By Danny C. | DCPeriodical | 11/16/19 |
Fraught with disinformation, misinformation, half-truths, and complete fabrications; inside factions and outside interlopers; economic, military, private interest, nationalistic, imperialistic, and global incentives, the war in Syria is a confusing nut to crack.
Beginning in 2011 and still raging today, there are several pieces that make up this disastrous puzzle of senseless death and destruction. But by taking what evidence we can obtain and laying it out before us, the picture begins to make sense. Syria’s war is about utter control, of resources, of nations, of governments, of the entire globe, and in this exclusive DCPeriodical piece, we’ll do our best to disperse of the smoke and mirrors and expose the main drivers to this dire conflict and show what it is truly all about.
The Assad Regime
By 1970, not too many years after being liberated from French Colonialism and claiming its independence, tensions were coming to head within the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party (‘Ba’ath’ meaning ‘Rebirth’) which governed the relatively new Republic of Syria.
Among other problems, such as disagreements over military skirmishes in Israel and Jordan, the Ba’ath Party’s military commander had developed a heightening animosity towards the party leader’s close relationship with the Soviets, a country he felt was crossing lines by meddling in Syria’s affairs.
It was these very tensions that eventually led to the Minister of Defence, Haffez al-Assad, spearheading a coup against the party leader, Salah Jadid. Though no blood was spilled in the episode, Assad successfully overthrew Jadid and staked his claim as the President of Syria until his death in the year 2000, ending a thirty year reign.
Unchallenged that year in an election, Haffez’s son, Bashar al-Assad, then became Syria’s president and remains as such today, nearly twenty years later.
This presidency, solidifying nearly fifty years of Assad leadership, is what lies at the root of all of Syria’s current military conflicts.
Syrian Civil War
Beginning first in Tunisia, unrest broke out across the entire the Middle East in early 2011 in a schism known as the Arab Spring. Opposition groups sprung into the streets in basically every Islamic country in a coordinated effort to topple the regimes they were living under. Some regimes fell while others crushed the uprisings with an iron fist. In some cases the demonstrations were quite minor and died off before anything serious took place.
In Syria’s case, an abundance of opposition militias rose up. These were predominantly Sunni Muslim factions, such as the Free Syrian Army, al Nusra Front, the Islamic State of Syria (ISIS), and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).
This would have been a civil war easily won by the Syrian government’s forces, but due to outside influence and interference, the war has now been going on for eight years and innocent people are still being slaughtered.
This then begs the question: which outside influences are perpetuating this conflict?
We’ll answer this by looking at the main outside-powers driving in this conflict—Russia, Iran, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the main driver, the United States of America. We’ll only briefly touch on the former five nations, but will then go in depth on the latter to complete our analysis.
Friends of Assad
Syria has a longstanding relationship with Russia. Economically, Russia has been involved in building up Syria’s infrastructure since well before the fall of the Soviet Union, and has continued to be hereafter. While most of their relations fall under energy production, with several Russian companies stationed in Syria assisting in the production of its gas and oil, weapons contracts in 2011 alone have been reported to total over $4 billion.
As business partners and allies on friendly terms, Russia, like most nations, recognizes the Assad regime as the legitimately elected government of Syria. As such, they’ve backed Syria militarily since the beginning of the 2011 Civil War, both by providing weapons, training, and even infantry to fight alongside Assad’s forces against those rebelling.
In fact, the only military base Russia has outside of the former Soviet Union is in the Syrian province of Tartus, where the Russian military forces of the current conflict are centrally stationed, and where Syria has permanently housed a host of Russian naval ships and submarines armed with nuclear missiles since 2008.
As ISIS and al Qaeda-linked factions began making significant gains in 2014, by July 2015 Assad was requesting the support from the Russian military to help defeat them. Putin agreed. By that August Russian troops were deployed, bringing with them combat jets, tanks, and by September, warships.
This was a turning point in the war, because by the close of that month—September 2015—Russia, Iran, Iraq, and Syria had set up an intelligence center in Baghdad, Iraq, to communicate their joint operations in the targeting and defeat the rebel armies. The missile strikes began soon after.
While Russia has been criticized for their reckless endangerment of Syrian civilians, reportedly killing more of them in their attacks than rebel fighters, by September 2017 Putin declared the complete liberation of Syria from ISIS, and began withdrawing troops, only to have many more return later that year when it was agreed upon between the Assad and Putin governments to expand and officially ratify the Russian base in Tartus as a permanently active naval facility. Since then Russia has continued to fight within the coalition of the aforementioned nations allied with Assad.
Even more recently, with the October withdrawal of American troops from the Turkish border, Russian forces assisted Assad’s army in reentering northeastern regions of Syria, which had been Kurdish rebel-controlled for over seven years, through brokering a deal with the abandoned Syrian Kurds to protect them from slaughter by the Turkish-backed rebel factions in the area.
The US and Russia also play a solitary part of their own in Syria’s ongoing violence. This is why many commentators label it a ‘proxy war.’ Moreover, the two foreign armies have actually exchanged fire in a few situations.
As it sits, Russia currently supplies up to 75% of fossil fuels and gas to European states. America as well as most of Europe aren’t pleased with this dependence on the Kremlin, and have therefore been formulating plans for various pipelines to run from the gas-rich Persian Gulf, through Syria and into Europe, effectively cutting off Russia’s stronghold over the industry. As Assad has reportedly put the kibosh on such ventures, many feel this is the reason Russia is fighting so hard to protect him from being toppled.
In a manner of speaking, the war in Syria can be viewed through this lens—Russia vs. America for oil and gas dominance. But that, in truth, though a large piece of the puzzle, is just one part of the whole. However, the tensions between these superpowers are nothing to be ignored as they may lead to a situation where the wrong move sparks a much larger military conflict—world war.
While the West paints Russia’s involvement in Syria as a grab at asserting itself as a Middle Eastern power broker—and therefore a direct threat to American hegemony—it must be admitted that overall their forces have been effective in their stated mission of fighting back anti-Assad rebels and jihadist factions. While they’ve been inhumanely reckless in their attacks, killing as many, if not more, innocent civilians than enemy fighters, they haven’t lied or deceived the world in the process of fulfilling their stated objective—and they’ve been under the microscope the whole time. If ulterior motives exist in the mind of Vladimir Putin, for which there is little reason to doubt, it can’t be overlooked that he is currently fighting on the side of the legitimate government of Syria at their formal request, and cannot be faulted for doing so.
Falling under this same column of ‘friends to Syria’ is the Middle East’s contending superpower, Iran, an ally of Russia and China, and sworn enemy, both religiously and economically, of the other regional superpower, the Arab kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Since fighting broke out in 2011, Iran has been involved in the funding, training, and military strategies of Assad’s defense troops, and since 2012 has garnered support for Lebanon’s Hezbollah forces who have been quite effective at fighting back rebel insurgents in the region.
Aside from losing nearly 2500 Iranian Revolutionary Guard soldiers to the Syrian war, Iran has also sacrificed billions in cash to prop up Assad’s power. Estimates range anywhere from $6 billion a year to $105 billion since the war’s beginning.
This is all for good reason, of course. Iran isn’t simply being charitable. Their relationship with Syria is heavily based on what they get in return. For example, Syria’s ability to act as a bulwark against Saudi and US interference. Couple this with the fact that Syria acts as a route to send weapons from Iran to to the notorious Hezbollah forces in Lebanon, something they’ve been actively doing since well before the Syrian conflict broke out, and the alliance comes into into focus.
Enemies of Assad
In 1967, Syria lost a battle with its neighboring adversary Israel, consequently losing control of a region of land on the Israel-Syrian border called the Golan Heights, which Israeli forces have occupied and claimed as their own ever since.
Even before that, though, Syria had always aligned itself with the Palestinian forces defending their land from Israeli occupation—an ongoing battle to this day.
Additionally, Syria also aligns itself with Israel’s other arch enemy to northeast—Iran. So it goes without saying that these next-door-neighbors, Israel and Iran, are bitter rivals who would both like to see the other wiped off the map.
Bearing that in mind, it should come as no surprise that Israel has been caught on several occasions arming and funding the Syrian rebel militias, including jihad-extremist factions, currently at war with Assad, as well as treating those rebels in Israeli hospitals while launching their own missile attacks on Syrian lands.
This all, of course, goes a long way in preventing Assad from putting Syrian opposition forces down, making Israel a major contributor to the ongoing violence and occupation in the country.
Next we have the oppressive and deceptive kingdom of Saudi Arabia, who has been an enemy of Israel for many years, yet on the issue of Syria maintains comdradery.
Easily the most conservative and oppressive fundamentalist Islamic country on the face of the earth—where Sharia is the brutal law of the land—Saudi Arabia’s relations with Syria have been off-and-on over the past fifty years. In recent times, however, they have been anything but cordial.
Again Iran plays a part here as Iran and Syria are allies, and in both country’s cases it’s safe to say they view Syria as more of an Iranian province than anything else.
As mentioned before, Iran and Saudi Arabia are the main economic competitors in the Middle East, each vying for dominance over the other. Additionally, they respectively represent the hubs of two warring theocratic Muslim factions—the Shi’as (Iran) and the Sunnis (Saudi Arabia). These two have been at each other’s throats for centuries over who the proper successor-sect to the Prophet Mohammed is. This lunacy-based feud has spilled the blood and taken the lives of countless millions for eons.
Like Israel, but arguably to an even greater extent, Saudi Arabia supports the Syrian rebel militias at war with Assad’s regime, including the most heinous jihadists among them. Interestingly, a substantial amount of the rebels in Syria aren’t even from there. They’re recruited from Saudi Arabia for the most part, and sneaked in the country through Turkey—a popular smuggling route since the war’s start.
It isn’t hard to find reports on the Saudis, and Turks and Qataris for that matter, supplying weapons, strategic assistance, recruiting, training, rebel fighters and major funding to Assad’s opposition, including ISIS and al Qaeda. Moreover, American government knowledge of this activity is documented in the Clinton emails published on Wikileaks.
So you as you can see, the civil war could have been handled neatly by the ruling government of Syria. But due to constant flows of foreign fighters supported by outside powers, such as the Saudis, it makes this an uphill battle no matter how much ground is gained.
This is because the war isn’t meant to end. It’s meant to continue until the country is in ruins and its government in pieces.
One country more than any previously mentioned makes sure of this. So let’s get into the real meat and potatoes and look at who the real driving force is in this tragedy known as the Syrian conflict—the good-old US of A.
The American Plot of Regime Change and Resource Dominance
Now, to understand America’s motivations in Syria, we need to understand America’s overall plan for the Middle East in general, as Syria is just one piece of that puzzle.
Let’s begin with the ‘Petrodollar.’
In the early 1970’s, President Richard Nixon and his Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, devised a scheme with the oil-rich kingdom of Saudi Arabia, whereby American protection over Saudi oil fields was promised in exchange for the Saudis to sell their oil on the global market exclusively for American dollars.
That is to say, if Canada, for example, wanted to buy oil from the Saudis, they’d first have to acquire American dollars to pay for it. Every country has to. This, in turn, props up American currency and keeps it in high global demand.
“The petrodollar system also creates surpluses of U.S. dollar reserves for oil-producing countries, which need to be ‘recycled.’ These surplus dollars are spent on domestic consumption, lent abroad to meet the balance of payments of developing nations, or invested in U.S. dollar-denominated assets. This last point is the most beneficial for the U.S. dollar because petrodollars make their way back to the United States.”-Investopedia, How Petrodollars Affect the US Dollar, Nov. 11, 2019.
But Nixon and Kissinger didn’t stop at Saudi Arabia. A few years after that original deal, all member nations of the OPEC (Organization of Oil Exporting Countries) also signed on, ensuring America profited off of every oil sale made anywhere.
It’s really not much different than the mafia offering ‘protection’ of a person’s business in exchange for a vig every month. Now, consider what happens to the business owner who doesn’t pay up. Ka-blowie! If you can understand that, you can understand why America has been, and continues to be, involved in invasions in the oil-rich Muslim world.
As time went on, inevitably a number of countries became fed up with having to cut America in on the sales of their own resources—countries such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, and Syria—and began calling the agreement out as imperialistic extortion.
Those four countries listed above abandoned the Petrodollar at one time or another, and began selling their oil for other currencies, such as gold, the Euro, or Japanese Yen, effectively cutting America out of the picture.
Well, this behavior didn’t sit well with a group of neoconservative oil-boys connected to former president and CIA director George H.W Bush, and so they hatched an agenda to solidify their stranglehold over their adversaries and get filthy rich in the process.
These men—most notably Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz—were all members of a neoconservative ‘think tank’ (DC lobbyist group) known as the Project for the New American Century (PNAC).
In September of 2000 they published a very secretive document called Rebuilding America’s Defences: strategy, forces and resources for a new century, in which, according to renowned investigative journalist John Pilger, they ‘outlined in prophetic detail…what was needed for America to dominate much of humanity and the world’s resources.’
A matter of weeks after the document’s release, in November of 2000, the men mentioned above who were involved its creation—Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz—became the vice president, secretary of defense, and deputy defense secretary (respectively) in the newly elected George W. Bush administration.
Now, aside from outlining the need to make America’s military the most monumentally domineering entity on the planet, the document also pointed at ‘a number of regimes’ that were in need of a ‘process of transformation.’ Aside from North Korea, these were the governments of ‘Iraq, Iran, Libya and Syria’—who, as you remember, are the same countries who had spoken out against the Petrodollar and American private interests’ interference in the Middle East.
And then the document eerily prophecies that this ‘process of transformation’ was ‘likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor.’
In other words, Americans, who weren’t involved in any wars at that time, wouldn’t be easily convinced that military interventions in a bunch of foreign countries was at all necessary unless they were terrorized into it.
Well, not even a year later, while these men were sitting in the top possible positions of the US Government, that ‘catalyzing event’—that ‘new Pearl Harbor’—conveniently took place. On September 11th, 2001, I’m sure you remember, the World Trade Center was attacked by Muslim hijackers in airplanes before they collapsed into dust that flew all over New York City. They now had their traumatizing event. It was time to go to work.
Even though al Qaeda terrorists from Afghanistan were given the blame, within a mere few days of the 9/11 attacks there were already top secret memorandums being floated around the Pentagon, outlining missions to invade the exact countries mentioned in the 2000 PNAC document, plus additions—Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran—as US Military General Wesley Clark, who read the Pentagon documents, made public in this 2003 Democracy Now interview:
As Clark reported, the plan was to have all seven of those countries toppled in five years. How’s that for arrogance? It’s been nearly twenty years now. But that hasn’t deterred them. Three administrations later and counting and the plan’s still very much in motion. Every administration since Bush has done its part.
First was Afghanistan, where they had their sights on taking control of the country’s Taliban-controlled oil fields. The Bush Administration invaded in October of 2001 citing apparent links between the Taliban (who controlled Afghanistan and its oil) and al Qaeda. This was a lie.
“The lie was hinted at, rather than expressed outright. The lie was there that was no distinction between the Taliban and al-Qaeda. ‘We make no distinction between terrorists and those who harbor them,’ declared George W. Bush. This is the heart of the Bush Doctrine. The point was to justify the overthrow of a regime by actively confusing distinctions, encouraging people to see the Taliban as actively in cahoots with al-Qaeda plots, hence enemies of America and ‘terrorists’ by definition.”– The Fundamental Lie of the Afghan War, by Gary Leupp, CounterPunch.com. 2014.
After the American military quickly took control of Afghanistan, and its oil, they inserted a CIA asset named Hamid Karzai as the country’s new puppet president.
In 2001, a book based on the testimony of former FBI Deputy Director John O’Neill delineated that President Bush went out of his way to obstruct an FBI investigation into Afghani terrorism—the official reason the US invaded the country—knowing they would find out it was all bullshit, at the behest of ‘US oil interests, corporate interests, and the role played by Saudi Arabia’ in the planning and execution of the invasion.
However, additional to oil—and this should help make sense of the current opioid and opiate epidemic—before the invasion of Afghanistan the Taliban was producing a very measly percentage of the world’s opium supply. Since, Afghanistan produces around 90% of the planet’s opium. A near monopoly.
Countless articles, testimony from soldiers, and a plethora of photographic evidence have proven many times over the years that American and British troops are assigned to guard the poppy fields the opium is cultivated from, making the global opium market, from heroin to fentanyl, a joint UK/US government enterprise.
After Afghanistan came Iraq. As a result of President Saddam Hussein putting Iraq’s oil on the market without pricing it in the Petrodollar, the Bush Administration announced to the world that he was not only ‘hiding weapons of mass destruction,’ but was ‘linked to al Qaeda.’
These assertions were proven to be lies within a few months of them being peddled. No matter, America led Western troops into Iraq, destroyed the country, captured Saddam and hung him on live television. The succeeding government, propped up by America, put their oil sales back on the Petrodollar.
Libya is another perfect example. By then the Bush Administration was long gone—and somehow not in jail—but, keeping to the original PNAC plan, the invasion took place anyways, being spearheaded by Hillary Clinton from within the Obama Administration, as Wikileaks documents in Clinton’s published emails.
Muammar Gaddafi, it should be no surprise to learn, began placing Libya’s oil on the market in exchange for gold rather than the Petrodollar. As a result, rebel militias sprung up around him while American troops arrived to assist them. Before he knew it, Gaddafi was being stabbed in the anus while being ruthlessly beaten to death. As Hillary Clinton psychopathically summed it up (while laughing), ‘we came, we saw, he died!’
Libya, it must be pointed out, is so completely annihilated to this day from that invasion that not only are terrorist militias in control of the country, but an active slave-trade runs rampant within its borders. It is beyond a senseless tragedy.
Here’s the thing. It doesn’t matter which administration gets into the White House. Democrat, Republican. They’re all put there and controlled by the same private interests, and therefore they all stick to the agenda.
President Trump, for example—who ran on ending the wars and ‘draining the swamp’—just extended the military mission in Somalia—another country on the list General Wesley Clark outlined—for at least another seven years; he’s increased troops to Afghanistan; his administration is bristling to attack Iran; and he literally—and stupidly—keeps saying that American troops have commandeered several oil fields in Syria and aren’t giving them back—an international crime as occupying forces are forbidden to steal a countries resources by UN Charter. He is announcing—I’m sure against their wishes, I’m sure—that this all being done in the name of oil interests, just as he did when he tweeted that he was ready pimp out America’s military at the Saudi government’s order after Iran supposedly attacked a Saudi oil field in September (2019)—an event that has raised more questions than answers.
However, all this being said it is important to note that the US would rather destroy a country’s oil production than have it in the hands of a regime they can’t control, which is what they’ve been doing in Syria the whole time—bombing oil fields. For one, it destabilizes the country’s economy, bringing the government that much closer to ruin, and in the end they figure they’ll eventually get control of the remainder of the resource when the failed regime is toppled. In the meantime, the less oil being pumped out of a country not under American control, the more dependency on Saudi Arabia and countries that are.
“Since the end of the Cold War, the US has waged several ground and air wars in the region – two in Iraq, one in Afghanistan, and one in Libya – and is currently threatening more. Each conflict has of course its own specific objectives, but there is a common denominator: the need to keep the oil of the region free-flowing, inexpensive, and under the firm control of the US and its friends. American strategists don’t simply want to obtain oil. If you have money, that’s easy. They also want to eliminate all potential competitors, safeguarding the region politically and militarily so that the flow of oil from the Middle East to world markets remains under their direct control.”-Bulent Gökay, Professor of International Relations, Keele University, 2016.
If nothing else, this should be a lesson as to what happens when private interests get into government. Deception, invasion, extortion, exploitation, and murder on scales too big to imagine. Many millions pay the ultimate price while very few see the profit.
The American War Racket
There are other factors at play here other than oil, though. Oil, the most lucrative commodity on the planet, is a means to dominance. However, war in and of itself is a massive money making scheme to the American oligarchy in its own right.
Consider those profiting from government contracts to build weapons and military supplies. These are people who, like the oil boys, frequently pass through the revolving doors between government and industry. These people are sickeningly rich, especially when one considers where they get their money from.
Here’s the facts. America spends around $6.5 billion a year on US military defense—estimated next year to be over a trillion. That’s more than the next top seven countries combined. After those seven countries, the remainder of the world, 144 countries combined, still spend less on defense than the US.
Conversely, the US also leads the world in weapons exports by a massive margin.
In essence, Americans are taxed, and while their infrastructure crumbles, an enormous amount of that money goes right into the pockets of US defense contractors run by former government officials and others connected to them; companies such as Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, and General Dynamics, who make obscenely expensive weapons of murder and mass destruction. These people depend on war to make them filthy rich, and so do their many Wall Street investors. They can’t get enough of it. It is truly greed-driven insanity in its (im-)purest form.
And its not just weapons makers. There are other private interests who rake in billions from war.
Take the company Brown and Root, who in the 1960’s funded their bought-and-paid-for political asset, Lyndon B. Johnson, right into the White House. At the behest of this company, President Johnson greatly escalated American entanglement in the Vietnam war, all so Brown and Root could take on numerous government contracts to build ‘airports, bases, hospitals and other facilities for the U.S. Navy in South Vietnam’ (NPR, 2003).
Brown and Root profited in the hundred-millions (1960’s money) to rebuild a country that President Johnson, a man on their payroll, spearheaded the destruction of, and to top it all off, here’s the icing on the cake. Ladybird Johnson, the president’s wife, was Brown and Root’s majority shareholder the whole time!
Interestingly, decades later Brown and Root—then known as KBR (Kellogg Brown and Root)—became a subsidiary of an oil conglomerate called Halliburton, of which PNAC founder and vice president to George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, was once CEO.
And wouldn’t you know it? KBR (Brown and Root) received at least $39 billion in contracts to rebuild Iraq after America destroyed it—in a war started by Dick Cheney, its former CEO. Same company, same military, same scheme as Johnson in Vietnam. War is a racket.
Unsurprisingly, Cheney appears again in this regard more recently. This time attached to another private entity known as Genie Energy, whose strategic advisory board includes Cheney, media mogul, CIA asset, and sinister propagandist Rupert Murdoch, former CIA director James Woosley, and Jacob Rothschild, to name a few.
In the Israeli occupied Syrian territory of the Golan Heights (which we went over above), it should come as no shock that Genie Energy is already looting oil from Syria.
So aside from the obvious imperialistic objectives of the continuous American war effort, war itself is a ridiculously lucrative American industry. It’s both the most evil and most profitable racket in existence.
Put simply, innocent poor people die so psychopathic rich people, who are already obscenely rich, can get richer. This is why they call it the ‘military industrial complex.’ It is a trillion dollar military-based industry composed of many different and interconnected parts, and they will say and do anything to anyone to keep the industry flourishing and their pockets filled with your money.
American Made and Protected Terrorism
Since 9/11, the US has used the excuse of wiping out terrorism to invade the countries they’ve deployed troops to—Iraq, Somalia, Libya, Syria, etc. But it’s no secret anymore that the terrorists the US says they’re fighting are all offshoots of the Mujaheddin—a CIA funded and armed Arab militia, mostly recruited from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. These men were trained in the 1980’s by American intelligence agents in the arts of ‘bomb-making, sabotage and urban guerrilla warfare,’ as the Guardian reported so many years ago. With Osama bin Laden among their ranks, they were used as an American proxy army in the fight against the Soviet Union during the Soviet–Afghan War (79-89).
These Mujaheddin are the very rebels who eventually branched off into becoming al Qaeda, ISIS, al Nusra, and so on, as Hillary Clinton details in the video excerpt above. ‘Al Qaeda’ itself, according to Osama bin Laden, meant ‘the base,’ as in the military base where the CIA trained he and his fellow Mujaheddin fighters.
Moreover, there is no indication that America has ever stopped funding and arming rebel militias to use as proxy forces. The evidence is quite to the contrary. While American citizens are told US troops are in Syria to combat terrorist rebels, in actuality the US has trained, funded, and/or armed 21 out of the 28 militias attempting to overthrow Syria’s president, many of which who were trained in Jordan before America officially joined the Syrian war.
Though covert missions were taking place for years, in 2014, President Obama officially initiated the US Syrian invasion after the sudden pop-up of the insane jihadist faction known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), conveniently not revealing to the public that they were driving around in American-made vehicles and shooting American-made bullets from their American-made guns; or that America’s partners in the region, The Saudis and Israelis, were supplying these things, plus treating injured ISIS fighters in their hospitals and providing a never ending supply of additional recruits.
ISIS has been anything but inconvenient for America’s cause in Syria. For one, they’re fighting against Assad’s forces, destabilizing the country’s infrastructure, and looting its resources. This is exactly what American interests crave. ISIS was methodically taking over Syria’s oil refineries and giving America cart blanche to drop scores of bombs on them to halt Syria’s exporting abilities of their most precious resource, in turn bankrupting the country on top of the inhuman sanctions already in place. But more importantly, it is ISIS, remember, who provides the cover story for American troops to be in Syria in the first place.
Unfortunately for US war profiteers, after ISIS didn’t seem to be doing anything but growing since the US invasion, Russia and Iran decided to assist Assad in defeating them, and in no time flat, ISIS wasn’t a problem anymore.
Lo and behold, President Trump then decided to pull US Troops near the Turkish border out of Syria, allowing the Syrian Kurdish rebels there, supposed allies of the US, to be targeted by their enemies from Turkey with no one there to protect them. As the chaos ensued, the captured ISIS fighters in the region were given the opportunity break free from their cells. How convenient.
And those troops Trump said he was pulling out of Syria? Were they able to return home to America? No. After a brief trip to Iraq, many were back in Syria within a matter of days patrolling its oil and gas fields—the ones Trump said he’s ‘keeping.’ The ‘official’ excuse for doing this, of course, is to make sure the fields don’t fall into the hands of the freshly escaped members of ISIS. Again, how convenient.
Now let us consider the recently reported US killing of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in the Syrian province of Idlib. It is very telling.
Ask yourself, why would the most notorious jihadist on earth, recognized by jihadists as the sole Caliph, be hiding in Idlib?
“’Idlib Province is the largest Al Qaeda safe haven since 9/11,’ Brett H. McGurk, the United States envoy to the coalition fighting the Islamic State, said last month. ‘Idlib now is a huge problem.'”–NY Times, In a Syria Refuge, Extremists Exert Greater Control , August 2017.
As the NY Times reported in 2017, the province of Idlib is dominated by al Qaeda—more accurately its provincial chapter known as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham—and overrun with anti-Assad wahabiests who send missiles into civilian-packed Syrian cities on a regular basis. If we want to talk about where the stronghold of Muslim extremists is in Syria, this is it.
Aaccording to that same NY Times article, ‘for years, the United States and its allies [have] sent covert aid‘ to the rebels in Idlib—including deadly weapons that end up in the hands of al Qaeda. Not only that, but the US Mission to the UN threatened force against anyone—namely the Syrian government and its allies—who dares attack Idlib, thus creating the circumstances for this jihadist sanctuary to exist—though Syrian forces have been going ahead with various attacks on Idlib in very recent times. The city is completely destroyed. The boy sitting in rubble that was once his house at the beginning of this article is a perfect depiction of life inside Idlib.
Lastly on this note, we’ll take a look at the curious case of the so-called ‘White Helmets.’
Supposedly a volunteer rescue/medical emergency organization in Syria, whose funding comes mainly from the UK’s Foreign Commonwealth Office, as well as the governments of the US, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, and New Zealand, several sources have shown that they are just another covert faction of al Qaeda used to fight against the Syrian government.
Not only is there video of al Qaeda militants singing their praises, but Western journalists who have investigated the White Helmets have inevitably reached the same conclusion such as Counterpunch’s Rick Sterling, who reported that ‘the White Helmets [are] a project created by the UK and US…a public relations project which has received glowing publicity from [the Huffington Post] to Nicholas Kristof at the [New York Times].’
Investigative journalist Vanessa Beeley, who spent months witnessing the Western-backed White Helmets in action in Syria, had this to report in April of 2017:
“I visited the White Helmet centres in Marjeh and Bab Al Nairab, East Aleppo, vacated since the liberation of East Aleppo from [the] Nusra Front led occupation in December 2016. The White Helmets departed with Nusra Front in the buses that evacuated many of them to Idlib. They left behind undeniable evidence of the White Helmet affiliation with an allegiance to Al Qaeda. Syrian civilian testimony and paperwork, graffiti all testify to the White Helmets being Al Qaeda ‘with a facelift.'”–Vanessa Beeley, August 2017.
In a word, when people say America (and all of the West for that matter) is actually supporting the terrorists they claim to be fighting, this is what they mean. Despite what the military industrial complex’s corporate propaganda media machine attempts to have you believe, it is no ‘conspiracy theory.’ It is a matter of fact.
Debunked Gas Attacks and the Extermination of Illiteracy
Assad, like Saddam and Gaddafi before him, is the current boogeyman of the hour, and his murder and overthrow, like theirs, must be justified to the American public as they’re the ones paying for it. But even if he is a ruthless man—which his reported bombings of rebel-controlled hospitals and schools certainly show him to be—the wise person should be weary of war-time propaganda.
While we read that Assad is a psychopathic dictator who frequently gasses his own population, in reality, the majority of Syrian citizens overwhelming support their president, and his father before him, and there are legitimate reasons for doing so. Progress has been made under their rule.
Take education, for example. In the beginning of the 1980’s, 42% of Syrians were completely illiterate. But through a government-led literacy initiative, by 1991 the illiteracy rate had disappeared. This social accomplishment coincided with Bashar’s father Haffez al-Assad’s dedication to educating Syrians. He opened multiple universities throughout the country while introducing primary schools to the youth, which had a 100% enrollment rate for boys and 85% for girls in the early eighties.
On top of that, through introducing healthcare to the country, life expectancy rose by nearly twenty years between 1970 and 2009! Conversely, infant mortality dropped from 132/1000 pregnancies per year to 17 during the same period.
The 1980’s also saw Syria grow to prosperity through ‘massive expenditures for development of irrigation, electricity, water, road building projects, and the expansion of health services and education to rural areas,’ all of which were brought about by a $100 million loan from the Soviet Union which paid for the Tabqa Dam on the Euphrates River, which had stood as the backbone to all Syrian social development that has occurred thereafter.
Sadly, the future would bring war, drought, and a plummeting oil market that rocked Syria’s economy. But Bashar al-Assad, aside from putting forth general political reforms, nearly had the country back to its full economic potential before the Civil War of 2011 erupted. This was heavily due to hundreds of millions of dollars he acquired through investments from China to modernize Syria’s oil and gas infrastructure.
To add to this, unlike other Middle Eastern countries—such as America’s ally Saudi Arabia—Syria, which was in the process of heavy reforms before the war, is a secular state, with each religious ideology represented within its government.
Yet we hear that the Assad regime monstrously gasses innocent people within its country’s borders.
On April 8th, 2018, for instance, it was alleged that the Assad regime used chemical weapons in an attack against rebels in Douma, Syria, leading to the deaths of forty to fifty individuals, while wounding nearly double that. One week later, American, British, and French forces delivered a series of attacks against Syrian government-controlled sites in Damascus.
While Assad asserted he didn’t use chemical weapons, and therefore these responsive attacks on his capital were in violation of international law, an investigation was launched by the international body known as the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which concluded chemical weapons were indeed used in the Douma attack, thus justifying the Western retaliations.
However, as time went on, doubts began to arise over the OPCW report. Videos of the aftermath in Douma were released on corporate news programs which were heavily criticized as being faked.
Then the whole narrative was blown to pieces when a whistleblower from within the OPCW came forward to Wikileaks with official documentation showing the report which concluded the chemical attacks in Douma took place was an unreliable fraud.
Wikileaks went ahead and convened a panel—which included, among others, first Director-General of the OPCW, Dr. José Bustani—to debrief the whistleblower.
Following that briefing, Wikileaks published the documents they had received, and OPCW Director-General Dr. Bustani had this to say:
“The convincing evidence of irregular behaviour in the OPCW investigation of the alleged Douma chemical attack confirms doubts and suspicions I already had. I could make no sense of what I was reading in the international press. Even official reports of investigations seemed incoherent at best. The picture is certainly clearer now, although very disturbing.”– Dr. José Bustani, First Director-General of the OPCW, Wikileaks, Oc. 23, 2019.
Days later, the Guardian’s Middle East correspondent Jonathan Steele, who also attended the briefing, spoke about what he witnessed on Paul Henley’s BBC World Service Programme, where he revealed the whistleblower was not only the OPCW scientist tasked with taking samples from the alleged attack site, but he was the second scientist to come forward and expose the episode being a hoax:
“I attended a briefing by a whistleblower from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons… [He] was in charge of picking up the samples in the affected areas, and in neutral areas, to check whether there were chlorine derivatives there…and he found that there was no difference.”–Jonathan Steel, BBC World Service Programme, Oct. 27, 2019.
‘These two scientists,’ Steele reasoned about the whistleblowers later, ‘I think they’re non-political. They wouldn’t have been sent to Douma if they’d had strong political views, by the OPCW. They want to speak to the Conference of the Member States in November, next month, and give their views, and be allowed to come forward publicly with their concerns. Because they’ve tried to raise them internally and been, they say they’ve been suppressed, their views have been suppressed.’
At this point, with multiple whistleblowers coming forward with documented evidence, it should be safe to say the chemical attack narrative in Douma was a propaganda operation to green light the American-led attacks on Damascus, making those attacks, as Assad had submitted, unprovoked and therefore an international war crime. But not only that, with the OPCW being exposed to have faked its reports, it calls into question every other supposed chemical weapons attack they’ve ever presented a conclusion on.
But you’ll hear none of this reported on CNN, MSNBC, FOX News, or any of the other CIA-controlled propaganda networks or publications in the West. Because their job is cover up the truth and sell the war.
In the End
All of this being said—and it was a lot to take in—I’d like to make it perfectly clear that this piece was in no way designed to paint Assad, Gaddafi, Saddam, or anybody else in some kind of angelic or saintly light. From what I can trust to know about these men, I disagree with all of their politics and general brutality. But that’s the point. It’s not on me to decide how a foreign country is run, just as it’s not on anyone to tell anyone else how their country is to be run. That’s the definition of imperialism.
Most anti-war advocates incorrectly speak against America ‘being the world’s police.’ But even that isn’t true. America isn’t being the world’s police, because the police intervene in situations to put a halt to criminality. If America were being the world’s police they would be taking action against Saudi Arabia for the treatment of its population, not walking around hand in hand with its leaders. It would be putting an end to the genocide going on in Yemen, not providing the weapons that make it possible to continue. It would be condemning the vicious attacks on, and displacement of, the Palestinians, rather than catering to the Zionists committing these atrocities.
No, America isn’t being the world’s police. American private interests, be them corporate, intelligence, industrial, or other, are pretending as if America is being the world’s police in order to deceptively and violently pull the entire planet under their direct control, and not only risking but taking anyone’s life they see fit to in the process. We’re talking millions of people dead since 9/11. A frightfully repugnant number of casualties one can only stand in awe of.
In the end, as should be perfectly clear by now, the war in Syria continues because the target is to topple the Assad regime and insert an American-controlled government in its place, and Syria is but one ring in a long chain of country’s who have either already taken a fall, or are set to take a fall in the future in order for Western private interests to achieve their overall objective—complete and utter global domination.
What we are witnessing, and taking part in, is ruthless, unscrupulous imperialism in motion, and for the sake of all that is decent and all that is good, and in order for us to achieve the peace civilized man so greatly strives after and so truly deserves, and in order for diplomacy to take a front seat to outright global terrorism, it must be stopped.
That begins with being informed. And now that you are, spread the information.
As independent media, continuation of this periodical is only possible through the kind support of our readers. Become a patron by donating here, or you can show your support by simply clicking one of the share buttons at the top or bottom of this article. And, hey! Don’t forget to subscribe and follow us on Twitter and Facebook.