a warning to its enemies or perhaps its enemies are using these events to justify further aggression towards Iran. At this point it is too early to tell but there is a glimmer of hope that sanity will prevail with Japan, Germany and the EU all questioning the US version of events. What is clear however is that the US’ ideological ‘maximum pressure campaign’ against Iran, which seeks to grind that countries economy to a halt, is setting the pre-conditions for events that could lead to a global economic catastrophe.
The conclusion that we can draw from these events is that we cannot trust the intelligence agencies or governments of our closest allies. Further they indicate that we cannot trust our own government who predictably swallows hook, line and sinker the preferred narrative of the US or UK. Most disappointingly we cannot trust our mass media. It appears that little has been learnt since the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The threat to liberal democracies is not an external one but rather a deep gangrenous rot that is coming from within. Reasserting Australia’s sovereignty through an independent foreign policy is a must if we are to avoid the rot becoming terminal.
Cameron Leckie served 24 years in the Australian Army and is currently studying Agricultural Engineering.