Two Chinese teachers based in Pakistan’s southwest province of Baluchistan were reportedly abducted and murdered by militants from the self-proclaimed “Islamic State” (ISIS).
CNN, in an article titled, “‘Grave concern’ over Chinese teachers reportedly killed by ISIS in Pakistan,” would attempt to portray the act of terrorism as a random strike aimed at China’s expanding economic activity abroad.
In reality, the terror attack was very precise in terms of location and purpose, and fits into a larger pattern of violence and political instability that has plagued Pakistan’s Baluchistan province and China’s ambitions there for years.
US Using Proxies to Disrupt China-Pakistan Economic Corridor
Baluchistan, and more specifically, the port city of Gwadar, serve as the central nexus of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). It is a complex and expanding system of rail, roads, ports, and other infrastructure projects built jointly with the Pakistani government to facilitate regional economic growth – and an integral component of the much larger One Belt, One Road initiative.
Disrupting China’s economic lifelines to the rest of the world is an open objective of US policymakers. A paper published in 2006 by the Strategic Studies Institute titled, “String of Pearls: Meeting the Challenge of China’s Rising Power across the Asian Littoral.” identified Gwadar by name as one of several components of China’s “String of Pearls.”The report states explicitly in regards to a possible “hard approach” toward Beijing that:
There are no guarantees that China will respond favorably to any U.S. strategy, and prudence may suggest to “prepare for the worst” and that it is “better to be safe than sorry.” Is it perhaps better to take a hard line towards China and contain it while it is still relatively weak? Is now the time to keep China down before she can make a bid for regional hegemony? Foreign policy realists, citing history and political theory, argue that inevitably China will challenge American primacy and that it is a question of “when” and not “if” the U.S.-China relationship will become adversarial or worse.
What better way to contain China’s regional ambitions than to mire economic development in places like Baluchistan with armed militancy, or obstruct it altogether with a US-backed independence movement in the province?
US policymakers have noted just that. In a 2012 paper published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace titled, “Pakistan: The Resurgence of Baluch Nationalism” (PDF), it would be stated unequivocally that (emphasis added):
If Baluchistan were to become independent, would Pakistan be able to withstand another dismemberment—thirty-four years have passed since the secession of Bangladesh—and what effect would that have on regional stability? Pakistan would lose a major part of its natural resources and would become more dependent on the Middle East for its energy supplies. Although Baluchistan’s resources are currently underexploited and benefit only the non-Baluch provinces, especially Punjab, these resources could undoubtedly contribute to the development of an independent Baluchistan.
Baluchistan’s independence would also dash Islamabad’s hopes for the Gwadar port and other related projects. Any chance that Pakistan would become more attractive to the rest of the world would be lost.
Not only would it be Pakistan’s loss regarding the Gwadar port, it would be China’s loss as well.
And while the paper attempts to claim the US stands nothing to gain from Baluchistan’s independence, the US State Department has spent years and an untold sum of money and resources supporting just such an independence movement. Additionally, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace itself hosted an event by the “Baloch Society of North America,” advocating US intervention in the province toward achieving “independence.”
The US State Department’s National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and convicted financial criminal George Soros’ Open Society via “Global Voices” funds a long list of organizations in Pakistan’s Baluchistan province advocating everything from autonomy to outright independence. This includes the Association for Integrated Development Balochistan (AID Balochistan), The Balochistan Point, and the Balochistan Institute for Development.The US NED-funded Institute for Development Studies & Practices’s (IDSP) president regularly uses social media like Twitter to make and support statements calling for Baluchistan’s independence and depicting the province as a “colony” of Pakistan. So do virtually all other members of the above mentioned organizations funded by the US government.
The long list of US-funded Baluchistan-based organizations regularly link to op-eds and propaganda depicting violence in the province as one-sided and perpetuated by Pakistani forces alone – echoing the same sort of intentionally skewed public relations campaigns supporters of US-backed violence in Syria have undertaken since 2011.
And just like in Syria, the violence being spun, excused, or glossed over directly meshes with US interests – in this case – impeding Chinese-Pakistani cooperation in Baluchistan and beyond.
Violence in Baluchistan Benefits US Proxy War with Iran Also
That the Islamic State has claimed responsibility for this latest attack, following in the wake of a larger attack on Tehran, Iran, is particularly significant. It was US policymakers who, in a 2009 Brookings Institution policy paper titled, “Which Path to Persia? Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran,” would mention Baluchistan and Baluchi separatists by name as possible conduits, safe havens, and proxies for conducting armed conflict against Iran.
Creating violence in Baluchistan, Pakistan thus serves to not only mire Chinese ambitions across Asia, it assists Washington’s long-standing objective to encircle Iran with hostile state and non-state actors ahead of eventual regime change operations against Tehran.
Previously, the United States has attempted to use a variety of local groups to foment political instability and violence. Now it appears that all of its geopolitical mischief is being lumped under the catch-all, the “Islamic State.” In reality, the militants who kidnapped and murdered the two Chinese teachers in Baluchistan, Pakistan, were likely local militants the US has been backing for years, and whose role in destabilizing Pakistan is increasingly understood by local and global audiences.
Assigning blame to the Islamic State appears to be a means of disassociating America from the violence it is intentionally fueling across the region.
The Islamic State “coincidentally” appearing in virtually every geopolitical theater on Earth US interests are impeded or challenged by local and regional interests helps explain why not only the Islamic State exists in the first place, but explains how it has managed to survive and continue to thrive despite multinational efforts by nations like Russia, Syria, and Iran to defeat it.
Through state sponsorship, the Islamic State’s source of logistical, political, and military power ultimately lies in Washington, London, Brussels, Ankara, Riyadh, and Doha – where Russian-Syrian-Iranian military and political power cannot reach.
For those wondering where the Islamic State will strike next, one needs only to look at a world map and identify where else US interests are being impeded by an increasingly multipolar world unwilling to yield to Wall Street and Washington’s corporate-financier monopolies. As illustrated in this recent and abhorrent attack in Baluchistan, Pakistan, important points along China’s One Belt, One Road project would be important places to look out for.
By targeting teachers, such terrorism seeks to incite fear across the very workers who are part of implementing this ambitious regional economic plan. It is a motive that resides far above the crude ideological motivations generally assigned to the Islamic State, and instead resembles well thought-out – if not sinister – geostrategic planning.
Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”, where this article first appeared.
It’s not a coincidence that the US made Isis, Boko Haram or the other proxy armies as the Ukraine Nazi battalions are causing murderous problems in the world today. It is an evil plan and Russia, China and dozens of other countries know it. When will the people in the US – wake up ?
The Silk Road project is a United Nations UNCTAD project for regionalism – not exclusively a China national economic pursuit. That means it’s a globalist project.
China has used SITE released videos to rationalize a bigger role in the global war on terror against ISIS, going after Chinese Uighurs allegedly joining ISIS. SITE is the organization that released fake beheading videos. It may be ISIS is making an “appearance” in the Silk Road project to bolster the use of privatized security forces on the Silk Road – which is exactly the reason Erik Prince has been in China training armies of private corporate mercenaries. Many of these mercenaries are already in Africa in bases guarding Chinese business interests.
I wouldn’t put anything past the CIA and entire Global EYES intelligence network. The entire global war on terror is contrived starting with Al-CIA-duh, onto 9/11, Boston, Paris, London, SITE productions, etc. The globalists will do whatever they have to to shove global fascism down our throats.
U should really be analyzing what the NED/CIA-sponsored Uygh*r separatist movement is about!
1. at –
Washington is Playing a Deeper Game with China
By F. William Engdahl
Global Research, July 11, 2009; and at –
2. CIA’s Hidden Hand in ‘Democracy’ Groups
Robert Parry
January 8, 2015
Thanks. I’m fairly well read regarding the hidden hand in ‘revolutions’.
I admire Engdahl’s stellar research on GMOs and the relationship of oil and geopolitics / war, in addition to other stuff he’s worked on. However, imho, as a socialist (statist) he tends to have blind spots, as do other great “left-wing” researchers such as Chussodovsky and Tarpley. This is why he didn’t already recognize China is clearly a stem to stern NWO construct and was China was already deep into GMO research, including CRISPR, before China announced it was purchasing Syngenta and reversing its overall stance on GMOs. Last year Engdahl wrote on his blog when he got the news about China he was shocked and very upset. How is it he didn’t know China is Brzezinski’s NWO Technocracy? There are more examples.
What does Engdahl say about UN Agenda 2030, social credit scores, the surveillance society, and the rise of Maoism and Stalinism? I haven’t been following him closely, but I imagine he hasn’t even caught up to Max Igan yet as to understanding the global gulag quietly unfolding.
Thanks again. I’ll take a look at the references in case I missed some info.
Who are the ever predatory and carnivorous ZNWO mass murderer/rapist/robber invaders, the failed and evil beasts, who can only pathetically survive by enslaving the non-Wezztern world, globally, especially our poor Indigenous masses?!
NOT China – for sure!
The ‘monsters’ are very old bloodlines. Lots of researchers spend countless hours trying to figure out the history and pecking order. I only look at it as part of the larger pattern, and that sometimes includes modern day Eastern elites. I totally agree, this heIIish NWO incarnation did not start with China. However, the beast recruited Mao and other Chinese elites into this monstrosity of a global control grid – which is leading the way to large scale Technocratic dictatorships. I don’t fault the Chinese people EVER. I have a very close friend who is Chinese and know what’s going on from his testimony and from others. This NWO system is taking over China, UN Agendas 21 and 2030 and global technocracy, et cetera. Silk Road is United Nations UNCTAD. Erik Prince is deep into this too working directly with China. The UN = Rockefellers & Rothschilds.
I like your thinking. Don’t forget the process the US has undertaken to establish its own independence movements along China’s trade routes. It’s more than creating terrorists and solutions to react to them. The US is trying to overwrite the entire process of local and joint-Chinese relations across Eurasia.
There is real competition between Wall Street/Washington and interests across Eurasia including in Beijing. There is really no reason why people with money and power in China would just bow down and acquiesce to foreign interests or vice versa.
China probably looks like an “NWO technocracy” because human progress and technology at this point in time makes such a technocracy the optimal outcome of basic human greed in terms of wealth and power. Call it a geopolitical form of convergent evolution.
That means even if you pushed a button and erased every member of the “NWO” in a week, a whole crop of new weeds almost indistinguishable from them would sprout because the current socioeconomic environment favors those traits.
They will continue to sprout until we make the very ground they sink their roots in inhospitable to these traits.
I like your warning about people trusting China (or even Russia). Human greed means that anyone in America’s position is likely to follow directly in its footsteps. A “Chinese” version of what the US is doing, is no more enlightened or desirable.
If you do the research on Brzezinski (Technotronic Era, same as technocracy) and how the Trilateral Commission worked to create China as a NWO Technocracy, that historical aspect might change your mind. The best researcher on this is Patrick Wood who co-wrote the seminal book Trilaterals Over Washington with the late great Antony Sutton. All of the information on China as Brzezinski’s ‘baby’ is solid and sourced.
Ever wonder why, if US elites were trying to maintain US hegemony, they would transfer the US manufacturing sector to China? Not to mention big technology transfers to both Russia and China, in the past and in the present.
What about Obama’s transfer of control over the internet last October to the UN via ICANN with China poised to take on much or most of the management of the net worth trillions in data collection alone. Never mind the “hacking” and “national security” aspects of handing off the internet. That does not compute into the Kabuki narrative.
I’m a long time student of evolution and professionally educated as a medical scientist. I really dig the relevance of evolutionary drivers. I know exactly what you are talking about regarding convergent evolution and think that’s a fascinating point you are making but, imo, it does not apply in this case (I mean the specific framework of the NWO Technocracy). You are spot on about conditions bringing out similar behavior, i.e. a collection of cunning psychopaths working together. That would be the historically recognized pattern by political science academics termed the Iron Law of Politics.
I wish there was more space and time to flesh this out. Perhaps consider checking out the news feeds from Patrick Woods website (technocracy.news) and interviews. My favorite interview was done with Richard Grove of Tragedy and Hope. It’s on YouTube.
Something to keep in mind is the rapid global economic interdependence that is being created and can be easily followed. It does NOT match the rhetoric. Also, the Rockefeller Panel Reports of 1956 explicitly stated the US hegemon will be dismantled for regionalism for world government, meant to appear multipolar though it is the same elites at the top of the pyramid cap that aim to more tightly control the new paradigm.
Thanks for sharing your keen insight. Love it, good stuff.
…. Insightfully stellar,discerning & an illuminatingly perspicacious view on your part…(imho)… that indeed sharpens the focus & clarifies our collective fishbowls …muddied as ever by the cacophonous & obfuscatory miasma of intentionally contrived ‘misdirection’ propounded daily by a diabolically connived liturgy of outright fallacious psy-op propaganda spewed by the 666 corporation MSM juggernaut.
…Thankfully there are enlightened individuals such as yourself that can see clearly …despite the countervailing obstacles of their Grand Illusion Matrix of orchestrated obscurantism… that’s consistently thrown up in front of us all every waking day…cheers
Very kind and generous compliments. Thank you, Eddysaxx. 🙂
ISIS is a proxy group for CIA & Mossad.
The IS/ISIS/ISIL are all created by MOSSAD/CIA, as revealed by Snowden, for goodness sake! As usual, a typical ZioNa*i MO to confuse readers with anti-Saudi/anti-Turkish propaganda!
This CIA/MOSSAD-created IS chaos in both Balochistan and Xinjiang, through their two-faced allies that include that genocidal anti-Islam killer, Mo*i’s Indi*n regime in Balochistan, and the CIA/MOSSAD-Gulen sponsored Uygh*r separatist movements especially based in the US/Europe – plan to break up Pakistan and China, whilst conquering the Arabian Sea as part of theTRILLIONS of deep sea oil/gas-rich Indian Ocean!
Also, to sabotage China’s great dream of its great and most visionary new Silk Road Economic Belt linking Gwadar Port in Balochistan in Pakistan to Xinjiang in China; and the cargo train railway linking China to five Central Asian countries, that include passing Xinjiang!
Besides DISARMING Muslim Pakistan’s NUCLEAR weapon of course by these
NA*O/IS-ra*l/Indi*n ZioNazis (thus is why they want to conquer Balochistan too,
– besides Xinjiang of course)! See –
1. at –
China has to keep the peace in Pakistan’s Gwadar Port
Syed Fazl-e-Haider
National. AE
June24, 2013
2. at –
Cargo train linking Central Asia, east China begin soperation
Chinadaily.com
Updated: 2014-01-22
3. at –
Washington is Playing a Deeper Game with China
By F. William Engdahl
Global Research, July 11, 2009.
Besides DISARMING Musl*m Pakistan’s NUCLEAR weapon of course by these
NA*O/IS-ra*l/Indi*n ZioNazis (thus is why they want to conquer Balochistan too,
– besides Xinjiang of course)! See –
1. at –
China has to keep the peace in Pakistan’s Gwadar Port
Syed Fazl-e-Haider
National. AE
June 24, 2013
2. at –
Cargo train linking Central Asia, east China begins operation
China Daily
Updated: 2014-01-22
3. at –
Washington is Playing a Deeper Game with China
By F. William Engdahl
Global Research, July 11, 2009.