Zalmay Khalilzad
Envoy for Islamic Terror

JARED ISRAEL / Emperor's Clothes Newsletter 16apr03

Who is this U.S. Official in Charge of Afghanistan and the Iraqi Opposition?

[ www.tenc.net ]

The following text is more relevant today (April 16th) than when it was first written, six weeks ago. It includes a political biography of Zalmay Khalilzad, with useful source materials.

Two years ago, Khalilzad was put in charge of the Persian Gulf, Southwest Asia "and Other Regional Issues" for the National Security Council.

If learning about any one person can provide a clue as to what the U.S.- led Empire is trying to accomplish, from Iraq to Afghanistan, it is Zalmay Khalilzad. Hence the importance of the information that follows.

- Jared Israel Editor, Emperor's Clothes 16 April 2003

Who is Zalmay Khalilzad and why is he the man on the ground in Iraq?

George Bush has named the disease: Islamic fundamentalist terrorism.

But rest easy. He has also named the cure: Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad.

US Special envoy to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad
gestures during a press conference at the US Embassy
in Kabul on Sunday. Khalilzad said warlordism represented
the main threat to peace and stability in Afghanistan and
urged the rapid formation of a national Afghan army and
police force to cope with instability.— Reuters 24feb02

Dr. Khalilzad? Would that be the same Zalmay Khalilzad who oversaw the mobilization, leadership, funding and coordination of, and the media support for, the Islamic fundamentalist terrorists who devastated Afghanistan and Bosnia?

That's the man.

Dr. Khalilzad is in charge of a large part of Asia and the Middle East for the National Security Council. He has *two* field positions: special U.S. envoy to Afghanistan *and* special U.S. envoy to the Iraqi opposition. [1]

Why those two? Afghanistan and Iraq aren't even in the same region. They are separated by 1424 miles, Baghdad to Kabul. [2]

Those miles have a name. It's Iran. Could that be a clue?

Describing Zalmay Khalilzad as an 'envoy' charmingly understates his power. For example, he is the one who chose Hamid Karzai to head the current Afghan government, after which Khalilzad's choice was 'democratically approved' by the members of the Afghan elite, whom he had assembled. [3]

To help us think about what Khalilzad could be doing in Afghanistan and Iraq, let us examine his curriculum vitae, or résumé.

To that end, further down I have assembled significant excerpts from news reports and documents I've collected about Khalilzad, with some comments.

Misinformation on Khalilzad

You may have heard Khalilzad described, with some scorn, as a 'Unocal consultant.'

This label derives from the latest war in Afghanistan. After the U.S. launched that war, some writers put forward that the U.S. goal was to force Afghanistan to accept a gas pipeline, supposedly desired by Unocal, a big U.S. oil company. We have refuted those writers [4] and shown that their research techniques and reasoning are sloppy to the point of parody. [5C]

Those putting forward the 'it's-for-oil' argument made much of Zalmay Khalilzad's brief stint working with a company that did some consulting for Unocal. Based on that minor gig, hundreds of Websites and some mainstream journalists still refer to Khalilzad as a 'Unocal consultant.'

Thus we are now told:

1) Khalilzad is the envoy to the Iraqi opposition;

2) Khalilzad is a Unocal consultant;

3) Therefore, it's 'all about oil!' [5]

Never mind that Khalilzad is a top figure in the US-led Western Empire - hardly an 'oil consultant.'

Never mind that Unocal *pulled out* of Afghanistan in 1998 (i.e., during the Clinton years) because the war between the Taliban and the Northern Alliance showed no signs of ending and you can't build a pipeline during a war.

Never mind that when Unocal pulled out the U.S. did *not* immediately invade Afghanistan to remove the Taliban. (Indeed there is strong evidence that, during the Clinton years, the U.S. covertly helped the Taliban fight their Northern Alliance enemies. [7] )

Never mind that after the U.S. finally did attack Afghanistan, in 2001, that is, three years later, Unocal did not return to that country. And now, in the middle of 2003, they still have not returned.

Never mind that Unocal hasn't made a dime out of Afghanistan before or after the latest war.

Never mind that today Zalmay Khalilzad, the 'Unocal consultant', is in charge and yet there are exactly zero plans by any Western oil company to build a pipeline through Afghanistan.

Calling Khalilzad an 'oil industry consultant' is like calling U.S. President Harry S. Truman a 'hat store owner' (which he was). Then, when Truman's government drops the A-bomb on Hiroshima, everyone can say, 'See? It's all about hats!'

And here's the central point: the 'oil consultant' label trivializes the harm Khalilzad has done.

When the Turkish media speaks of Khalilzad, they refer to him as President Bush's adviser on Iraq. Given the relative intellectual stature of these two men, it is unlikely that Khalilzad is merely Bush's 'adviser'. As of May 2001 his official job assignment with the National Security Council was, "Special Assistant" for the "Gulf, Southwest Asia and Other Regional Issues." That's quite a sweep. He appears to have had the decisive role in setting up the present government of Afghanistan. He is now the power broker on the ground, wheeling and dealing with the Iraqi opposition, Iran and Turkey.

As the following excerpts suggest, Zalmay Khalilzad's experience is highly specialized. He is perhaps *the* leading practical planner and on-the-scene operative for carrying out the Brzezinski strategy. That strategy involves using Islamic fundamentalist terrorists to advance the US-led Empire. The fundamentalists do this by attacking secular movements and societies and by taking political and organizational leadership of opposition movements so that they can be used as tools of the Empire.

Khalilzad helped develop the notion of using the media to run public relations for terrorists - demonizing those who resist the terrorists as human rights abusers.

All this is documented below.

It is my hypothesis that Khalilzad's role, at this time, is to coordinate the creation of a continuous line of Islamic fundamentalist states, including Saudi Arabia and Iraq, reaching Afghanistan and beyond. These states might be US puppets (Afghanistan) or they might *officially* have strong differences with the US government (Iran) but they must all be integrated, at least on the operational level, with the US-led Empire. In the past, Iran and the US have had the most hostile relations *in public* while cooperating extensively on a covert level. This is discussed in the article, "U.S. & Iran: Enemies in Public, but Secret Allies in Terror," at http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/deja.htm

It may be necessary for Islamic fundamentalists in countries like Iran not only to denounce the U.S., but also to organize demonstrations and even violent attacks against the current US-led invasion. That sort of thing easily deceives people who are used to thinking that the US *government* is the same as the US-led *Empire*. It is not. It is merely a *part* of the Empire.

As the documents below make clear, Khalilzad has a unique mixture of experience in both planning *and* actual work with terrorists, on the ground. There may be nobody better placed than he to coordinate joint efforts between various covert and semi-covert forces of the Empire, on the one hand, and Islamic fundamentalists who must seem to oppose the US-led Empire in order to maintain their political base, on the other.

If the US-led Empire can create an Islamist bloc from Saudi Arabia going east, eventually incorporating all of Central Asia, it would vastly increase the influence of fundamentalists among Muslims all over Asia and the Caucasus. The biggest potential opponents of the US-led Empire are in this area - the multiethnic states of India, China and Russia. Since 1984, Zalmay Khalilzad has specialized in mobilizing Islamic fundamentalism against opponents of the US (the Soviet Union) and destroying multiethnic states (Yugoslavia-Bosnia). http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/deja.htm

I found the following description of Dr. Khalilzad in the Washington Post:

"Colleagues call the suave and savvy 50-year-old, who has worked at both the State and Defense departments, charming, even playful. He's a sharp dresser..." [5B]

Yes, so is the devil.

The facts about Khalilzad are below.

[This text is continued in Part 2 at http://emperors-clothes.com/archive/khalilzad-facts.htm#part2 Part 2 will be sent out by email shortly.]

* Appeal from the Editors *

Emperor's Clothes publishes information and analysis which in aggregate cannot be found elsewhere. A subscription to any of the major newspapers - let us say, the N. Y. Times - could cost $500 (US) a year or more. What is Emperor's Clothes worth to you?

Right now, we spend too much energy trying to cover costs with inadequate funds. This of course decreases our productivity. If you find that our work is valuable, and you are in a position to help, please make a donation. You, our readers, are our only source of funds.

Thank you!

-- Jared Israel, Francisco Gil-White, Petar Makara and Nico Varkevisser Editors, Emperor's Clothes

Footnotes & Further Reading

[1] See, official U.S. government announcement, "White House Report: Bush on Iraq; Foreign Policy Appointments. Zalmay Khalilzad, Elliot Abrahms named to new positions," at http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/text/1203wthsrpt.htm Scroll half way down the page to subhead, "Bush, Rice Announce Foreign Policy Appointments."

[2] See map at http://www.askasia.org/image/maps/asia.htm

[3] Saying that U.S. envoy Khalilzad picked Hamid Karzai to be President of Afghanistan is not hyperbole. It is well known that Karzai was elected at an Afghan grand assembly, a loya jirga, held in Germany two years ago. Here's how the LA Times described the process of choosing Karzai:

"Although challenged by two other candidates, his victory was preordained by the controversial influence of U.S. and other foreign advisors, which could taint the credibility of his tenure. Mohammad Zaher Shah, the nation's former king, withdrew from the political stage on the advice of President Bush's envoy [Zalmay Khalilzad]. Former President Burhanuddin Rabbani's departure from the race is believed to have been arranged in return for a prestigious title to be bestowed later. Still, Karzai's selection--he received 1,295 of the 1,575 votes cast--clearly reflected majority sentiment among those gathered for the weeklong convocation. Even his rivals joined in the spirit of celebration over what they see as the beginning of a new age in their homeland." -- Los Angeles Times June 14, 2002 Friday Home Edition Section: Part A Main News; Part 1; Page 1; Foreign Desk Headline: The World; Karzai Chosen As Leader, Vows To Rebuild Nation;

Note that the first part of the quote, where the Times states that the envoy (that's Khalilzad) got two candidates to withdraw, renders humorous the second part, about how the result reflected everybody's wishes. In today's Afghanistan, the elite, convened by Khalilzad, are free to democratically decide whatever Khalilzad proposes, followed by merriment.

[4] The notion that Khalilzad is a flunky of the oil industry is eviscerated in "Zbigniew And Zalmay's Excellent Afghan Pro-Terrorist Propaganda Adventure," at http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/zbi-zal.htm

For more on the myth that U.S. actions in Central Asia are aimed at making money for the oil industry, see 'The Empire Isn't in Afghanistan for the Oil!' by Jared Israel at http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/oil-1.htm

[5] Robert Fisk, apparently trying to start the year by cornering the award for "Least Original Thought with Most Factual Errors of 2003," wrote:

"Zalmay Khalilzad, the former Unocal Corporation oil industry consultant who became US special envoy to Afghanistan - where Unocal tried to cut a deal with the Taliban for a gas pipeline across Afghan territory - and who now, miracle of miracles, has been appointed a special Bush official for - you guessed it - Iraq." --The Independent (London) January 18, 2003, Saturday Section: Comment; Pg. 18 Headline: This Looming War Isn't About Chemical Warheads Or Human Rights: It's About Oil;

All Fisk leaves out is that:

* A) Khalilzad was never a "Unocal Corporation oil industry consultant." He was apparently briefly associated with Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA) an energy-and-geopolitics outfit whose luminaries move in and out of government including national security. CERA did some work with Unocal six years ago, and Khalilzad was involved. Defining Khalilzad based on this minor association with Unocal is simply ludicrous;

* B) The Taliban never rejected building a pipeline. Why on earth would they? They needed money, and a pipeline is a cash cow, producing vast fees simply for letting oil or gas pass through one's country. Every Central Asian country wants a pipeline.

So it was the Taliban who pushed for a gas pipeline while powerful figures in the US-led Empire, like Zalmay Khalilzad, made such a pipeline contingent on the creation of a stable government in Afghanistan. When it was clear that the Taliban could not achieve even a modicum of stability, it was Unocal - not the Taliban - that rejected the deal. They pulled out in 1998, that is, two years before Bush came to Washington. For more on this go to http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/oil-1.htm#p

* C) Khalilzad now runs Afghanistan and still no pipeline. Not even any potential plans for a pipeline. This does not bother those who tell us that, "it's-all-about-oil." Their beliefs survive the inconvenience of contradicting the evidence.

* D) Khalilzad has been a big player in the Bush government since before Bush got elected. In my estimate he is *much* higher on the real ladder of power than George, Jr. It is commonplace for the biggest players to run things through jobs without big titles. A good example in recent U.S. history is Averill Harriman, for more on whom see 'Nazis in the Attic,' at www.emperors-clothes.com/articles/randy/swas5.htm

[5A] See, 'What's the Target of the U.S. Move into Central Asia?' at http://emperors-clothes.com/news/sco.htm

[5B] The Washington Post November 23, 2001, Friday, Final Edition Section: A Section; Pg. A41 Length: 1260 Words Headline: Afghan Roots Keep Adviser Firmly In The Inner Circle; Consultant's Policy Influence Goes Back To The Reagan Era Byline: Joe Stephens And David B. Ottaway, Washington Post Staff Writers

[5C] A book has been written and widely distributed arguing that the Afghan war is about oil. The authors' standards of argument and research are so bad it is breathtaking. We discuss their arguments and methods a few articles, including:

* 'A Reader Asks: 'What About Bush's Carpet-Of-Bombs Threat?"' at http://emperors-clothes.com/letters/carpet.htm

* 'Waiting For Gold...Is Brisard And Dasquié's Book Theater Of The Absurd? Or Is It Worse?' at http://emperors-clothes.com/letters/gold.htm

[7] We have smoking-gun evidence that the U.S. in fact militarily supported the Taliban against the Northern Alliance in the late 1990s. This changed, apparently because it became clear that the Taliban were incapable of, and/or unwilling to unite *all* the Islamic fundamentalist forces in Afghanistan; so the U.S.-led Empire took Afghanistan into receivership and set up a unified Islamist government.

Regarding covert US support for the Taliban, check out the stunning debate between Cong. Rohrabacher and the State Department in 'Congressman: U.S. Set Up Anti-Taliban to be Slaughtered,' at http://emperors-clothes.com/misc/rohr.htm