OBAMA’S POLICY IN SYRIA

There is dismay and confusion within the Obama administration over its proposed “regime change” in Syria. It is not going according to plan. President Assad is still in power after five years of intense combat. His military is still loyal to him as are his people and Assad’s allies, Russia, Iran, China and Hezbollah stand steadfastly behind him. The Obama administration is particularly angry because Syrian and Russian militaries are attacking the jihadists lodged in eastern Aleppo, the same jihadists who are associated with al-Qaeda and ISIS and/or similar Islamic fundamentalist armed groups.  

But shouldn’t the US be glad that the Syrian military and the Russians are attacking the jihadists?

It turns out that Washington has no interest in defeating the jihadists in Syria. In fact, this administration is just fine with the jihadists as long as they help them move the ball closer to their goal. The objective is to topple the regime, replace Assad with a US-stooge, splinter the country into multiple parts and control vital pipeline corridors.  The only force capable of bring this about are jihadist forces.

In my political thriller, The Syrian, I wrote that Syria was the conduit between Iran and Hezbollah, Israel’s two main enemies. In order to weaken Israel’s adversaries, Syria had to be destroyed. I also argued that there was a religious component. Syria is ruled by Alawites, an offshoot of Shiite Islam. Iran and Hezbollah are also Shiites. Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf nations, mostly Sunni, support the US and Israel’s attempt to destroy the three Shiite entities.

Since 2014, when The Syrian was published, facts on the ground have become more complicated, or should I say, much clearer.

Not only is the US willing to let jihadists do their bidding, they are supplying sophisticated weaponry to al-Qaeda, albeit through Saudi Arabia and Qatar, knowing full well that they are giving these weapons to the jihadists. Why isn’t this newsworthy? It would undercut the desired propaganda narrative of “good guy” rebels fighting “bad guy” Syrian government backed by “ultra-bad-guy” Russians.

The US wants Assad out of power and the only forces capable of bringing this about are the jihadists, euphemistically re-named “rebels” or moderates” by the cabal of “loyal” journalists who are not being honest with the American public. Why shouldn’t Americans be told that their tax money and US weaponry is going to aid the terrorist group that perpetuated the 9/11 attack? Why shouldn’t they be reminded, lest they’d forgotten, that Washington under President Carter helped midwife the modern jihadist movement and al-Qaeda through US-Saudi support for the Afghan mujahedeen in the 1980?

Under the Freedom of Information Act, an unclassified U.S. Department of State document, dated November 30, 2015 stated: “Bringing down Assad would not only be a massive boon to Israel’s security, it would also ease Israel’s understandable fear of losing its nuclear monopoly. With Assad gone, and Iran no longer able to threaten Israel through its proxies, Syria and Hezbollah, it is possible that the U.S. and Israel can agree on red lines for when Iran’s nuclear program has crossed an unacceptable threshold. In short, the White House can ease the tension that has developed with Israel over Iran by doing the “right thing” in Syria.”

Never mind that this same support of Israel and Saudi Arabia has brought us into a dangerous confrontation with Russia along with recently imposed sanctions and the elimination of nuclear and plutonium cooperation.

The new playbook gets even more dangerous. Washington now wants to encircle Mosul, closing off all escape corridors, and then, once Mosul falls, push the 9,000 or so jihadists into eastern Syria so Assad and his ally Russia cannot liberate Aleppo and declare victory.

According to Israel’s former Ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, “We’ve always wanted Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren’t backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran, even if the bad guys are affiliated with al-Qaeda.”

Stephen Kinzer wrote in the The Boston Globe  on February 18, 2016 that,  “The United States has the power to decree the death of nations. It can do so with popular support because many American are content with the official story. In Syria, it is: fight Assad, Russia and Iran. Join with our Turkish, Saudi, and Kurdish friends and support peace. This is appallingly distant from reality. It is also likely to prolong the war and condemn more Syrians to suffering and death.”

US support of Israel and Saudi Arabia has never had a reasonable basis in terms of American interests. Such support has brought us grief, death and trouble, including 9/11. So why is the American government the servant of Israeli and Saudi interests and not American interests?

This book is available for purchase here:

Syrian-230x335

 

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “OBAMA’S POLICY IN SYRIA

  1. Cathy
    I haven’t read the book, but will certainly look out for it. I’ve spent time in the region and read a few months ago that it was actually the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church who personally met with Putin and asked him to consider sending Russian troops to support Assad as he was the only one protecting the Christian minorities!

    Liked by 2 people

    • LAWRENCE, THANKS FOR ADDING THIS IMPORTANT BIT OF INFORMATION. I HAVE SAID ALL ALONG THAT IF IT WASN’T FOR PUTIN
      SYRIA WOULD HAVE GONE THE WAY OF LIBYA AND IF WE HAVE THE RUSSIAN PATRIARCH TO THANK FOR HIS INTERVENTION, SO BE IT.
      IN THE MEANTIME WE CONTINUE TO DEMONIZE PUTIN BECAUSE HE ISN’T LETTING OUR NEOCONS CARRY OUT THEIR
      DIRTY WORK AND COMPLETELY DESTROY SYRIA. HOPEFULLY FOR THE SAKE OF ALL SYRIANS THEY WON’T SUCCEED.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Dear Cathy, I got an idea of your novel. I think we have to bear in mind that Russia is also an empire. It embodies absolutism and totalitarianism along with its allies. The work of the philosopher Karl Popper on the meaning of Holism,Historicism, and Essentialism that brought about Nazism and fascism, is worth examining these days. An empire would tip various absolutism(s) – that’s religious and non – on each other, for its own preservation. That’s what perhaps would be called the law of struggle. The challenge facing the west is that it’s bolstering another face of absolutism by unflinchingly backing Israeli injustices and sins. In these complicated times one can’t even utter a critical word on Israel’s policies, which is in Karl Popper’s views another configuration of absolutism. Apparently,the world is hurling towards another clash between absolutism(s).

    Like

  3. Good post Cathy – I will certainly read the book. What I find worrying is that some Western leaders were prepared to let the war and suffering go on rather than admit that they were wrong. Hopefully the current peace talks will succeed. And yes they are thanks to Putin and Patriarch Kirill.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s