Nationalism describes the mechanism by which a people derive and enact their collective psychological and geographical identity. In its most common form nationalism may form around ideas of national myth, heritage, birth right, ethnicity, colonialism or assimilation. While nationalism may be seen as being a loose and informal narrative which forms over extended periods of time, the term is better understood as having trivial and non-trivial period specific components. In its trivial form, nationalism may be represented as being a common series of 'public values' centred around the intermixing of myth with heritage; understood informally by the populace through collective folklore, passed down through the generations by word of mouth or popular sing-song. Nationalism is, therefore, a romanticised inter-public discourse in which the popular collective identity is articulated across the generational divide by popular folklore.

The arrhythmia of nationalism.

The arrhythmia of nationalism.

In this image of The United States Republican party presidential candidates taking part in the 2012 presidential debate held in Las Vegas, the full range of U.S nationalist polity can be seen on display as the United States national anthem is played. Holding their right hands over their hearts, traditionally done to symbolise the raised heartbeat associated with nationalist pride, the candidates stand to attention in a display of strident national pride.

At first glance, this rank appears politically benign, but a more detailed analysis reveals Republican nationalist polity in tactical form; each of the candidates represents a key tactical nationalist faction within the overall nationalist polity, the most interesting of which is Ron Paul (second from left). Ron Paul is a long-time Republican presidential candidate responsible for conversion of liberal and centrist voters to the Republican cause.

From left to right they are: Rick Santoram (law), Ron Paul (liberalism), Herman Cain (business/industry/ethnic), Mitt Romney (business/industry/religion), Rick Perry (military), Newt Gingritch (core nationalist Republicanism) and Michele Bachman (gender). Each of these candidates is chosen by the Republican Party to represent their respective core polity from which to garner public engagement. The final presidential candidate chosen by the Republican Party will be the candidate that garner's the widest spread pattern of political engagement with the general populace as a whole. From here, a candidate will be chosen and a presidential 'campaign' will be formed to isolate and exploit that polity and steer it toward prompting electoral action by the populace. Using this approach, both the Republican and Democratic parties of the United States Empire are able to manufacture political dominance over the populace by honing political and media debate toward the polity of their chosen candidates, isolating and disrupting independent challengers and discharging any polity which does not fit within the framework of their collective sovereign authority.

By these mechanisms, the bi-polarity of the U.S political arena is able to fabricate a dual domestic polity of internal (Democrat) and external (Republican) nationalism as the need arises.

Picture: Ethan Miller/Getty Images North America

The role and polity of tactical nationalism has become increasingly visible within the United States as its previous foreign policy framework of direct military intervention into foreign states has waned1. Since 2009, elements within the United States Empire and its multilateral partner states and dependencies have searched for a range of opportunities2

While the so-called "War on Terror" polemic has obviously lapsed and become inoperable, the overall tendency toward polity of intervention into foreign states has not diminished. As the end of 2012 approaches and 2013 begins, the United States Empire and its primary dependency the United Kingdom, are cautiously but actively engaged with a policy of intervention into the sovereign state of Syria. At present, the country is in the midst of appalling human rights abuses5 committed by ultra-nationalists6 intent on deposing the socialist government of Bashar al-Assad, a key foreign policy initiative7 of elements of the United States and United Kingdom. Since 2011, both the United States and United Kingdom have allowed nationalist elements within their ranks to articulate subversive polity directed toward Syria.

A civil conflict which might otherwise have been abbreviated in a timely manner, has been elongated beyond its life by nationalist elements within the U.S multilateral cartel8 hell-bent on toppling yet another Muslim state. At present, both the United States and British governments have acceded to the policy initiatives of British and U.S nationalists at the expense of the ordinary citizenry of Syria9.

The driving motivator of this current foreign policy failure, therefore, is tactical nationalism.

In places where strident nationalism has been in vitro from 2011 to present, requests for intervention by the United States have been persistently made by foreign nationalists10

While these calls for intervention seem most noticeably to be of foreign origin, they have rarely originated solely from outside the United States itself15. They have in fact been joined, and in some case prompted, by American nationalists acting from within the corporate media system within Washington16. Where these internal and external calls to intervention have coalesced together in either economic or political form, striking and violent military action from the Empire or its allies has resulted in interventions in Korea [1950-1953], Vietnam [1955-1972], Laos [1962-1975], Dominican Republic [1965], Laos & Cambodia [1968], Cambodia [1970], North Vietnam [1972], Nicaragua [1979], El Salvador [1980], Lebanon [1982], Grenada [1983], Libya [1986], Haiti [1986], Panama [1988], Libya [1989], Iraq [1991-2003], Somalia [1992 - 1995], Bosnia [1993-1995], Haiti [1994 - 1995], Iraq [1998], Afghanistan and Sudan [1998], Serbia [1999], Afghanistan [2001-present], Yemen [2001-present], Iraq [2003-2011], Liberia [2003], Georgia, Djibouti, Kenya, Ethiopia, Yemen, and Eritrea [2004], Pakistan [2004-present], Somalia [2007], Iraq [2010-2011], Libya [2011], Pakistan [2011] and Somalia [2011].

It is clearly the case that this current period of nationalism has been responsible for serious and chronic on-going human rights abuses. To date, there is no known attempt by any non-nationalist entity to abbreviate or disable these abuses, either from within the empire, or from within the ranks of the empires multilateral partners. In fact, the 'arena' is heavily crowded by nationalist elements to such a degree that most, if not all, narratives have become septic.


Nationalism17 describes the mechanism by which a people derive and enact their collective psychological and geographical identity. In its most common form nationalism may form around ideas of national myth, heritage, birth right, ethnicity, colonialism or assimilation. While nationalism may be seen as being a loose and informal narrative which forms over extended periods of time, the term is better understood as having trivial and non-trivial period specific components. In its trivial form, nationalism may be represented as being a common series of 'public values' centred around the intermixing of myth with heritage; understood informally by the populace through collective folklore, passed down through the generations by word of mouth or popular sing-song. Nationalism is, therefore, a romanticised inter-public discourse in which the popular collective identity is articulated across the generational divide by popular folklore.

In its non-trivial form, nationalism is a manufactured endeavour undertaken by a nationalist authority in which its own history to build dominance of authority over the populace is articulated as being the history of the populace, thereby enabling sovereignty. Nationalism is, in this sense, an authoritarian tendency in which citizenry is required to capitulate before the historic authority. By the act of capitulation, the nationalist is formed.

For a national authority, the history of its struggle to territorially dominate and assert itself over time will form the 'national histrionic' using the polemic of political, ethnic or religious 'schism'. As a result, popular identity in collective form becomes the history of authoritarian struggle for territorial dominance. Ordinarily within any given territory, competition for control of the various developed national schism's will be in a constant state of revision and correction as sovereignty finds it necessary to further ingratiate itself to the populace. At any given time, the national schism may be truncated or accelerated by political forces for political effect. This may occur as a result of handicap of power, excessive revision of folklore, ethnic persecution, colonisation and assimilation or in some cases, severe trauma or sudden invasion. Broadly speaking, nationalism is a latent and benign force acting from within society but periodically may become nascent due as a result of political interference.

Latent Nationalism

The Egyptian revolution.

The Egyptian revolution.

The bodies of eight men lay in a street in Tahrir Square in Egypt in 2011 after the nationalist Egyptian President, Hosni El Sayed Mubarak, attempted to violently put down a revolt in the city. Egypt up to this point had been ruled by a military nationalist body polity headed by Mubarak who had taken power in Egypt in 1981 after the former President, Anwar El Sadat, had been assassinated.

The assassination has since been cited to be the work of pro-western Arab nationalists keen to cement the 1976 Camp David accords, a critical doctrine which removed Egypt from formal opposition to Israeli nationalists as they continued on with their policy of ethnic cleansing in Palestine. Mubarak has long been claimed to have been a part of the plot to assassinate Sadat, for the sole aim of installing a military nationalist polity deep in the heart of Egypt's political order. In 2011, Mubarak was removed by popular demand leaving Israeli nationalists bereft of tactical and strategic support in the region. Picture Unaccredited.

Latent nationalism can be understood as being the character of a territories people in heritage and cultural form as represented and celebrated within periods of national stability. The gluing of national culture and heritage together ordinarily provides the combinatorial framework for political discourse and planned revision. During times in which perceptual stability is strongly represented, and therefore where nationalism is demonstrably in its latent form, the gluing of culture and heritage is a process that is ordinarily driven by ethnic displacement, migration, economic stability along with religious or secular popular ideology where it exists. Very obviously, latent nationalism is rarely seen as being the seed of conflict, but more a binding national twine in which ethnic, cultural, political, economic and societal stabilities are roped together to form a coherent national netted identity.

The stability of this netted identity provides the mechanism by which many of the endeavours of state can become progressively autonomous. For instance, in the areas of policing, taxation, welfare and local governance, regimented consensus among the populace allows the populace itself to take on board much of the state's enforcement doctrine to such a degree that national government becomes less intrusive; and therefore less authoritive. A people that are happy in their national identity and who feel safe from outside interference, are far easier to govern because they are more open to being governed.

Latent nationalism will ordinarily manifest in increasingly trivial form over time as governance becomes subject to autonomous self-enactment in the populace. Latent nationalism is, by its nature, stable and characterised by straightforward polity at the domestic level. The majority of the world's nation states are of a latent nationalist type with strident stability seen in those nation states with uninterrupted popular history, low rate of invasion, high rates of popular autonomy, manageable rates of immigration, low rates of external intervention into foreign states and controlled competent economia. International stability as a doctrine is critically dependent on the inclusion of nation states of a latent nationalist type.

Nascent Nationalism

Normalising nascent nationalism.

Normalising nascent nationalism.

In this image, armed Israeli nationalists are pictured standing on the cots of a Palestinian family after their home is seized in 2009. For most of its history, the Israeli sovereign military authority has used its populace to enact seizure of Palestinian land and property in service to an expansionist nationalist polity. This has always been presented under the moniker of latent self-defence, thereby appealing to the international community as a whole.

The international community is, on the whole, a collection of latent nationalist states. By presenting its own nationalist doctrine to be of a latent type, the military authority of Israel is able to scrape international consensus thereby enabling its nationalist doctrine of ethnic cleansing. Israel is a military state of a stridently nationalist type with its doctrinal nationalism propelled by a nascent nationalist polity. Picture: Unaccredited.

Nascent nationalism relates to the transmission of nationalism as an identity from its latent status to an agitated revisionist status. This may occur because the populace perceive changes to its ethnic structure through migration or because the sitting authority or government have been successfully challenged and require motivation of the populace to a defensive national posture. Where increased rates of immigration occur, cultural and religious values can become subject to change, thereby motivating nationalist sentiment in defensive or proscriptive form. However, this may also occur as a result of political policy which acts on a populace in service to polity which does not easily fit within the confines of the cultural and societal values of the populace, i.e. political interference. The polity of globalisation, for instance, can often be perceived as being antagonistic to the cultural and societal values of a territorial people. Interdependence when it is used to describe the spread of free-trade can often be seen as the mechanism which drives migration across territories which in turn drives nationalism from latent to nascent status in every territory where that migration takes place.

Geopolitics can often reduce a nation state to a perpetual state of nascent nationalism. In regions in which a nation state acts to spread its political and military influence, the domestic populace may be exposed to a never-ending cycle of ideological propaganda with the intention of undermining the national identity of its populace, in order to force them to imbibe a strategic or tactical policy to enable political or military expansion. In the United States and United Kingdom, the politics of 'Atlanticism' form the kernel of political discourse which is routinely used to revise the U.K national identity toward domestic political 'diffusion'; a lack of coherent support for any given domestic idea, in order to enable unchallenged reign of the 'trans-Atlantic' relationship. Multi-culturalism, human-rights law, the European Union (E.U), immigration, migration and religion are all used in proscriptive form to consolidate and strengthen this polity.

Where nascent nationalism is seen in a territory of region, irrespective of its cause, segmentation of the populace will occur leading to separatism, isolationism and eventually conflict of some type. Where a territory alights into open conflict; ethnic, religious, and cultural differences often abound throughout the populace which will go on to cause ethnic cleansing, ethnic proscription and industrial warfare. Due to the complexity of nationalist conflict, trivial and non-trivial actors will often collide in order to defend their interests in territorial and political form.

In a nation state that has seen its nationalist identity corrupted or revised to affect some outcome, especially where that outcome has been violent, political nationalists and opportunists are almost always the culprit. For much of the world, domestic nationalists are successfully curtailed within governmental or judicial system which allow for the selective abbreviation of internal 'subversives'. In a number of nation states, especially those concerned with foreign interventions and maintaining regional influence beyond their borders, political nationalists are often given free-reign to operate in order to maintain a segmented populace along nationalist poles. This policy, where it exists, is ordinarily understood as being 'tactical nationalism'.

Tactical Nationalism.

Militarised tactical nationalism.

Militarised tactical nationalism.

Israeli nationalists and representatives of the military government of Israel are a prime illustration in the modern period of how nationalist regimes form. In Israel, almost all representatives of high political office are drawn from the state security services or from former members of the military. Civilians are permitted to operate lower order political offices but are not permitted to attain high office. This is, almost exclusively, due to the military requirement to maintain absolute synchronicity between domestic nationalist polity of Israel, and the nationalist polity of foreign states, chiefly the United States and its multilateral partners.

By ensuring complete domination of its political sphere by military personnel, Israel is able to articulate absolute military logic throughout the entirety of its domestic affairs. As a result, policies of hatred of Islam, hatred of the United Nations, pathological mistrust of Liberalism and strident evasion of any and all external or internal peace initiatives can be maintained without interference from the civilian quarter. Picture: AFP

Tactical nationalism describes the policy of prompting nationalist polity at the domestic level, while aiding foreign nationalists at the international level, in order to qualify the domestic nationalist polity at home. In short; creating a domestic ideological banner, which can be consolidated abroad - thereby legitimising it at home. For the bulk of nationalists around the world, international influence cannot be maintained due to economic or military limitations and so any nationalist polity attempted is ordinarily confined to a domestic scope. For a number of nations around the world namely nation states of the European Union and multilateral partners18

This toolset when used alongside and in conjunction with nationalist terrestrial broadcasters [Fox, CNN] amplify the nationalist polity and its interventionist message into most territories around the world, including those in which domestic U.S nationalists have a pre-existing interest. While much of the toolset described above in the electronic and broadcast sectors appears at face value to be commercially democratised and available for use by anyone, the domestic nationalist tendency to be able to effect domestic legislation and domestic government within the U.S ensures that this toolset will be subtly balanced toward the domestic self-interest of the nationalist polity. Within the United States Empire, all electronic communications going through, or arriving at, U.S web services are routinely monitored and scraped by domestic U.S intelligence services21

Where recent direct engagements on the international stage have been undertaken by the United States and its multilateral partners, including European states acting in the affairs of foreign nation states around the world, tactical nationalism has been the prime agitating force.

On every occasion in which this tactical form of nationalism has been attempted, the policy has been presented through U.S global media corporations and electronic toolset as being the result of international opinion. On some occasions, this international opinion has constituted nothing more than the personal views of a few dozen nationalists acting in concert with a small band of political opportunists in turn operating in concert with military, security service and on some occasions, corporate interests such as media and broadcast outlets. Where this kind of nationalist agitation occurs outside of the domestic polity, for instance directed toward a foreign nation state, the intention will be to consolidate the domestic nationalist agenda. Very rarely, if ever, will the domestic nationalists of the United States or its multilateral partners act outside the sphere and 'comfort' zone of nationalist pride.

Nationalism when used in its tactical form has a very heavy reliance on propaganda along with prompting and exploiting violence and the fear of violence23

Ramzi Hashem Abed, Iraqi partisan based in Mosul.

In this video, disseminated by a global surveillance organisation operating out of Washington, U.S and Jerusalem, Israel - an Iraqi TV broadcast is recorded depicting an interview with a man from Mosul in northern Iraq by the name Ramzi Hashem Abed. Ramzi was a member of the Sunni group Ansar al-Islam which operated in Iraq from 2003, carrying out surveillance and sectarian bombing operations including targeted assassinations of key Iraqi political figures. Ramzi operated from Mosul and was one of thousands of Iraqi partisans who could be called on to harass and disrupt the U.S nationalist occupation of the country.

With a little care and attention to detail, it is possible to see the reality of this mans situation.

Ramzi is clearly a man of poor education and little wealth who has been used by anti-occupation forces to bedevil the U.S. occupation of his country. All the central tactics used to frustrate an occupying force are referred to in this interview. Targeted assassinations of key occupation figures, sectarian bombings to prevent consolidation of occupying forces, killing of collaborators, targeting of political groups that may be used by occupying forces to consolidate the occupation and any tactic that will encourage prevention of free movement of occupation forces within Iraq.

There is nothing in the behaviour of Ramzi, that would not be seen in any man of his age in any country anywhere in the world when faced with invasion and occupation by a foreign power.^If the United States had been invaded in 2003, Ramzi's place would be taken in this interview by a young, poorly educated and jobless American man.

For the entirety of the occupation from 2003 to 2011, U.S nationalists and their multilateral nationalist partners in the political and media sectors had continued to refer to Ramzi and other Iraqi partisans as international terrorists - presumably to terrorise the populations of the U.S. Empires multilateral partners into remaining complicit with the U.S while it occupied resource-rich Iraq.

In an era in which Globalisation abounds and many nationalist entities around the world have sought sponsorship from the United States, the proscriptions used by nationalist regimes and entities are globally similar. Obviously, this similarity most often presents as fabricated political counter-terrorism in relation to Muslims27, that being the periods most prominent narratorial shorthand currency. Throughout the present nationalist polity of the United States, the proscriptive devices most commonly used relate to the coupling of Islam to terrorism, and then on to the linking of Islamic terrorism to existential threats to Israel, the U.S nationalists 'favoured ideological state'. In service to this is an exaggerated polemic in which Islamic radicalism is given its own form of quasi-nationalism which is then inflated into an historic Caliph, or Caliphate.

So, in logical form, the U.S nationalist's current narrative is geopolitical and relating to the appearance of a worldwide Caliph in which the United States will need to expand and prepare in order to offset on the international stage. In service to this narrative, abstract and episodic evidence is often presented drawn from spurious and mostly unknown groups of minority political extremists in the Muslim world, with the intention of inflating the particular groups cause into a menace of global proportions.

For the most part these attempts present as mostly ridiculous and in some cases completely deranged28, but when disseminated on large audience broadcasters by mainstream corporations, inevitably the casual viewer is inclined to accept the presented diatribe at face value; and if the viewer is of a nationalist persuasion, even the most deranged diatribe may seem adroit.

U.S nationalist; Senator John McCain, publicly calls for intervention into Syria.

In this interview, conducted by the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) in October 2012, U.S nationalist senator, John McCain, attempts to put together a call for U.S intervention in Syria to aid Syrian nationalists as they continue with attempts to depose the Socialist Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. This interview is typical of nationalist polity in action. In the interview, McCain attempts to claim that U.S intervention is a statement of American strength and that regional nation states in proximity to Syria are crying out for American leadership. He also claims that current U.S policy in the near east is not inline with American political history. These nationalist arguments compellingly reveal the exploitative nature of western centric nationalism and go to the core of the interventionist polity of the United States Empire. In reality, the situation in Syria has been brought about by ultra-nationalists struggling against their government having become convinced that the U.S would intervene should a chronic human rights situation develop, a fact that McCain has done more than most to help bring about. McCain serves as a prime illustration why U.S interventionist polity is the prime cause of many of the worlds most serious human rights abusing episodes, all in service to the nationalist fantasy of American strength and continuing conflict with a series of socialist governments around the world. In 2013, this fantasy will undoubtedly turn toward Iran and North Korea. BBC News Middle East - 11th October 2012.

The fundamental ideology of all western centric nationalism at present, especially where it is directed toward the subject of Islam or religion, is actively racist and intolerant by design. This may seem itself to be an intolerant statement, however, the sheer scale of the diatribe and the regularity in which it is disseminated hint strongly at a severe and clearly unstated prejudice which is enjoyed by nationalists through the meter of their objections. It is a fact that nationalists do not tolerate minority groups, it is a fact that we live in a globalised age headed by the United States and its Empire...and it is a fact that nationalists in that empire have manufactured three serious conflicts over the past decade all against Muslim people, in socialist Islamic countries; with the promise of a fourth in the very near future. It is of no concern, whether nationalists in the U.S are willing to speak freely about the ideology that drives them.

In service to these goals, the favoured mechanisms used to articulate nationalist subversion within domestic and foreign societies may include bombarding newspaper and broadcast outlets with false reports designed to cause alarm, worry and distress; seeding media outlets with corrupted information from secure sources designed to disseminate false information which cannot be confirmed...or denied; forming committees with retired members of foreign governments, military and diplomatic corps in order to claim sovereign legitimacy for a cause; carrying out targeted campaigns of intimidation and harassment toward friendly partners in order to claim persecution by non-existent enemies; co-opting opposition groups with the intention of steering public sympathy toward or away from the group's leaders; covert and anonymous threats of violence toward state institutions made in the name of an opposition group, and interference in monetary supply and distribution to spread subversive ideology.

Where a significant destabilisation occurs in the world involving calls for intervention by the United States, it will almost always be the case that domestic U.S nationalists will have been in communication with the persons making those calls for significant periods beforehand.

Fundamentally, despite all these complex and convoluted devices which are used in service to western centric nationalist dogma and polity, U.S. style nationalism is still overwhelmingly concerned exclusively with the United States status as an empire of the modern world. Economic, military and democratic strength go hand in hand with nationalist polity so all threats laid out by the nationalist from whatever foe may seem topical, will always be threats of a monetary, security or freedom loving nature. In whatever form these potential threats may take, it is empire that the nationalist exclusively reserves his fondness and sense of self-sacrifice for.

Tactical nationalism and multilateralism.

UN-fit - the nationalist attitude of hatred to the U.N

UN-fit - the nationalist attitude of hatred to the U.N

In this image taken from a British television documentary on international war crimes committed by Sri Lanka during 2009, the Deputy Solicitor General of Sri Lanka, Mr. A Nawan, is seen here at a U.N panel investigation into the war crimes with his middle finger raised in an offensive gesture before a camera operator as he attempts to evade complicity from a pre-prepared statement. The Deputy Solicitor General presumably expects the gesture to be enjoyed back in Sri Lanka among his nationalist friends.

This contempt for the multilateral institution of the U.N is a typical characteristic of nationalist polity and is common in nationalist circles. In Sri Lanka, it derives from the fear of being held to account for the murder of between 40,000 and 60,000 ethnic Tamils in the north of Sri Lanka in 2009. In the United States, it derives from the illegitimacy of the United States as a multilateral institution while the U.N exists as a competitor entity. In Israel, with over 100 separate and outstanding breaches of U.N resolutions relating to its treatment of ethnic Palestinians, the U.N is a body that perpetually frustrates its desire to simply cleanse Jewish Israel of all Muslims.

These inadequacies are further aggravated by imbecility in government; the nationalist simply does not possess the cogent toolset required to govern competently and so has an unhealthy reliance on the rump politic of fear, intolerance, populism and polemic.

As outlined in a previous article, multilateralism as exercised by the United States Empire and its multilateral partners is a disruptive doctrine which has the effect of undermining the world's first and primary multilateral institution; the United Nations [U.N]. With alarming precision and regularity, the nationalist polity both inside and outside the United States is stridently hostile to the United Nations as an entity. Without fail, the nationalist polity will routinely denounce the U.N as an ineffectual body riddled with indecision while being slow to act. This should not come as a surprise given the nationalist dependence on reserving conceptual multilateralism exclusively for use by the United States and its multilateral partner states around the world. As the world's primary and only legitimate multilateral institution, the U.N is a direct competitor to the U.S in the nationalist mind-set, consequently, the nationalist polity in practice and ideology is fundamentally hostile to the U.N and, therefore, the bulk of its 193 members.

At present, the U.N currently has a wide-ranging29

In Sri Lanka, human rights abuses, torture and arbitrary detentions continue against Tamils even after the ending of a civil conflict in which heavy weapons were freely used against the unarmed civilian populace.

In Syria, nationalists attempting to depose the Syrian socialist government of Bashar al-Assad continue to commit atrocities in the country while pleading with counterpart nationalists in the United States to intervene.

In Libya, ethnic warfare is being waged by the nationalist government against political activists previously loyal to the Socialist President Muammar al-Khaddafi in Bani Walid.

In all of these cases, the U.N.s work has been seriously undermined and disrupted by the self-interest of the United States and its multilateral partner's.

On 7th November 2012 the British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, made a written statement33 on his government's policy on Syria. He stated:

"I would like to provide the House with an update on Syria since my last statement (Official Record 18 October 2012: Column 34WS). This week talks are taking place in Doha between members of Syrian opposition groups. The United Kingdom, France, Turkey, the United States and other international partners will attend the meeting on 8th November. Our objective is to encourage Syria's opposition groups to unite around a vision for a democratic and stable Syria. This is necessary to offer the Syrian people a credible alternative to the Assad regime and to achieve an inclusive political transition that ends the appalling bloodshed and reflects the will of the Syrian people.

As well as increasing our development assistance to the Syrian people we have gradually increased our efforts to build the capacity and coordination of unarmed opposition groups inside Syria. This includes the provision of technical, non-lethal equipment such as radios and emergency power generators, as well as training journalists and civil society groups on human rights. Earlier this year I instructed FCO officials to begin to make contacts outside Syria with political representatives of armed Syrian opposition groups. I informed the House of this on 3 September (Official Report: Vol. 549, Col. 54).

Such groups are playing an increasingly influential role within Syria as the conflict worsens. I have therefore now authorised my officials to have direct contact with an even wider range of representatives including military figures in the armed opposition. This will help us to understand better the situation in Syria and the relationship between political and armed opposition groups so we can properly support political transition. All contacts will take place outside Syria, and then only in environments we deem suitably secure. Each potential contact will be explored cautiously and on a case-by-case basis. Through continuous assessment, we will make every effort to ensure that FCO officials engage only with legitimate representatives of the opposition. We will continue to adhere to our clearly stated policy of only supplying non-lethal support to the unarmed opposition. All support is in compliance with both the EU arms embargo and our own stringent export licensing laws. In all contacts my officials will stress the importance of respecting human rights and international human rights norms, rejecting extremism and terrorism, and working towards peaceful political transition. British contacts with military elements of the Syrian armed opposition will be limited to a political dialogue including working towards and inclusive political transition."

- William Hague, Foreign Secretary for H.M. Government, United Kingdom.

While this statement is clearly compiled from apparent confusion within the Foreign Office [FO] about exactly what is happening inside Syria, it is of course unlikely that the British government can fail to understand nationalist polity when it appears, given the regularity with which it appears. The British government is very much more than the political parties which take Parliamentary turns to inhabit it. What is clear from the FO's statement is that the government of Bashar al-Assad and the nationalist polity of the Syrian nationalists and their sponsors are locked in a conflict in which the Syrian people are effectively being held to ransom.

Either one side in Syria may exercise temporary dominance over the other, but ultimately, the choice will be to what degree the nationalist polity responsible for this crisis will be rewarded for its efforts. If the nationalists in Syria and their nationalist sponsors in the U.S are rewarded, it will not be long before a secondary crisis of substantially larger magnitude will appear.

In this sense, the U.N has a clear mandate to act.

Ethnic Cleansing

The ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

The ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

The body of 1 year old Ibrahim Mohammed Jamal al-Dalou is shrouded on the day of his funeral on 19th November 2012. Ibrahim died after an Israeli nationalist F16 fixed wing aircraft dropped ordnance onto a four story building the al-Dalou family were living in.

Ten members of the al-Dalou family were killed34 outright along with two neighbours. Israeli nationalists claimed that the family had been killed because their father was a member of Hamas, the elected representative of the people of Gaza. When questioned about the death of Ibrahim, and the deaths of nine other members of his family, including his two brothers; Jamal 6 years, Yousef, 4 years and his sister Sarah, 7 years, the Israeli nationalists claimed35 the family were being used by their father as a human shield.

All ten members of the al-Dalou family were killed in the family home.

Picture: Ibrahim Faraj.

One of the fundamental properties of tactical nationalism is the natural contradiction which exists when adopting a nationalist stance to achieve a goal in a foreign territory, where that territory is significantly different in cultural, political, economic or societal form. It should be clear to the reader that nationalism is, by its nature, a closeted and heavily idiosyncratic credence heavily laced with the natural handicap of national geographic identity. A nationalist resident in one territory cannot, by default, understand the religion, culture, polity or economy of another territory. Any attempt to renovate a foreign territory that may be undertaken by nationalist polity is bound to end in failure.

Given the number of interventions into foreign nation states the United States has undertaken, and given the percentage of those interventions that have been controlled by U.S nationalists, it is a simple thing to understand why so many U.S interventions end in rampant and disastrous failure. It is an even simpler thing to understand how U.S nationalists have come to consider that any intervention, irrespective of how it ends, can be deemed a success, given the business interests of nationalists, and their financial proximity to the U.S arms industry.

In the domestic sense, nationalism can often manifest in nascent form by tactical nationalists with the aim of disengaging an ethnic minority from representation within society. This may be to delegitimise them, or to provide the mechanism under which conflict with that minority can be enticed. Where this occurs, either as a result of internal tactical nationalism, or where agitation from foreign nationalists takes place...ethnic cleansing often results.

Throughout most of modern history, nationalism has constituted the most persistent and chronic problem on the world stage. Without any shadow of doubt, the most violent and repulsive episodes in human history, have been committed by the nationalist polity and its followers. With nationalism, comes division of populace along geographic criteria and not ethnic or inter-ethnic criteria. In the modern period, the formation of identity on nationalist principle has obliquely introduced mass murder of large groups of people fighting for national not ethnic identity.

We know and have come to understand this as ethnic cleansing.

From the Armenian Genocide of 1915 in which 800,000 - 1,800,000 Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks were killed during an organised mass murder by Turkish nationalists - through to the mass murder of Jews, Communists, Poles, Serbs, Romani, disabled and other minorities during the pan-European Nazi, Ustaše and Bandera genocides of 1941 - 1945, and onto the appalling Rwanda genocide of 1994 in which 800,000 Tutsi's were murdered by Hutu's. Nationalists and their hatred of ethnic minorities and international law obviously constitute one of the world's primary threats to international peace and security. In the recent period, nationalism has rescinded in scale, but only insofar as being at a lower level that the exceptional period between 1900 and 1950.

The roots of tactical nationalism and ethnic cleansing.

Tactical nationalism derives from an unpleasant side-effect of democracy. In a democracy, the people are free. They are free to adopt and revise their history toward collective identity, free to tolerate any given polity and free to limit or reject that polity. The people are free to expect that citizenship within a democracy can involve self-governance and practical autonomy if their polity does not work as expected or is in need of refinement. The people are free to disengage with the toolset of state should it fall into the hands of delinquents, alternatively, they are free to engage.

But the people are also free to engage in behaviour that encourages segmentation of the populace along ethnic, religious and economic divisions. The people are free to operate with nationalist credentials across the strata of state...and in a world that claims to have globalised credentials; the people are free to interfere with the sovereignty of other states. Since 2001, this has been a septic problem among the nationalist classes of the United States Empire and an increasing problem among its multilateral dependents.

The by-product of this interference has been political multilateralism which has undermined the United Nations and the national security of both the United States and a number of its dependents. In all instances where this policy has been enacted, a very few number of individuals have been creating the seeds of conflict and have done so while building 'world opinion' through the tools of U.S global corporations.

At no time, has world opinion ever supported any such action, policy or opinion.

From 1945 to the present, nationalism has fully exploited the concept of national sovereignty and has engaged fully in actions and interventions on the international stage to consolidate and further enhance conceptual nationalism. The period from 1945 to present has seen an explosion of new nation states around the world, with formal borders haphazardly cutting across, and in some cases deep into, ethnic and religious regions with catastrophic effect. For the nationalist, these 'adventures' create an endless cycle of fractured social divisions not on the basis of the reality of latent and ancient ancestral principle held within a given populace, but along artificial lines of geography and economy. Not surprisingly, as the nationalist burrows deeper down into the limited vocabulary of their limited ideology, the world becomes a more violent and insecure place. Wars, ethnic cleansing, genocide and low-level normalised violence meld together into a single problem uniquely pleasant to the nationalist...the fight against international terrorism, a singular and one dimensional polity enacted as a single offensive policy, throughout the whole of the known world.

Nationalism is a deeply failing legacy of the post-war period. The nationalist tendency to perpetuate borders and barriers and blockades and sanctions to enforce these divisions cannot and should not continue to violate the peace of the world to the point where it can routinely lead to the mass-murders of entire peoples; which it has done, continues to do, and will do well into the future if it is not abbreviated and halted.

In light of these and other facts, globalisation can be seen as nothing more than the U.S economy violently enforced throughout the world by an incompetent U.S nationalist order with no international legitimacy at all.


1. 'The End of American Intervention'. By James Traub, 18th February 2012. New York Times [U.S.] 2. 'As Syria burns, Assad's British-born wife goes on ;pound;270,000 online shopping spree'. By ABUL TAHER, 14th July 2012. Daily Mail [U.K.] 3. 'EU recognises Syria opposition bloc ' By Agencies. 19th November 2012. al-Jazeera [Qatar] 4. 'Jerusalem concerned by Syria's chemical weapons'. By Herb Keinon , 18th December 2012. Jerusalem Post [Israel]. 5. 'Magnitude of human rights violations in Syria has dramatically increased - UN panel' By U.N. News Centre. 17th September 2012. U.N. 6. 'Sectarianism out, ethnic nationalism in'. By Verda Ozer, 18th December 2012. al-Arabiya [Saudi Arabia] 7. 'Chapter 3: State Sponsors of Terrorism'. *Note: It should be noted that sanctions, prohibitions and designations of foreign nation states by U.S. government departments carries no weight in international law even when corroborated by the United Nations. The United States has no power to enforce any such doctrine except within the boundaries of the continental United States. For this reason, sanctions in particular, are often reported within the United States as having an effect which is often exaggerated. U.S. Department of State. 8. 'No way for peace with Syria's Assad: Israel's FM'. By Occupied Jerusalem (Agencies), 11th November 2010. al-Arabiya [Saudi Arabia] 9. 'Child Beheaded by Syrian Army in Kafr Owaid [Warning: Extremely Graphic]'. WARNING VERY GRAPHIC. Video (MP4) Time: 1 Minute 17 Seconds. Size: 6.13MB 10. 'STATEMENT BY THE TRANSITIONAL NATIONAL COUNCIL'. pdf [28.1kb] 11. 'Syrians Plead for Help as President Assad Continues Assault on Homs'. By Ivana Kvesic, 8th February 2012. Christian Post 12. 'Some Republicans calling for U.S. to step up role in Libya after Gaddafi falls'. By Felicia Sonmez, 22nd August 2011. Washington Post [U.S.] 13. 'David Cameron: Syria empowering new al-Qaeda generation'. By Unacredited/Guardian. 17th December 2012. Guardian [U.K.] 14. 'David Cameron says UN has let the world down over Syria - video'. Guardian [U.K.] 15. 'John McCain, Joe Lieberman, Lindsay Graham Urge To Arm Syria's Rebels'. By Dan Perry, 7th September 2012. Huffingdon Post [U.S.] 16. 'Joe Cirincione in The Situation Room on Syria's Chemical Threats '. U.S. nationalist Wolf Blitzer, The Situation Room, YouTube. 17. 'Nationalism'. WikiPedia [U.S.] 18. 'France, Britain say Syria military intervention on table'. By John Irish and Michelle Nichols, 30th August 2012. Reuters. 19. 'West changes tack on Syria intervention'. By David Stringer and Dale Gavlak. The Australian [Australia] 20. 'Israel might intervene to prevent Syria's chemical weapons from falling into wrong hands, PM says'. By Michal Shmulovich, 17th October 2012. Times of israel [Israel] 21. 'USA PATRIOT IMPROVEMENT AND REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2005, SEC. 128. USA PATRIOT ACT SECTION 214; AUTHORITY FOR DISCLOSURE OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN CONNECTION WITH ORDERS FOR PEN REGISTER AND TRAP AND TRACE AUTHORITY UNDER FISA.' - This section outlines additional authority under the U.S. PATRIOT ACT for information collected by federal authorities under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act [FISA] for data collected by monitoring foreign communications. There is naturally existing protection for U.S. citizens under the first amendment which is not applicable for persons resident outside the United States.U.S. government Printing Office. 22. 'Joint Terrorism Task Force Arrests Man in Lower Manhattan After He Attempted to Bomb New York Federal Reserve Bank, 17th October 2012. extract

"NYPD Commissioner Kelly stated - Al Qaeda operatives and those they have inspired have tried time and again to make New York City their killing field. We are up to 15 plots and counting since 9/11, with the Federal Reserve now added to a list of iconic targets that previously included the Brooklyn Bridge, the New York Stock Exchange, and Citicorp Center. After 11 years without a successful attack, it's understandable if the public becomes complacent. But that's a luxury law enforcement can't afford. Vigilance is our watchword now and into the foreseeable future. That's why we have over 1,000 NYPD officers assigned to counterterrorism duties every day and why we built the domain awareness system. I want to commend the NYPD detectives and FBI agents of the Joint Terrorism Task Force for the work they did in the case and U.S. Attorney Lynch and her dedicated team in prosecuting it."

Since 2001, the United States government, private sector, domestic security and public sector law enforcement community has been creating a national intelligence monitoring system in accordance with a Presidential directive issued by the nationalist president George W Bush under the U.S. PATRIOT ACT in 2001. In the act, the President outlined the need for the United States to 'Attain Domain Awareness' as part of its counter-terrorism provision. No reliable information is available about any single or networked system that may exist in the United States 11 years after the order was made. However, it is likely that any system that will now exist will entail trap and trace type technology being routinely used in conjunction with telecommunications infrastructure inside the United States and within the telecommunications industries of allied nations. Trap and trace and other 'quiet' technology is almost certainly linked to YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Wordpress and other 'networking tools' where public users are encouraged to upload information to servers located within the United States - which then serves to 'attract' possible persons of interest toward the surveillance technology. In this sense, an important segment of current U.S. intelligence gathering provision is 'crowd sourced'. U.S. Attorney's Office [U.S.]
23. 'Iran "finding ways" to supply more weapons to Hamas'. By Barbara Starr, 26th November 2012. CNN [U.S.] 24. 'Lieberman Accuses EU of Holocaust Attitude'. By Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, 11th December 2012. Israel National News [Israel] 25. 'Israeli army spokeswoman comments on Gaza attacks '. It should be noted here that in a democracy, the military and its representatives have no legitimate voice. From the point of view of media ethics and best practice, it is not acceptable to allow members of a paramilitary organisation to articulate views and accounts which should be given by the democratically elected representatives of the people. Only in military states, totalitarian states or states struggling with authoritarianism is the practice of interviewing military personnel tolerated and only then with suitable clarification. In Israel, this practice of media corporations interviewing nationalist members of the IDF is tolerated as a result of acceptance among media corporations that Israel is effectively operating a military government under the guise of a democracy. When Israel is engaged with military violence against the Palestinian people, it is invariably the case that its so-called civilian leaders will be prevented from giving interviews to the media, as IDF nationalists take informal control. al-Jazeera [Qatar]. 26. 'Former British Armed Forces Commander Speaks About the IDF'. By Colonel Richard Kemp. 13th June 2011. Colonel Richard Kemp is a previously serving member of British Armed Forces who's service period came to an end in 2005. He was predominately deployed in Afghanistan and is one of a large number of failed coalition commanders deployed in the country. Since leaving his post, he has become a strident polemicist in favour of nationalists and the military government of Israel. IDF 27. 'Muslim 'terror threat' belied by numbers'. by Jim Lobe, 9th February 2012. al-Jazeera [Qatar]. 28. 'Beck: A New Caliphate?'. by Glenn Beck. 4th February 2011. FOX News [U.S.] 29. 'Following report on activities in Sri Lanka war, Ban determined to strengthen UN responses to crises'. 14th November 2012. U.N 30. 'U.N. seeks .5 billion to help suffering Syrians'. By Stephanie Nebehay, 19th December 2012. U.N. 31. 'Hillary Clinton seeks Syria action from 'paralysed' UN'. By Unacredited. 27th September 2012. BBC [U.K.] 32. 'Binyamin Netanyahu's UN bomb triggers derision and admiration'. by Harriet Sherwood. 28th September 2012. Guardian [U.K.] 33. 'Foreign Secretary Written Ministerial Statement on Syria'. 7th November 2012. Foreign & Commonwealth Office [U.K.] 34. 'Israel 'still investigating' al-Dalou family killing'. By Maayan Lubell, 19th November 2012. Maan News Agency [Palestine] 35. 'Strike that killed Gaza family was 'no mistake': Israel'. By Unacredited. AFP [France}