Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr’s recent decision to withdraw his representatives from the Iraqi government signals a serious landmark on the road to finding a sustainable social and national future for Iraq.

This is nothing to do with any dissension within the Shia alliance or even the disagreement between al-Sadr and the Iraqi prime minister, the leader of the Shia alliance, on the issue of the timing of the withdrawal of U.S. forces as these are the stuff of which party politics agonizes through from time to time. There is something fundamental and deeper.

The Sharm el-Sheikh conference in Egypt was an opposite reaction to the same underlying circumstances, which may bring pressures of a different kind on the Iraq government from regional interests rather than national ones. Meanwhile, the U.S. will continue to play the field of players to see its policy is sustained, regardless of who takes part in the game. For those in Iraq who desire to see life get back to ‘normal’, if we can use that term, the prospects for this seem to be becoming much more unlikely.

The world has witnessed many conferences, some of which provided photo opportunities on the White House lawn, but life at ground level in the problem areas has deteriorated almost to ‘gulag’ status. The icon walls and checkpoints are now appearing in Iraq. The Sharm el-Sheikh conference was about ‘peace and stabilization’, so from history we can expect to see a phoney implementation of this if not the reverse increased. Although we still read articles about the U.S. military failure in Iraq, it has never been a war of the military kind that was the main thrust. The U.S. policy, which is a Zionist policy, is about destabilization and has been highly successful, so successful that it compelled the recent conference. Pundits may claim that this was a card played by the U.S. desperate for a means to withdraw from Iraq and save face at home and abroad. It has potential for a whole lot more and shows the U.S. strength not weakness.

The pretext conditioning of what may develop here is to be seen in a number of features of the recent past. First, the number of leaders within the region who have ceased by various means from holding powerful and influential roles, within the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, Israel, and Lebanon.

Then there was the failed Israeli war on Lebanon, apparently thanks to Israeli leaders’ incompetence. World public opinion may very well come to view the Bush White House and the Pentagon as equally inept in due course. Following the failure of Israel’s summer offensive and the subsequent national political uncertainty in Israel, the possibility of disorder within the Arab royal states arose, aspects of which are threatening political order in Pakistan. Then came the ‘surge’, which publicly highlighted the threat of total military ‘failure’ for the U.S. in Iraq. This was closely followed by ‘terrorist’ activity inside the exclusive Green Zone, and even the parliamentarians’ restaurant facilities.

One of the strategies of the U.S. policy has been the formation of a ‘coalition of the willing’ that helped carry the U.S. policy and the initial invasion of Iraq. The Sharm el-Sheikh conference had exactly the same aim, to form a new coalition of the willing, however formal or informal, to carry the U.S. policy into the future. The created scenario of the weakness of the U.S. position, increasingly looking unsustainable due to the weakening dollar, and the parallel weakness of Israel, and the concerns of widespread destabilization across a number of states will open a possibility for the corruptible moderates, the type upon which American phoney democracy would be built, to gain the high ground in the region, overshadowing the radicals on the one hand and those who won’t compromise their traditional way of life and culture.

There are no guarantees the U.S. would entirely leave anyway, given the bases and enormous ‘embassy’ it has constructed. Whatever plans start to emerge, the U.S. forces will be required to remain on the simple and fallacious premise of the likelihood of the situation becoming worse if they leave. However the ‘insurgency’, which includes fifth-column ‘terrorists’, will continue the deterioration caused by U.S. troops and their large proxy private military force remaining, and further destabilization, which is the basis of U.S. policy for permanent change in the region socially and politically, will be more effective. It remains to be seen if it will be with the help of a new ‘coalition of the willing’.

To appreciate the ‘revolution’ that is taking place, one needs to go back to the forerunner, the Third Reich, which set out to construct a (New Order) new sociopolitical culture built on the destruction of the established order and religion. In the U.S. itself, the Democratic majority in Congress have passed a new bill adding to hate crimes that will potentially make criminals of Christians and others who continue to adhere to fundamental moral beliefs in regard to homosexuality based on the Books of Moses and the New Testament. In Israel, a freelance journalist claims certain rabbis are being targeted for elimination.

An interesting sideline is the speculation regarding Britain’s Prince Harry and his military duties in southern Iraq. The prediction in 1933 by internationalist and author H.G. Wells of a third world war arising from the misfortune of a British royal in Basra has been brought to pubic attention.

But whatever the outcome, the acts of commission by Kuwaiti royals in regard to the border problems with the Saddam Hussein regime and the subsequent acts of omission by the Arab League, to whom Saddam appealed, are the origins of the ongoing destruction of the Iraqi people and the Middle East as we have known it. In one sense, there is already an international war on the ‘old order’ and monotheism from the military war that started in the region of Basra, rather than Jerusalem. The U.S. is used in a dual role, both financially and militarily. The implication of a collapse of either compels others to take actions to prevent this. Afghanistan is a clear example, and thus in part adopting the policy, making it international, which betrays the illusion that the U.S. itself is the origin of the policy. Biblically speaking, some have described the world of today as nations in the ‘valley of decision’. If we see a new ‘coalition of the willing’ emerge, then we should see new pressure on Middle Eastern countries and Shia groups to join those nations who, as described in the Book of Revelations, “…have drunk the wine of the passion of her (modern empire of ‘Babylon’) immorality, and the kings of the earth have committed acts of immorality with her, and the merchants of the earth have become rich by the wealth of her sensuality.”