The Ralph Peters Map: NATO’s Plan for Redrawing the Borders in the Middle East ?

The Ralph Peters Map: NATO’s Plan for Redrawing the Borders in the Middle East ?

Known as the Peters Map, after Ralph Peters its producer, the map below represents a vision of the MIddle East in which virtually all the boundaries have been changed as a result of NATO military operations, aided by auxiliary forces described as “rebels”. Peters is a former military officer and intelligence expert with access to the highest levels of the US government. The map appears in a book published by Peters in 2008.

Middle_East_location_map _ 1. SEnhanced Peters Map indicating new national entities friendly to ‘Western’ concerns effectively capturing oil and other valuable assets – petroleum assets are here assigned ‘salmon’ color. Middle_East_location_map _ 1. SMap indicating existing political boundaries showing petroleum assets.

The map dovetails neatly with the plans for regime change spelled out in the PNAC (Project for a New American Century) Document. That document is a policy statement framed by the Council of Foreign Relations in 1997. The document not only calls for regime change throughout the Middle East and North Africa, but claims that a “new Pearl Harbor” would be needed to set it off. Some commentators believe that 9/11 was the New Pearl Harbor and that the War on Terror is essentially the plan of regime change being put into action.

The map above is an expanded version of the Peters Map. Directly below it is a map indicating existing political boundaries. Comparing the maps will make clear the goal of ‘capturing’ existing petroleum and other energy resources. Note how the oil deposits would, after “regime change”, lie almost entirely within the newly formed NATO-friendly states. This is thought by some to be the main driver of the entire operation of “regime change”.

An essential military ingredient of the War on Terror is called Fourth Generation Warfare. It does not involve declarations or war between nation states nor does it involve armies facing each other en masse, as in past centuries. Instead it involves a “blurring of the lines” between civilian and military action and a reopening of tactics previously outlawed or thought too horrendous to use. The key operational factor is deception, representing an event as perpetrated by A when in fact it was perpetrated by B, giving B an excuse to attack A

Examples of Fourth Generation Warfare in the 21st Century

Here is a brief summary of the War on Terror to this point

Operation: War on Terror Initiation
Pseudo victim: United States
Event: 9/11
Real victim: Islamic world. broadly considered

Operation: Invasion of Iraq, replacement of government
Pseudo victim: NATO nations
Event: Alleged threat of “weapons of mass destruction”
Real victim: Iraq

Operation: Rebellion in Libya, no fly zone, replacement of government
Pseudo victim: NATO nations
Event: Lockerbie bombing blamed on Ghadaffi
Real victim: Libya

Operation: Pending
Pseudo victim: Israel
Event: Alleged threat of nuclear weapons
Real Victim: Iran

Operation: Rebellion in Syria. ongoing with invasion immanent
Pseudo victim: Syrian population
Event: alleged use of military force on own citizens
Real victim: Syria

More to come on this section . . .


High resolution map of traditional (2012) borders

High resolution map of traditional (2012) borders

High resolution map of traditional (2012) borders WITH OIL deposits

High resolution map of proposed borders WITH OIL deposits


Ralph Peters on Wikipedia

Plans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a “New Middle East

Counterpoint/Disinformation References

The fallacy behind Ralph Peters’ new Middle East map


All Maps have been been created by hand using Google Maps data. All boundaries are accurate to within one arc-minute.

The indicated oil bearing regions were recompiled from data displayed at the following URLs:

Middle East Map of the Future