Connect with us

Intelligence

Under False Pretenses: Who Directed the Assassin to Kill the Russian Ambassador in Turkey in 2016?

Published

on

Motivation for the assassination of Andrei Karlov, the Russian ambassador to Ankara, remains shrouded in mystery five years after off-duty Turkish police officer Mevlut Mert Altintas committed the crime during the opening of an art exhibition in Ankara on December 19, 2016. Chaos ensued when Altintas (circled in the photo below) calmly pulled out his duty gun and fired at least eight rounds, shouting in Arabic and Turkish, “Allahu Akbar! Don’t forget Aleppo. Don’t forget Syria. Unless our towns are secure, you won’t enjoy security. Only death can take me from here. Everyone who is involved in this suffering will pay the price.”

Speculation about why Altintas acted as he did have run the gamut, but three theories have come to the forefront. First, Turkish government officials blame the Gulen movement, which they designated as a terrorist organization right after the suspicious July 15, 2016, coup attempt. Second, Altintas, who was opposed to increasing economic ties between Turkey and Russia and opposed to Russia’s support for the Assad regime in Syria, operated as a lone actor. Third, suspicion has been cast on the Kurds who are fighting against ISIS. The leaders of both Turkey and Russia were prudent in their statements after the assassination. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said,“I describe this attack on Russia’s embassy as an attack to Turkey, Turkey’s state and nation,” while President Vladimir Putin said that “the crime was a “provocation designed to spoil” relations between Russia and Turkey and “derail the peace process in Syria.”

As might have been expected, the Second Heavy Penal Court of Ankara, which announced its verdict in the assassination case on March 9, 2021, said that the Gulen movement was complicit in Karlov’s death. Russia and experts of the Western world, however, do not support the Turkish government’s theory. This article attempts to shed light on the indictmentsTurkey issued in the Karlov case and delves into questions related to the Gulen theory and the lone-actor theory that need to be reinvestigated. The Kurdish theory is not addressed here because no evidence exists to even suggest that such a scenario is plausible.

Turkey’s Accusations in the Indictment

Like it had done with other investigations of notable attacks in Turkey since the anti-corruption scandals came to light in late 2013, the court accused Fethullah Gulen and his movement of plotting the assassination of Karlov and persuading Altintas to commit the crime. Before examining the details of Karlov’s indictment, however, it is necessary to explain how the Turkish justice system works and why the investigation and prosecution of notable attacks always have the same scapegoats: former police officers, former military personnel, and Gulenists. The December 2013 anti-corruption investigations, which used solid evidence to implicate Erdogan, his family members, and Erdogan’s cabinet, is a prime example. Erdogan accused allegedly Gulenist police officers to plot a scheme to overthrow the government and oust Erdogan from power. Furious about such an unconvincing plan, Erdogan responded by launching a retaliatory crackdown against the Gulenists and subjecting all members of the movement to relentless oppression.

Erdogan’s implacable grudge against Gulen has harmed the credibility of Turkey’s justice system because, now, every investigation is directed to conclude that Gulenists were somehow the perpetrators. This hijacking of the Turkish justice system helps to explain why Turkey was ranked near the bottom of the constraints on government powers category in the 2020Rule of Law Index. The World Justice Project compiles the index each year and reflects how the influential nonprofit civil society organization perceives 128 countries’ adherence to the rule of law. Turkey ranked 124th on the list.

The government’s disregard for the rule of law in Turkey has meant the demise of bottom-up investigations that aimed to collect evidence and then identify the suspect and the rise of top-down investigations that name the suspect first and then fabricate evidence against the predetermined suspect. Prosecutors now routinely use copy-and-paste indictments filled with fabricated evidence presented by intelligence officials. Prosecutors who were opposed to the directives promulgated by Erdogan and his government were accused of being members of a terrorist organization and then put in jail. The indictments prepared after the 2013anti-corruption scandals were no different and include many contradictions that Western countries consider to be suspicious.

Suspicious Investigations by Turkey’s Judicial System

An examination of how the prosecution and conviction systems work in Turkey suggests a pattern of subterfuge that undermines the credibility of the government’s indictment of Altintas for the assassination of Karlov. That pattern involves the use of fabricated and dubious evidence and the statements of secret so-called witnesses provided by intelligence officials and the police for the sole purpose of indicting a perceived enemy of the government. Prosecutors are complicit in the charade, signing the bogus indictments and referring them to the court without question.

The police investigation that targeted members of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is a case in point. During this investigation, the police collected solid evidence about the spying activities of IRGC members in Turkey and how they had targeted the U.S. Consulate in Turkey. The government, however, ignored the evidence and shut down the investigation. In another case, the government shutdown a police investigation that targeted the Tahsiye Group, an al Qaeda-affiliated organization led by Mehmet Dogan. Dogan had become a target of the law enforcement when, during a speech, he praised Osama Bin Laden and told his followers that they have a binding duty (fardh) to join Osama Bin Laden’s army in Afghanistan. In a third case, the government relentlessly punished the police investigators who examined several trucks that belonged to Turkey’s Intelligence Office. The investigators found that the trucks contained arms and explosives destined for jihadist groups in Syria. Despite solid evidence and video footage showing arms hidden inside the trucks, the government shut down the case. In yet another case, the government shut down the December 17 and 25, 2013 anti-corruption investigations that implicated Erdogan, his family, and members of his cabinet. Reza Zarrab, the money launderer for the corrupt government officials, transported$20 billion to Iran on a route through Turkey at a time when the European Union and the United States had imposed embargoes on Iran for its ambition to possess nuclear weapons. The police had proved that Zarrab was giving bribes worth millions of euros and dollars to Turkey’s bureaucrats and ministers, but the government disregarded the evidence and released Zarrab and his accomplices. Zarrab, however, was arrested in the United States on March 19, 2016. At Zarrab’s trial, the U.S. prosecutors were able to use all of the evidence—including wiretappings—that the Turkish police had collected within the scope of their corruption investigations from three years ago and which the Turkish government alleged that they had been fabricated by the Turkish police investigators. A fifth case involves the conviction of police officers who allegedly had ignored the killing of Armenian journalist Hrant Dink in Istanbul in 2007. The court announced its verdict on March 2021; however, Dink’s family and the family’s lawyers believed that the investigation had overlooked critical elements and were not satisfied with the court’s decision. The common thread that ties these five cases together is the government’s adamant contention—despite clear evidence to the contrary—that all the defendants were Gulenists who deserved lengthy, and even lifelong, prison sentences. 

The outcome of the government’s investigation of the July 15, 2016, coup attempt differed slightly from its usual strategy. This time, the government accused not only Gulenists but also Americans of plotting the failed coup. Evidence uncovered since then, however, indicates the July 15 coup attempt was one of the most suspicious events of Turkey’s history. Some high level politicians in Turkey have said that Erdogan knew about the coup in advance and did not try to stop it because he believed the fallout from a coup would be to his benefit. The coup, therefore, was not a failed coup but rather a fake coup. The author’s previous articles about the coup emphasizes the idea that a small group of military personnel who were provoked into staging a badly orchestrated coup and paid a colossal cost for doing so, as Erdogan used the event to undermine Turkey’s democracy and turn a democracy into an authoritarian regime.

Details and Questions from the Altintas Indictment

The prosecutor accused 28 suspects in a 600-page indictment and concluded that Gulen was the number one suspect. According to the indictment, the prosecutor made the following accusations:

  • Altintas joined religious meetings of Gulenists before the December 17 and 25, 2013, corruption scandals.
  • An SD card (provided by an anonymous witness) contained encrypted content identified Altintas as a Gulenist and noted that Altintas broke his ties with Gulenists after the December 17 and 25, 2013, corruption scandals.
  • Gulenists directed Altintas to infiltrate and join the radical Islamist group Sosyal DokuVakfi (SDV-Social Fabric Association). The prosecutor based this accusation on the radical slogans Altintas uttered when he assassinated Karlov, believing that Altintas wanted to draw attention away from Gulenists and create the perception that ISIS and al Qaeda were to blame for the assassination.
  • Gulenists created a plan to kill the Russian ambassador (i.e., Karlov) in 2016. The prosecutor based this accusation on an inference he made from one episode in a movie series broadcast in 2014 on a Gulenist media outlet. It was in that episode that a fictitious ambassador was killed.
  • Some Gulenists, using a virtual private network, tapped into the social media accounts of Altintas in Northern Cyprus and then deleted some information and made alterations to those accounts.
  • Altintas met with several Gulenist suspects and was directed to kill Karlov. The prosecutor based this accusation on the results from Historical Traffic Search (HTS) data.

The following questions still need to be answered:

  • Was Altintas really a Gulenist police officer? For example, one of the police reports concluded that Altintas and his family had no relations with the Gulen movement during the time when Altintas killed Karlov. In addition, the Gulenists firmly rejected the idea that Altintas was a member of the movement when he killed Karlov and said that no evidence exists that members of the movement has used violence even though they have been harshly oppressed and all their assets confiscated.
  • Why did the prosecutor not investigate Altintas’ radicalization and his association with suspects linked to al Qaeda?
  • Why did the prosecutor ignore Altintas’ relationships with SDV, a Salafi radical association?
  • Why did the prosecutor fail to identify any suspects after allegedly uncovering some suspicious IP addresses in Northern Cyprus?
  • After examining 30 minutes of HTS  data captured from 500 meters (1,640 feet) away and used for signals intelligence, how did the prosecutor come to a specific conclusion about several individual suspects when the duration of the captured data was short and hundreds of thousands of people were in the area from which the data were obtained?
  • Why did the prosecutor not investigate the person who called Karlov’s wife, Marina, before the assassination? In her statement to the prosecutor, Marina Karlov said that she received a mysterious phone call on December 14 or 15, 2016,from Moscow, in which the caller wanted to know whether her husband had bodyguards to protect him.
  • Why did the prosecutor not question one of the witnesses, Abdulkadir Sen, who was affiliated with al Qaeda and whose brother, Ibrahim Sen, was being held in the Guantanamo Bay prison because of his linkages with al Qaeda? U.S. authorities had accused the Sen brothers of transferring $600,000 to al Shabaab in 2012 and, in 2014, British and French investigators asked Turkish authorities for information about the Sen brothers. When investigators first questioned Enes Asim Silin, one of the witnesses to the assassination of Karlov, Silin said that Altintas and Abdulkadir Sen met on October 8, 2016. Sometime later, Silin suspiciously changed his statement, saying that the two men did not meet on October 8, 2016.
  • Why did the prosecutor not question the weak security at the art museum where Karlov was killed? According to Marina Karlov, her husband went to the exhibition with nobody guard and weapon, and only one security officer (unarmed) was inside the building.
  • Why did Turkish officials fail to provide enhanced security inside the museum when they knew that demonstrations against Russia’s involvement in the Syrian conflict occurred just a few days before the assassination?
  • Why did not the prosecutor question the possibility of arresting Altintas alive? According to the prosecutor, Altintas entered the art museum at 6:31 p.m., followed by Karlov at 6:45 p.m. Altintas shot Karlov to death at 7:05 p.m., and the police arrived 20 minutes later, at 7:25 p.m. Altintas did not take his own life and instead waited for the police to come to the scene of the crime. Also according to the prosecutor, clashes between Altintas and the police ensued, and Altintas was killed by the police at 7:42 p.m. However, according to the statement of a police officer who took part in the clashes, Altintas fell to the ground, after which another police officer kicked the murder weapon away from the wounded Altintas, and then the police shot Altintasin his head several times. Altintas did not attempt to escape, nor did he attempt to hold anyone hostage. The police, however, chose to kill Altintasrather than capture him alive. The outcome raises the possibility that Altintas wanted to be silenced.

Now the Second Theory: Was Altintas a Lone Actor Inspired by al Qaeda Ideology?

The second theory contends that, in his effort to punish Russia for of its involvement in the Syrian conflict, Altintas acted on his own volition when he assassinated Karlov. Such lone-actor terrorism has been a threat to the world since the early 2010s. Individuals who engage in lone-actor terrorism operate according to their own timetable, are not directed by any terrorist leader or terrorist organization, and may be inspired by one or more radical ideologies. Most lone actors, however, have been inspired by ideologies of either al Qaeda or ISIS. Given that Altintas was a self-radicalized individual with close ties to SDV and given that the Syrian branch of al Qaeda, al Nusra Front,has claimed responsibility for Karlov’s assassination, proponents of the second theory believe that their interpretation of assassin’s motivation has more credibility than any other proposed theory.

Altintas’ Radicalization

Details in the prosecutor’s indictment of Altintas provides clues about how Altintas was self-radicalized. Various models explain how individuals are radicalized, and, according to one of them, radicalization is a four-step process: (1) pre-radicalization, (2) conversion and identification, (3) conviction and indoctrination, and (4) action. At the pre-radicalization step, according to the details of the indictment, Altintas’ introvert personality made him susceptible to being affected by the teachings of the Turkish radical Islamist Nurettin Yildiz. The indictment also noted that Atintas had complained about his family, telling friends that his family was not practicing Islam. According to Altintas family, he drank alcohol and was not a religious person until he attended the Turkish National Police Academy in 2012. In his second year in the academy, family members said, Altintas began to sympathize with radical religious groups and joined the religious programs offered by Yildiz.

At the conversion and identification step, the indictment indicates that in 2013, Altintas began to question his job and Turkey’s approach to Islam. For example, Altintas began to complain about his position as a police officer, telling his friends that it is not appropriate to work in a state until it is ruled by Islamic law, that he was planning to resign from his position as a police officer, and that he was against the democratic elections.

At the conviction and indoctrination step, Altintas seemed to have become an ardent believer in jihadist ideology. For example, Altintas shared extremist messages on a WhatsApp group about Syria and ISIS. He also used hate rhetoric against the United States and said that the United States was inflicting cruelty on the people in Islamic countries. Altintas also was followed the news in Syria and criticized Russian atrocities in Syria.

At the action step, Altintas sought to engage in deeds that would serve his ideology. For example, he wanted to travel to Syria, join a jihadist group, and become a martyr. He also became involved in donation programs that send money to Syria. When investigators examined Altitas’ computer, they discovered that he had downloaded a video in February 2016 titled “Al Qaeda: You Only Are Responsible Yourself,” which began with a speech by Osama bin Laden. Altintas’ computer also contained a draft email to mrtltns@gmail.com, dated July 27, 2015, that Altintas was preparing to be a martyr.

SDV and Salafism in Turkey

Turkey has been one of the top 10 countries with the most jihadists joining al Qaeda or ISIS groups in Syria. In 2015, more than 2,000 Turkish jihadists joined one of these terrorist organizations. Turkey’s government has been criticized for ignoring the activities of jihadist groups in Syria and for allowing the militants to use its borders freely not only to transfer militants but also money and logistics. In 2015, Russian authorities published satellite images purportedly showing Turkish trucks transporting oil from ISIS-controlled areas in Syria. 

Nurettin Yildiz, a retired imam and director of SDV, played an essential role in the radicalization of many individuals, including Altintas. Yildiz is known for his anti-Semitic and jihadist speeches. In one of those speeches, he said, “Jews are the symbols of brutality and enjoy killing of women and children.”Yildiz also is an advocate of Salafism in Turkey and regularly holds meetings and gives sermons on topics such as Salafi-interpreted jihadism and support for jihadists in Syria. He also is a fervent supporter of Erdogan and the AKP. As an example, a page on the SDV website and a google search on Yildiz bring photos of Yildiz with previously-investigated suspects for their roles in transferring arms and explosives to Syria.

After the assassination of Karlov, the al Qaeda-affiliated group in Syria known as Fatah al-Sham Front (formerly al-Nusra Front) claimed responsibility for the assassination of Karlov in a letter the group published online. The letter talks about the “Revenge of Aleppo” and claims that Altintas was not only a riot police officer but also a member of the al-Nusra Front. Erdogan, however, said in a 2016 speech that al-Nusra Front is not a terrorist organization, only to reverse his stance two years later and designated the group as a terrorist organization.

To conclude, Turkey’s Second Heavy Penal Court of Ankara announced its verdict in the Karlov assassination casein March 2021, concluding that the Gulen movement was responsible for the crime. The court ignored an investigation report that said Altintas committed the crime as a radicalized lone actor with link to al Qaeda-affiliated individuals. The court’s decision appears to have been based on a government-directed investigation that declared an alleged perpetrator and then tried to find or fabricate evidence to fit its contrived scenario. In Russia and the Western world, the verdict has been deemed unsatisfactory. It is not realistic, of course, to expect reliable investigations and prosecutions under the current authoritarian regime in Turkey. Further investigation of the Karlov assassination is needed to determine who directed Altintas to kill the Russian ambassador, who was behind the government-directed investigations, who ignored potential evidence that could have led to the identification of the real culprits, who chose not to provide adequate protection for Karlov inside the exhibition, and who directed officers to kill Altintas at the crime scene even though it would have been possible to capture him alive.

Dr. Mahmut Cengiz is an Assistant Professor and Research Faculty with Terrorism, Transnational Crime and Corruption Center (TraCCC) and the Schar School of Policy and Government. Dr. Cengiz has international field experience where he has delivered capacity building and training assistance to international partners in the Middle East, Asia, and Europe. He also has been involved in the research projects for the Brookings Institute, European Union, and various U.S. agencies.

Continue Reading
Comments

Intelligence

China and Russia’s infiltration of the American Jewish and Israeli lobbies

Published

on

 – First: The reasons for the registration of (Communist Lobbyists in the Middle East in the United States of America) in the database documents of the US Department of Justice

 – Second: Did Washington actually seek (with the help of Jewish and Israeli lobbies) to lure the Arab communists into it to prevent Chinese and Russian communist influence in the Middle East?: Iraq as a model

– Third: The establishment of Chinese liberal democratic parties in the United States of America and the Chinese Communist Party allowing them to practice their activities legally and freely inside China until today: the (Chinese Qigongdang Party) as a model

   Despite the strangeness of this previous analysis of the Egyptian researcher, she relied on it through the proof of the relationship of (Jewish lobbies in the United States of America to the opposition communists in Iran and the Middle East), and from here came the Egyptian researcher’s question, about:

  Do China and Russia have a role in supporting the polarization of the oppressed communists from inside Iran and the Middle East in general, planting them in Washington, facilitating and drawing a plan for their relations with the (Zionist lobby and the various Jewish lobbies) within the United States of America itself, and infiltrating all American official circles, to present the communists in the Middle East as persecuted in their homelands in the Middle East?

 Thus, (the Jewish lobby and all the well-known Jewish and Israeli institutions in the United States of America present these communists fleeing from their homelands to the major American institutions as persecuted communists in the Middle East). The most important question for the Egyptian researcher remains, about:

 (Why did the oppressed communists and leftists in Iran and the Middle East choose to flee to the heart of Washington as a superpower that sponsors liberalism around the world and is the most resolute and strictest in the face of the flow of communist ideas). And does it have anything to do with the future Russian and Chinese policies to infiltrate Washington itself and the communist thought to penetrate the Jewish lobbies inside American Trans (the game of spreading Chinese and Russian communist ideology within the major American political institutions).

 Perhaps it is a new global analysis that has not been addressed by any Arab research with analysis and study, but what attracted the Egyptian researcher is her precise area of expertise and her PhD study thesis was on the Chinese political affairs, and the role of the Chinese Communist Party in the political and economic reform issues, and thus the extension of the Egyptian researcher’s interests in studying the history of communists around the world, especially the closest to the region of the Egyptian researcher in the Middle East, Israel, Iran and Turkey as regional powers that seek to support or gain their influence through two unrelated mechanisms, either:

 A) Closeness to Washington and its liberal ideas, and the rejection of Chinese and Russian communist ideas and doctrine

 B) Or by defying Washington and applying pressure towards it by rapprochement with the communists of Russia and China, and thus challenging those liberal ideas and American democratic values ​​that Washington always seeks to promote globally.

  So that some would not accuse me of drawing features of unreasonable or unimaginable relations between (the Communists and the Jewish lobby in Washington through the support of China and Russia together), then the question I had about:

  What is the position of the United States of America and its institutions towards the Jewish lobbies within it regarding the facts of the Chinese and then Russian communist penetration of its institutions with the help and close support of the Jewish and Israeli lobbies most closely related and close to the American administration and the major American institutions themselves?

 – Based on these questions, the Egyptian researcher will analyze the following main elements to understand these new global relations that have not been searched for academically and globally, through:

 – First: The reasons for the registration of (Communist Lobbyists in the Middle East in the United States of America) in the database documents of the US Department of Justice

   Perhaps the “Pilgrimage to Washington” project, which is meant to cover the activities of the Middle East lobbies in the United States, and most of the information in the report is based on documents from a database of the US Department of Justice, which follows the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which is known as “Fara”, which Lobbyists are required to disclose their activities and funds, and all documents are available for browsing on the Internet.

  Through the Egyptian researcher following the previous American report, she was able to find a new relationship that proves the registration of (communists from the Middle East as independent lobbies in the US Department of Justice, and their relations with Jewish and Israeli lobbies inside the American interior itself).

  Looking at the previous US archive of Communist records, we will find that (the documents of the US Department of Justice explicitly refer to the intense political activity of the opposition communist parties in the Middle East inside Washington with the help of Jewish and Israeli lobbies).

   By tracing the relations of the communists in Washington, we will find that, according to the official American data issued by the US Department of Justice, we will find a record of building relations between the Middle Eastern communist parties in Washington and the United States, and building influence networks with politicians in the US Congress and the US State Department itself, with those communist parties communicating  Right-leaning research centers on the American interior, and they have a special influential relationship, according to the American database of the US Department of Justice, with (the Israeli lobby in Washington).

 Hence, the official US reports themselves present a comprehensive and detailed picture of the activities of communist and leftist parties coming from the Middle East, such as the Kurdish party opposing Iranian policies in the world of lobbies.

  The documents indicate that the (Kurdish Communist Party opposed to Iran) contracted with (IF International) to penetrate the corridors of Washington itself through the gate of the Jewish and Israeli lobbies in Washington.

  The files of the US Department of Justice indicate that the opposition communist parties authorized official representatives of their parties in America to establish close relations with the US government with the help of the powerful and most influential Jewish lobby with the help of Israel, and the most significant question mark is the increase in the total payments of these Middle Eastern communist parties inside the US of thousands of dollars per month  Including the expenses of opening representative offices for its parties there.

  For example, we find a document issued by the US Department of Justice on January 2, 2019, in which (the opposition Kurdish Communist Party in Syria and Iran) contracted with the company (IF International), as a well-known international American lobbying company, and among its well-known clients in the Middle East:

  The Syrian Democratic Council, which is the political wing of the (Syrian Democratic Forces), known as the “SDF”, as one of the largest armed Kurdish factions stationed in northern Syria and supported by the United States.

 The services provided by (IF International Company) to those communist, left-wing Arab, Middle Eastern, Iranian and Kurdish opposition parties in their homelands in the Middle East are summarized in:

 1) Communication and pressure on Congress, especially with congressional staff working in the State Department and the armed forces.

  2) Communicating on behalf of those communist and leftist parties with right-leaning think tanks in general, or funded and supported by the Israeli lobby.

 3) In addition to (IF International Company’s keenness) to facilitate communication of communist parties and movements from the Middle East with the largest internationally known Israeli lobby in Washington, known as (AIPAC), and the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee.

 The company of (IF International) is owned by the well-known Jewish American citizen (Eyal Frank), a political consultant who worked for political parties, and has long experience in the field of political pressure, as “Eyal Frank” previously worked in major companies, such as: (Mercury – Qorivs), and he worked as a legislative assistant in Congress between 2000-2002.

   The total payments of the communist and leftist parties from the Middle East to the mentioned American company amounted to thousands of dollars per month, according to its documented documents registered in the (US Department of Justice).

 – Second: Did Washington actually seek (with the help of Jewish and Israeli lobbies) to lure the Arab communists into it to prevent Chinese and Russian communist influence in the Middle East?: Iraq as a model

   The issue of the penetration of communist influence in the Middle East in general and in Iraq in particular is one of the most important issues that have attracted the attention of the United States of America, due to the important strategic location of Iraq in the Middle East, as it is one of the most important centres of oil production in the region and the world, despite the presence of Iraq within the accounts of the American strategy before World War II, however, America’s large entry into Iraq actually began after (the emergence of the communists on the Iraqi political scene) after the 1958 revolution, and this is a piece of information that was overlooked and ignored by most Arab and international research and studies.

  Then the political weight of the (Communist Party in Iraq) began to weaken after the Baathists took power following the movement of November 18, 1963. However, as a result of the intensive arrests and continuous pursuit of members of the Iraqi Communist Party and its organizations, the Iraqi communist and leftist movement subsided, even if it did not end or completely died.

  During the 1967 war between Iraq and Israel and Iraq’s entry into it, the Soviet Union tried to get closer to Iraq, but the American weight was stronger, which caused the collapse of the rule of (Abdul Rahman Aref) in 1968, and the Iraqi political arena was almost completely emptied of the communists.

  What caught the Egyptian researcher’s attention and curiosity was what many American presidents have repeatedly said about their “willingness to fight a third world war if they had to, so that Iraq or the Middle East in general would not be a foothold for communism”.

 Hence, the Egyptian researcher stopped at this previous phrase in research and analysis, regarding:

  Her research on the reasons for the absence of Iraqi, Kurdish, Iranian and Arab communists.

  Then suddenly the Egyptian researcher stopped at the presence of Arab, Iranian and Kurdish communist parties and the Syrian opposition within the American interior itself, which prompted the Egyptian researcher to have a theoretical hypothesis:

 Did America seek to get rid of the influence of the communists and the Arab leftists, especially the Iraqis, the Iranians, the Kurds and the Turks in the Middle East in the face of the Soviet Union and later Russia after its disintegration and China, by inviting them – that is, the communists of the Middle East region – into the United States of America itself and facilitating their unspoken assimilation into the (Liberalism intellectual agenda), and then waiting again to use them against Chinese and Russian influence in the Middle East again?

 Then the Egyptian researcher thought about another theoretical hypothesis that was not put forward at all, which is:

 Did Russia and China, through the Jewish and Israeli lobbies in the American interior itself, seek to re- polarize these communists fleeing their homelands in the Middle East once again and recruit them to serve their interests in the United States of America in the face of Washington itself?

 Which is what the Egyptian researcher could call the theory (playing with toys or returning the game with another game).

  Perhaps the most important thing I relied on in my previous analysis was (the presence of dozens of communist and leftist Arab, Iranian, Kurdish and Turkish parties that are actually opposed inside the American interior), and the emergence of communist names, especially Kurdish, Iranian and Syrian, once again as influential and influential elites in Washington itself.

   And I think that (the game of the Chinese and Russian communist penetration into the American interior is a completely logical game from my point of view), it is not an unlikely game as some will accuse me, after the American political elites and the most prominent American politicians point completely accusing fingers at (the corruption of the ruling Communist Party of China, and talk about the communist and liberal ideological war between Washington and Beijing)

 Perhaps one of the most prominent things that stopped me in this context is the accusation by prominent officials in the American administration itself and in the centers of American rule of the Communist Party of China that it is the cause of the spread of the Corona virus, or the cause of the deterioration of the world and so on. It is a sign, despite its strangeness – but it is understandable to the Egyptian researcher due to her academic research and analytical specialization on that very crucial point – regarding the export of American politicians that the hostility between the United States of America and China is not political, but has become (ideological dispute or ideological war) in the first place.  This raises many questions about:

 (The American, Chinese and Russian play and hack each other through the communist and liberal ideological gate in the face of each other)

 And even the most dangerous proposition went too far, about: Beijing and Moscow unilaterally inviting a number of American politicians to visit their countries and meet their officials in the form of announced unofficial visits. In fact, accusations were extended during the US presidential elections period by supporters of the former President (Trump) to investigate the reasons for inviting (Joe Biden), the current US president to China, and meeting with its officials and praising them, at a time when he assumed the position of responsibility in the administration of former President (Barack Obama).

 Rather, the accusations of the candidate’s supporters (Trump) at the time went even further, accusing (Biden) of working for the Communist Party of China, based on the reasons for his previously unannounced visit to Beijing, and whether he was the favorite communist candidate in Beijing and Moscow?

 Here, we must consider this future game between all its parties, regarding:

 (They accuse each other of adopting a Chinese or Russian communist agenda, or a hegemonic US imperialist liberal agenda seeking world domination)

 It is a matter or a proposal that has become new in its context, and from here I can almost imagine according to this proposition: the extent of the American determination to transform the competition between China, Russia and Washington from being (a political war or just a legitimate political competition for leadership of the new world order to an ideological war or an ideological and ideological competition) between communists and liberals around the world)…and this is where the danger lies, or less the danger of the proposition with which Washington started its game with China, regarding:

 Distracting the attention of the whole world and even its peoples and broadening the base of accusations from political affiliation in favor of the Chinese and Russian alliance together or the US to adopting communist ideology, ideas or values ​​in the face of its liberal or American democratic counterpart, and this proposition is what Washington insists on in all global circles.  This raises many questions about:

 The reasons for the presence of former Arab, Iranian, Turkish and Kurdish communists in Washington itself and the penetration of its political institutions, the reasons and the extent of their relations with the Jewish and Israeli lobby, and what is most dangerous to me and what concerns me personally and academically, are:

 The extent of the relationship between China and Russia in penetrating the communist and leftist lobbies in Washington by supporting those same Jewish and Israeli lobbies in the American interior, and thus the response of the American game itself by luring and protecting communist lobbies in the United States of America, and using them at an appropriate time to confront the agenda of China and Russia through the adoption of China and Russia for these communists who  Washington adopts them in its lands under the pretext of protecting them from the persecution of their homelands to which they belong, especially in the Middle East, as we mentioned.

– Third: The establishment of Chinese liberal democratic parties in the United States of America and the Chinese Communist Party allowing them to practice their activities legally and freely inside China until today: the (Qiqongdang Liberal Democratic Party of China) as a model

  Perhaps this information came as a surprise to many – in the Arab world and from non-academics and specialists in Chinese and communist academic studies around the world – who are not aware of the existence of (eight parties operating within Chinese society itself that follow American liberal democratic values, including parties founded by expatriate Chinese who lived in the United States). The United States of America itself, then they returned and settled inside China, and they were allowed to engage in their opposition party activity.

 Perhaps the most prominent Chinese liberal democratic party founded by a group of Chinese expatriates inside the United States of America itself is (the Qigongdang Party in China), which was founded in the city (San Francisco) in the United States of America by Chinese expatriates who were living within the same American society, most of whom are university graduates.  And when most of them returned to the bosom of the motherland in China, they submitted an official request to establish this party, and the surprise to them and to the American observers was that the official Chinese authorities missed their American counterpart that opportunity, by allowing the ruling Chinese communist authorities to practice their activities according to the scope of the similar liberal democratic party practice.  With those American values ​​that they brought back from abroad, i.e. from the United States of America itself, and carried them into Chinese society, this party is practicing its activities completely freely until this moment with the knowledge of the Chinese authorities without any harassment mentioned by the testimony of its members.

 The Egyptian researcher analyzed this very important point that (the Chinese authorities have succeeded in missing the opportunity for Washington to allow the return of these Chinese expatriates, most of whom studied in American universities and were saturated with liberal American culture, by giving them the freedom to establish a liberal democratic political party in China itself).

  Currently, the (Qiqongdang Liberal Democratic Party of China) consists of Chinese personalities from the middle and upper classes, most of whom are expatriates or Chinese immigrants who have returned to the country. After returning to their homeland in China, these expatriates and immigrants were able to attract their Chinese parents and friends to participate and become members of this party.  And expanding its base, despite following the approach and philosophy of American liberal democratic values ​​that are different from the communist approach that the majority of Chinese owe.

  On the other hand, the official Chinese authorities also allowed the licensing of (seven other parties) that follow the same liberal democratic values, in addition to the (Qigongdang Party) as we mentioned, and all of them were allowed to operate officially and legally in China, bringing the total of those liberal democratic parties in Chinese society (eight liberal parties  Chinese democracy), which is as follows:

 1) (Taiwan Democratic Party Self-Government League): It is located

 In (Hong Kong), however, his official headquarters has moved from (Hong Kong) to the Chinese capital, Beijing), and many information about him and his most prominent current activities and the names of his most prominent members are available in the archive of the well-known (China Network) website.

 2) The (Jiusan Association Party): which focuses on the need to implement democracy within Chinese society.

 3) (Chinese Association Party for the Development of Democracy): which raises the slogans of (implementing democratic policy in China, reforming Chinese authority, and then returning power to the Chinese people themselves). This party is currently adopting an agenda dominated by (the blending of American liberal democratic values ​​with Chinese socialist values), by promoting the adoption of the (socialist democracy model).

 4) The (Chinese Democratic Party of Peasants and Workers): which is based on the slogan of (establishment of the power of the Chinese people), and most importantly, its current constitution expressly provides for the acceptance of (the leadership of the Communist Party of China), and welcomes the cooperation of all liberal democratic parties with the ruling Communist Party in China, according to  The mechanism or system of (political consultation), according to what is recorded in the a well-known (China Network Website Archive) in China.

5) (KMT Revolutionary Committee Party): whose members adopt the liberal democratic doctrine, noting that (KMT) itself is an old party that was overthrown by the ruling Communist Party in China, but it is a group of old party members who wanted to work legitimately under the supervision of the same Chinese state, and applied for the founding of the (KMT Revolutionary Committee Party), and the official Chinese authorities immediately approved their request, and its members currently adopt the principles and slogans of (Unification of China), and include members of the upper and middle levels or classes in the Chinese society mainly.

  6) (Chinese Democratic National Building Association Party): The political advocacy of this party is to guarantee the basic political rights of the Chinese citizen, protect the human rights of citizens, protect and develop national industry and trade, and oppose the rule of the (old Kuomintang Party), that was overthrown by the ruling Communist Party in China. There are many data published about him, according to the official Chinese media.

  7) (Chinese Democratic Front Party League): bearing the name of (Chinese Democratic League), officially recognized by the Chinese authorities, which began its political activity as a joint political organization of parties and political forces calling for democracy, and was welcomed by the ruling Communist authorities in China.

  Hence, we find that the Chinese official authorities had (a future view in their relationship with the United States of America as a global hegemon that seeks to spread its liberal democratic values ​​around the world), by allowing the return of its Chinese citizens from the United States of America and giving them the right to exercise their political convictions in complete freedom within the framework of the state and the law and the prevailing Chinese constitution, while ensuring the freedom to exercise their own liberal democratic political beliefs and ideology under the supervision of the Chinese authorities at home. And it is the most dangerous and most important point that all of us should stop at, which indicates a (Chinese foresight regarding its future relationship with the world and the American values ​​themselves).

  Hence, the ruling Chinese communist authorities raise in the face of the United States of America and the West themselves critics of its political practice under the slogan of (political consultation between the political parties in China, and collective consultative decisions), which means: those decisions taken by the ruling Communist Party after consulting (the Eight Liberal democracy Parties) in the Chinese society, and this is one of the most prominent points of intelligence in the mechanism of exercising governance in China, by allowing the absorption of those opposition political entities and parties as long as they submit an official request to work within Chinese society itself under the supervision of the Chinese state itself.

  This is what Washington fears when other Chinese expatriates submit the similar requests to the American authorities to allow them to establish communist and left ideological parties within the American society, expand their membership base by attracting and recruiting new members, and push those communist and leftist parties with Chinese communist ideology to compete in the future in the American elections by the Chinese or Russian financial fund raising.

  Through the previous analysis, the Egyptian researcher concluded that the current competition between the United States of America, China and Russia is no longer a political or even economic and cultural competition as much as it is a tacit recognition by Washington itself and its politicians that it is (an ideological and doctrine competition between the American liberal values ​​and Chinese communist values).

  By shedding light on what is happening inside the American interior by polarizing the communists themselves to work under the supervision of the American authorities, and the Chinese attracting these liberal democrats with American orientations to work inside communist China officially, it becomes clear to us that it is (an ideological game that has been preparing for many years between the Americans and the Chinese Communists).

  In the same context, the same idea invokes me in the Arab context and in the Middle East itself, is it possible to expand the base of real partisan competition between those with liberal and communist values ​​in our countries, or does the scale tilt only in favor of American liberal democratic values, despite criticism of the American policy itself in our Arab countries?

  And my last and most serious question remains in this new future analysis of the Egyptian researcher, and it is the inevitable question that I have no choice but to ask without searching for an answer to it, which is:

  Can China and Russia intervene to finance and establish Arab communist and leftist parties and in the Middle East in general, and even around the world under supervision of African, Arab, Latin and other governments closely related to China to expand the base of communists and bearers of communist tendencies at the expense of American liberal values?, It is the question of the future that we should all keep towards the future.

Continue Reading

Intelligence

The New World Order: The conspiracy theory and the power of the Internet

Published

on

“The Illuminati, a mysterious international organisation made up of the world’s top political and social elites, controls the workings of the entire world behind the scenes”. This is the world’s most famous conspiracy theory about the New World Order.

For hundreds of years, legends about the Illuminati have been spread and many people currently believe that the Illuminati still exist. It is believed that the Illuminati operate in various fields such as global politics, military affairs, finance and mass media and control the historical process of the entire world.

The ultimate goal is to establish a New World Order. Nobody can prove it, but many people believe it. This is the greatest paradox about conspiracy theories.

In the 2009 film, Angels and Demons – based on Dan Brown’s best seller of the same name about Professor Langdon, played by Tom Hanks – the story of the Illuminati, who supposedly originated in Europe during the Age of Enlightenment, was recalled. There were physicists, mathematicians and astronomers who questioned the “erroneous teachings” of the authority of the Holy See and dedicated themselves to the scientific field of the search for truth.

Eventually, the Illuminati were forced to become a clandestine organisation and have continued to recruit members for hundreds of years to this day. In Angels and Demons, the historical facts are clearly questionable, and the movie appeared after the great economic crisis of 2007-2008.

The New World Order conspiracy theory has been circulating for a long time and is full of mysterious theories that, however, convince many people who are powerless and dissatisfied with the current state of the world.

The Illuminati, who advocate the establishment of a New World Order through the planning of a series of political and financial events (the financial tsunami of 2007-2008 is said to have been planned by the Illuminati), attempt to influence the course of world history, and ultimately establish an authoritarian world government.

Supporters of the New World Order theory believe that even the powerful US government is now just a puppet government. While another “shadow government” made up of a few people makes decisions that will change the fate of the planet.

You might think that all of the above is just crackpot theories. Many people, however, believe this is true. According to a 2013 poll conducted by the Public Policy Polling Foundation, 28% of US voters believe that the New World Order is actually taking hold.

Brian L. Keeley, a professor of philosophy at Pitts College who devotes himself to the study of modern conspiracy theories, believes that an important feature of conspiracy theorists is that they cite some trivial and overlooked incidents and then propose a perfect explanation compared to an embarrassed official response. The reason why the conspiracy theory explanation can be widely disseminated is that it has no argumentation process to deny. It is just a judgement that jumps directly from hypothesis to conclusion. In the argumentation process, it is only a subjective interpretation of the event.

Nevertheless, for the public that does not fully understand the incident, the conspiracy theory provides an “explanation” for the unknown part of the said incident, and this “explanation” cannot be denied (because its very existence is not corroborated by real arguments and facts). It is therefore recognised as a valid argument by many people.

For example, no one has substantial evidence to prove that the Illuminati actually exist, but no one can prove that the Illuminati are purely fictitious. Therefore, you cannot deny their existence because their existence is “perfection without evidence”.

Columnist Martha Gill wrote in The Guardian on the subject, describing the Illuminati as the most enduring conspiracy theory organisation in world history.

“Conspiracy theories relating to the 1969 moon landing mission, the Kennedy assassination, the 9/11 attacks, etc., are all limited to a specific time and place. But conspiracy theories supporting the existence of the Illuminati can connect them. Anything about these connections, however, is difficult to prove”. In other words, the supporters of conspiracy theories may have common imagination and attribute everything to this organisation, so that every irrational phenomenon in the world can be explained.

Although no one can prove the real existence of the Illuminati, there is actually an alleged “global shadow government” in the world whose name is the Bilderberg Group. The Bilderberg Group holds an annual world-class private meeting and participants include elites from all walks of society such as government, business, media, science and technology.

Known as the “World’s Most Mysterious Conference”, the Bilderberg Group invites various famous political and economic figures to participate in its meetings every year.

Prince Bernhard van Lippe-Biesterfeld (1911-2004) held the first meeting in 1954. As the venue for the meeting was the Bilderberg Hotel in Oosterbeek, that name was used as the name of the group.

The existence of the Bilderberg Group is not a secret, but the content of the topics discussed at the Conferences is absolutely confidential and mainstream media cannot report on the content of the meetings.

The Bilderberg Group issues a press release every year to introduce the Conference participants and the outline of the topics discussed. Over the years, participants have come from many places, including Prince Philip of Edinburgh (1921-2021) of the British Royal Family, Crown Prince Charles, former British Prime Ministers, French President Macron, German Chancellor Merkel, former US Presidents Bush and Clinton, and even Bill Gates and other Internet giants. There were also Italians, as reported years ago in a newspaper of our country.

The 2018 Conference was held in Turin, Italy, in June. According to the description on the Bilderberg Group’s official website, the main topics included European populism, the development of artificial intelligence, quantum computer technology and the “post-truth” era. Obviously the actual content and results of the meeting’s discussion have never been reported.

Therefore, the Bilderberg Group has naturally become a locus where conspiracy theorists want to draw material. They describe the Bilderberg Group as true evidence of the theory that a very small number of elites controls the world, and the participants are planning a New World Order.

On the subject of strange things, let us give some examples. In June 2018, the British Royal Family was also caught up in conspiracy theories. When Prince Harry and his wife Meghan attended a show, they were caught on camera motionless, like two stiff and dull robots. Later related clips went viral on the Internet and netizens were in an uproar: many people believed that the distinguished members of the Royal Family were actually robots developed by high technology.

However, the management of the London museum, Madame Tussauds, later explained the mystery by stating that Harry and Meghan were only played by two actors who wore extremely high-realism wax masks on their faces – all to promote an exhibition of wax statues – and inadvertently caused an uproar.

In that short video, Harry and Meghan did not change their facial appearance and their expressions were stiff just like robots. Consequently, conspiracy theorists used this as evidence that they were robots secretly built by the British Royal Family.

This argument is an extension of the ‘trivial evidence’ mentioned above. The argument proponents ignore any argumentation process and directly draw the final conclusion through the above stated “trivial evidence”. This conclusion is highly topical and quite appealing. With the fast spread of the Internet, the “quick truth” will naturally be recognised and sought after by many people.

I think many people still remember the “Mandela effect” that spread wildly across the Internet in the early years as a false memory. The name “Mandela effect” is believed to have come from Fiona Broome, a self-described “paranormal consultant”, who created a website called the “Mandela effect”. Supporters of the ‘Mandela effect’ claim to “remember” that former South African President Mandela died in prison in the 1980s. But in reality, after being released from prison, Mandela served as President of South Africa from 1994 to 1999 and died in December 2013.

So why should anyone believe this seemingly absurd statement? The Internet has become a support platform for a lot of false content, fake news, as well as unreasonableness and lack of justification. When someone shared that ‘false memory’ with others on the Internet, many people believed it to be true, and even suddenly recalled having that memory: “Mandela died in prison that year”.

As a result, lies inconsistent with facts continue to spread. The lie is repeated thousands of times and many people consider it to be the truth: this learning phase is the first misleading rule on the Internet.

In the Internet era, multidimensional and multiplatform features have generated a number of online “malignancies” of conspiracy theories. Moreover, their dissemination ability is not limited to “believers” only. Since online social media provide a widespread and wide dissemination platform, one passes it onto ten people, ten spread it to a hundred, a hundred to a thousand, and so it goes on in geometric fashion, thus turning a ‘hot’ topic on the Internet into an absolute truth. Those who want to believe are naturally prepared and willing to do so. Moreover, these false opinions on the Internet may even have an impact on the real world.

For example, at the political level, everyone can now comment and participate in the online arena. For politicians to get the right to speak and set the agenda, the key is to rely on the public’s direction on the Internet. The Internet discourse has become the dominant factor of the political storytelling, and not vice versa. The characteristics of social networks are precisely the breeding ground for conspiracy theories.

The Internet is easy to spread among the public and it is exactly the breeding ground for conspiracy theories.

Nowadays, conspiracy theories are enough to influence politics and even political developments. A specific conspiracy theory gains a number of supporters through the Internet that promotes it to become a highly debated topic among the public. Consequently, it enters the real political arena coming from the virtual community and its influence can change the direction of governmental decisions.

Looking at it from another perspective, when conspiracy theories are put on the Internet and continue to proliferate – regardless of whether the Illuminati exist or not – they are enough to establish a New World Order. The real-world public opinions, as well as the composition of opinions and the basis of social discussions are changed, and thus world’s countries, politics and rulers are affected.

Continue Reading

Intelligence

USA and Australia Worry About Cyber Attacks from China Amidst Pegasus Spyware

Published

on

Pegasus Spyware Scandal has shaken whole India and several other countries. What will be its fallout no one knows as we know only tip of iceberg. Amidst Pegasus Spyware Scandal USA and Australia both have shown serious concerns about Cyber Attacks on US and Australian interests. Both say that China is hub of malware software and both face millions of such attacks daily.

I am trying to understand why a software is needed to spy on a particular individual when all calls, messages, data, emails are easily accessible from server. In most of cases these servers are located in USA and some cases these are located in host country. In certain sensitive cases Government Agencies have their own server like Central Intelligence Agency and hundreds of other agencies and military establishment world over including India. Now point is who installs those servers.

A couple of years back I had talked to Mr Mike Molloy who is Chief Executive Officer of Orion Global Technologies previously known as Orion SAS. He had explained me how his company installs servers in host countries on request of private or gov bodies. He talks about contract and trust. That means even when a company or Gov buys a server or software for designated uses the “Secrecy” Factor remain on discretion of company which has supplied server or software.

Now  if all data, e-mail, chat, messages, calls are accessible to Gov as per law and technology (Through Server all components of Communication are accessible and thats why  me and you see start seeing call recording of a person even after many years later), I am unable to understand why a Gov will be needing a software to Spy on any one.

Now coming to where Australia and USA wants to carry the whole debate.

Australian Foreign Minister Sen Marise Payne said, “Australian Government joins international partners in expressing serious concerns about malicious cyber activities by China’s Ministry of State Security.

“In consultation with our partners, the Australian Government has determined that China’s Ministry of State Security exploited vulnerabilities in the Microsoft Exchange software to affect thousands of computers and networks worldwide, including in Australia. These actions have undermined international stability and security by opening the door to a range of other actors, including cybercriminals, who continue to exploit this vulnerability for illicit gain”, She further added.

She opined, ”The Australian Government is also seriously concerned about reports from our international partners that China’s Ministry of State Security is engaging contract hackers who have carried out cyber-enabled intellectual property theft for personal gain and to provide commercial advantage to the Chinese Government”.

She warned China by saying, “Australia calls on all countries – including China – to act responsibly in cyberspace.  China must adhere to the commitments it has made in the G20, and bilaterally, to refrain from cyber-enabled theft of intellectual property, trade secrets and confidential business information with the intent of obtaining competitive advantage”.

On other hand USA’s The National Security Agency (NSA), Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) released a Cybersecurity Advisory on Chinese State-Sponsored Cyber Operations. National Security Advisor said, ”Chinese state-sponsored cyber activity poses a major threat to U.S. and allied systems. These actors aggressively target political, economic, military, educational, and critical infrastructure personnel and organizations to access valuable, sensitive data. These cyber operations support China’s long-term economic and military objectives”.

The information in this advisory builds on NSA’s previous release “Chinese State-Sponsored Actors Exploit Publicly Known Vulnerabilities.” The NSA, CISA, and FBI recommended mitigations empower our customers to reduce the risk of Chinese malicious cyber activity, and increase the defensive posture of their critical networks. 

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Europe11 mins ago

The 30th Anniversary of the Visegrád Group: The Voice of Central Europe

The Visegrád group or V4 is a cultural and political union created in 1991, during a conference in the city...

Central Asia2 hours ago

Russia’s ‘Great Game’ in Central Asia Amid the US Withdrawal from Afghanistan

The post-Soviet Central Asian nations are gravely concerned about the Taliban’s rapid offensive in non-Pashtun northern provinces of Afghanistan seizing...

Travel & Leisure14 hours ago

Four Seasons Hotel Mexico City Reveals Five of the City’s Hidden Gems

The Concierge team at Four Seasons Hotel Mexico City, members of the Les Clefs d’Or international association, invites you to...

East Asia16 hours ago

Will US-China Tensions Trigger the Fourth Taiwan Strait Crisis?

Half a century ago, the then-National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger flew to Beijing in the hope of seeking China’s alliance...

South Asia18 hours ago

The Indo-US bonhomie: A challenge to China in the IOR

The oceans have long been recognized as one of the world’s valuable natural resources, and our well-being is tied to...

Uncategorized20 hours ago

The day France fustigated Big Tech: How Google ended up in the crosshair and what will follow

At the beginning of April 2019, the European Parliament approved the EU’s unified regulation on copyright and related rights. Since...

Middle East22 hours ago

Politics by Other Means: A Case Study of the 1991 Gulf War

War has been around since the dawn of man and is spawned by innate human characteristics. Often, when efforts at...

Trending