Consequences of the Fall of the Syrian Regime


July 24, 2012

By George Friedman

We have entered the endgame in Syria. That doesn't mean that we have reached the end by any means, but it does mean that the precondition has been met for the fall of the regime of Syrian President Bashar al Assad. We have argued that so long as the military and security apparatus remain intact and effective, the regime could endure. Although they continue to function, neither appears intact any longer; their control of key areas such as Damascus and Aleppo is in doubt, and the reliability of their personnel, given defections, is no longer certain. We had thought that there was a reasonable chance of the al Assad regime surviving completely. That is no longer the case. At a certain point -- in our view, after the defection of a Syrian pilot June 21 and then the defection of the Tlass clan -- key members of the regime began to recalculate the probability of survival and their interests. The regime has not unraveled, but it is unraveling.

The speculation over al Assad's whereabouts and heavy fighting in Damascus is simply part of the regime's problems. Rumors, whether true or not, create uncertainty that the regime cannot afford right now. The outcome is unclear. On the one hand, a new regime might emerge that could exercise control. On the other hand, Syria could collapse into a Lebanon situation in which it disintegrates into regions held by various factions, with no effective central government.

The Russian and Chinese Strategy

The geopolitical picture is somewhat clearer than the internal political picture. Whatever else happens, it is unlikely that al Assad will be able to return to unchallenged rule. The United States, France and other European countries have opposed his regime. Russia, China and Iran have supported it, each for different reasons. The Russians opposed the West's calls to intervene, which were grounded on human rights concerns, fearing that the proposed intervention was simply a subterfuge to extend Western power and that it would be used against them. The Chinese also supported the Syrians, in part for these same reasons. Both Moscow and Beijing hoped to avoid legitimizing Western pressure based on human rights considerations -- something they had each faced at one time or another. In addition, Russia and China wanted the United States in particular focused on the Middle East rather than on them. They would not have minded a military intervention that would have bogged down the United States, but the United States declined to give that to them.

But the Russian and Chinese game was subtler than that. It focused on Iran. As we have argued, if the al Assad regime were to survive and were to be isolated from the West, it would be primarily dependent on Iran, its main patron. Iran had supplied trainers, special operations troops, supplies and money to sustain the regime. For Iran, the events in Syria represented a tremendous opportunity. Iran already held a powerful position in Iraq, not quite dominating it but heavily influencing it. If the al Assad regime survived and had Iranian support to thank for its survival, Syria would become even more dependent on Iran than was Iraq. This would shore up the Iranian position in Iraq, but more important, it would have created an Iranian sphere of influence stretching from western Afghanistan to Lebanon, where Hezbollah is an Iranian ally.

The Russians and Chinese clearly understood that if this had happened, the United States would have had an intense interest in undermining the Iranian sphere of influence -- and would have had to devote massive resources to doing so. Russia and China benefitted greatly in the post-9/11 world, when the United States was obsessed with the Islamic world and had little interest or resources to devote to China and Russia. With the end of the Afghanistan war looming, this respite seemed likely to end. Underwriting Iranian hegemony over a region that would inevitably draw the United States' attention was a low-cost, high-return strategy.

The Chinese primarily provided political cover, keeping the Russians from having to operate alone diplomatically. They devoted no resources to the Syrian conflict but did continue to oppose sanctions against Iran and provided trade opportunities for Iran. The Russians made a much larger commitment, providing material and political support to the al Assad regime.

It seems the Russians began calculating the end for the regime some time ago. Russia continued to deliver ammunition and other supplies to Syria but pulled back on a delivery of helicopters. Several attempts to deliver the helicopters "failed" when British insurers of the ship pulled coverage. That was the reason the Russians gave for not delivering the helicopters, but obviously the Russians could have insured the ship themselves. They were backing off from supporting al Assad, their intelligence indicating trouble in Damascus. In the last few days the Russians have moved to the point where they had their ambassador to France suggest that the time had come for al Assad to leave -- then, of course, he denied having made the statement.

A Strategic Blow to Iran

As the Russians withdraw support, Iran is now left extremely exposed. There had been a sense of inevitability in Iran's rise in the region, particularly in the Arabian Peninsula. The decline of al Assad's regime is a strategic blow to the Iranians in two ways. First, the wide-reaching sphere of influence they were creating clearly won't happen now. Second, Iran will rapidly move from being an ascendant power to a power on the defensive.

The place where this will become most apparent is in Iraq. For Iran, Iraq represents a fundamental national security interest. Having fought a bloody war with Iraq in the 1980s, the Iranians have an overriding interest in assuring that Iraq remains at least neutral and preferably pro-Iranian. While Iran was ascendant, Iraqi politicians felt that they had to be accommodating. However, in the same way that Syrian generals had to recalculate their positions, Iraqi politicians have to do the same. With sanctions -- whatever their effectiveness -- being imposed on Iran, and with Iran's position in Syria unraveling, the psychology in Iraq might change.

This is particularly the case because of intensifying Turkish interest in Iraq. In recent days the Turks have announced plans for pipelines in Iraq to oil fields in the south and in the north. Turkish economic activity is intensifying. Turkey is the only regional power that can challenge Iran militarily. It uses that power against the Kurds in Iraq. But more to the point, if a country builds a pipeline, it must ensure access to it, either politically or militarily. Turkey does not want to militarily involve itself in Iraq, but it does want political influence to guarantee its interests. Thus, just as the Iranians are in retreat, the Turks have an interest in, if not supplanting them, certainly supplementing them.

The pressure on Iran is now intense, and it will be interesting to see the political consequences. There was consensus on the Syrian strategy, but with failure of the strategy, that consensus dissolves. This will have an impact inside of Iran, possibly even more than the sanctions. Governments have trouble managing reversals.

Other Consequences

From the American point of view, al Assad's decline opens two opportunities. First, its policy of no direct military intervention but unremitting political and, to a lesser extent, economic pressure appears to be working in this instance. More precisely, even if it had no effect, it will appear that it did, which will enhance the ability of the United States to influence events in other countries without actually having to intervene.

Second, the current situation opens the door for a genuine balance of power in the region that does not require constant American intervention. One of the consequences of the events in Syria is that Turkey has had to reconsider its policy toward countries on its periphery. In the case of Iraq, Turkey has an interest in suppressing the Kurdistan Workers' Party militants who have taken refuge there and defending oil and other economic interests. Turkey's strategy is moving from avoiding all confrontations to avoiding major military commitments while pursuing its political interests. In the end, that means that Turkey will begin moving into a position of balancing Iran for its own interests in Iraq.

This relieves the United States of the burden of containing Iran. We continue to regard the Iranian sphere of influence as a greater threat to American and regional interests than Iran's nuclear program. The decline of al Assad solves the major problem. It also increases the sense of vulnerability in Iran. Depending on how close they are to creating a deliverable nuclear weapon -- and our view is that they are not close -- the Iranians may feel it necessary to moderate their position.

A major loser in this is Israel. Israel had maintained a clear understanding with the al Assad regime. If the al Assad regime restrained Hezbollah, Israel would have no objection to al Assad's dominating Lebanon. That agreement has frayed since the United States pushed al Assad's influence out of Lebanon in 2006. Nevertheless, the Israelis preferred al Assad to the Sunnis -- until it appeared that the Iranians would dominate Syria. But the possibility of either an Islamist regime in Damascus or, more likely, Lebanese-style instability cannot please the Israelis. They are already experiencing jihadist threats in Sinai. The idea of having similar problems in Syria, where the other side of the border is the Galilee rather than the Negev, must make them nervous.

But perhaps the most important losers will be Russia and China. Russia, like Iran, has suffered a significant setback in its foreign policy that will have psychological consequences. The situation in Syria has halted the foreign-policy momentum the Russians had built up. But more important, the Russian and Chinese hope has been that the United States would continue to treat them as secondary issues while it focused on the Middle East. The decline of al Assad and the resulting dynamic in the region increases the possibility that the United States can disengage from the region. This is not something the Russians or Chinese want, but in the end, they did not have the power to create the outcome in Syria that they had wanted.

The strategy of the dominant power is to encourage a balance of power that contains threats without requiring direct intervention. This was the British strategy, but it has not been one that the United States has managed well. After the jihadist wars, there is a maturation under way in U.S. strategy. That means allowing the intrinsic dynamic in the region to work, intervening only as the final recourse. The events in Syria appear to be simply about the survival of the al Assad regime. But they have far greater significance in terms of limiting Iranian power, creating a local balance of power and freeing the United States to focus on global issues, including Russia and China.

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/consequences-fall-syrian-regime?utm_source=freelist-f&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20120724&utm_term=gweekly&utm_content=readmore&elq=ce3680afa5384d8db9ddd95464ab80b0

Let us hope that the nation doesn't become another Lebanon.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/syria-is-stronger-troops-fight-to-regain-ground-in-aleppo-20120730-237nu.html


'Syria is stronger': troops fight to regain ground in Aleppo

Date July 30, 2012 - 5:47AM

With thousands of refugees streaming across Syria's borders into Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq, Syrian government forces continued to pound the country's commercial capital, Aleppo in a bid to regain ground won by Free Syrian Army rebels.

The country's foreign minister, Walid al-Muallem, who has not been seen since the devastating bomb attack two weeks ago that killed four of President Bashar al-Assad's top security and defence officials, warned the rebel's big to seize control of Aleppo would fail.

Speaking on a state visit to Iran, the foreign minister described the 17-month long uprising that the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights says has left as many as 20,000 dead, as nothing more than a conspiracy of armed terrorist groups serving the interests of Syria's neighbouring enemy, Israel.

“Today I tell you, Syria is stronger …in less than a week they [the rebels] were defeated [in Damascus],” he said, predicting the same would happen in Aleppo, Reuters reported.

Rebels forces say they have so far been able to hold off the official army in the south-western Aleppo neighbourhood of Salaheddine, while fighting continues in other districts held by the Free Syria Army.

Terrified residents who have been in the firing line for the last week were fleeing the city, and local activists say up to 190 people were killed on Sunday, although that figure cannot be verified.

There are more than 150,000 Syrians registered with the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, although it is understood the number of people who have fled the country is much higher.

Many are staying with relatives in neighbouring countries or delay registering with the UN until they run out food and other basics and are forced to seek assistance, the UN said.

So many have been flooding across the Syrian border into Jordan that it opened its first official camp on the weekend, with enough room for 10,000 refugees and the capacity to expand to 100,000.

Turkey already has several refugee camps for Syrians fleeing the increasingly violent uprising - many of them leaving the city of Aleppo, which is just 50 kilometres from the border - and the UN says it has plans to build two more camps with the capacity to hold a further 20,000 people as the refugee crisis worsens.


I particularly loved this:


Speaking on a state visit to Iran, the foreign minister described the 17-month long uprising that the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights says has left as many as 20,000 dead, as nothing more than a conspiracy of armed terrorist groups serving the interests of Syria's neighbouring enemy, Israel.

Considering the role Qatar and Saudi Arabia have played in arming the rebels, this statement becomes absurd.

US Authorizes Financial Support to Free Syrian Army

By Laura Rozen

July 28, 2012 "Al-Monitor" -- A US group that supports the Free Syrian Army has received a waiver from the US Treasury Department authorizing it to provide logistical and financial support to the armed Syrian resistance.

The waiver was received from the Treasury Department Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) last week, Brian Sayers, of the Syrian Support Group, told Al- Monitor in an interview Friday.

“The OFAC decision is huge,” Sayers said. “It gets us the leeway to support the Free Syrian Army in broad terms.”

The Syrian Support Group hired Sayers, who previously spent six years working in NATO operations in Brussels and Kosovo, four months ago to be the Washington agent for the group.

With backers from the Syrian exile community in the United States and Canada, the Syrian Support Group's goal “has always been to support the Free Syrian Army in different ways,” Sayers said.

In the constellation of Syrian opposition and exile organizations and personalities, the Syrian Support Group “sees its niche as to provide direct support for the FSA, and to stand up the Free Syrian Army as the future Syrian Army,” he explained. “That requires both short term things — financial operations, logistics support, communications— but also long-term support: security sector reform, a training doctrine.”

In the near-term, the "OFAC letter allows for providing financial, communications and logistics support to the FSA,” Sayers said. That could include paying for FSA salaries and provisions, as well as “communications equipment, satellite imagery, paying for satellite imagery, logistical support for transport, which could mean everything from buying a 4x4 to supporting someone’s travel to Turkey.”

On their more intermediate term wish-list, “our ask is intelligence support, drone support, eyes in the sky, an intelligence platform,” Sayers said. Syria’s rebels “need both intelligence and weapons,” as they seek to carve out and protect safe areas on the ground in Syria, and try to secure the defection of more members of the Syrian military.

Indeed, one Syrian source, speaking anonymously, suggested the Syrian Support Group’s mission is not only about lobbying the US government to provide support to the FSA, but also the reverse: to help turn the FSA into a more organized entity that could receive intelligence and other assistance from Western security agencies.

The FSA has formed a nine-member military council, comprised of the commanders from 10 of Syria’s provinces. Although they have previously operated in a more decentralized manner, the Free Syrian Army commanders have recently increased their coordination, including holding conference calls almost daily, Sayers said.

This past week, all nine members of the Free Syrian Army military council signed a previously unpublished “Proclamation of Principles,” pledging to respect democracy, multi-ethnic and sectarian pluralism, and the authority of Syria’s future, elected, civilian leadership. “We believe in a free and democratic Syria where all Syrian citizens, regardless of their ethnicity, creed, religion or class shall enjoy equal rights and live in liberty, justice and peace,” the document reads. “We will do our utmost to uphold international humanitarian law and norms, including by treating prisoners humanely, even as the Assad regime engages in crimes against humanity.”

However, one figure the FSA is unlikely to support as a Syrian opposition unity leader is the recently defected Gen. Manaf Tlas, who arrived in Turkey on Thursday. Reports this week have suggested the US is eyeing Tlas, formerly a close friend of Bashar al-Assad and the son of Hafez al-Assad’s Defense Minister, for that role.

But Sayers said, in his opinion, the US government has not decided yet.

“In our briefings [with US officials], we get asked what do we think of the guy. I think they are asking us to try to get more information. They have not made up their mind,” he said.

Tlas had considerable means at his disposal to facilitate his defection, Sayers said, including being able to get his family safely out ahead of time. But Tlas and his father are seen as having been too close for too long to the Assad regime, and would have little support among Syria’s rebels, he suggested.

“A Chalabi would be the last thing you want,” Sayers said, referring to the Iraqi exile, Ahmad Chalabi, who wooed American neo-conservatives to overthrow Saddam Hussein only to turn out to have no base of support in Iraq. “Nobody wants that.”

© 2012 AL-MONITOR

Secret Turkish Nerve Center Provides Aid to Syria "Rebels"

By Regan Doherty and Amena Bakr

July 27, 2012 "DOHA/DUBAI" -- (Reuters) - Turkey has set up a secret base with allies Saudi Arabia and Qatar to direct vital military and communications aid to Syria's rebels from a city near the border, Gulf sources have told Reuters.

News of the clandestine Middle East-run "nerve centre" working to topple Syrian President Bashar al-Assad underlines the extent to which Western powers - who played a key role in unseating Muammar Gaddafi in Libya - have avoided military involvement so far in Syria.

"It's the Turks who are militarily controlling it. Turkey is the main co-ordinator/facilitator. Think of a triangle, with Turkey at the top and Saudi Arabia and Qatar at the bottom," said a Doha-based source.

"The Americans are very hands-off on this. U.S. intel(ligence) are working through middlemen. Middlemen are controlling access to weapons and routes."

The centre in Adana, a city in southern Turkey about 100 km (60 miles) from the Syrian border, was set up after Saudi Deputy Foreign Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Abdullah al-Saud visited Turkey and requested it, a source in the Gulf said. The Turks liked the idea of having the base in Adana so that they could supervise its operations, he added.

A Saudi foreign ministry official was not immediately available to comment on the operation.

Adana is home to Incirlik, a large Turkish/U.S. air force base which Washington has used in the past for reconnaissance and military logistics operations. It was not clear from the sources whether the anti-Syrian "nerve centre" was located inside Incirlik base or in the city of Adana.

Qatar, the tiny gas-rich Gulf state which played a leading part in supplying weapons to Libyan rebels, has a key role in directing operations at the Adana base, the sources said. Qatari military intelligence and state security officials are involved.

"Three governments are supplying weapons: Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia," said a Doha-based source.

Ankara has officially denied supplying weapons.

"All weaponry is Russian. The obvious reason is that these guys (the Syrian rebels) are trained to use Russian weapons, also because the Americans don't want their hands on it. All weapons are from the black market. The other way they get weapons is to steal them from the Syrian army. They raid weapons stores."

The source added: "The Turks have been desperate to improve their weak surveillance, and have been begging Washington for drones and surveillance." The pleas appear to have failed. "So they have hired some private guys come do the job."

President Barack Obama has so far preferred to use diplomatic means to try to oust Assad, although Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signaled this week that Washington plans to step up help to the rebels.

Reuters has established that Obama's aides have drafted a resolution which would authorize greater covert assistance to the rebels but still stop short of arming them.

The White House's wariness is shared by other Western powers. It reflects concerns about what might follow Assad in Syria and about the substantial presence of anti-Western Islamists and jihadi fighters among the rebels.

The presence of the secret Middle East-run "nerve centre" may explain how the Syrian rebels, a rag-tag assortment of ill-armed and poorly organized groups, have pulled off major strikes such as the devastating bomb attack on July 18 which killed at least four key Assad aides including the defense minister.

A Turkish diplomat in the region insisted however that his country played no part in the Damascus bombing.

"That's out of the question," he said. "The Syrian minister of information blamed Turkey and other countries for the killing. Turkey doesn't do such things. We are not a terrorist country. Turkey condemns such attacks."

However, two former senior U.S. security officials said that Turkey has been playing an increasing role in sheltering and training Syrian rebels who have crossed into its territory.

One of the former officials, who is also an adviser to a government in the region, told Reuters that 20 former Syrian generals are now based in Turkey, from where they are helping shape the rebel forces. Israel believes up to 20,000 Syrian troops may now have defected to the opposition.

Former officials said there is reason to believe the Turks stepped up their support for anti-Assad forces after Syria shot down a Turkish plane which had made several passes over border areas.

Sources in Qatar said the Gulf state is providing training and supplies to the Syrian rebels.

"The Qataris mobilized their special forces team two weeks ago. Their remit is to train and help logistically, not to fight," said a Doha-based source with ties to the FSA.

Qatar's military intelligence directorate, Foreign Ministry and State Security Bureau are involved, said the source.

WESTERN CAUTION

The United States, Israel, France and Britain - traditionally key players in the Middle East - have avoided getting involved so far, largely because they see little chance of a "good outcome" in Syria.

"Israel is not really in the business of trying to 'shape' the outcome of the revolt,", a diplomat in the region said. "The consensus is that you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't. The risk of identifying with any side is too great".

A former U.S. official who advises a government in the region and other current and former U.S. and European security officials say that there has been little to zero direct assistance or training from the U.S. or its European allies.

The former official also said that few sophisticated weapons such as shoulder-fired bazookas for destroying tanks or surface-to-air missiles have reached the anti-Assad forces.

While some Gulf officials and conservative American politicians have privately suggested that a supply of surface-to-air missiles would help anti-Assad forces bring the conflict to a close, officials familiar with U.S. policy say they are anxious to keep such weapons out of the hands of Syrian rebels. They fear such weapons could make their way to pro-jihad militants who could use them against Western aircraft.

AFTER ASSAD

The CIA and the Israelis' main concern so far has been that elements of al-Qaeda may attempt to infiltrate the rebels and acquire some of Syria's stockpile of chemical weapons.

Sima Shine, a former chief Mossad analyst who now serves as an adviser to the Israeli government, told Reuters: "It's a nightmare for the international community, and chiefly the Americans - weapons of mass-destruction falling into the hands of terrorists. In parallel to its foreign contacts, Israel is taking this especially seriously. After all, we are here, and the Americans are over there."

She envisaged two circumstances under which Hezbollah, the Lebanese Islamist group, could obtain some of the chemical weapons stockpile.

"Assad goes and anarchy ensues, during which Hezbollah gets its hands on the weapons. There is a significant Hezbollah presence in Syria and they are well-ensconced in the military and other national agencies. So they are close enough to make a grab for it.

"Another possibility is that Assad, knowing that he is on his way out, will authorized a handover to Hezbollah, as a message to the world about the price of encouraging his ouster."

However, British and U.S. officials believe there is little or no sign of Assad being toppled imminently.

The situation, one senior European official said, is still likely to veer back and forth, like a tug-of-war between pro- and anti-Assad forces.

There is no indication, the official added, that Assad himself has any intention of doing anything but fighting on until the bitter end.

(additional reporting by Mark Hosenball in London and Dan Williams in Jerusalem; writing by Richard Woods; editing by Michael Stott and Ralph Boulton)

US Proxy Al Qaeda Death Squads in Syria

By Stephen Lendman

July 28, 2012 "Information Clearing House" -- Washington's agenda involves death squad diplomacy. Evidence mounts proving it. It's standard practice in all US direct and proxy wars. It's how America treats its enemies.

Massacres and unspeakable atrocities are committed. Women are raped. Civilians are treated like combatants. They're indiscriminately killed.

Others are targeted for opposing US aggression. Children are harmed like adults. Prisoners are tortured. No crime's too gruesome to commit.

Lies, duplicity, and coverup follow. Media scoundrels bear direct responsibility. Their hands are bloodstained like US officials, forces and proxy killers.

Vietnam's Operation Phoenix became a prototype for today's wars. It included intimidation, kidnappings torture, and mass murder. At issue was eliminating opposition elements. Terrorizing people into submission was policy.

Southeast Asia tactics are replicated in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria. Barbarism defines US policy.

On July 11, German writer Jurgen Todenhofer confirmed the presence of Al Qaeda insurgents in Syria. He met with them, he said. He holds them and others like them responsible for mass terror attacks.

He described a "massacre marketing strategy." He called it "among the most disgusting things that I have ever experienced in an armed conflict."

He added that Western media distort what's happening on the ground. Viewers and readers know it's their stock and trade. They're paid to lie. Journalists dedicated to truth and full disclosure need not apply.

On July 24, Asia Times writer John Rosenthal headlined "German intelligence: al-Qaeda all over Syria," saying:

"German intelligence estimates that 'around 90' terror attacks that 'can be attributed to organizations that are close to al-Qaeda or jihadist groups' were carried out in Syria between the end of December and the beginning of July, as reported by the German daily Die Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ)."

Die Welt and Bild published similar reports. All three name Al Qaeda behind the May 25 Houla massacre. Russian journalist Marat Musin was there. He said hundreds of "bandits and mercenaries" were responsible.

Washington's imperial tactics involve cutthroat killer atrocities. Human lives have no value. Only wealth, privilege and dominance matter. US officials don't keep body counts. Objectives are pursued lawlessly.

Rosenthal cited Die Welt contributor Alfred Hackensberger. Taldo is part of Syria's Houla region. Insurgents controlled it for months, said Hackensberger. They bear responsibility for Houla killings.

He visited the area. He interviewed an eyewitness. He left him unidentified for his safety. He was at Qara's Saint James Monastery. Victims were pro-Assad Sunnis, he said. Many people know what happened but won't say "out of fear for their lives."

"Whoever says something can only repeat the rebels' version. Anything else is certain death."

Hackensberger related similar stories. A former Qusayr resident said Christians and others refusing to "enroll their children in the Free Syrian Army" were shot. He held "foreign Islamists" responsible.

"I have seen them with my own eyes," he said. Pakistanis, Libyans, Tunisians and also Lebanese. They call Osama bin Laden their sheikh."

A Homs Sunni resident told Hackensberger he witnessed armed insurgents stopping a bus. "The passengers were divided into two groups: on one side, Sunnis; on the other, Alawis."

Nine Alawis were decapitated.

Rosenthal said:

"That the German government would cite national interest in refusing to disclose its information (publicly) concerning the circumstances of the Houla massacre is particularly notable in light of Germany's support for the rebellion and its political arm, the Syrian National Council (SNC)."

It plays a quiet behind the scenes role, he added. Its foreign office is involved in developing "political transition" plans.

So is former US Saudi Arabia ambassador Prince Bandar, reports Haaretz. His close ties to the Bush family earned him the nickname "Bandar Bush."

For years he's been involved with Washington's Syria regime change plans. He now serves as Saudi intelligence chief. He's also National Security Council secretary-general.

His intelligence appointment involves "preparing for the next stage in Syria," said Haaretz. His wife has Al Qaeda "connections." He's considered "CIA's man in Riyadh." He's "known as a can-do" guy.

He spares nothing to achieve objectives. He participated directly in America's Contra wars. He helped fund Central American death squads and Afghan mujahideen fighters against Soviet forces.

He's active in current Washington plans to depose Assad. Like other US allies, his hands are bloodstained.

In her daily press briefing, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland condoned the murder of Syrian officials. She justified her position, saying they "organize(d) Assad's military campaign...."

She tried having it both ways, adding "we don't condone violence of any kind." She ignored Washington's direct role in orchestrating it.

US rhetoric about supporting human rights and other democratic values rings hollow.

America is the world's worst human rights abuser. It spurns democracy. It's intolerant at home and abroad. It's hardline, belligerent and repressive.

Saying one thing and doing another is policy. At the same time, it audaciously points fingers at China.

On July 25, Bloomberg headlined "US Finds China's Human Rights Situation Is Deteriorating," saying:

According to Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor Michael Posner, conditions in China are worsening. We have human rights issues in America, he added. He left unsaid how US policy spurns them at home and abroad.

Do as I say not as I do is policy. So is practicing wrong over right. Interfering in the internal affairs of other countries blatantly violates international and constitutional law.

Doing it by direct or proxy belligerence adds crimes of war, against humanity and genocide. Justice Robert Jackson called aggressive war "the supreme international crime against peace."

Convicted Nazis were hanged. America repeatedly gets away with murder unaccountably.

A July 25 Washington Post article provided more evidence, saying:

Free Syrian Army fighters have safe havens in Turkey. In Antakya, they "stride through its narrow streets sunburned and sweaty from the battlefield, hoping to meet benefactors to provide them with money and arms."

"Salafi Muslims, who have come to offer help from the countries of the Persian Gulf region, huddle over kebabs, their long beards and robes conspicuous in secularist Turkey."

Ankara officials are largely tight-lipped. Little is said about "rebel fighters" passing freely cross border to Syria and back. Military trucks ferry weapons into Syrian territory.

Turkish authorities deny what independent observers confirm. Officials claim only humanitarian aid is provided. At the same time, Hurriyet daily headlined "PM declares Syria intervention a 'natural right,' " saying:

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Syrian-based Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) elements give Turkey the right to intervene. "We will not tolerate PKK cooperation with other organizations in the area," he said.

This, earlier hostile comments, and Turkey's provocative violation of Syria's airspace suggest Ankara's looking for a pretext to intervene.

Washington calls the shots. Erdogan's a useful tool. He's complicit in US regime change plans. Whether he'll initiate preemptive cross-border attacks remains to be seen.

It's unclear if Israel plans getting involved. Recent tax increases were announced. Mossad-connected DEBKAfile says they're "steps towards a $25-30bn war budget."

Israel already spends an enormous amount on militarism. Like America, it does it at a time it has no enemies except ones it invents.

Between militarism, settlement construction, and corporate favoritism, little remains for domestic needs mattering most to ordinary Israelis.

Whether Israel plans more war won't be known unless or attacks confirm it. Threats alone don't signify policy. Netanyahu and other Israeli officials make them often. On July 25, Defense Minister Ehud Barak said:

Israel faces "tough and crucial (security) decisions. I am well aware of the difficulties involved in thwarting Iran's attempts to acquire a nuclear weapon."

"However, it is clear to me that without a doubt, dealing with the threat itself will be far more complicated, far more dangerous and far more costly in resources and human life than thwarting it."

Israel may or may not be planning to confront Syria. On July 24, IDF Chief of Staff General Benny Gantz was ambiguous about an alleged Damascus chemical and biological weapons threat.

On the one hand, he urged caution. On the other, he said Israel might "find itself in a wider conflict that it planned" if military operations against Syria are initiated.

He left unexplained what he meant except to suggest attacking WMDs may have unintended consequences. He added that IDF policy sometimes means engaging in action. At other times, it's about holding back.

The Syrian pot is boiling. Both countries share a common border. Full-scale war could spill over. Syria run by extremist elements means anything going forward is possible.

Israel, Western states and regional allies plan regime change. Achieving it might bring more than what they bargain for.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. His new book is titled "How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War"
http://www.claritypress.com/Lendman.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour

Checks and Balances

Please endeavour to use credible sources in this thread. The texts you posted are opinion pieces and not news articles. Thank you.

You didn't bother to Check out the sources of those articles did you.

Have a butchers and get back to me.

I did actually, and you must've failed to notice that only snippets of the Reuters article was used, the rest was merely opinion. The Information Clearing House is just a sounding board for fringe theories and therefore lacks credibility. Al-Monitor is known for its specious bias.

Please refer to the original news sources and avoid skewed opinion pieces.

In addition, if you post your sources using the tools available, it would save me some time.

I.e. http://www.voanews.com/content/syria-fighting-continues/1448528.html

Thank you for your cooperation.

George Friedman is a company man all the way. He's not all that "reliable."

Well, unlike Information Clearing House and their ilk, Stratfor is one of the more reliable sources. Can you provide accurate supporting evidence of your opinion?

So, back on topic, what's your take on the future of Syria?

I don't have much faith in the CIA .... and Barron's once referred to Stratfor it as "The Shadow CIA".

Being a reliable source of information for the Corporate machine (which is totally corrupt)and a good bunch of spies for big brother is not an agency I would trust.

They spy on people for money. Their clients are the Corporate Cabal

They are part of the machine, which is evil and out to enslave the entire world.

(That is why anonymous hacked their system.)

They (Stratfor)-- violate people's privacy.

So, they are reliable, and yet you do not trust them? That doesn't make sense.

I don't trust spies and I don't like being spied on.
No, I don't trust them.

Now if they will help to expose the corruption I would salute them. But so far, they are just selling information to the Company.

They are part of a corrupt machine.

They gain information for their subscribers, and that can be anyone, myself included. They attempt to collate information free from bias, national interests and extremism. I've personally seen the site expose corruption and misdeeds. Barron's and Anonymous may have fallen for hyperbole by the look of it. Subscribers would realise that this is merely exaggeration.

Okay if their information is so reliable and accurate, do they know who is committing the atrocities in these countries? (If indeed atrocities are being committed.)

Do they know the "why"?

Do they know and understand why there are rebels in the first place and why they want to over throw their government?

Do they really address motive? Do they really know what is going on in that country? If they do, they are not explaining it well. The O.P. report is very generic, very dry, and it says very little.

It strikes me as very removed from the situation. Its speculative and unspecific.

This is what is happening there.

The global Cabal wants to change the regime to one that will cooperate with the global bankers and join their world community to become good consumers of the corporate machine.


That's it in a nutshell.

Yes, if you followed their articles. Remember, it was you that stated Stratfor is "a reliable source of information..."



Yes, I believe I posted some of these on a previous thread.



It appears you missed the point of the article. It's about the FUTURE in Syria, of course it would be speculative. Very dry is how I like information, for it generally lacks the bias of more 'entertaining' articles. Please note, this is merely one article among many constant updates of the situation.

Oops! Double post.

Well about Syria... the future.

This is what the Cabal has planned in a nutshell.

Replace the current leadership with a puppet who will cooperate with the corporate machine and the plan for global corporate domination, fiat money and basic enslavement and poor wages for the people.

Slaughter anyone who is a serious threat to this plan.

Terrorize everyone who would appose it.

I don't need a boring generic dry report from a corporate spy to know that.