"Question: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalists, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

"Brzezinski: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?"

Note the clear explicit logic of Brzezinski's analysis. It was preferable for the U.S. to have Islamic jihadist terrorists, "Taliban" and "some stirred-up Moslems," than to have a state opposed to the U.S. This realpolitik logic applies not only to the Soviet Union but also to Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Gadaffi's Libya, or Assad's Syria, and explains clearly the real events which have unfolded - the "actions that speak louder than words."

The Iraq state was destroyed by the 2003 invasion resulting in a situation when prior to the invasion ISIS and Al Qaeada were powerless and now they are powerful. In Libya the state was destroyed by the NATO bombings - prior to this ISIS was powerless, now it is powerful. In Syria prior to the war against Assad ISIS was powerless, now it is powerful. The "stirred up Moslems" that resulted, ISIS and similar forces, have no power through terrorism to seriously threaten U.S. interests - unlike the states which had existed previously.

The population who died in terrorist attacks in Paris, Mali or Russian planes over Sinai of course pay for Brzezinski's logic with their lives. Because civilian populations don't like to be killed to serve this logic, it has to be concealed. That is why there must be verbal rhetoric of a "war on terror" - but a reality of continual U.S. actions that result in strengthening jihadism.

The same logic would of course be followed elsewhere - for example in "double standards" on terrorism in Xinjiang.

There is, in short, no contradiction between U.S. words of the "war on terror" and its real results in strengthening jihadism - they are merely two sides of the same coin.

The writer is a columnist with China.org.cn. For more information please visit:

http://www.h5a3.com/opinion/johnross.htm

Opinion articles reflect the views of their authors, not necessarily those of China.org.cn.