General Wesley Clark
Wars Were Planned - Seven Countries In Five Years
Gen. Wesley Clark - watch
complete original video
March 02, 2007
Pertinent audio only
of
original video at Democracy Now!
General Wesley Clark:
Because I had been through the Pentagon right after
9/11.
About ten days after 9/11, I went through the
Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy
Secretary Wolfowitz.
I went downstairs just to say hello
to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to
work for me, and one of the generals called me in.
He
said, "Sir, you've got to come in and talk to me a
second." I said, "Well, you're too busy." He said, "No,
no." He says, "We've made the decision we're going to
war with Iraq."
This was on or about the 20th of
September. I said, "We're going to war with Iraq? Why?"
He said, "I don't know." He said, "I guess they don't
know what else to do." So I said, "Well, did they find
some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?" He
said, "No, no."
He says, "There's nothing new that way.
They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq." He
said, "I guess it's like we don't know what to do about
terrorists, but we've got a good military and we can
take down governments."
And he said, "I guess if the
only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to
look like a nail."
So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that
time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, "Are we
still going to war with Iraq?" And he said, "Oh, it's
worse than that."
He reached over on his desk. He picked
up a piece of paper. And he said, "I just got this down
from upstairs" - meaning the Secretary of Defense's
office - "today."
And he said, "This is a memo that
describes how we're going to take out seven countries in
five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon,
Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran." I said,
"Is it classified?" He said, "Yes, sir."
I said, "Well,
don't show it to me." And I saw him a year or so ago,
and I said, "You remember that?"
He said, "Sir, I didn't
show you that memo! I didn't show it to you!"
PART I
|
This article was updated on
August 11, 2011 |
An extended Middle East Central Asian war
has been on the Pentagon's drawing board since the mid-1990s.
As part of this extended war scenario, the U.S.-NATO alliance plans to
wage a military campaign against Syria under a
United Nations sponsored
"humanitarian mandate".
Escalation is an integral part of the military agenda. Destabilization
of sovereign states through "regime change" is closely coordinated with
military planning.
There is a military roadmap characterized by a sequence of U.S.-NATO war
theaters.
War preparations to attack Syria and Iran have been in "an advanced
state of readiness" for several years. The Syria Accountability and
Lebanese
Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003 categorizes Syria as a
"rogue state", as a country which supports terrorism.
A war on Syria is viewed by the Pentagon as part of the broader war
directed against Iran.
President George W. Bush confirmed in his Memoirs
that he had,
"ordered the Pentagon to plan an attack on Iran's nuclear
facilities and [had] considered a covert attack on Syria".
(George Bush's
memoirs reveal how he considered attacks on Iran and Syria, The
Guardian, November 8, 2010)
This broader military agenda is intimately related to strategic oil
reserves and pipeline routes. It is supported by the Anglo-American oil
giants.
The July 2006 bombing of Lebanon was part of a carefully planned
"military road map". The extension of "The July War" on Lebanon into
Syria had been contemplated by U.S. and Israeli military planners. It was
abandoned upon the defeat of Israeli ground forces by Hizbollah.
Israel's July 2006 war on Lebanon also sought to establish Israeli
control over the North Eastern Mediterranean coastline including
offshore oil and gas reserves in Lebanese and Palestinian territorial
waters.
The plans to invade both Lebanon and Syria have remained on the
Pentagon's drawing board despite Israel's setback in the 2006 July War:
"In November 2008, barely a month before
Tel Aviv started its massacre in the Gaza Strip, the Israeli
military held drills for a two-front war against Lebanon and Syria
called Shiluv Zro’ot III (Crossing Arms III).
The military exercise
included a massive simulated invasion of both Syria and Lebanon"
(See Mahdi Darius Nazemoraya,
Israel's Next War: Today the Gaza Strip, Tomorrow Lebanon?, Global
Research, January 17, 2009)
The road to Tehran goes through Damascus.
A
U.S.-NATO sponsored war on Iran would involve, as a first step, a
destabilization campaign ("regime change") including covert intelligence
operations in support of rebel forces directed against the Syrian
government.
A "humanitarian war" under the logo of "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P)
directed against Syria would also contribute to the ongoing
destabilization of Lebanon.
Were a military campaign to be waged against Syria, Israel would be
directly or indirectly involved in military and intelligence operations.
A war on Syria would lead to military escalation.
There are at present four distinct war theaters:
-
Afghanistan-Pakistan
-
Iraq
-
Palestine
-
Libya
An attack on Syria would lead to the integration of these separate war
theaters, eventually leading towards a broader Middle East-Central Asian
war, engulfing an entire region from North Africa and the Mediterranean
to Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The ongoing protest movement is intended to
serve as a pretext and a justification to intervene militarily against
Syria.
The existence of an armed insurrection is
denied. The Western media in chorus have described recent events in Syria as
a "peaceful protest movement" directed against the government of
Bashar Al
Assad, when the evidence confirms the existence of an armed insurgency
integrated by Islamic paramilitary groups.
From the outset of the protest movement in Daraa in mid-March, there has
been an exchange of fire between the police and armed forces on the one hand
and armed gunmen on the other. Acts of arson directed against government
buildings have also been committed. In late July in Hama, public buildings
including the Court House and the Agricultural Bank were set on fire.
Israeli news sources, while dismissing the
existence of an armed conflict, nonetheless, acknowledge that,
"protesters [were] armed with heavy machine
guns."
(DEBKAfile August 1, 2001. Report on
Hama)
"All Options on the
Table"
In June, U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (who serves on the Senate Armed Services
Committee) hinted to the possibility of a "humanitarian" military
intervention directed against Syria with a view to "saving the lives of
civilians".
Graham suggested that the "option" applied to
Libya under UN Secuirty Council resolution 1973 should be envisaged in the
case of Syria:
“If it made sense to protect the Libyan
people against Gadhafi, and it did because they were going to get
slaughtered if we hadn’t sent NATO in when he was on the outskirts of
Benghazi, the question for the world [is], have we gotten to that point
in Syria, ...
We may not be there yet, but we are getting very close, so if you really
care about protecting the Syrian people from slaughter, now is the time
to let Assad know that all options are on the table,” (CBS "Face The
Nation", June 12, 2011)
Following the adoption of the UN Security
Council Statement pertaining to Syria (August 3, 2011), the White House
called, in no uncertain terms, for "regime change" in Syria and the ouster
of President Bashar Al Assad:
"We do not want to see him remain in Syria
for stability's sake, and rather, we view him as the cause of
instability in Syria," White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters
Wednesday.
"And we think, frankly, that it's safe to say that Syria would be a
better place without President Assad," (quoted in Syria: U.S. Call Closer
to Calling for Regime Change, IPS, August 4, 2011)
Extended economic sanctions often constitute a
leadup towards outright military intervention.nA bill sponsored by Senator
Lieberman was introduced in the U.S. Senate with a
view to authorizing sweeping economic sanctions against Syria.
Moreover, in
a letter to President Obama in early August, a group of more than sixty U.S.
senators called for,
"implementing additional sanctions... while
also making it clear to the Syrian regime that it will pay an increasing
cost for its outrageous repression."
These sanctions would require blocking bank and
financial transactions as well as,
"ending purchases of Syrian oil, and cutting
off investments in Syria's oil and gas sectors."
(See
Pressure on Obama
to get tougher on Syria coming from all sides - Foreign Policy, August
3, 2011).
Meanwhile, the U.S. State Department has also met
with members of the Syrian opposition in exile. Covert support has also been
channeled to the armed rebel groups.
Dangerous Crossroads -
War on Syria
Beachhead for an Attack on Iran
Following the August 3 Statement by the Chairman of the UN Security Council
directed against Syria, Moscow's envoy to NATO Dmitry Rogozin warned of the
dangers of military escalation:
"NATO is planning a military campaign
against Syria to help overthrow the regime of President Bashar
al-Assad with a long-reaching goal of preparing a beachhead for an
attack on Iran...
"[This statement] means that the planning [of the military campaign]
is well underway. It could be a logical conclusion of those military
and propaganda operations, which have been carried out by certain
Western countries against North Africa," Rogozin said in an
interview with the Izvestia newspaper...
The Russian diplomat pointed out at the fact
that the alliance is aiming to interfere only with the regimes "whose
views do not coincide with those of the West."
Rogozin agreed with the opinion expressed by
some experts that Syria and later Yemen could be NATO's last steps on
the way to launch an attack on Iran.
"The noose around Iran is tightening.
Military planning against Iran is underway. And we are certainly
concerned about an escalation of a large-scale war in this huge
region," Rogozin said.
Having learned the Libyan lesson, Russia,
"will continue to oppose a forcible
resolution of the situation in Syria," he said, adding that the
consequences of a large-scale conflict in North Africa would be
devastating for the whole world.
("Beachhead for an Attack on Iran"
- NATO
is planning a Military Campaign against Syria, Novosti, August 5, 2011)
Dmitry Rogozin
August
2011
Military Blueprint for
an Attack on Syria
Dimitry Rogozin's warning was based on concrete information known and
documented in military circles, that NATO is currently planning a military
campaign against Syria.
In this regard, a scenario of an attack on Syria is
currently on the drawing board, involving French, British and Israeli
military experts.
According to former Commander of the French Air Force
(chef d'Etat-Major de l'Armée de l'air) General Jean Rannou, "a NATO strike
to disable the Syrian army is technically feasible":
"NATO member countries would begin by using
satellite technology to spot Syrian air defenses. A few days later,
warplanes, in larger numbers than Libya, would take off from the UK base
in Cyprus and spend some 48 hours destroying Syrian surface-to-air
missiles (SAMs) and jets.
Alliance aircraft would then start an
open-ended bombardment of Syrian tanks and ground troops.
The scenario is based on analysts in the French military, from the
specialist British publication Jane's Defense Weekly and from Israel's
Channel 10 TV station.
The Syrian air force is said to pose little threat. It has around 60
Russian-made MiG-29s. But the rest - some 160 MiG-21s, 80 MiG-23s, 60
MiG-23BNs, 50 Su-22s and 20 Su-24MKs - is out of date.
..."I don't see any purely military problems. Syria has no
defense
against Western systems ... [But] it would be more risky than Libya. It
would be a heavy military operation," Jean Rannou, the former chief of
the French air force, told EUobserver.
He added that action is highly
unlikely because Russia would veto a UN mandate, NATO assets are
stretched in Afghanistan and Libya and NATO countries are in financial
crisis.
(Andrew Rettman,
Blueprint For NATO Attack On Syria Revealed,
Global Research, August 11, 2011)
The Broader Military
Roadmap
While Libya, Syria and Iran are part of the military roadmap, this strategic
deployment if it were to be carried out would also threaten China and
Russia.
Both countries have investment, trade as well as military
cooperation agreements with Syria and Iran. Iran has observer status in the
Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).
Escalation is part of the military agenda. Since 2005, the U.S. and its
allies, including America's NATO partners and Israel, have been involved in
the extensive deployment and stockpiling of advanced weapons systems.
The
air defense systems of the U.S., NATO member countries and Israel are fully
integrated.
The Role of Israel and
Turkey
Both Ankara and Tel Aviv are involved in supporting an armed insurgency.
These endeavors are coordinated between the two governments and their
intelligence agencies.
Israel's Mossad, according to reports, has provided covert support to
radical Salafi terrorist groups, which became active in Southern Syria at
the outset of the protest movement in Daraa in mid-March. Reports suggest
that financing for the Salafi insurgency is coming from Saudi Arabia. (See
Syrian army closes in on Damascus suburbs, The Irish Times, May 10, 2011).
The Turkish government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyib Erdogan is supporting
Syrian opposition groups in exile while also backing the armed rebels of the
Muslim Brotherhood in Northern Syria.
Both the Syrian
Muslim Brotherhood (MB) (whose leadership is in exile in the
UK) and the banned Hizb ut-Tahrir (the Party of Liberation) are behind the
insurrection. Both organizations are supported by Britain's MI6.
The avowed
objective of both MB and Hizb-ut Tahir is ultimately to destabilize Syria's
secular State. (See Michel Chossudovsky,
SYRIA: Who is Behind The Protest
Movement? Fabricating a Pretext for a U.S.-NATO "Humanitarian Intervention",
Global Research, May 3, 2011).
In June, Turkish troops crossed the border into northern Syria, officially
to come to the rescue of Syrian refugees.
The government of Bashar Al Assad
accused Turkey of directly supporting the incursion of rebel forces into
northern Syria:
"A rebel force of up to 500 fighters
attacked a Syrian Army position on June 4 in northern Syria. They said
the target, a garrison of Military Intelligence, was captured in a
36-hour assault in which 72 soldiers were killed in Jisr Al Shoughour,
near the border with Turkey.
“We found that the criminals [rebel fighters] were using weapons from
Turkey, and this is very worrisome,” an official said.
This marked the first time that the Assad regime has accused Turkey of
helping the revolt... Officials said the rebels drove the Syrian Army
from Jisr Al Shoughour and then took over the town. They said government
buildings were looted and torched before another Assad force arrived.
...
A Syrian officer who conducted the tour said the rebels in Jisr Al
Shoughour consisted of Al Qaida-aligned fighters. He said the rebels
employed a range of Turkish weapons and ammunition but did not accuse
the Ankara government of supplying the equipment."
(Syria’s Assad accuses Turkey of arming
rebels, TR Defence, Jun 25 2011)
Denied by the Western media, foreign support to
Islamist insurgents, which have "infiltrated the protest movement", is,
nonetheless, confirmed by Western intelligence sources.
According to former MI6 officer Alistair Crooke
(and high level EU adviser):
"two important forces behind events [in
Syria] are Sunni radicals and Syrian exile groups in France and the U.S.
He said the radicals follow the teaching of Abu Musab Zarqawi, a late
Jordanian Islamist, who aimed to create a Sunni emirate in Jordan,
Lebanon, Palestine and Syria called Bilad a-Sham.
They are experienced urban guerillas who
fought in Iraq and have outside finance. They infiltrate protests to
attack Assad forces, as in Jisr al-Shagour in June, where they inflicted
heavy casualties."
(Andrew Rettman,
Blueprint For NATO
Attack On Syria Revealed, Global Research, August 11, 2011)
The former MI6 official also confirms that
Israel and the U.S. are supporting and financing the terrorists:
"Crooke said the exile groups aim to topple
the anti-Israeli [Syrian] regime. They are funded and trained by the
U.S.
and have links to Israel. They pay Sunni tribal chiefs to put people on
the streets, work with NGOs to feed uncorroborated stories of atrocities
to Western media and co-operate with radicals in the hope that
escalating violence will justify NATO intervention."
(Ibid)
Political factions within Lebanon are also
involved. Lebanese intelligence has confirmed the covert shipment of assault
rifles and automatic weapons to Salafi fighters.
The
shipment was carried
out by Saudi-backed Lebanese politicians.
The Israel-Turkey
Military Cooperation Agreement
Israel and Turkey have a military cooperation agreement which pertains in a
very direct way to Syria as well to the strategic Lebanese-Syrian Eastern
Mediterranean coastline (including the gas reserves off the coast of Lebanon
and pipeline routes).
Already during the Clinton Administration, a
triangular military alliance between the U.S., Israel and Turkey had
unfolded.
This "triple alliance", which is dominated by the
U.S. Joint
Chiefs of Staff, integrates and coordinates military command decisions
between the three countries pertaining to the broader Middle East.
It is
based on the close military ties respectively of Israel and Turkey with
the U.S., coupled with a strong bilateral military relationship between
Tel Aviv and Ankara...
The triple alliance is also coupled with a 2005 NATO-Israeli military
cooperation agreement which includes "many areas of common interest,
such as the fight against terrorism and joint military exercises.
These
military cooperation ties with NATO are viewed by the Israeli military
as a means to "enhance Israel's deterrence capability regarding
potential enemies threatening it, mainly Iran and Syria."
(See Michel Chossudovsky,
"Triple Alliance"
- The U.S., Turkey, Israel and the War on
Lebanon, August 6, 2006)
Meanwhile, the recent reshuffle within Turkey's
top brass has reinforced the pro-Islamist faction within the armed forces.
In late July, The Commander in Chief of the Army and head of Turkey's Joint
Chiefs of Staff, General Isik Kosaner, resigned together with the commanders
of the Navy and Air Force.
General Kosaner represented a broadly secular stance within the Armed
Forces. General Necdet Ozel has been appointed as his replacement as
commander of the Army the new army chief.
These developments are of crucial importance. They tend to support U.S.
interests.
They also point to a potential shift within the military in favor
of the
Muslim Brotherhood
including the armed insurrection in Northern
Syria.
"New appointments have strengthened Erdogan
and the ruling party in Turkey... [T]he military power is able to carry
out more ambitious projects in the region.
It is predicted that in case
of using the Libyan scenario in Syria it is possible that Turkey will
apply for military intervention."
(New appointments have strengthened Erdogan and the ruling party in Turkey
- Public Radio of Armenia, August
06, 2011)
Muslim Brotherhood Rebels at
Jisr al Shughour
Photos AFP June 16, 2011
[Note: this photo is in many regards misleading.
Most of the rebel gunmen are highly trained with modern weapons.]
The Extended
NATO Military Alliance
Egypt, the Gulf states and Saudi Arabia (within the extended military
alliance) are partners of NATO, whose forces could be deployed in a campaign
directed against Syria.
Israel is a de facto member of NATO following an agreement signed in 2005.
The process of military planning within NATO's extended alliance involves
coordination between the Pentagon, NATO, Israel's Defense Force (IDF), as
well as the active military involvement of the frontline Arab states,
including Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Egypt: all in all ten Arab
countries plus Israel are members of The Mediterranean Dialogue and the
Istanbul Cooperation Initiative.
We are at a dangerous crossroads. The geopolitical implications are
far-reaching.
Syria has borders with Jordan, Israel, Lebanon, Turkey and Iraq. It spreads
across the valley of the Euphrates, it is at the crossroads of major
waterways and pipeline routes.
Syria is an ally of Iran. Russia has a naval
base in North Western Syria (see map).
Establishment of a base in Tartus and rapid
advancement of military technology cooperation with Damascus makes Syria
Russia's instrumental bridgehead and bulwark in the Middle East.
Damascus is an important ally of Iran and irreconcilable enemy of
Israel. It goes without saying that appearance of the Russian military
base in the region will certainly introduce corrections into the
existing correlation of forces.
Russia is taking the Syrian regime under its protection. It will almost
certainly sour Moscow's relations with Israel.
It may even encourage the
Iranian regime nearby and make it even less tractable in the nuclear
program talks.
(Ivan Safronov,
Russia to defend its
principal Middle East ally: Moscow takes Syria under its protection,
Global Research July 28, 2006)
World War III Scenario
For the last five years, the Middle East-Central Asian region has been on an
active war footing.
Syria has significant air defense capabilities as well as ground forces.
Syria has been building up its air defense system with the delivery of
Russian Pantsir S1 air-defense missiles. In 2010, Russia delivered a Yakhont
missile system to Syria.
The Yakhont operating out of Russia's Tartus
naval base,
"are designed for engagement of enemy's
ships at the range of up to 300 km".
(Bastion missile systems to protect
Russian naval base in Syria, Ria Novosti, September 21, 2010)
The structure of military alliances respectively
on the U.S.-NATO and Syria-Iran-SCO sides, not to mention the military
involvement of Israel, the complex relationship between Syria and Lebanon,
the pressures exerted by Turkey on Syria's northern border, point indelibly
to a dangerous process of escalation.
Any form of U.S.-NATO sponsored military intervention directed against Syria
would destabilize the entire region, potentially leading to escalation over
a vast geographical area, extending from the Eastern Mediterranean to the
Afghanistan-Pakistan border with Tajikistan and China.
In the short run, with the war in Libya, the U.S.-NATO military alliance is
overextended in terms of its capabilities.
While we do not foresee the implementation of a
U.S.-NATO military operation in the short-term, the process of political
destabilization through the covert support of a rebel insurgency will in all
likelihood continue.
PART II
The Pentagon's "Salvador Option"
The Deployment of
Death Squads in Iraq and Syria
|
This Part II focuses on the
history of the Pentagon's "Salvador Option" in Iraq and its
relevance to Syria.
The program was implemented under the tenure of John D. Negroponte,
who served as U.S. ambassador to Iraq
(June 2004-April 2005).
The current ambassador to
Syria, Robert S. Ford was part of Negroponte's team in Baghdad in
2004-2005. |
Syria - Overview and
Recent Developments
The Western media has played a central role in obfuscating the
nature of foreign interference in Syria including outside
support to armed insurgents.
In chorus they have
described recent events in Syria as a "peaceful protest
movement" directed against the government of Bashar Al Assad,
when the evidence amply confirms that Islamic paramilitary
groups have infiltrated the rallies.
Israel's Debka Intelligence news, while avoiding the issue of an
armed insurgency, tacitly acknowledges that Syrian forces are
being confronted by an organized paramilitary:
"[Syrian forces] are
now running into heavy resistance: Awaiting them are
anti-tank traps and fortified barriers manned by protesters
armed with heavy machine guns."
DEBKAfile
Since when are peaceful
civilian protesters armed with "heavy machine guns" and
"anti-tank traps"?
Recent developments in Syria point to a full-fledged armed
insurgency, integrated by Islamist "freedom fighters" covertly
supported, trained and equipped by foreign powers.
According to Israeli
intelligence sources:
NATO headquarters in
Brussels and the Turkish high command are meanwhile drawing
up plans for their first military step in Syria, which is to
arm the rebels with weapons for combating the tanks and
helicopters spearheading the Assad regime's crackdown on
dissent.
Instead of repeating
the Libyan model of air strikes, NATO strategists are
thinking more in terms of pouring large quantities of
anti-tank and anti-air rockets, mortars and heavy machine
guns into the protest centers for beating back the
government armored forces.
(DEBKAfile,
NATO to
give rebels anti-tank weapons, August 14, 2011)
The delivery of weapons to
the rebels is to be implemented,
"overland, namely
through Turkey and under Turkish army protection...
Alternatively, the arms would be trucked into Syria under
Turkish military guard and transferred to rebel leaders at
pre-arranged rendez-vous."
(Ibid)
According to Israeli
sources, which remain to be verified, NATO and the Turkish High
command, also contemplate the development of a "jihad" involving
the recruitment of thousands of Islamist "freedom fighters",
reminiscent of the enlistment of Mujahideen to wage the CIA's
jihad (holy war) in the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan war:
Also discussed in Brussels and Ankara, our sources report, is a
campaign to enlist thousands of Muslim volunteers in Middle East
countries and the Muslim world to fight alongside the Syrian
rebels. The Turkish army would house these volunteers, train
them and secure their passage into Syria.
(Ibid)
These various developments point towards the possible
involvement of Turkish troops inside Syria, which could
potentially lead to a broader military confrontation between
Syria and Turkey as well as a full-fledged "humanitarian"
military intervention by NATO.
In recent developments, Islamist death squads have penetrated
the port city of Latakia's Ramleh district, which includes a
Palestinian refugee camp of some 10,000 residents. These armed
gunmen which include rooftop snipers are terrorizing the local
population.
In a cynical twist, the Western media has presented the Islamist
paramilitary groups in Latakia as "Palestinian dissidents" and
"activists" defending themselves against the Syrian armed
forces. In this regard, the actions of armed gangs directed
against the Palestinian community in Ramleh visibly seeks to
foment political conflict between Palestine and Syria.
Several Palestinian
personalities have sided with the Syrian "protest movement",
while casually ignoring the fact that the "pro-democracy" death
squads are covertly supported by Israel and Turkey.
Turkey's foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu has intimated that
Ankara could consider military action against Syria if the Al
Assad government doesn't cease "immediately and unconditionally"
its actions against "protesters". In a bitter irony, the
Islamist fighters operating inside Syria who are terrorizing the
civilian population, are trained and financed by the Turkish
Erdogan government.
Meanwhile, U.S., NATO and Israeli military planners have outlined
the contours of a humanitarian military campaign, in which
Turkey (the second largest military force inside NATO) would
play a central role.
On August 15, Tehran reacted to the unfolding crisis in Syria,
stating that,
"events in Syria should
be considered only as internal affairs of that country and
accused the West and its allies with trying to destabilize
Syria, in order to make the case for its eventual
occupation".
(Iran Foreign Ministry
Statement, quoted in Iran urges West to stay out of Syria's
‘internal matters' Todayszaman.com, August 15, 2011)
We are at dangerous
crossroads:
Were a military operation to be launched against Syria, the
broader Middle East Central Asian region extending from North
Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean to the Afghanistan-Pakistan
border with China would be engulfed in the turmoil of an
extended war. A war on Syria could evolve towards a U.S.-NATO
military campaign directed against Iran, in which Turkey and
Israel would be directly involved.
It is crucial to spread the word and break the channels of media
disinformation.
A critical and unbiased understanding of what is happening in
Syria is of crucial importance in reversing the tide of military
escalation towards a broader regional war.
Michel Chossudovsky
August 16, 2011
Background - America's
Ambassador Robert S. Ford Arrives in Damascus
(January 2011)
U.S. Ambassador Robert S. Ford arrived in Damascus in late January 2011 at the
height of the protest movement in Egypt.
America's previous Ambassador to Syria was recalled by Washington following
the 2005 assassination of former Prime minister Rafick Hariri, which was
blamed, without evidence, on the government of Bashar Al Assad.
The author was in Damascus on January 27, 2011 when Washington's Envoy
presented his credentials to the Al Assad government. (See photo below).
At the outset of my visit to Syria in January 2011, I reflected on the
significance of this diplomatic appointment and the role it might play in a
covert process of political destabilization. I did not, however, foresee
that this process would be implemented within less than two months following
the instatement of Robert S. Ford as U.S. Ambassador to Syria.
The reinstatement of a U.S. ambassador in Damascus, but more specifically the
choice of Robert S. Ford as U.S. ambassador, bears a direct relationship to
the onset of the protest movement in mid-March against the government of
Bashar al Assad.
Robert S. Ford was the man for the job. As "Number Two" at the
U.S. embassy in
Baghdad (2004-2005) under the helm of Ambassador John D. Negroponte, he
played a key role in implementing the Pentagon's "Iraq Salvador Option".
The
latter consisted in supporting Iraqi death squadrons and paramilitary forces
modeled on the experience of Central America.
The Western media has misled public opinion on the nature of the Arab
protest movement by failing to address the support provided by the U.S. State
Department as well as U.S. foundations (including the National Endowment for
Democracy -
NED) to selected pro-U.S. opposition groups.
Known and documented,
the U.S. State Department,
"has been been funding opponents of Syrian
President Bashar Assad, since 2006."
(U.S. admits funding Syrian opposition -
World - CBC News April 18, 2011)
The protest movement in Syria was upheld by the media as part of the "Arab
Spring", presented to public opinion as a pro-democracy protest movement
which spread spontaneously from Egypt and the Maghreb to the Mashriq.
The
fact of the matter is that these various country initiatives were closely
timed and coordinated. (Michel Chossudovsky,
The Protest Movement in Egypt:
"Dictators" do not Dictate, They Obey Orders, Global Research, January 29,
2011)
There is reason to believe that events in Syria, however, were planned well
in advance in coordination with the process of regime change in other Arab
countries including Egypt and Tunisia.
The outbreak of the protest movement in the southern border city of Daraa
was carefully timed to follow
the events in Tunisia and Egypt.
It is worth noting that the U.S. Embassy in various countries has played a
central role in supporting opposition groups. In Egypt, for instance, the
April 6 Youth Movement was supported directly by the U.S. embassy in Cairo
Ambassador Robert S Ford
presents his credentials to President Bashar al Assad
January 2011
Ambassador Robert S Ford and President Bashar Al Assad
January 2011
Who is Ambassador
Robert Stephen Ford?
Since his arrival in Damascus in late January 2011, Ambassador Robert S.
Ford played a central role in laying the groundwork as well as establishing
contacts with opposition groups.
A functioning U.S. embassy in Damascus was seen as a precondition for carrying
out a process of political destabilization leading to "regime change".
Ambassador Robert S. Ford is no ordinary diplomat. He was U.S.
representative in January 2004 to the Shiite city of Najaf in Iraq. Najaf
was the stronghold of the Mahdi army
A few months later he was appointed "Number Two Man" (Minister
Counselor
for Political Affairs), at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad at the outset of John
Negroponte's tenure as U.S. Ambassador to Iraq (June 2004- April 2005).
Ford subsequently served under Negroponte's
successor Zalmay Khalilzad prior to his appointment as Ambassador to Algeria
in 2006.
New Ambassador Negroponte Meets With Iraqi Officials (Photo - LIFE)
June 29, 2004 U.S.
Ambassador John Negroponte (2nd L) stands with his staff
(3rd L)
Legal Advisor, Corrin Stone, Minister Counsellor for Political Affairs,
Robert Ford (C), and
Deputy Chief of Staff, James Jeffrey (3rd R) while meeting officials of the
Iraqi interim
government June 29, 2004 in Baghdad, Iraq.
Negroponte's mandate as U.S. ambassador to Iraq
(together with Robert S. Ford) was to coordinate out of the U.S. embassy, the
covert support to death squads and paramilitary groups in Iraq with a view
to fomenting sectarian violence and weakening the resistance movement.
Robert S. Ford as "Number Two" (Minister
Counselor for Political Affairs) at the U.S. Embassy played a central role in
this endeavor.
To understand Robert Ford's mandate in both Baghdad and subsequently in
Damascus, it is important to reflect briefly on the history of U.S. covert
operations and the central role played by John D. Negroponte.
Negroponte and the
"Salvador Option"
John Negroponte had served as U.S. ambassador to Honduras from 1981 to 1985.
As Ambassador in Tegucigalpa, he played a key role in supporting and
supervising the Nicaraguan Contra mercenaries who were based in Honduras.
The cross border Contra attacks into Nicaragua claimed some 50 000 civilian
lives.
During the same period, Negroponte was instrumental in setting up the
Honduran military death squads,
"operating with Washington support's, [they]
assassinated hundreds of opponents of the U.S.-backed regime."
(See
Bush Nominee linked to Latin American Terrorism,
by Bill Vann, Global Research, November 2001)
"Under the rule of General Gustavo Alvarez
Martnez, Honduras's military government was both a close ally of the
Reagan administration and was "disappearing" dozens of political
opponents in classic death squad fashion.
In a 1982 letter to The Economist, Negroponte wrote that it was "simply
untrue to state that death squads have made their appearance in
Honduras."
The Country Report on Human Rights Practices that his embassy
sent to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee took the same line,
insisting that there were "no political prisoners in Honduras" and that
the "Honduran government neither condones nor knowingly permits killings
of a political or nonpolitical nature."
Yet according to a four-part series in the Baltimore Sun in 1995, in
1982 alone the Honduran press ran 318 stories of murders and kidnappings
by the Honduran military. The Sun described the activities of a secret
CIA-trained Honduran army unit, Battalion 316, that used "shock and
suffocation devices in interrogations. Prisoners often were kept naked
and, when no longer useful, killed and buried in unmarked graves."
On August 27, 1997, CIA Inspector General Frederick P. Hitz released a
211-page classified report entitled "Selected Issues Relating to CIA
Activities in Honduras in the 1980's." This report was partly
declassified on Oct. 22, 1998, in response to demands by the Honduran
human rights ombudsman.
Opponents of Negroponte are demanding that all
Senators read the full report before voting on his nomination. to the
position of U.S. Permanent Representative to the UN}"
(Peter Roff and
James Chapin,
Face-off: Bush's Foreign Policy Warriors,
Global Research November 2001)
John Negroponte-Robert
S. Ford - The Iraq "Salvador Option"
In January 2005, following Negroponte's appointment as U.S. ambassador to
Iraq, the Pentagon confirmed in a story leaked to Newsweek that it was,
"considering forming hit squads of Kurdish
and Shia fighters to target leaders of the Iraqi insurgency in a
strategic shift borrowed from the American struggle against left-wing
guerrillas in Central America 20 years ago".
(El Salvador-style 'death squads' to be
deployed by U.S. against Iraq militants - Times Online, January 10, 2005)
John Negroponte and Robert S. Ford at the U.S.
Embassy worked closely together on the Pentagon's project.
Two other embassy
officials, namely Henry Ensher (Ford's Deputy) and a younger official in the
political section, Jeffrey Beals, played an important role in the team
"talking to a range of Iraqis, including extremists". (See The New Yorker,
March 26, 2007).
Another key individual in Negroponte's team was
James
Franklin Jeffrey, America's ambassador to Albania (2002-2004). Jeffrey is
currently the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq.
Negroponte also brought into the team one of his former collaborators
Colonel James Steele (ret) from his Honduras heyday:
Under the 'Salvador Option,' Negroponte had
assistance from his colleague from his days in Central America during
the 1980's, Ret. Col James Steele. Steele, whose title in Baghdad was
Counselor for Iraqi Security Forces supervised the selection and
training of members of the Badr Organization and Mehdi Army, the two
largest Shi'ite militias in Iraq, in order to target the leadership and
support networks of a primarily Sunni resistance.
Planned or not, these
death squads promptly spiraled out of control to become the leading
cause of death in Iraq.
Intentional or not, the scores of tortured, mutilated bodies which turn
up on the streets of Baghdad each day are generated by the death squads
whose impetus was John Negroponte. And it is this U.S.-backed sectarian
violence which largely led to the hell-disaster that Iraq is today.
(Dahr
Jamail,
Managing Escalation: Negroponte and Bush's New Iraq Team, Antiwar.com, January 7, 2007)
John Negroponte described Robert Ford while at
the embassy in Baghdad, as,
"one of these very tireless people... who didn’t
mind putting on his flak jacket and helmet and going out of the Green Zone
to meet contacts."
Robert S. Ford is fluent in both Arabic and Turkish.
He
was dispatched by Negroponte to undertake strategic contacts:
[O]ne Pentagon proposal would send Special
Forces teams to advise, support and possibly train Iraqi squads, most
likely hand-picked Kurdish Peshmerga fighters and Shiite militiamen, to
target Sunni insurgents and their sympathizers, even across the border
into Syria, according to military insiders familiar with the
discussions.
It remains unclear, however, whether this would be a policy
of assassination or so-called "snatch" operations, in which the targets
are sent to secret facilities for interrogation.
The current thinking is
that while U.S. Special Forces would lead operations in, say, Syria,
activities inside Iraq itself would be carried out by Iraqi
paramilitaries.
(Newsweek, January 8, 2005)
The plan had the support of the U.S. appointed
Iraqi government of Prime Minister Iyad Allawi:
The Pentagon declined to comment, but one
insider told Newsweek:
“What everyone agrees is that we can’t just go on
as we are. We have to find a way to take the offensive against the
insurgents. Right now, we are playing defense. And we are losing.”
Hit squads would be controversial and would probably be kept secret.
The experience of the so-called “death squads” in Central America
remains raw for many even now and helped to sully the image of the
United States in the region.
.... John Negroponte, the U.S. Ambassador in Baghdad, had a front-row seat
at the time as Ambassador to Honduras from 1981-85.
Death squads were a brutal feature of Latin American politics of the
time. In Argentina in the 1970s and Guatemala in the 1980s, soldiers
wore uniform by day but used unmarked cars by night to kidnap and kill
those hostile to the regime or their suspected sympathizers.
In the early 1980s President Reagan’s Administration funded and helped
to train Nicaraguan contras based in Honduras with the aim of ousting
Nicaragua’s Sandinista regime. The Contras were equipped using money
from illegal American arms sales to Iran, a scandal that could have
toppled Mr Reagan.
It was in El Salvador that the United States trained small units of
local forces specifically to target rebels.
The thrust of the Pentagon proposal in Iraq, according to Newsweek, is
to follow that model and direct U.S. special forces teams to advise,
support and train Kurdish Peshmerga fighters and Shia militiamen to
target leaders of the Sunni insurgency.
It is unclear whether the main aim of the missions would be to
assassinate the rebels or kidnap them and take them away for
interrogation. Any mission in Syria would probably be undertaken by U.S.
Special Forces.
Nor is it clear who would take responsibility for such a program - the
Pentagon or the Central Intelligence Agency. Such covert operations have
traditionally been run by the CIA at arm’s length from the
administration in power, giving U.S. officials the ability to deny
knowledge of it.
(Times Online, op cit, emphasis added)
Under Negroponte's helm at the U.S. Embassy in
Baghdad, a wave of covert civilian killings and targeted assassinations was
unleashed.
Engineers, medical doctors, scientists and intellectuals were
also targeted. The objective was to create factional divisions between
Sunni, Shiite, Kurds and Christians, as well as weed out civilian support
for the Iraqi resistance. The Christian community was one of the main
targets of the assassination program.
The Pentagon's objective also consisted in training an Iraqi Army, Police
and Security Forces, which would carry out a homegrown "counterinsurgency"
program (unofficially) on behalf of the U.S.
The Role of General
David Petraeus
A "Multi-National Security Transition Command Iraq" (MNSTC) was established
under the command of General David Petraeus with the mandate to train and
equip a local Iraqi Army, Police and Security forces.
General David Petraeus's (who was appointed by Obama to head the CIA in July 2011),
assumed the command of the MNSTC in June 2004 at the very outset of
Negroponte's tenure as ambassador.
The MNSTC was an integral part of the Pentagon's "Operation Salvador Iraq"
under the helm of Ambassador John Negroponte. It was categorized as an
exercise in counterinsurgency.
At the end of Petraeus' term, the MNSTC had
trained some 100,000 Iraqi Security Forces, police, etc., which constituted
a body of local military personnel to be used to target the Iraqi resistance
as well as its civilian supporters.
From Baghdad to
Damascus - The Syria "Salvador Option"
While conditions in Syria are markedly different to those in Iraq, Robert S.
Ford's stint as "Number Two Man" at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad has a direct
bearing on the nature of his activities in Syria including his contacts with
opposition groups.
In early July, U.S. Ambassador Robert Ford travelled to Hama and had meetings
with members of the protest movement (Low-key U.S. diplomat transforms Syria
policy - The Washington Post, July 12, 2011).
Reports confirm that Robert Ford had numerous
contacts with opposition groups both before and after his July trip to Hama.
In a recent statement (August 4), he confirmed that the embassy will
continue "reaching out" to opposition groups in defiance of the Syrian
authorities.
Ambassador Ford in Hama in
early July
General David Petraeus
- President Obama's New Head of the CIA
Obama's newly appointed
CIA head, David Petraeus who led the MNSTC
"Counterinsurgency" program in Baghdad in 2004 in coordination with
Ambassador John Negroponte, is slated to play a key intelligence role in
relation to Syria - including covert support to opposition forces and
"freedom fighters", the infiltration of Syrian intelligence and armed
forces, etc.
These tasks would be carried out in liaison with
Ambassador Robert S. Ford.
Both men worked together in Iraq; they were part
of Negroponte's extended team in Baghdad in 2004-2005.
PART III
The Al Qaeda Insurgency in Syria
Recruiting Jihadists to Wage NATO's "Humanitarian Wars"
September 2, 2011
What triggered the crisis in
Syria?
It was not the result of internal political cleavages, but
rather the consequence of a deliberate plan by the US-NATO
alliance to trigger social chaos, to discredit the Syrian
government of Bashar Al Assad and ultimately destabilize Syria
as a Nation State.
Since the middle of March 2011, Islamist armed groups covertly
supported by Western and Israeli intelligence have conducted
terrorist attacks on government buildings and acts of arson.
Amply documented, trained gunmen and snipers have targeted the
police, the armed forces as well as unarmed civilians.
The objective of this armed insurrection is to trigger the
response of the police and armed forces, including the
deployment of tanks and armored vehicles with a view to
eventually justifying a "humanitarian" military intervention,
under NATO's "responsibility to protect" mandate.
The Nature of the Syrian
Political System
There is certainly cause for social unrest and mass protest in Syria:
unemployment has increased in recent years, social conditions have
deteriorated, particularly since the adoption in 2006 of sweeping economic
reforms under IMF guidance.
The later include austerity measures, a freeze
on wages, the deregulation of the financial system, trade reform and
privatization. (See
IMF Syrian Arab Republic - IMF Article IV Consultation
Mission's Concluding Statement - 2006).
Moreover, there are serious divisions within the government and the
military. The populist policy framework of the Baath party has largely been
eroded. A faction within the ruling political establishment has embraced the
neoliberal agenda. In turn, the adoption of IMF "economic medicine" has
served to enrich the ruling economic elite. Pro-US factions have also
developed within the upper echelons of the Syrian military and intelligence.
But the "pro-democracy" movement integrated by Islamists and supported by
NATO and the "international community" did not emanate from the mainstay of
Syrian civil society.
The protests largely dominated by Islamists represent a very small fraction
of Syrian public opinion. They are of a sectarian nature. They do no address
the broader issues of social inequality, civil rights and unemployment.
The majority of Syria's population (including the opponents of the Al Assad
government) do not support the "protest movement" which is characterized by
an armed insurgency. In fact quite the opposite.
Ironically, despite its authoritarian nature, there is considerable popular
support for the government of President Bashar Al Assad, which is
confirmed by the large pro-government rallies.
Syria constitutes the only (remaining) independent secular state in the Arab
world. Its populist, anti-Imperialist and secular base is inherited from the
dominant Baath party, which integrates Muslims, Christians and Druze. It
supports the struggle of the Palestinian people.
The objective of the US-NATO alliance is to ultimately displace and destroy
the Syrian secular State, displace or co-opt the national economic elites
and eventually replace the Syrian government of Bashar Al Assad with an Arab
sheikdom, a pro-US Islamic republic or a compliant pro-US "democracy".
The role of the US-NATO- Israel military alliance in triggering an armed
insurrection is not addressed by the Western media. Moreover, several
"progressive voices" have accepted the "NATO consensus" at face value:
"a peaceful protest" which is being
"violently repressed by the Syrian police and armed forces".
The Insurgency is
integrated by Terrorists
Al Jazeera, the Israeli and Lebanese press confirm that "the protesters" had
burned the headquarters of the Baath Party and the court house in Daraa in
mid-March, while at the same time claiming that the demonstrations were
"peaceful".
Terrorists have infiltrated the civilian protest movement. Similar acts of
arson were carried out in late July in Hama. Public buildings including the
Court House and the Agricultural Bank were set on fire.
This insurgency is directed against the secular State. Its ultimate object
is political destabilization and regime change. The hit squads of armed
gunmen are involved in terrorist acts directed against both Syrian forces
and civilians.
Civilians who support the government are the object of threats and
intimidation. Pro-government civilians are also the object of targeted
assassination by armed gunmen:
In Karak, a village near Dara’a, Salafis
forced villagers to join anti-government protests and remove photos of
President Assad from their homes. Witnesses reported that a young Muslim
man who refused to remove a photo was found hanged on his front porch
the next morning.
“People want to go out and peacefully ask for certain changes, but
Muslim Salafi groups are sneaking in with their goal, which is not to
make changes for the betterment of Syria, but to take over the country
with their agenda.”
(International Christian Concern (ICC),
May 4, 2011)
In late July, terrorists attacked a train
travelling between Aleppo and Damascus:
"The train was carrying 480 passengers...
The terrorists dismantled the rails which caused the accident... The
leading carriage was burnt... Other carriages were derailed and turned
over onto their sides...
(quoted in 'Terrorists attacked a train
traveling from Aleppo to Damascus' - below YouTube video, Truth
Syria)
Most of the passengers on the train "were
children, women and patients who were traveling to undergo surgeries."
(Saboteurs
Target a Train Traveling from Aleppo to Damascus, Driver Martyred
- Local - jpnews-sy.com, July 24, 2011)
The Recruitment of
Mujahedeen - NATO and Turkey
This insurgency in Syria has similar features to that of Libya: it is
integrated by paramilitary brigades affiliated to Al Qaeda.
Recent developments point to a full-fledged
armed insurgency, integrated by Islamist "freedom fighters" supported,
trained and equipped by NATO and Turkey's High Command.
According to Israeli intelligence sources:
NATO headquarters in Brussels and the
Turkish high command are meanwhile drawing up plans for their first
military step in Syria, which is to arm the rebels with weapons for
combating the tanks and helicopters spearheading the Assad regime's
crackdown on dissent.
Instead of repeating the Libyan model of air
strikes, NATO strategists are thinking more in terms of pouring large
quantities of anti-tank and anti-air rockets, mortars and heavy machine
guns into the protest centers for beating back the government armored
forces.
(DEBKAfile,
NATO to give rebels anti-tank
weapons, August 14, 2011)
A NATO-led intervention is on the drawing board.
According to military and intelligence sources,
NATO, Turkey and Saudi Arabia have been discussing "the form this
intervention would take".
Shift in Turkey's
Military Command Structure
In late July, the Commander in Chief of the Army and head of Turkey's Joint
Chiefs of Staff, General Isik Kosaner, resigned together with the
commanders of the Navy and Air Force.
General Kosaner represented a broadly secular
stance within the Armed Forces.
General Necdet Ozel has been appointed as
his replacement as commander of the Army and head of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff.
These developments are of crucial importance. They point to a shift within
Turkey's military high command in favor of the Muslim Brotherhood including
enhanced support to the armed insurrection in Northern Syria.
Military sources also confirm that Syrian rebels,
"have been training in the use of the new
weapons with Turkish military officers at makeshift installations in
Turkish bases near the Syrian border."
(DEBKAfile,
NATO to give rebels anti-tank
weapons, August 14, 2011)
The delivery of weapons to the rebels is to be
implemented,
"overland, namely through Turkey and under
Turkish army protection... Alternatively, the arms would be trucked into
Syria under Turkish military guard and transferred to rebel leaders at
pre-arranged rendezvous."
(Ibid)
These various developments point towards the
possibility of the direct involvement of Turkish troops in the conflict,
which could potentially lead to a broader process of military confrontation
between Syria and Turkey, as well as the direct involvement of Turkish
troops inside Syria.
A ground war involving Turkish troops would involve sending troops into
Northern Syria and,
"carving out a military pocket from which
Syria's rebels would be supplied with military, logistic and medical
aid."
(Assad
may opt for war to escape Russian, Arab, European ultimatums, Debkafile, August 31, 2011).
As in the case of Libya, financial support is
being channeled to the Syrian rebel forces by Saudi Arabia.
"Ankara and Riyadh will provide the
anti-Assad movements with large quantities of weapons and funds to be
smuggled in from outside Syria".
(Ibid)
The deployment of Saudi and GCC troops is also contemplated in Southern
Syria in coordination with Turkey.
(Ibid)
Recruiting Thousands
of Jihadists
NATO and the Turkish High command, also contemplate the development of a
jihad involving the recruitment of thousands of "freedom fighters",
reminiscent of the enlistment of Mujahideen to wage the CIA's jihad (holy
war) in the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan war:
Also discussed in Brussels and Ankara, our
sources report, is a campaign to enlist thousands of Muslim volunteers
in Middle East countries and the Muslim world to fight alongside the
Syrian rebels. The Turkish army would house these volunteers, train them
and secure their passage into Syria.
(Ibid)
This recruitment of Mujahideen to fight NATO's
humanitarian wars (including Libay and Syria) is well underway.
Some 1500 jihadists from Afghanistan trained by
the CIA were dispatched to fight with the "pro-democracy" rebels under the
helm of "former" Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) Commander Abdel
Hakim Belhadj:
“Most of the men have been recruited from
Afghanistan. They are Uzbeks, Persians and Hazaras. According to the
footage, these men attired in the Uzbek-style of shalwar and Hazara-Uzbek
Kurta were found fighting in Libyan cities.”
(The Nation, Pakistan)
The Libyan model of rebel forces integrated by
the Islamic brigades together with NATO special forces is slated to be
applied in Syria, where Islamist fighters supported by Western and Israeli
intelligence have already been deployed.
The Triggering of
Factional Divisions within Syrian Society
Syria is a secular state where Muslims and Christian have shared a common
heritage from the early Christian period and have lived together for
centuries.
Covert support is channeled to the jihadist fighters, who in turn are
responsible for acts of sectarian violence directed against Alawite,
Christians and Druze.
In early May, as part of the anti-government
"protest movement", armed gunmen were reported to have attacked Christian
homes in Daraa in Southern Syria:
In a Christian village outside of Dara’a, in
southern Syria, eye witnesses reported that twenty masked men on
motorcycles opened fire on a Christian home while shouting malicious
remarks against Christians in the street. According to another ICC
source in Syria, churches received threatening letters during the Easter
holidays telling them to join Salafi protestors or leave.
Last week in Duma, a suburb of Damascus, Salafis chanted,
“Alawites to the grave and Christians to
Beirut!” according to an ICC source and Tayyar.org, a Lebanese news
agency.
Christians in Syria are concerned that the
agenda of many hard-line Islamists in Syria, including the Salafis, is
to take over the government and kick Christians out of the country.
“If Muslim Salafis gain political
influence, they will make sure that there will be no trace of
Christianity in Syria,” a Syrian Christian leader told ICC.
“We want to improve life and rights in
Syria under this president, but we do not want terrorism. Christians
will be first to pay the price of terrorism... What Christians are
asking for is the realization that when changes are happening, it
should happen not under certain agendas or for certain people, but
for the people of Syria in a peaceful way under the current
government.”
Aidan Clay, ICC Regional Manager for the
Middle East, said,
“Unlike in Egypt, where Christians
predominantly supported the revolution that removed President Hosni
Mubarak from power, Syrian Christians have desired peace while
demanding greater freedoms under the current government. Christians
anticipate that only chaos and bloodshed will follow if Salafi
demands are met.
We urge the U.S. government to act
wisely and carefully when developing policies that have deep
political ramifications for Syria’s minorities by not indirectly
supporting a foothold to be used by Salafis to carry out their
radical agenda.”
(Syrian Christians Threatened by Salafi
Protestors, Persecution News, International Christian Concern (ICC), May
4, 2011)
The attacks on Christians in Syria are reminiscent of the death squadron
killings directed against Chaldean Christians in Iraq.
Towards a Syrian
Government in Exile
The Formation of a National Salvation Council (NSC)
Modeled on Libya's Transitional Council (TC)
A first step towards establishing a provisional government in exile was
envisaged at a so-called National Salvation Conference in Istanbul (July 16,
2011) integrated by some 300 Syrians in exile.
This conference venue led to the formation of a
National Salvation Council (NSC), composed of 25 members, modeled on
Libya's Transitional Council.
"Those present finally agreed on an
initiative that will select 25 from 300 present in Istanbul and 50 more
from inside Syria, resulting in a 75 member council to represent the
current uprising. This 75 member council will also work towards forming
a national unity government that can guide Syria in a transitory period,
should the regime fall.
This transitory period will seek to
administer a road-map that re-structures the Syrian state from a
dictatorship, dismantling a police state, to a representative democracy.
However, those present have refused the idea of forming a shadow
government at this moment..."
(Syrian opposition conference in Istanbul
and the formation of a joint council Syria Revolts, July 18, 2011)
The NSC envisaged the formation of an 11 member "Cabinet", which could
act as a de facto provisional government in the case of a "regime
collapse". The NSC is dominated by the outlawed Syrian Muslim
Brotherhood and Liberals from the Syrian exile community.
Syrian exiles vote for 'transitional
government' - Sidney Morning Herald, July 19, 2011
The Central Role of
General David Petraeus
President Obama's New Head of the CIA
Obama's newly appointed CIA head, David Petraeus who led the MNSTC
"Counterinsurgency" program in Baghdad in 2004 in coordination with
Ambassador John Negroponte, is slated to play a key intelligence role in
relation to Syria - including covert support to opposition forces and
"freedom fighters", the infiltration of Syrian intelligence and armed
forces, etc.
These tasks would be carried out in liaison with
Ambassador Robert S. Ford. Both men worked together in Iraq; they were part
of Negroponte's extended team in Baghdad in 2004-2005.
According to reports, General Petraeus, travelled to Turkey in mid July to
meet members of the National Salvation Council.
The meeting organized by Turkey's Foreign
Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu took place immediately following the National
Salvation Conference (July 16-18, 2011):
"[T]he source noted that Petraeous stressed
his support during the meeting for the idea of establishing an
exile-government, a government which is led by the Muslim Brotherhood
and their allies and assisted by American military officials..."
(See
The Syrian Opposition and the CIA -
Another Evidence of Treason - below YouTube).
While Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's
official visit to Turkey coincided with the holding of the National
Salvation Conference, there was no confirmation that Clinton had met up with
members of the NSC.
Officially,
Hillary Clinton met members of the
Syrian opposition "for the first time" on August 2nd. (Syria Opposition
Meets With Clinton - WSJ.com, August 3, 2011).
The Role of the
Western media
The Western media has played a central role in obfuscating the nature of
foreign interference in Syria including outside support to armed insurgents.
In chorus they have described recent events in
Syria as a "peaceful protest movement" directed against the government of
Bashar Al Assad, when the evidence amply confirms that Islamic paramilitary
groups are involved in terrorist acts. These same Islamic groups have
infiltrated the protest rallies.
Western media distortions abound. Large "pro-government" rallies (including
photographs) are casually presented as "evidence" of a mass anti-government
protest movement. The reports on casualties are based on unconfirmed
"eye-witness reports" or on Syrian opposition sources in exile.
Sham News and the London based Syria Observatory for Human Rights are
profusely quoted by the Western media as a "reliable source" with the usual
disclaimers.
Israel's Debka Intelligence news, while avoiding the issue of an armed
insurgency, tacitly acknowledges that Syrian forces are being confronted by
an organized paramilitary:
"[Syrian forces] are now running into heavy
resistance: Awaiting them are anti-tank traps and fortified barriers
manned by protesters armed with heavy machine guns."
DEBKAfile
Since when are peaceful civilian protesters
armed with "heavy machine guns" and "anti-tank traps"? What we are dealing
with is a trained paramilitary.
While Shaam News is quoted as the source of Associated Press reports and
photos, Sham News (SNN) is not a recognized news agency.
SNN describes
itself as,
"a group of patriotic Syrian youth activists
demanding the freedom and dignity for the Syrian people..." with pages
on Facebook and Twitter.
See
Shaam News Network
An Associated Press photo of a mass rally in
Hama indicates the following disclaimer:
The Associated Press is unable to
independently verify the authenticity, Content, location or date of this
handout Photo. Photo: HO / Shaam News Network.
Yet these same unconfirmed photos are used
profusely in the mainstream media.
The absence of verifiable data, however, has not prevented the Western media
from putting forth "authoritative figures"
on the number of casualties:
"Over 1,600 dead, 2,000 wounded (Al Jazeera,
July 27) and nearly 3,000 disappearances."
(CNN, July 28)
What are the sources of this data? Who is
responsible for the casualties?
The US Ambassador Robert S. Ford candidly stated to a Senate Committee
hearing that:
"The most dangerous weapon I saw was a sling-shot".
And that sling-shot catch phrase, which is an outright lie, has been quoted
profusely to uphold the non-violent character of the protest movement as
well provide a "humanitarian face" to Ambassador Robert S. Ford, lest we
forget, who was part of Negroponte's plan to set up death squadrons in Iraq
modeled on El Salvador and Honduras.
The Lie becomes the Truth.
Responsibility of the
Syrian Government
The Syrian government, its military and police force, bear a burden of
responsibility in the way they have responded to the insurgency which has
resulted in deaths of civilians and police.
But this issue, which is the object of open
discussion in Syria, cannot be meaningfully addressed without analyzing how
the US and its allies have supported and financed an insurrection integrated
by Islamist paramilitary groups and death squads.
The primary responsibility for the civilian deaths rests with Washington,
Brussels and Ankara, which have supported the formation and incursion of
Islamist "Freedom Fighters". They have also facilitated the financing and
delivery of weapons to the insurgents.
Since the existence of an armed insurgency (supported by foreign powers) is
not acknowledged by NATO governments and the Eastern media, pari passu these
deaths are attributed without further explanation solely to government
forces "shooting on defenseless civilians" or government forces shooting at
police defectors...
Dangerous Crossroads
Towards a Broader Middle East Central Asian War
Escalation is an integral part of the military agenda. Destabilization of
sovereign states through "regime change" is closely coordinated with
military planning. There is a military roadmap characterized by a sequence
of US-NATO war theaters.
War preparations to attack Syria and Iran have been in "an advanced state of
readiness" for several years.
US, NATO and Israeli military planners have outlined the contours of a
"humanitarian" military campaign, in which Turkey (the second largest
military force inside NATO) would play a central role.
In recent developments, Turkey has intimated that Ankara is considering
military action against Syria if the Al Assad government doesn't cease
"immediately and unconditionally" its actions against "protesters". In a
bitter irony, the Islamist fighters operating inside Syria who are
terrorizing the civilian population, are trained and financed by the Turkish
Erdogan government.
These veiled threats point towards the possible involvement of Turkish
troops inside Syria, which could evolve towards a full-fledged
"humanitarian" military intervention by NATO.
We are at dangerous crossroads. Were a US-NATO military operation to be
launched against Syria, the broader Middle East Central Asian region
extending from North Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean to the
Afghanistan-Pakistan border with China would be engulfed in the turmoil of
an extended regional war.
There are at present four distinct war theaters: Afghanistan-Pakistan, Iraq,
Palestine and Libya.
An attack on Syria would lead to the integration of these separate war
theaters, eventually leading towards a broader Middle East-Central Asian
war.
The road to Tehran goes through Damascus. A US-NATO sponsored war on Iran
would involve, as a first step, a destabilization campaign ("regime change")
including covert intelligence operations in support of rebel forces directed
against the Syrian government.
A war on Syria could evolve towards a US-NATO military campaign directed
against Iran, in which Turkey and Israel would be directly involved. It
would also contribute to the ongoing destabilization of Lebanon.
It is crucial to spread the word and break the channels of media
disinformation.
A critical and unbiased understanding of what is happening in Syria is of
crucial importance in reversing the tide of military escalation towards a
broader regional war.
