BERLIN (Own report) - The periodical of the German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP) has published a survey on this years' ten possibly most dangerous conflicts. As author, Louise Arbour, former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, writes, her list covers ten countries / regions of conflict, where a range of factors have led or could lead to escalation: For example, these include "organized crime," "political competition," "authoritarian rule." The author does not mention western interventions as a cause of the desolate situations in a whole series of countries, even though she lists Libya as one example of the "top ten" conflicts. Libya was crushed by the 2011 NATO aggression and has been unable to recover since. Her list, published by the DGAP, does not mention South Sudan - a product of a geostrategically motivated western secessionist policy, which, last December, has erupted into bloody battles. Louise Arbour anticipates the aggravation of conflicts particularly in Russia's northern Caucasus. Severe conflicts in that region could seriously weaken Russia.

The "Top 10" Conflicts

The periodical of the German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP) "Internationale Politik" has published the article entitled "Next Year's Wars" on its website.[1] The article originally appeared December 30 in the US publication, "Foreign Policy." This article was authored by Louise Arbour, former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (2004 - 2008) and since 2009 President and CEO of the transatlantic "International Crisis Group." In her article, Arbour focuses on ten countries / regions where dangerous conflicts are smoldering, which, in her opinion, could escalate at any moment.

A Range of Factors

According to the author, the list of conflict countries / regions - now also submitted for discussion by the "Internationale Politik" - illustrates the "remarkable range of factors that can cause instability." According to the author, these include, "organized crime," "political competition around elections," "the threat of insurgency," as well as "regional spill over" (without further elucidation). "Center/periphery tensions" or "authoritarian rule" could also lead to conflicts. The author acknowledges that conflicts could have "long roots," for example, underdevelopment and inequality. But, she disregards the deeper causes of underdevelopment and inequality, as well as western interventions. This is all the more surprising, when she mentions four countries / regions, which have been plunged into war or civil war by western interference and two others, where Western activities - including those of Germany - have led to serious internal tensions. All "Top 10" conflict regions have experienced noxious Western interference.

The West's Innocence

Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Libya and the Sahel Zone are among the ten countries or regions listed by Arbour. The war in Syria has largely been fuelled by the fact that foreign countries began early to support armed opponents of the government and have continued furnishing them arms, either directly or by way of allies, such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar or Turkey.[2] There was no lack of warnings that this conflict could suffer irreversible escalation and that because of the regional social-religious relations, it could be expected that the war will spillover, at least into Lebanon.[3] In her analysis of the Iraqi situation, Arbour does not mention the 2003 Western invasion; instead she exclusively attributes the current combat to - undeniable - domestic shortcomings. The same applies to Libya: The article makes it clear that the author obviously considers the fact of the Libyan state having been destroyed by NATO's war on the Gadhafi government, to be completely insignificant. It is general knowledge that the Northern Mali conflicts were ignited by the destruction of the Libyan state making possible alliances of ethnic cliques and Salafists, to plunder arsenals and become active as militias in the Sahel Zone. In Arbour's analysis, this is not even mentioned as the trigger for combat in Mali.

Not Worth Mentioning

In Arbour's interpretation of the tensions in Honduras and Sudan, Western states appear absolutely innocent. Both countries are also among the "Top 10" in her list of conflicts. Arbour admits that in Honduras - one of the world's top ten countries with the greatest inequality - poverty and a lack of rule of law are leading to tensions and violence. "Violence in Honduras spiked upward in 2009, when President Manuel Zelaya was ousted in a coup," she writes. Zelaya wanted to bring Honduras into an alliance with ALBA member countries, led by Venezuela and Bolivia, where the struggle against poverty is of great importance. Because western foreign policy considers ALBA undependable, there were no objections from Washington or Berlin to the putsch that withdrew Honduras from ALBA. On the contrary, German foreign policy front organizations pleaded in favor of complacency with the putsch, with whose protagonists they had been closely cooperating. (german-foreign-policy.com reported.[4]) Arbour evidently did not mention, for example, the role played by the FDP-affiliated Friedrich Naumann Foundation during the putsch in Honduras.

Poor Governance

Also in the case of Sudan, if one were to believe the text published by "Internationale Politik," the secession of South Sudan, so resolutely pushed by the West, had led to no mentionable consequences. Arbour, for example, classifies Khartoum's suspending fuel subsidies - a measure, often enough demanded by Western finance institutions, such as the IMF - as a case of "poor governance." This measure, however, was in fact made necessary by the government's loss of revenue from oil exports. Three-fourths of Sudan's oil reserves are on South Sudanese territory. South Sudan's secession, also imposed with Berlin's help, has dramatically reduced Khartoum's state revenues.[5] It is noteworthy that Arbour's "Top 10" list does not include South Sudan, whose secession was a top priority project among Berlin's policies toward Africa. The author's attempt to pass over the escalating South Sudanese conflict in silence, suffered a dramatic setback just prior to publication of her article. The bloody combat, sparked in mid-December, has already accounted for up to 10,000 casualties. (german-foreign-policy.com reported.[6])

Implosion

On her "Top 10" list, alongside the Central African Republic and Bangladesh, Arbour includes also Central Asia and the Northern Caucasus. According to the article published by DGAP, Central Asia is, at the moment, tottering "ever closer to a political and security implosion." The five Central Asian nations are ascribed to Russia's immediate sphere of influence. The Northern Caucasus - including Sochi - which Arbour has included in her list, is Russian territory. The author admits that "there were at least 30 terrorist attacks in southern Russia" in 2013. Whereas her "Top Ten" list of conflicts does not include the US drone warfare - supported by intelligence information from Germany's BND - against presumed or real terrorists in Pakistan, and does not even consider Western drone operations worth mentioning, she accuses Russia - which is not using drones - of "reverting to heavy-handed methods" which will escalate the conflict in the Northern Caucasus. Arbour's hypocrisy particularly demonstrates that the Western political establishment, the DGAP included, concocts inconsistent tactical arguments, to apply them against Russia. This, in fact, nurtures apprehensions that a new major conflict - possibly in the Northern Caucasus - could erupt.

[1] Zitate hier und im Folgenden aus: Louise Arbour: Die Kriege des kommenden Jahres. Von Sotchi bis Sudan: 10 Konflikte, die 2014 die globale Stabilität bedrohen werden. zeitschrift-ip.dgap.org 10.01.2014.

[2] See also German War Assistance.

[3] See also Nach vierzig ruhigen Jahren and Religion und Interesse.

[4] See also The Naumann Caucus and Ein Amtsenthebungsverfahren.

[5] See also Nächstes Jahr ein neuer Staat.

[6] See also The Impact of Geostrategists.