Many videos on youtube speak about Al Jazeera’s coverage of the Arab Spring events. This channel based in Qatar has been accused by many as being a collaborator with ‘foreign agents’ working to destabilize the region and serve the interests of foreign powers. I am posting here a specimen of such videos which I chose because it speaks specifically about what Al Jazeera’s plans are for Algeria:
The clip is from a privately-owned Syrian satellite TV channel (قناة الدنيا). It is owned by businessman Rami Makhlouf; a cousin of president Bashar Al-Assad and said to be the most influential businessman in Syria.
In this clip which dates back to September 2011, we hear that:
- Al Jazeera has orchestrated the uprisings in Libya and Syria and that Algeria is next on the list
- Al Jazeera is actively working to execute Western destructive plans for the Arab World and create the Great Discord.
- It plans to ‘hide’ planned Israeli massacres of Palestinians, right after the UN Security Council recognizes the Palestinian State. Furthermore, it concealed NATO crimes in Libya.
- Establishing democracy is just a sinister trick by the West to slaughter civilians, create chaos and pillage the regions’ resources (Iraq, Afghanistan, Ghaza, Somalia and Libya are given as evidence for these plans).
It is fascinating how all Arab regimes chew the exact same stories about ‘foreign intervention’ and ‘conspiracies against stability’. I do watch Al Jazeera occasionally and although I did notice that they have a hostile stance with respect to the Algerian State and they had selective coverage for the various countries during the ‘Arab Spring’, none of these warrants the ridiculous story that is presented by Arab regimes. Evidently, like any media channel, Al Jazeera must have a political agenda, but what is it? It is undeniable that Al Jazeera had a big role to play in the ‘Arab Spring’; crowds in Tahrir Square were chanting ‘Long live Al Jazeera!”. But is it really a Western collaborator? An ally of the Zionist State? And how has this propaganda affected the perception of Al Jazeera by the Arab masses? In Algeria, it seems the government has succeeded in making many Algerians side with Al-Gadafi. I was amazed at how popular he was. The ‘foreign intervention’ story was really effective, and the proof was that Zionist Bernard-Henri Levy was involved with the revolutionaries. Incidently, he wrote a book about the Libyan insurgency and here’s a quote, according to Israeli newspaper haaretz:
Because he does not officially “belong” to the Elysee, Levy allows himself to relate in minute detail his conversations with the president; in them, Sarkozy reveals his opinions of the world’s top leaders. The things he says are frequently far from flattering. The Americans? “Oddly soft.” Merkel? “Pathetic,” in her caution. Berlusconi? “Asks himself if he has a brain left.” Papandreou? “Throws too many wrenches into the works. You can’t … sabotage [the operation] when you’re not even on deck.” And the Turks? “Good thing I blocked them” (during the debate over possible entry to the European Union ). Levy even describes Sarkozy’s reaction when, on July 20, a rebel delegation that came to the Elysee offered to assassinate Gadhafi: “I do not want to turn him into a martyr, and in addition to that, I am not a murderer!” According to Levy, the president nonetheless went on to say that, if Gadhafi were to be “killed in a confrontation, that is another matter. I think it would be a mistake, but it would not be any of my business.” The Libyan leader was executed during a “confrontation” three months later.
Levy strongly protests the assumption that the Arab dictators were strategically convenient for Israel, but makes an even more fundamental point: “We have no choice. It is not the role of democracy in general and of Israel in particular to decide whether the dictator should disappear or not. It is the people that are supposed to decide that. The only choice before Israel is to hunker down in a stance of refusal – a position that would bind its fate with that of the dictators, or to express sympathy in principle for the budding signs of democracy and liberty. I, as a friend of Israel, prefer the view that says: Maybe it will end badly but we’ll extend it credit for now, we won’t shut the door on it. We won’t rule out in advance that the friends of human rights will also be able to triumph in the Arab world.”
There is a lot of talk about Algeria being perceived as a ‘threat’ by Israel. It is not surprising as Algeria has a hostile political stance towards the Zionist State. But Algeria is too far from the Middle East to pose any real threat! So if Al Jazeera is hostile to the Algerian State, does it also mean that their hidden agenda is to support Western plans and provoke chaos in Algeria in order to bring about a more ‘moderate’ regime vis-a-vis the Israeli question? Who knows what that daft Qatari Prince has promised them in return of winning the World Cup bid for 2022. Here’s another quote from haaretz’ article on Lévy’s involvement in the Libyan war:
At the end of May he received a call from one of his contacts in Libya, who asked him to tell “your Israeli friends” that “Libya will not be hostile toward them.”
Levy takes off for Israel the next day and manages to complete his “assignment”: On June 2 he met Benjamin Netanyahu, with whom he jointly drafted a statement saying that “the State of Israel hopes that when a new government will arise in Libya, it will advance peace and security for all peoples of the entire region.” The statement was issued after a meeting between the Israeli premier and French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe. In the meantime, news of the message Levy delivered from the Libyans became public, causing an uproar in the Arab world. The Libyans were forced into a vehement denial – and Levy realized he had made a mistake.
With so many conflicting and converging interests, so many actors at play, it is difficult to make a good reading of the situation. What seems most plausible to me however, is that the West is very good at taking advantage of situations in order to further their own interests in the region. They surely have many scenarios studied which covers all possible outcomes. I don’t believe Al Jazeera is an agent of the West, I just think the West are good at making the most of whatever happens. Same goes for Israel. The only side with a vested interest in regime change are the people of the Arab World, the West and Israel will attempt to work with whoever takes over and will only resort to drastic measures if whoever takes over is not ‘collaborative’ enough. So at the end of the day, the only side with a vested interest in collaborating with Israel and the West are Arab regimes themselves. Which makes their ‘foreign intervention’ ghost story even more pathetic. So on top of wondering what Al Jazeera’s real agenda is for Algeria (assuming there is one that is), I also wonder if we will see the Algerian stance towards Israel soften in the years to come? Wouldn’t the US demand this at some point? I cannot see this not cropping up at some stage, what do we have to bargain with apart from oil and gas?