Syria in the Context of Longterm U.S. Plans in the Region
You may not know much about the reason for the tragedy and disaster unfolding in Syria, which has resulted in 250,000 deaths and 7 million refugees. You may not know who the “opposition” is, who is fighting whom and what foreign forces or countries are involved in the war and for what purpose. But, you probably do know the following, even if all you did all this time was watch CNN, MSNBC or some other U.S. mainstream media outlet:
1. The U.S. wants the Assad government gone. President Obama, his Secretary of State, John Kerry and others have made that clear.
2. The terrorist group ISIS is the main force fighting the government and has occupied certain parts of the country from which it operates.
3. The U.S. began bombing Syria a year ago which they said was to eliminate ISIS.
4. After a year of heavy bombing by the U.S., the group is still as strong as ever.
Now, questions that these known points might raise in your mind:
1. If the U.S. wants regime change in Syria and ISIS is fighting them, would the U.S. seriously try to eliminate the only potent force fighting it? Logic says no, they wouldn’t; they don’t have the incentive. U.S. leaders and policy makers are very calculating and never miss an opportunity to reach the empire’s geopolitical objectives. They’re not known for considering the moral, ethical or human consequences of their decisions. Since they ultimately represent the interests of multinational corporations that are driven by profits and are very cold and businesslike in their decisions, the U.S. government too acts the same way in its strategic and geopolitical decisions that ultimately affect the profitability of the corporations it represents. There are many examples that one could site here that go back to over a hundred years, from the Philippines in the waning days of the 19th Century to the wars in Korea and Vietnam to the CIA coups in various countries to their policy in Indonesia in regards to East Timor, in Central and South America, in Africa, in Middle East and particularly in regards to Lebanon and Iraq in 1980’s, Iraq again in 1991 and again in late 1990’s, the Iran-Iraq war of 1980, in Afghanistan in 1980’s, the second war on Iraq, followed by Libya and then in Ukraine, etc. The human toll and suffering has never entered into U.S. calculations and decision making.
2. Could that be why a year of bombings hasn’t made ISIS weaker? Could that be why the Russians got involved and began bombing the group? Won’t the Russians be logically more serious about fighting ISIS since they don’t share the U.S. purpose of regime change? This too I think is self-evident.
3. Almost all Arab countries in the region are allied with the U.S., especially Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Bahrain, Jordan and Egypt. Syrian government seems to be the exception. The other two Arab countries that weren’t allied with the U.S. were Iraq and Libya which were attacked and their rulers were toppled by the U.S. and its allies. Is there a pattern here? Could the U.S. and its allies in the region have fomented and helped create the war in Syria? Did they at least materially support the terrorists fighting the regime such as by giving them arms? The answer to the first question comes from correspondences leaked to and published by WikiLeaks and is affirmative. The answer to the second was made clear by major news organizations that reported on it in 2012, including The New York Times in an article published on June 21, 2012, with a title that read: “CIA Said to Steer Arms to Syrian Opposition”.
Once you understand the general pattern and their long term objectives, then the various decisions they make become understandable and even predictable. Does this mean that President Putin has the best of intentions or that Assad is a good guy? No. But, when your house is being robbed and ransacked at gun point, you don’t stop and think: you know, my neighbor isn’t such a good guy, either.