We have been told that the recent disruption of Internet communications was the result of several undersea international communications cables being cut the Egyptian coast, in the Eastern Mediterranean and in the Gulf. We were also told that the cables were cut by a "ship anchor."
It is a difficult story to believe because at least three and upto four cables -- if we include the Suez to Sri Lanka link -- were cut in the period between Jan.30 and Feb.1. It is too much of a coincidence to be accepted as such. It is incredulous that three (and perhaps four) undersea cables were cut in the same region in just a two-day span.
That is the point raised by an American expert, Dr Richard Sauder, who is well known for his researched works on underwater bases and technology.
Sauder presents an interesting case of what could be the latest phase in technological warfare and it could involve a build-up for US/Israeli military action against Iran.
The thrust of Sauder's argument is that two countries in the region were spared from the resulting disruption -- Israel, which uses a "different route," and Iraq, where the US military fighting an intense insurgency could not afford any breakdown of its Internet lines.
More importantly, the Iranian Internet was completely shut down. And Sauder suggests that the cables could have been deliberately cut by US/Israeli experts who then patched in sophisticated surveillance equipment before splicing the cables back together. Effectively, it would mean total surveillance over the last byte of Internet and other communications going in and out of any country linked to the "spliced cable." In essence, the suggestion -- although it sounds like a spy novel thriller -- is backed by the fact, according to Sauder, that "the US Navy has for decades had special operations teams that go out on submarines and deploy undersea, on the seabed itself, specifically for cutting or tapping communications cables." It is part of the hi-tech war that the US has mastered.
Given the US/Israeli warnings and threats against Iran, it is not beyond comprehension that the "disruption" in Internet communication was deliberate and that it was a smokescreen while the US/Israeli alliance installed an overriding spying and control system involving Iran's Internet communications in such a way that the country could be totally isolated from the rest of the world when the US and Israel want it to be so. Well, that is Sauder suggests but not without leaving room for doubts that the disruption was a trial run for similar operations elsewhere in the world.
If Sauder's theory is true, then it is also true that the culprits did not care of other countries in the region which suffered badly as a result of the Internet disruption. But then, it is only "collateral damage" as far as the US is concerned. Isn't it?
