Newsgroup: it.politica
Titolo: DENNIS HASTERT ON TURKISH PAYROLL: MONEY LAUNDERING; ARMS DEALING; DRUG TRAFFICKING

By Mike Mejia
Online Journal Contributing Writer
Online Journal, FL
Aug 31 2005
August 31, 2005-Thanks to a Vanity Fair article penned by British
Journalist David Rose, as well as to some excellent follow-up
interviews in the alternative press, the final 'dots' in the story
of fired FBI contract linguist and 9/11 whistleblower Sibel Edmonds
are close to being fully connected.
A case that has been shrouded in unprecedented government secrecy
for over three years is finally being forced into sharp focus,
giving the mainstream press no more excuses to ignore a scandal
that makes Tom DeLay's lobbying shenanigans look like an exercise
in 'good government' by comparison. We now have a very good idea
of the countries, organizations and individuals Edmonds heard in
wiretaps connected with the money laundering, arms dealing and drug
trafficking activities that the whistleblower says facilitated the
crimes of September 11, 2001.
Although the Turkish-American Edmonds had always been creative
in drawing an abstract outline of the official corruption she had
discovered as a translator of Central Asian languages at the FBI,
where she was hired a few days after 9/11, she was hindered from
'naming names' by a series of Justice Department gag orders. However,
the Vanity Fair article has opened a floodgate of new information,
as author Rose was able to obtain leaks from congressional sources
and FBI officials present during Ms. Edmonds classified testimony
before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The article reveals for the first time that one of the elected
officials that bin Laden-connected Turkish nationals claimed to
have on their payroll was none other than Republican House Speaker
Dennis Hastert, to whom bribes and illicit campaign contributions may
have been funneled in order to get him to pull a House Resolution on
Armenian Genocide from the House Floor in 2000. It also reveals that
these same Turkish nationals claimed to have bribed several State
Department and Defense Department officials to facilitate illicit
conventional and nuclear arms trades, and had infiltrated U.S.
nuclear weapons laboratories in order to sell U.S. technology to the
"highest bidder" (al Qaeda, North Korea, Iran?)
The one flaw in the Vanity Fair article is that it seems to boil
Sibel Edmonds' testimony down to an Armenian Genocide resolution, when
actually most of what Edmonds has testified about relates directly to
9-11 (It is not clear why a bunch of Turkish mafia types would have
been so interested in a non-binding resolution on the slaughter of the
Armenians by the Ottoman Turks at the beginning of the 20th Century:
were they acting on behalf of the Turkish government, or were they
afraid a freeze in U.S.-Turkish relations would cut off Turkey as a
transshipment point for heroin and nuclear materials?)
As a result, Ms. Edmonds has been made a pariah in Turkey, while
Dennis Hastert is apparently no worse off than before: except
for one article in USA Today, no major newspaper has reported on
these explosive revelations surrounding the speaker of the House of
Representatives. But although the Rose article missed the mark in
certain respects, it provided a useful launching pad for the follow-up
interviews the FBI whistleblower gave with Amy Goodman, Scott Horton
and Chris Deliso, in which she fleshed out many additional details
of the scandal.
Pulling all this new data together, we now have a pretty good idea
of what exactly Attorney General Ashcroft was trying to hide when
he twice invoked the "State Secrets" privilege to suppress Edmonds'
testimony in the U.S. court system.
Foreign Relations: The Edmonds case has always been quashed by the
State and Justice Departments under the guise of protecting "sensitive
foreign relations." In the Deliso and Horton interviews, Edmonds hints
this is because U.S. "quasi-allies" Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan,
Tajikistan, and at least one Balkan country, are implicated in 9-11,
mainly through partnership with al Qaeda in the global heroin trade.
Government officials: Besides Dennis Hastert, Edmonds testimony
pointed to bribes given to State Department and Pentagon officials.
Edmonds harshest rhetoric is directed at the State Department,
which she hints blocked the investigation into the "drugs for arms"
network, partially because some of its own officials had been bribed.
She also claims that at least some neocons are involved in this
illicit activity.
Organizations: At least three Turkish organizations were apparently
named in Edmonds testimony, including the American Turkish Council
and the Assembly of Turkish American Associations. However, Edmonds,
has spoken of "several" such "semi-legitimate" organizations. Some
of her recent statements may put AIPAC in that category, as well as
other organizations connected to the above mentioned Central Asian
countries (I would personally not be surprised to find the Project
for a New American Century end up on the list someday).
So how does one pull all these new clues together to develop a coherent
narrative of what Edmonds testified to before various Committees and
the 9-11 Commission? One thing that struck this author is the close
parallel between the claims the 'Inconvenient Patriot' has been making
and the testimony given by author Peter Dale Scott at the recent 9/11
symposium organized by Representative Cynthia McKinney. Specifically,
Scott pointed out how the U.S. geopolitical strategy in Central
Asia-primarily designed to gain control of the energy resources in
the region-has led to a tolerance of and maybe even complicity in the
heroin trade and to a much more complex relationship with al Qaeda
than was revealed in the 9-11 Commission Report.
Scott writes: "The truth is that for at least two decades the United
States has engaged in energetic covert programs to secure U.S.
control over the Persian Gulf, and also to open up Central Asia for
development by U.S. oil companies . . . To this end, time after time,
U.S. covert operations in the region have used so-called 'Arab Afghan'
warriors as assets, the jihadis whom we loosely link with the name and
leadership of al Qaeda. In country after country these 'Arab Afghans'
have been involved in trafficking Afghan heroin."
Combining the analysis of Mr. Scott with the testimony of Edmonds,
it would appear that investigative reporter John Stanton had it
exactly right when he wrote that the American people " . . . are easily
sacrificed for a perceived greater good." From the U.S. support for the
drug-running KLA in Kosovo, to its coddling of totalitarian regimes
in Central Asia, it appears that once again the U.S. is complicit in
the drug trade, even though that same trade also benefits our alleged
enemy, Osama Bin Laden. And the heroin is not just going into Europe:
Edmonds makes clear that the pipeline of Southwest Asian heroin to
the United States that closed after the end of the Soviet-Afghan war
has been reopened. The DEA's own website may give credence to her
allegations: According to the its Domestic Monitor Program, Southwest
Asian Heroin, which had previously been brought in small quantities by
West African couriers, principally through JFK Airport in New York,
suddenly began appearing in larger quantities in Washington D.C. in
2001. Was this heroin coming in with the full knowledge and even
the support of the U.S. government? Were these narcotics, and not
some obscure collection of Islamic charities, the primary financing
mechanism for the 9-11 attacks?
Anyone who has studied the history of U.S. intelligence agencies
involvement with drug traffickers and terrorists should not be
surprised about these revelations. However, this would be the first
time as far as this author knows, that the drugs being allowed into
the country by U.S. officials may be financing the very attacks that
endanger our citizen's lives-a fact that would be almost comical if
it were not so tragic. And the next attack, if it comes, could be with
WMD-knowledge obtained not from tinhorn dictators or Iranian mullahs,
but from our own military-industrial complex.
While those of us looking to reopen the 9-11 inquiry have much to be
encouraged about with the recent clues put out by Sibel Edmonds, we
are once again disappointed with the tepid response of the corporate
media, and frankly, the nonresponse of much of the Internet community
(Where are Buzzflash, Josh Marshall, Daily KOS and Juan Cole on
this issue?) Beyond Online Journal, Antiwar.com and Democracy Now,
these stunning allegations have received scant coverage. Yet, if Ms.
Edmonds is correct-and Republican Senator Charles Grassley calling her
'credible' is a strong indicator that she is-then at this very moment,
our nuclear secrets are being sold to the very alleged terrorists
our government claims to be chasing down in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Is there any issue more important than the fact that the reckless
hypocrisy of the U.S. government could result in a nuclear attack on
American soil and the subsequent shredding of what little remains of
the U.S. Constitution? If there is, I'm all ears.
http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/083105Mejia/083105mejia.html
###############################################################
###############################################################
###############################################################
http://www.hillnews.com/news/072004/turkey.aspx
Hastert slices Turkey bill
By Jonathan E. Kaplan
House GOP leaders are vowing to kill a controversial amendment that
chastises a key U.S. ally following a successful Democratic maneuver to
pass the bill late last week.
Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.), chairman of the Appropriations Foreign
Operations Subcommittee, exasperated House leaders last Thursday when
he accepted a Democratic amendment, which would bar Turkey from
lobbying against a Republican-backed resolution that would call the
Ottoman Empire's killings of 1.5 Armenians during World War I
"genocide."
patrick g. ryan
Turkey would be barred from lobbying against a bill sponsored by Rep.
George Radanovich (Calif.) under a foreigh-operations amendment.
------------------------------­------------------------------­--------------------
Rep. Adam Schiff's (D-Calif.) amendment would deny Turkey the use of
U.S. foreign aid money to lobby against the Armenian genocide
resolution sponsored by GOP Rep. George Radanovich (Calif.). If
enacted, Radanovich's resolution would be the first time Congress
formally marked the deaths of 1.5 million Armenians between 1915 and
1923.
But House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) said he will not schedule
Radanovich's bill for a vote this Congress even though the Judiciary
Committee has passed it.
Schiff, who represents one of the highest concentrations of Armenians
in the United States, said he used the appropriations process because
Hastert has not scheduled a vote. "Leadership understands the House
will vote overwhelmingly to recognize Armenian genocide. ... They chose
wisely to let it be voice voted," he told The Hill.
Radanovich told The Hill: "I think [the amendment] was a good way to
keep Armenian genocide in front of people," adding that his bill will
never be passed because "of the force of the Turkish lobby."
Turkey has tapped former House Appropriations Committee Chairman Bob
Livingston, a lobbying powerhouse, as its Washington representative.
Livingston's associate referred calls to the Turkish Embassy,.
"There is a Turkish-American presence here. [But] the Turkish lobby
is not considered a very strong lobby," said Timur Soylemez, a
Turkish Embassy official. "We are not putting [this issue] at heart
of the Turkish American relationships. Some on the Hill are trying to
poison that relationship. I would very much doubt either the Armenians
or Turks would call it symbolic."
Schiff had redrafted his original proposal, which could not have been
considered under the House rules. But his redrafted account caught
House leaders off guard. During the debate, Kolbe said that was the
first time he had seen the amendment and complained that the language
was not clear.
Republican sources told The Hill that they did not think the House
parliamentarian was going to make Schiff's amendment "in order"
and were surprised when the parliamentarian decided it was. With a few
minutes' notice, appropriators and their aides chose to accept the
amendment. The alternative choice was to risk losing a roll call vote.
In a harshly worded statement, Hastert, Majority Leader Tom DeLay
(R-Texas) and Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) acknowledged their
displeasure with Kolbe and the amendment.
"We are strongly opposed to the Schiff Amendment to the
foreign-operations appropriations bill, and we will insist that
conferees drop that provision in conference. We have also conveyed our
opposition to Chairman Kolbe, and he has assured us that he will insist
on it being dropped in the conference committee," Hastert said.
Kolbe said, "I allowed this because I determined that the amendment
had no practical effect. ... As the chair of pending conference
committee on the Foreign Operations bill, I will insist this
meaningless language be removed in conference."
Armenian genocide has flummoxed Hastert and House Republicans over the
past several years. Many lawmakers want the House to acknowledge the
genocide even though Turkey, a longtime U.S. ally and NATO member,
objects to any such legislation.
In 2000, Hastert promised Schiff's predecessor, then GOP Rep. Jim
Rogan, a vote on a resolution condemning the genocide. But the Clinton
administration lobbied against a vote and Hastert yanked the bill
minutes before its consideration.
Also that year, George W. Bush said that as president, he would
"ensure that our nation properly recognizes the tragic suffering of
the Armenian people."
The White House was less involved this time, said John Feehery,
Hastert's spokesman, simply because House leaders knew the
administration's position.
Even if GOP leaders strip his amendment in a conference committee,
Schiff said:
"I think amendment succeeded in drawing out opposition into the open.
The battle has been joined."
Debate over spending bills has grown increasingly bitter as lawmakers
push their own projects or gain political points. On the foreign aid
bill, lawmakers used the process to object to Bush administration
policies toward Iran, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
Rep. Steve Buyer (R-Ind.) introduced an amendment that would bar the
government from using taxpayer money to have United Nations officials
monitor the 2004 elections.
##############################################################
###############################################################
###############################################################
THE TURKISH - ISRAELI ALLIANCE AND GENOCIDE DENIAL
It is a sad and painful truth that, as a consequence of the expanding
alliance between Turkey and Israel, the Jewish American lobby is now
also a Turkish lobby, and has declared war on Armenians.
The story begins in 1949. Turkey became the first Muslim state to
recognize Israel, though relations in the years following were not
always warm. The two states established full diplomatic relations in
1991, however, and by 1996 were in open embrace after signing a
Military & Training Cooperation Agreement and a Free Trade Agreement.
Actually, the romance had budded even a bit earlier, but behind closed
doors.
For example, after a stint at the Pentagon under Pres. Reagan,
prominent Jewish American Richard Perle became a paid ($231,000)
lobbyist for Turkey and, working alongside Israel, reportedly quashed a
Senate resolution in 1989 on the Armenian Genocide. Perle now chairs
the Pentagon's influential Defense Policy Board.
Just last year, the director of the American Jewish Committee, Barry
Jacobs, bragged, "We will champion to the best of our ability Turkish
interests in the US Congress."
But why would Turkey and Israel, a nation hated by many Muslims,
including Turks, become allies?
Common Enemies
What Turkey and Israel (along with the US) have most in common is a
trio of enemies: Syria, Iraq, and Iran. Though they share the Muslim
faith, Turks look down upon Arabs and still resent their revolt against
the Turkish Empire in World War I. In turn, Syria and Iraq, like most
Arab countries, detest Turkey's superiority complex and its
partnerships, such as NATO, with the generally pro-Israeli West.
Turkey has angered Syria and Iraq by limiting the flow of water from
the Euphrates and Tigris rivers. Likewise, Syria had infuriated Turkey
by hosting the anti-Turkish fighters of the Kurdish PKK up until 1998.
Additionally, Syrians have long regarded Turkey's Hatay province
(Alexandretta) as being rightfully theirs, while Turks have never fully
relinquished claims on the oil-rich Mosul region of northern Iraq.
Iran - Persia - has clashed with Turks for nearly a thousand years, and
the two compete for influence among Muslims in the ex-Soviet states of
Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and
Tajikistan. Tehran and Ankara also suspect the other is encouraging
separatist movements: Azeris in Iran, and Kurds in Turkey.
But the reasons for the alliance don't stop there.
More Reasons
Israel earns billions when it upgrades Turkish weapons, such as F-4
jets, and when Turkey purchases Israeli weapons, such as Popeye
air-to-surface missiles and, possibly, the partly American-funded
Homa/Arrow anti-ballistic missile system. Whereas Western countries
sometimes hesitate to sell Turkey weapons due to human rights concerns,
Israeli analyst Efrain Inbar says his country "is not as scrupulous as
most nations in the world in this area [selling weapons]".
The two countries trade intelligence data on common adversaries and,
almost certainly, on Cyprus, Greece, and even Armenians. Israel
reportedly flies spy planes and has electronic listening posts along
Turkey's southern border.
Israeli Air Force pilots drill Turkish counterparts in combat
techniques, and, in return, get to hone their own skills in Turkey's
expansive airspace. Together with the US, Turkey and Israel conduct
naval maneuvers each January dubbed "Reliant Mermaid". Some experts
even speculate that Israel could provide Turkey with a "nuclear
umbrella"
Water-poor Israel has also been negotiating with water-rich Turkey to
have that vital commodity shipped to Israel by tankers.
Periphery Strategy
The present strategy of Ankara (and the US State Department) to
penetrate the Muslim/Turkic nations of the former USSR such as
Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan - all of which are sitting on
oil and gas reserves - fits Tel Aviv's own ambitions.
As part of its long-standing "Periphery" strategy, Israel seeks friends
among distant non-Arab Muslim nations in order to counter nearby Arab
Muslim hostility. In the last decade, Israel has established
relationships, especially in the field of agriculture, with all six
ex-Soviet Muslim countries.
Israel also hopes to see oil and gas exported from the Caspian Basin,
not just for itself but also to lessen the West's dependence on Arab
oil and thus reduce Arab leverage against the West. Hence, Israel
supports the proposed oil pipeline from Azerbaijan to Turkey.
Jewish Lobby
The Turkish-Israeli deal included an extra provision: the powerful
Jewish American lobby - the American Israel Public Affairs Committee,
the American Jewish Committee and several other organizations - would
toil on Turkey's behalf, particularly in countering the Armenian and
Greek lobbies.
Though the average American - Jewish or otherwise - is unaware of that
provision, experts openly acknowledge it. Even five years ago, for
instance, Joseph Leitmann-Santa Cruz and Cagri Erdem - respectively
Jewish and Turkish analysts - were trumpeting that "the influential
Jewish lobby" could help Ankara "improve its image, diminish the
accusations of Armenian and Greek lobbying groups, and improve its
economic and defense cooperation with the US."
Indeed, in October of 2000, Jewish organizations and former Israeli
prime minister Shimon Peres helped the State Department kill an
Armenian Genocide resolution in the House of Representatives. "The
Jewish lobby," reported Turkey's Sabah newspaper, "threw all its weight
into the job ... and very openly at that."
In 2001, a major Jewish organization in Maryland tried to stop the
state from passing an Armenian Genocide resolution. Legislator Cheryl
Kagan, who also happens to sit on the board of the American Jewish
Committee, termed the Genocide "an alleged massacre" and compared the
bill to one designating "the official state cat". Fortunately, the
resolution passed anyway.
Partly as an outgrowth of the Israel-Turkey relationship, the Jewish
lobby labored for years against Armenian Americans to repeal
Congressional sanctions, known as "Section 907", on Azerbaijan.
Finally, in the wake of September 11, 2001, the Bush administration,
helped along by the Jewish lobby, succeeded in repealing the sanctions.
Around that same time, nine leading Jewish American organizations
formally asked Pres. Bush to provide Turkey "debt forgiveness, trade
concessions, and/or further [loan] relief".
In Los Angeles, the taxpayer-funded Jewish "Museum of Tolerance",
apparently bowing to Turkish and Israeli desires, has broken its pledge
to include an Armenian Genocide exhibit.
Meanwhile, Tel Aviv, like Washington, keeps Turkey happy by employing
euphemisms such as Armenian "tragedy" rather than "genocide".
Though it is hypocritical of Jewish leaders to conspire with Turkey in
covering up the Genocide, it cannot be said that Israel or Jews are
somehow uniquely pro-Turkish. After all, the governments and power
structures of the "Christian" West and elsewhere have long supported
Turkey and been largely indifferent to Armenian interests.
Nevertheless, American Jewish clout in government, media, academia, and
commerce provides Turkey with new and powerful allies.
For example, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Pres. Bush's
chief foreign policy strategist, is fervently pro-Turkish. Noted Jewish
political analyst Dr. Daniel Pipes acknowledges that "to make its
case," Turkey "counts on American Jews such as" Defense Undersecretary
Douglas Feith, Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle, and Prof.
Bernard Lewis (a Genocide denier and Bush advisor), as well as on
Jewish "institutions".
In an intriguing press release issued by his office in January, Rep.
Frank Pallone (D-NJ), co-chair of the Congressional Armenian Caucus and
a good friend of Armenians, stated that improved "Armenian/Israeli
relations" are important to the Bush administration. He suggested that
Armenia follow Turkey's example of establishing close links to Israel.
That far-away Tel Aviv plays a central role in Washington's policy
toward Armenia speaks volumes.

AL-QAEDA AND THE AZERI-TURKS
Center for Research on Globalization, Canada
July 30 2005
Al Qaeda, U.S. Oil Companies, and Central Asia
Excerpt of a forthcoming book entitled The Road to 9/11
by Peter Dale Scott
July 30, 2005
GlobalResearch.ca
What is slowly emerging from Al Qaeda activities in Central Asia in
the 1990s is the extent to which they involved both American oil
companies and the U.S. government.[1] By now we know that the
U.S.-protected movements of al Qaeda terrorists into regions like
Afghanistan, Azerbaijan and Kosovo have served the interests of U.S.
oil companies. In many cases they have also provided pretexts or
opportunities for a U.S. military commitment and even troops to
follow.
...U.S. Operatives, Oil Companies and Al Qaeda in Azerbaijan
In one former Soviet Republic, Azerbaijan, Arab Afghan jihadis
clearly assisted this effort of U.S. oil companies to penetrate the
region. In 1991, Richard Secord, Heinie Aderholt, and Ed Dearborn,
three veterans of U.S. operations in Laos, and later of Oliver
North's operations with the Contras, turned up in Baku under the
cover of an oil company, MEGA Oil.[14] This was at a time when the
first Bush administration had expressed its support for an oil
pipeline stretching from Azerbaijan across the Caucasus to
Turkey.[15] MEGA never did find oil, but did contribute materially to
the removal of Azerbaijan from the sphere of post-Soviet Russian
influence.
Secord, Aderholt, and Dearborn were all career U.S. Air Force
officers, not CIA. However Secord explains in his memoir how Aderholt
and himself were occasionally seconded to the CIA as CIA detailees.
Secord describes his own service as a CIA detailee with Air America
in first Vietnam and then Laos, in cooperation with the CIA Station
Chief Theodore Shackley.[16] Secord later worked with Oliver North to
supply arms and materiel to the Contras in Honduras, and also
developed a small air force for them, using many former Air America
pilots.[17] Because of this experience in air operations, CIA
Director Casey and Oliver North had selected Secord to trouble-shoot
the deliveries of weapons to Iran in the Iran-Contra operation.[18]
(Aderholt and Dearborn also served in the Laotian CIA operation, and
later in supporting the Contras.)
As MEGA operatives in Azerbaijan, Secord, Aderholt, Dearborn, and
their men engaged in military training, passed "brown bags filled
with cash" to members of the government, and above all set up an
airline on the model of Air America which soon was picking up
hundreds of mujahedin mercenaries in Afghanistan.[19] (Secord and
Aderholt claim to have left Azerbaijan before the mujahedin arrived.)
Meanwhile, Hekmatyar, who at the time was still allied with bin
Laden, was "observed recruiting Afghan mercenaries [i.e. Arab
Afghans] to fight in Azerbaijan against Armenia and its Russian
allies."[20] At this time, heroin flooded from Afghanistan through
Baku into Chechnya, Russia, and even North America.[21] It is
difficult to believe that MEGA's airline (so much like Air America)
did not become involved.[22]
The operation was not a small one. "Over the course of the next two
years, [MEGA Oil] procured thousands of dollars worth of weapons and
recruited at least two thousand Afghan mercenaries for Azerbaijan -
the first mujahedin to fight on the territory of the former Communist
Bloc."[23]
In 1993 the mujahedin also contributed to the ouster of Azerbaijan's
elected president, Abulfaz Elchibey, and his replacement by an
ex-Communist Brezhnev-era leader, Heidar Aliyev.
At stake was an $8 billion oil contract with a consortium of western
oil companies headed by BP. Part of the contract would be a pipeline
which would, for the first time, not pass through Russian-controlled
territory when exporting oil from the Caspian basin to Turkey. Thus
the contract was bitterly opposed by Russia, and required an Azeri
leader willing to stand up to the former Soviet Union.
The Arab Afghans helped supply that muscle. Their own eyes were set
on fighting Russia in the disputed Armenian-Azeri region of
Nagorno-Karabakh, and in liberating neighboring Muslim areas of
Russia: Chechnya and Dagestan.[24] To this end, as the 9/11 Report
notes (58), the bin Laden organization established an NGO in Baku,
which became a base for terrorism elsewhere.[25] It also became a
transshipment point for Afghan heroin to the Chechen mafia, whose
branches "extended not only to the London arms market, but also
throughout continental Europe and North America."[26]
The Arab Afghans' Azeri operations were financed in part with Afghan
heroin.
According to police sources in the Russian capital, 184 heroin
processing labs were discovered in Moscow alone last year. ''Every
one of them was run by Azeris, who use the proceeds to buy arms for
Azerbaijan's war against Armenia in Nagorno- Karabakh,'' [Russian
economist Alexandre] Datskevitch said.[27]
This foreign Islamist presence in Baku was also supported by bin
Laden's financial network.[28] With bin Laden's guidance and Saudi
support, Baku soon became a base for jihadi operations against
Dagestan and Chechnya in Russia.[29]And an informed article argued in
1999 that Pakistan's ISI, facing its own disposal problem with the
militant Arab-Afghan veterans, trained and armed them in Afghanistan
to fight in Chechnya. ISI also encouraged the flow of Afghan drugs
westward to support the Chechen militants, thus diminishing the flow
into Pakistan itself.[30]
As Michael Griffin has observed, the regional conflicts in
Nagorno-Karabakh and other disputed areas, Abkhazia, Turkish
Kurdistan and Chechnya each represented a distinct, tactical move,
crucial at the time, in discerning which power would ultimately
become master of the pipelines which, some time in this century, will
transport the oil and gas from the Caspian basin to an energy-avid
world.[31]
The wealthy Saudi families of al-Alamoudi (as Delta Oil) and bin
Mahfouz (as Nimir Oil) participated in the western oil consortium as
partners with the American firm Unocal. In October 2001, the U. S.
Treasury Department named among charities allegedly providing funds
to al Qaeda the Saudi charity Muwafaq (Blessed Relief), to which the
al-Alamoudis and bin Mahfouz families were named as major
contributors.[32] One cannot discern whether religion or oil was
their primary charitable motive.
It is unclear whether MEGA Oil was a front for the U.S. Government or
for U.S. oil companies and their Saudi allies. U.S. oil companies
have been accused of spending millions of dollars in Azerbaijan, not
just to bribe the government but also to install it. According to a
Turkish intelligence source who was an alleged eyewitness, major oil
companies, including Exxon and Mobil, were "behind the coup d'itat"
which in 1993 replaced the elected President, Abulfaz Elchibey, with
his successor, Heydar Aliyev. The source claimed to have been at
meetings in Baku with "senior members of BP, Exxon, Amoco, Mobil and
the Turkish Petroleum Company. The topic was always oil rights and,
on the insistence of the Azeris, supply and arms to Azerbaijan."
Turkish secret service documents allege middlemen paid off key
officials of the democratically elected government of the oil-rich
nation just before its president was overthrown.[33]
The true facts and backers of the Aliyev coup may never be fully
disclosed. But unquestionably, before the coup, the efforts of
Richard Secord, Heinie Aderholt, Ed Dearborn and Hekmatyar's
mujahedin helped contest Russian influence and prepare for Baku's
shift away to the west.[34] Three years later, in August 1996,
Amoco's president met with Clinton and arranged for Aliyev to be
invited to Washington.[35] In 1997 Clinton said that
In a world of growing energy demand.our nation cannot afford to rely
on a single region for our energy supplies. By working closely with
Azerbaijan to tap the Caspian's resources, we not only help
Azerbaijan to prosper, we also help diversify our energy supply and
strengthen our energy's security.[36]