The US and Its Terrorist “Enemies”
Published in Juventud Rebelde
(Cuba) on 3 January 2012
by Jorge L. Rodríguez González (link to original)
The U.S. claims that it has undertaken a global war against terrorism. This war has lasted for over a decade and is now looking for a new stage; its real objective is to conquer natural resources and areas of political influence. In this struggle, terrorists have only been an excuse, and in several occasions, as in Libya and now Syria, they are the best allies for America’s true intentions.
Days ago, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton admitted to the BBC that her country uses al-Qaida’s network and other organizations labeled by the White House as terrorists in its efforts to support the insurgency and subversion in Syria.
This is how both the media’s and the Syrian government’s stories of infiltration by external agents from Iraq, Libya and Qatar are being validated.
The claims of the leader of American diplomacy were quite contradictory because in that very same interview with the British network, Clinton said that the “defenseless” people of Syria were being attacked by the “restless” forces of the Syrian government. Those statements, which are generally predictable and follow an established pattern, were to be expected. Along with the truth of the U.S.’s involvement in the Arab nation’s crisis, it releases the venom that justifies as “honorable” and “legitimate” all of the maneuvering that Washington undertakes to carry out its strategy to change the regime: economic pressure, media demonization, political and diplomatic isolation and military strategies that go all the way from arming the opposition to possible military intervention.
At another time, Secretary Clinton stated: “There will be increasingly capable opposition forces. They will from somewhere, somehow, find the means to defend themselves as well as begin offensive measures.”
Many media outlets operating in Syria or in the Arab region acknowledge that the U.S. is involved, either directly or indirectly, in the destabilization of the Middle East through weapon smuggling in favor of the so-called Free Syrian Army (The Free Syrian Army is the armed branch of the Syrian National Council, a stateless organization based in Istanbul, Turkey. It publicly supports military intervention, which the people of Syria rejected in the constitutional referendum that took place last Sunday.)
The strategy of the U.S. and its European and Arab allies has been to arm the opposition and to create a Bengasi (“operations center,” named for the gangs that fueled the West’s intervention against Moammar Gadhafi) in Homs. Nowadays in Homs there is a clash between governmental forces and armed groups supported by this international trio. The U.S. cannot use the Syrian Armed forces against Bashar Assad because the Syrian Army has a close link to the Alawite family to which the President belongs. The army also has a different ideological foundation due to its training, first in the USSR and then in Russia, which is Damascus’ biggest ally. Russia is very interested in a way out of the political crisis that avoids civil war or a foreign intervention.
It is true that there have been detractors from the Syrian army that have joined the Free Syria Army, but it is not as massive as the transnational Western and Arabic briefings claim. Furthermore, the majority of detractors are Sunni recruits who refuse to comply with the military service. For the moment there is not a significant fragmentation of the Syrian army, which remains loyal to its president.
Syria’s enemies know that to overthrow the government they must undermine the country from within. Therefore, while they apply sanctions to strangle Syria’s economy, whip up even more popular dissatisfaction, undermine middle-class support for Assad, and work against the position of Russia and China at the Security Council, they must encourage even more the clashes that allow them to keep up the theory of a “humanitarian emergency.”
For that to happen they can count on their terrorists, the same men who served as puppets for George W. Bush to accelerate the mad war for oil and who Barack Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, is still fighting.
Days ago, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton admitted to the BBC that her country uses al-Qaida’s network and other organizations labeled by the White House as terrorists in its efforts to support the insurgency and subversion in Syria.
This is how both the media’s and the Syrian government’s stories of infiltration by external agents from Iraq, Libya and Qatar are being validated.
The claims of the leader of American diplomacy were quite contradictory because in that very same interview with the British network, Clinton said that the “defenseless” people of Syria were being attacked by the “restless” forces of the Syrian government. Those statements, which are generally predictable and follow an established pattern, were to be expected. Along with the truth of the U.S.’s involvement in the Arab nation’s crisis, it releases the venom that justifies as “honorable” and “legitimate” all of the maneuvering that Washington undertakes to carry out its strategy to change the regime: economic pressure, media demonization, political and diplomatic isolation and military strategies that go all the way from arming the opposition to possible military intervention.
At another time, Secretary Clinton stated: “There will be increasingly capable opposition forces. They will from somewhere, somehow, find the means to defend themselves as well as begin offensive measures.”
Many media outlets operating in Syria or in the Arab region acknowledge that the U.S. is involved, either directly or indirectly, in the destabilization of the Middle East through weapon smuggling in favor of the so-called Free Syrian Army (The Free Syrian Army is the armed branch of the Syrian National Council, a stateless organization based in Istanbul, Turkey. It publicly supports military intervention, which the people of Syria rejected in the constitutional referendum that took place last Sunday.)
The strategy of the U.S. and its European and Arab allies has been to arm the opposition and to create a Bengasi (“operations center,” named for the gangs that fueled the West’s intervention against Moammar Gadhafi) in Homs. Nowadays in Homs there is a clash between governmental forces and armed groups supported by this international trio. The U.S. cannot use the Syrian Armed forces against Bashar Assad because the Syrian Army has a close link to the Alawite family to which the President belongs. The army also has a different ideological foundation due to its training, first in the USSR and then in Russia, which is Damascus’ biggest ally. Russia is very interested in a way out of the political crisis that avoids civil war or a foreign intervention.
It is true that there have been detractors from the Syrian army that have joined the Free Syria Army, but it is not as massive as the transnational Western and Arabic briefings claim. Furthermore, the majority of detractors are Sunni recruits who refuse to comply with the military service. For the moment there is not a significant fragmentation of the Syrian army, which remains loyal to its president.
Syria’s enemies know that to overthrow the government they must undermine the country from within. Therefore, while they apply sanctions to strangle Syria’s economy, whip up even more popular dissatisfaction, undermine middle-class support for Assad, and work against the position of Russia and China at the Security Council, they must encourage even more the clashes that allow them to keep up the theory of a “humanitarian emergency.”
For that to happen they can count on their terrorists, the same men who served as puppets for George W. Bush to accelerate the mad war for oil and who Barack Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, is still fighting.