The world post-September 11th and the prospect of its future
When the idea of a “new Middle East” was first introduced in 1993 by Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres in a book of the same name, no one thought that the process of its implementation required the creation of a costly and horrendous scenario called the 11th September 2001 Disaster, and similarly, at the early stages of the event, nobody could have figured out that the incident was right in the direction of the new Middle East project of Perez and other representatives of the New World Order Project, in order to consolidate the extent of penetration and the hegemony of deterioration The West acts on the bones of crushed communism in the third world and the Muslim world.
26 days after September 11, 2001, Afghanistan was targeted by the United States and other members of the United States and other members of the Alliance for fighting against Terrorism, the Taliban and al-Qaeda regimes collapsed as they were expected, but the scope of ambiguity right from that point Beginning and to this day, every moment is added to its size and scope.
The Taliban regime collapsed and the core of the al-Qaeda organization warped, but their existence and presence did not disappear-something that ex-member of Taliban government Ahmed Mutawakil, the foreign minister of the Taliban regime, calls it a strategic mistake in calculations of global coalition against terrorism: the illusion of Having an “entity” is a phenomenon called Taliban! The war on terror from the Taliban regime fall down point of view and the collapse of the core of al-Qaeda’s network in Afghanistan chose a new route and identity. At that very beginning moments, America chose the foundation for the Shimon Peres Chart – The New Middle East – The Trend of Fighting Terrorism What Slavoj Žižek, the left-wing theorist calls “invisible enemy and infinite war”.
In the formula of “invisible enemy and infinite war,” we do not face the “conventional” and “conservative” words of the “enemy” and “war”; in this battle – the fight against American-led terrorism-the enemy, not as a systematic group, has a command center Specific and focused on a specific geographic area, but as dispersed individuals or multiple individuals’s invisible, anywhere there is likely to be by the United States and its allies. For this reason, the war is not against this enmity, the war in the traditional, old, well-defined concept, but in such a situation, the war is unilaterally by the forces of the anti-terrorist front against the enemy, which is supposed to be at the point of conscience And will continue for indefinite periods of time, without winning or defeating it, what we are witnessing today in Pakistan.
As we all know, the US-led counter-terrorism bloc was at the center of its intended ends: democracy, human rights and justice; therefore, unlike the old and classic warfare models, in which humanitarian organizations and human rights institutions end the battle and Assistance to the victims, they entered into action, and assumed the role of mediator between the hostile parties. In this war, as the Good Front, they essentially defined their own philosophy in the context of the concepts defined by human rights and humanitarian organizations. Therefore, it does not need to interfere with these organizations. That is why the United Nations has, from the old point of view, its highest authority, the legitimate and appropriate authority for defining the lawful and legal mechanisms of intergovernmental relations, virtually in the process of being a fully humanitarian organization and providing humanitarian assistance after The war has fallen, and in the meantime, everything that is done by the forces led by the Good Front.
The explicit opposition to Trump and John Bolton is rooted in this matter with any independent inquiry by the International Court of the Hague on the extent of US war crimes in Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda, no matter whether it is the main cause of the 9/11 incident, or whether there is a network of al-Qaeda, at least the theoretical presence and its conception of the “Damocles sword,” is a gigantic service to the pioneers of the war against aggression. The United States of America and that it was symbolizing and signifying America’s supposed enemy forever; on this basis, the United States no longer has to attribute to the target countries its justification for direct military intervention, In order to turn it into a suitable target for hatred and battle; but the post-9/11 world is for America However, with the design of a fundamental question that may be the apprehension and concern of all the experts, we will close the scroll of this article: after many years of this dark and brutal incident, terrorism, America, the world and all the phenomena around it, especially the Middle East What is the position of the United States?
Al-Qaeda network led by Osama bin Laden, although he did not initially accept the responsibility of the event, the post-incident situation in the United States was designed to make the country emotionally vulnerable in the general mindset of the world’s people. The right to such a situation was, firstly, to express sympathy and sensitive-emotional coherence with it, and then to coordinate and work to compensate for the oppression and practical confrontation with the agents of the event. The sum total of these issues would have caused the world to listen and listen to what the United States and its security spy security decision-makers assumed about the identity, position, and capacity of the enemy, as well as ways to deal with it; otherwise, The basis of the division of George W. Bush; the former president of the United States in the famous phrase “Whoever is not with us” is on us, who divides the world into “black and white” and “good and evil”, unwittingly on the evil and the world’s bottom of the globe It was considered to be part of the brutal and not sparring countries.