american plans for redrawing the borders of mohammedanism

aug 27th, 2006

yankee pipe-dreams of empire.

although i do see glimmerings of hope in that this is implicit recognition that two of the axis of evil types (saudi arabia and pakistan) lose territory and strategic depth. in truth, there should also be a new mohammedan state, east turkmenistan, to cut china (the third in the axis of evil) down to size.

it wouldn't be bad to have an indo-afghan border. would make it easy to get to central asia if we dont have to deal with the ISI.

but let's be realistic, knowing yankee double dealing. they would want india to cave in and give territory to musharraf's rump state. pakistan's 'natural' borders will include much of kashmir and points east of rawalpindi. in other words, what pakistan loses to free baluchistan would have to come out of india's hide.

http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/Display_news.asp?section=World_News&subsection=\ 
Pakistan+%26+Sub-Continent&month=August2006&file=World_News200608273018.xml

Muslims alarmed over redrawn map for Islamic world
Web posted at: 8/27/2006 3:0:18
Source ::: Internews
   WASHINGTON • Muslim circles have expressed alarm and disgust at the 
publication of a redrawn map of the Islamic world in a journal closely
linked to the US armed forces.
The Armed Forces Journal, which has published the redrawn map of the world
of Islam along with a long explanatory article, is published by the Army 
Times Publishing Company, a part of Gannett Company, Inc, the world's
largest publisher of professional military and defence periodicals.
   The proposed scheme places Pakistan on the chopping block. According to 
the plan, "Iran, a state with madcap boundaries, would lose a great deal of
territory to Unified Azerbaijan, Free Kurdistan, the Arab Shia State and
Free Balochistan, but would gain the provinces around Herat in today's 
Afghanistan — a region with a historical and linguistic affinity for Persia.
   "Iran would, in effect, become an ethnic Persian state again, with the
most difficult question being whether or not it should keep the port of 
Bandar Abbas or surrender it to the Arab Shia State.
   "What Afghanistan would lose to Persia in the west, it would gain in the
east, as Pakistan's North-west Frontier tribes would be reunited with their
 Afghan brethren Pakistan, another unnatural state, would also lose its
Baloch territory to Free Balochistan. The remaining 'natural' Pakistan would
lie entirely east of the Indus, except for a westward spur near Karachi. 
"The city-states of the UAE would have a mixed fate — as they probably will
in reality. Some might be incorporated in the Arab Shia State ringing much
of the Persian Gulf … Since all puritanical cultures are hypocritical, 
Dubai, of necessity, would be allowed to retain its playground status for
rich debauchees. Kuwait would remain within its current borders, as would
Oman."
   The redrawn map claims to "redress the wrongs suffered by the most 
significant 'cheated' population groups, such as the Kurds, Baloch and Arab
Shia, but still fail to account adequately for Middle Eastern Christians,
Bahais, Ismailis, Naqshbandis and many another numerically lesser 
minorities."
It adds that "one haunting wrong can never be redressed with a reward of
territory: The genocide perpetrated against the Armenians by the dying
Ottoman Empire."
   The author, Ralph Peters, argues that even those who abhor the topic of 
altering borders would be well-served to engage in an exercise that attempts
to conceive a fairer, if still imperfect, amendment of national boundaries
"between the Bosporus and the Indus."
   According to him, "We are dealing with colossal, man-made deformities that 
will not stop generating hatred and violence until they are corrected. As
for those who refuse to 'think the unthinkable', declaring that boundaries
must not change and that's that, it pays to remember that boundaries have 
never stopped changing through the centuries. Borders have never been
static, and many frontiers, from Congo through Kosovo to the Caucasus, are
changing even now. Ethnic cleansing works."
   Peter argues that for Israel to have any hope of living in "reasonable 
peace" with its neighbours, it will have to return to its pre-1967 borders,
with essential local adjustments for legitimate security concerns.
   He writes that the most "glaring injustice" between the Balkan Mountains 
and the Himalayas is the absence of an independent Kurdish state. There are
between 27m and 36 m Kurds living in contiguous regions in the Middle East.
He calls Iraq an unnatural state and calls for a greater Kurdish state, 
which will include Turkish, Syrian and Iranian Kurds. A Free Kurdistan,
stretching from Diyarbakir through Tabriz, would be the most pro-Western
state between Bulgaria and Japan, he adds.
   Iraq's three Sunni-majority provinces might eventually choose to unify 
with a Syria that loses its littoral to a Mediterranean-oriented Greater
Lebanon.
   The Shia south of old Iraq would form the basis of an Arab Shia State
rimming much of the Persian Gulf. Jordan would retain its current territory, 
with some southward expansion at Saudi expense. For its part, the unnatural
state of Saudi Arabia would suffer as great a dismantling as Pakistan.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\ 
------------------------------------------

The Article in the Armed Forces Journal can be read at:

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899/