Towards a World War III scenario

Coinciding with the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan a regional war theatre  opened up in North Africa, under the disguise of a UN-sponsored "humanitarian operation" with the mandate to "protect civilian lives", placing the world at a critical cross-roads, writes Professor Michel Chossudovsky in a new e-book under the title: "Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War."

Chossudovsky, an Emeritus Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa. and founder and director of the Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), argues that these two seemingly unrelated events are of crucial importance in understanding both the nuclear issue as well as the ongoing US-Nato sponsored war which has now extended its grip into Libya.

The crisis in Japan has been described as "a nuclear war without a war". Its potential repercussions, which are yet to be fully assessed, are far more serious than the Chernobyl disaster, as acknowledged by scientists.

The crisis in Japan has also brought into the open the unspoken relationship between nuclear energy and nuclear war.

Nuclear energy is not a civilian economic activity. It is an appendage of the nuclear weapons industry, which is controlled by the so-called defence contractors. The powerful corporate interests behind nuclear energy and nuclear weapons overlap.

He claims that in Japan at the height of the disaster, "the nuclear industry and government agencies [were] scrambling to prevent the discovery of atomic-bomb research facilities hidden inside Japan's civilian nuclear power plants".[1] The media consensus is that the crisis at Fukushima's five nuclear power plants has been contained. The realties are otherwise.

He notes that the war on Libya was launched within days of the Fukushima disaster.

“As we go to press, a dangerous process of military escalation is ongoing. Nato warplanes are hitting civilian targets in Libya including residential areas and government buildings in violation of international law,” he writes.

The war on Libya is an integral part of the broader military agenda in the Middle East and Central Asia which until recently consisted of three distinct areas of conflict : Afghanistan and Pakistan (the AfPak War), Iraq, Palestine.

A fourth war theatre has opened up in North Africa, which raises the issue of escalation over a vast geographical area. These four war theatres are interrelated. They are part of a broader region of conflict, which extends from North Africa and the Middle East, engulfing a large part of the Mediterranean basin, to China's Western frontier with Afghanistan, and Northern Pakistan.

He then poses the questions?

• How does the war on Libya relate to this broader US-Nato military agenda?
• Is a World War III scenario unfolding?
• Is the use of nuclear weapons contemplated in North Africa?

He points out that during the late 1990s the then Clinton-administration Defence Secretary William Perry had confirmed in a statement to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that "the U.S. retained the option of using nuclear weapons against countries [e.g. Libya] armed with chemical and biological weapons."[5] The Department of Defence objective was to fast-track the "testing" of the B61-11 nuclear bomb on an actual country and that country was Libya: "Even before the B61 came on line, Libya was identified as a potential target".[6]

While the 1996 plan to bomb Libya using tactical nuclear weapons was subsequently shelved, Libya was not removed from the "black list."

As to how real the threat of the use of nuclear weapons is, he writes that as revealed by William Arkin in early 2002, "The Bush administration, in a secret policy review... [had] ordered the Pentagon to draft contingency plans for the use of nuclear weapons against at least seven countries, naming not only Russia and the "axis of evil" Iraq, Iran, and North Korea but also China, Libya and Syria.

The first two chapters of this e-book focus on the "Cult of Death and Destruction" underlying this global military agenda. US-Nato weapons of mass destruction are portrayed as instruments of peace. Mini-nukes are said to be "harmless to the surrounding civilian population". Pre-emptive nuclear war is portrayed as a "humanitarian undertaking". Nuclear war has become a multibillion-dollar undertaking, which fills the pockets of US defence contractors. What is at stake is the outright "privatisation of nuclear war".

He argues that US nuclear doctrine is intimately related to "America's War on Terrorism" and the alleged threat of Al Qaeda, which in a bitter irony is considered as an upcoming nuclear power. Under the Obama administration, Islamic terrorists are said to be preparing to attack US cities. Proliferation is tacitly equated with “nuclear terrorism”. Obama's nuclear doctrine puts particular emphasis on “nuclear terrorism” and on the alleged plans by Al Qaeda to develop and use nuclear weapons.

Chapter III focuses on America's Holy Crusade and the Battle for Oil. The “Global War on Terrorism” requires going after the terrorists, using advanced weapons systems. US foreign policy upholds a pre-emptive religious-like crusade against evil, which serves to obscure the real objectives of military action.

Military intervention is justified as part of an international campaign against “Islamic terrorists”. Its ultimate intention, which is never mentioned in press reports, is territorial conquest and control over strategic resources. Ironically, under the Global War on Terrorism, these plans of conquest are instrumented by covertly supporting Islamic paramilitary armies, which are then used to destabilise non-compliant governments and impose Western standards of "governance" and "democracy”.

The contours of a World War III scenario are discussed in Chapter IV. The Pentagon’s global military design is one of world conquest. The military deployment of US-Nato forces is occurring in several regions of the world simultaneously. Militarisation at the global level is instrumented through the US military's Unified Command structure: the entire planet is divided up into geographic Combatant Commands under the control of the Pentagon. According to (former) Nato commander General Wesley Clark, the Pentagon’s military road-map consists of a sequence of war theatres: “[The] five-year campaign plan [includes]... a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.”

Chapter V focuses on war preparations pertaining to Iran, including the launching of a pre-emptive nuclear attack on the Islamic Republic. While Iran remains on the Pentagon's drawing board, a fundamental shift in the sequencing of military operations has occurred. The US-Nato-Israel alliance realises that Iran has significant capabilities to respond and retaliate. With the onset of the US-Nato-led war in North Africa, Washington and its allies have chosen to wage war on countries with lesser military capabilities. This factor in itself has been crucial in the decision by the US and its allies to put "the Iran operation" on hold, while launching a "humanitarian war" on Libya.

Chapter VI focuses on antiwar actions directed against this diabolical military agenda.

One  does not have  to agree with Chossudovsky or even have to accept all the “facts” as he presents them. He is also probably not the only author one should read on the subject.

But, in the sense that he forces you to look keenly at development on the global scene and challenges you to think of the implications, Towards a World War III scenario is definitely worth a read if the subject of international politics interests you.

Piet Coetzer

(Towards a World War III scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War is an e-book released by Global Research Publishers; E-Book Series No. 1.0
Global Research Publishers 
Montreal, 2011, 
ISBN 978-0-9737147-3-9; Order our pdf of this important new book from Global Research here at $5.00 – plus $1.50 processing fee.)