| SYRIA: NATO's Next "Humanitarian" War?
Michel Chossudovsky (Editor) February 2012 The Global Research's Online Interactive I-Book Reader, brings together, in the form of chapters, a collection of Global Research feature articles, including debate and analysis, on a broad theme or subject matter. To consult our Online Interactive I-Book Reader Series, click here. NOTE TO READERS: This I-Book was completed in February 2012. In view of recent developments, this collection has been updated (June 15, 2012) with additional articles, largely pertaining to the killings of civilians by the US-NATO sponsored Free Syrian Army (FSA). These killings and atrocities perpetrated by US-NATO sponsored death squads are casually blamed on the government with a view to justifying an R2P military intervention. Additions to the initial February 2012 edition of this I-Book consists of Part VI entitled War Propaganda and the Killing of Innocent Civilians. Other additions are indicated with an [*] For the most recent Global Research analysis and news reports on Syria, consult our dossier: SYRIA: NATO'S NEXT WAR INTRODUCTION
In this online interactive I-book, we bring to the attention of our readers a selection of feature articles on the Syrian crisis. Our objective is to dispel the tide of media lies and government propaganda, which presents the events in Syria as a "peaceful protest movement".
The
"protests" did not emanate from internal political cleavages as
described by the mainstream media. From the very outset, they were the
result of a covert US-NATO intelligence operation geared towards
triggering social chaos, with a view to eventually discrediting the
Syrian government of Bashar Al Assad and destabilizing Syria as a Nation
State.
While the Syrian government and military bear a heavy burden of responsibility. it is important to underscore the fact that these terrorist acts --including the indiscriminate killing of men, women and children-- are part of a US-NATO-Israeli initiative, which consists is supporting, training and financing "an armed entity" operating inside Syria. The evidence confirms that foreign intelligence operatives, according to reports, have integrated rebel ranks:
The Free Syrian Army (FSA) is a creation of the US
and NATO. 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
military intervention, under NATO's "responsibility to protect"
mandate.
A
NATO-led intervention is on the drawing board. It was drafted prior to
the onset of the protest movement in March 2011. According to military
and intelligence sources, NATO, Turkey and Saudi Arabia have been
discussing "the form this intervention would take".US, British and Turkish operatives are supplying the rebels with
weapons. Britain's Ministry of Defence confirms that it "is drawing up
secret plans for a NATO-sponsored no-fly zone [in coordination with its
allies] "but first it needs backing from the United Nations Security
Council." (Syria will be bloodiest yet, Daily
Star). According to these secret plans: "fighting in Syria could be
bigger and bloodier than the battle against Gaddafi".(Ibid ).
A "humanitarian"
military intervention modeled on Libya is contemplated. NATO Special
Forces from Britain, France, Qatar and Turkey are already on the ground
inside Syria in blatant violation of international law. Reports from British military sources (November 2011) confirm that:
 The Social and Political Context in Syria
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 wave of violent protests represents a very small fraction of Syrian public opinion. They are terrorist acts of a sectarian nature. They do not in any way 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 characterised 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".
 Pro-government rally, Damascus, March 2011The Insurgency: The Libya Model
The insurgency in Syria has similar features to that
of Libya: it is integrated by paramilitary brigades affiliated to Al
Qaeda, which are directly supported by NATO and Turkey.
Reports confirm that NATO and Turkey's High Command
are providing the rebels with weapons and training: "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)
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, Ibid).
Recent reports confirm that British and Qatari Special forces are on
the ground in the city of Homs, involved in training rebel forces as
well as organizing the supply of weapons in liaison with the Turkish
military.
As in the case of Libya, financial support is being
channelled 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).
NATO's activities are not limited to training and the
delivery of weapons systems, the recruitment of thousands of "freedom
fighters"` is also envisaged, reminiscent of the enlistment of
Mujahideen to wage the CIA's jihad (holy war) in the heyday of the
Soviet-Afghan war:
This recruitment of Mujahideen was part of NATO`s
strategy in Libya, where mercenary forces were dispatched to fight under
the helm of "former" Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) Commander
Abdel Hakim Belhadj.
The Libyan model of rebel forces integrated by
"Islamic brigades" together with NATO special forces has been applied to
Syria, where "Islamist fighters" supported by Western and Israeli
intelligence are deployed. In this regard, Abdel Hakim`s LIFG brigade
has now been dispatched to Syria, where it is involved in terrorist acts
under the supervision of NATO Special Forces.
The Central Role of US Ambassador Robert S. Ford
US Ambassador Robert S. Ford was dispatched to
Damascus in late January 2011 at the height of the protest movement in
Egypt. (The author was in Damascus on January 27, 2011 when Washington's
Envoy presented his credentials to the Al Assad government).
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 destabilization agenda would be
implemented within less than two months following the instatement of
Robert S. Ford as US Ambassador to Syria.
The reinstatement of a US ambassador in Damascus, but
more specifically the choice of Robert S. Ford as US 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 US 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 modelled on the
experience of Central America.
Ambassador Ford in Hama in July 2011
The Insidious Role of the Western media
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. The role of CIA-MI6 covert intelligence
operations in support of armed groups is simply not mentioned. Salafist
paramilitary groups involved in terrorist acts, are, according to
reports, supported covertly by Israeli intelligence (Mossad). The Muslim
Brotherhood has been supported by Turkey, as well as by MI6, Britain's
Secret Service (SIS) since the 1950s
More generally, the Western media has misled public
opinion on the nature of the Arab protest movement by failing to address
the support provided by the US State Department as well as US
foundations (including the National Endowment for Democracy (NED)) to
selected pro-US 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. There is reason to believe, however, 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.
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. The London based Syria Observatory for
Human Rights are profusely quoted by the Western media as a "reliable
source" with the usual disclaimers. Israeli news sources, while avoiding
the issue of an armed insurgency, tacitly acknowledge that Syrian
forces are being confronted by an organized professional paramilitary.
The absence of verifiable data, has not prevented the
Western media from putting forth "authoritative figures" on the number
of casualties. What are the sources of this data? Who is responsible for
the casualties?
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
characterised 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.
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.
In Part I of the online interactive I-Book, an introductory essay is presented.
Part II examines the nature of the
US-NATO-Israel sponsored insurgency, including the recruitment of
terrorists and mercenaries. It also includes an examination of a 1957
Anglo-American covert intelligence plan to destabilize Syria and
implement "regime change". The 1957 plan envisaged the triggering of
"internal disturbances as well as the mounting of "sabotage and coup de
main (sic) incidents" by the CIA and MI6. What this essay suggests
is continuity, i.e. today's Intel. Ops, while more sophisticated than
those of the Cold War era, belong to realm of DÉJÀ VU.
Part III examines the complicity of the
"international community" focussing respectively on the role of
non-governmental organizations, the dynamics within the United Nations
Security Council and role of the Arab League, acting on behalf of
Washington.
Part IV centers on the insidious role of the
corporate media, which has carefully distorted the facts, providing
systematically a biased understanding of the causes and consequences of
the Syrian crisis.
Part V focusses on the broader military agenda and the process of military escalation in the Middle East.
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.
Michel Chossudovsky, Montreal, February 11, 2012
| |
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
SYRIA: NATO's Next "Humanitarian" War?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment