The plan of the American war on Syria.

The plan of the American war on Syria.

By Ghaleb KANDIL

The facets of the escalation plan featured in the hostile war led by the United States against the Syrian national state and which will be implemented in the next few months are emerging, and it seems clear that the indirect war strategy drawn up and supervised by General David Petraeus and for which financial, military and security resources were mobilized, aims at developing the work of the terrorist gangs inside Syria to achieve long term depletion.

Firstly, the American planning centers conducted a comprehensive assessment of the status of the infighting Syrian opposition movements, agreeing they were mere gatherings of political communities that are engaged in a conflict and do not represent a weight worth mentioning inside Syrian society. The American experts also recognized that these opposition movements thwarted all the attempts led by the Americans with the help of France and Turkey to unify their various wings, at a time when the recent Cairo conference confirmed this truth. Indeed, despite the ousting of Borhan Ghalioun and the acceptance by the Istanbul council to relinquish the request it had imposed on the other oppositionists to file petitions to access it, the conference exploded and featured scandalous conflicts between those participating in it. As to the political outcome, it featured additional disputes revealing the control imposed by the leaders of the MB group with the support of America, the West, Turkey and Qatar, in parallel to Saudi Arabia’s support of takfiri gangs inside Syria and some oppositionists whom it has been funding for years and were treated by the other opposition factions as outcasts, mainly Abdel Halim Khaddam and Refaat al-Assad.

Secondly, the CIA conducted a comprehensive study into the formations of the armed gangs inside Syria via the center for war studies that works for the agency and the American chief of staff. The study which was posted on the center’s website revealed that the American planners were wagering on the development of the gang’s structure and were regularly trying to provide them with funds and weapons through direct contacts with their field command, starting from the operations room managed by a team of American intelligence officers from Turkey with the participation of other intelligence officials from the states engaged in the alliance against Syria, namely Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, France and Britain. Special and sophisticated communication networks were thus established for the gangs and funded by the Americans, in order to direct the terrorist groups on the ground, provide them with information and convey the orders and military plans.

Thirdly, on the political level, Petraeus’ plan drew up the limits of cooperation with the active Russian role, through the use of Annan’s initiative as a general headline for the international efforts surrounding the Syrian crisis based on the American administration’s abstinence from making any commitments regarding the discontinuation of the funding and arming of terrorist groups inside Syria and its rejection of any mechanism that would lead to the ending of violence in the near future. This, according to the plan, would cause the continuation of the sabotage and depletion through which the American planners wish to undermine the strength and cohesion of the army and consequently impact the popular climate supporting them and President Bashar al-Assad.

Fourthly, what happened in the Geneva conference and in the Paris conference later on revealed the American method in managing the war in Syria. On one hand, American diplomacy is forced to recognize general principles featured in the Russian and Chinese logic to politically resolve the crisis in Syria based on the national sovereignty of the Syrian state and the adoption of dialogue between the state and the opposition. But on the other hand, the American administration is deploying all efforts to sustain a major regional and international grouping aiming at achieving two goals. The first is the mobilization of the capabilities to expand the alliance involved in the arming and funding of the terrorist gangs inside Syria, while the second is to escalate the international pressures on the Russian and Chinese positions inside the Security Council. Therefore, the Geneva statement, which the US was forced to accept, was directly followed by Hillary Clinton’s statements which actually opposed its content. This pushed her Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov to issue a violent declaration in which he mocked the Western calls on President Al-Assad to step down and exposed the lies featured in the French statements regarding what was agreed on. It is likely that this Western and American duplicity will emerge on many other occasions.

Fifthly, the upcoming month will witness more hostile interferences in Syrian reality and more pressures on the Syrian state. In the meantime, it seems clear based on the events on the ground that the Syrian troops are making progress in deterring the terrorist gangs and tightening their control around additional strongholds, knowing that the number of terrorists and murderers and the quantities of arms that were introduced into Syria push us to believe that the confrontation will not end any time soon.

Sixthly, the planners are focusing on the activation of the Lebanese platform in the context of the war on Syria and on testing the possibility of organizing an armed rebellion in the Lebanese North to paralyze the Lebanese army and security forces and all the institutions of the Lebanese state. This is especially due to the fact that the progress of the operations of the Syrian army in the Homs province is pushing more terrorists to flee to Lebanon in search for strongholds in the North. However, the Lebanese authorities do not seem to have any intention to end the anarchy and block the road before the American project, despite the fact that the activation of the war platform against Syria will - one way or the other - mean the detonation of several incidents across the border and on the Lebanese domestic arena.

News analysis.

The Paris conference.

Hollande, France’s new president, won the presidency because he pledged to pull his troops out of Afghanistan before the end of the year instead of the year 2013, which had been set by Sarkozy following the death of ten French soldiers. In the meantime, he wants us to believe his threats in regard to the war on Syria.

Clinton, who is advising any winner in the American presidential elections which will be held next fall to reconsider the stay in Afghanistan until 2014, wants us to believe her threats regarding the fact that Russia and China will pay the price for their support of Syria.

A group of elderly was brought together at the Paris conference to listen to the speech of the Qatari Hamad in regard to the ways to avoid the scandal and see the collapse of an alliance including 85 states before the Syrian state. The unique genius thus came up with a theory in regard to the Libyan scenario.

The king of Morocco, who is seeking new touristic resources, has learned about the sums allocated for a new and similar conference, thus deciding to host it. He said: “Come numerous and we will show you something you will like in Rabat as long as no decision will be issued.”

A French journalist wrote that they sold the Syrian opposition in Geneva, which proved it was a product that could be bought or sold, thus rebuying it in Paris while the price featured money and talk, the first provided by the Arabs and the second by the West.

International affairs.

News analysis.

Only the resistance can topple unilateral hegemony.

The ongoing confrontation between the US and Europe on one hand and the BRICS group led by China and Russia on the other, is related to the future of the international balances and the fate of the United Nations. It is thus intensifying on all its strategic and political levels in the Middle East region, which was chosen by the Americans as a testing field for their project based on its importance and its geostrategic ties with the Asian depth that is rich in resources and hosts giant pipelines. In the meantime, the signs of the economic and financial crisis in the industrial West are escalating while Europe appears to be on the threshold of upcoming collapses, especially in key states such as Spain, Italy and Portugal where the debt has reached 100% of the national produce and exceeded the red lines in a way heralding - according to experts - a new meltdown. On the other hand, the economic situation in France and Britain is not doing any better.

For its part, the United States, which is currently witnessing the commotion generated by the presidential election campaigns, is suffering from recession and unemployment, while the trillions that were spent following the major collapse which affected the financial and stocks markets have evaporated. This climate is enhancing the inability to wage new wars around the world and caused the re-adoption of the strategy of indirect wars. At this level, the ongoing attack on Syria on the military, security and political levels, constitutes the most important test for the new balance around the world and the final outcome of the equations between the two international blocs, i.e. the industrial West that is drowning in crises and the repercussions of the failed wars on one hand, and the BRICS states, Syria and Iran that are opposed to hegemony on the other.

Arab File.

Syria.

In the third part of his interview with the Turkish Cumhuriyet newspaper, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad assured that the crisis in Syria was mostly an external one, the biggest proof for that being the existence of Arab fighters and Islamic extremists fighting in Syria, as well as the presence of sophisticated weapons being smuggled from across the border and funds flowing from abroad. Asked about the killing of dozens of people every day, he stated: “The revolution cannot be a revolution of gangs. It has to be a popular revolution and no one can oppress such a revolution. You are now present in Syria and you can go and check whether or not there is a revolution. We are pursuing and killing the terrorists and defending ourselves. They are committing massacres against the civilians and it is our duty to defend the civilians. This is our duty as a state. What do you do when you, the Turks, are being killed? Do you not defend yourselves? Do you not justify all your military operations in North Iraq and in Turkey under the headline of the fight against terrorism? Do we say that the Turkish state is killing its people in that case?”

Asked whether or not he regretted the oppression of the first peaceful demonstrations last year, he assured: “Certainly, any action features a margin of error. This is natural since we are humans and we make mistakes. However, we must differentiate between the mistakes committed inside Syria and the external factors. In any case, demonstrations are still being staged from time to time, but less people are participating in them and most of them are provoked [by external parties].”

In the second part of his interview, President Al-Assad had assured that Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan was building his government policy against a sectarian backdrop, while the circumstances revealed he had a personal agenda related to his personal position and that of his team which made him loose credibility on the Arab arena. He indicated that Erdogan’s government was involved in the bloody events in Syria through the provision of logistic support to the terrorists, urging the Turkish prime minister to have the courage to recognize his numerous mistakes in order for the Arab and Syrian people to forgive him.

General Robert Mood, the head of the United Nations-affiliated observers’ mission to Syria, presented his resignation. He said nonetheless that the mission should stay in Syria despite the fact the ceasefire which he was dispatched to monitor could not be sustained and although violence reached unprecedented levels. He added that the mission which included three hundred observers should be restructured to help support the political dialogue which foreign powers perceive as being the only way to exit the crisis.

UN representative Kofi Anan, along with the representatives of China and Russia and other members of the UN Security Council, held a meeting in Geneva on June 30 to discuss the Syrian crisis. The outcome of the conference was not positive for the Western states that have been engaged in a fierce political, military and media war against Syria and this was reflected in the final communiqué that was the object of numerous interpretations and revealed the diverging positions of the participating states.

At this level, disputes emerged during the meeting between Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassem al-Thani, after the latter, along with the Arab League representative, called for more stringency and for a military action on the Syrian domestic arena, a thing which was fiercely opposed by the Russian representative. Hamad told Lavrov: Are you addressing your speech to Qatar and do you believe that small states such as ours should not have a say in intentional affairs? To which Lavrov responded: As you know, all states are equal on the international arena. The problem is not with small states but rather with some officials with small minds.

Later in the week, another meeting was held by the Syrian opposition and Arab representatives in Cairo. However, the opposition’s coordination committee recognized the failure of the conference to “achieve any real progress at the level of the formation of a leading committee, a coordination and cooperation committee, or even a follow-up committee to monitor the implementation of the conference’s decisions.” It added: “efforts were deployed to achieve that but they all failed. On the other hand, the efforts deployed against the unification of the opposition were the successful ones.” In the meantime, the conference witnessed the withdrawal of numerous parties, at the head of which were the Kurdish movements, due to the Muslim Brotherhood’s refusal to include the Kurdish rights and cause in the new constitution.

Bahrain.

The regime’s forces in Bahrain confiscated the citizens right to express themselves and demonstrate on Friday July 6, using excessive power against the demonstrators, storming homes, assaulting citizens and arresting others. For their part, the opposition forces stressed that the ban was arbitrary and illegal and exposed the mentality of oppression and exclusion, which was the same mentality ordering the citizens’ oppression and torturing and preventing the adoption of any political solution to handle the existing political crisis. They assured that the prevention of the people from expressing themselves and staging peaceful demonstrations was due to a rash decision aiming at leading the country towards further security problems, which will not serve any side and will render the country and its people the biggest losers.

The regime’s troops stormed numerous houses in more than one area in order to spread terror among and punish the citizens, thus breaking down doors, destroying people’s belongings and beating and insulting those inside the homes. Moreover, they arrested a number of citizens and attacked children in an inhumane way, also pursing the citizens and the passersby and randomly shooting on them.

Israeli file.
The authorities of the Israeli enemy are preparing to resume the building of the racist separation wall in the West Bank, which will take major parts of the Palestinian territories occupied in 1967. On July 5th, Israeli Colonel Ofer Hindi, the officer responsible for the barrier, said that the army will resume - during the next few weeks - the construction of the racial separation wall in the West Bank, after these actions had been halted for five years. He assured that the construction works will firstly start in the Gush Etzion settlements near the city of Bethlehem and will proceed next year around Maale Adumim, one of the biggest settlements of the West Bank in Eastern Jerusalem.

On the other hand, Israel launched a project to link the Mediterranean Sea with the Eilat settlement via a railroad project which might compete with the Canal of Suez. At this level, Israeli Minister of Transportation Israel Katz sealed a cooperation agreement in the transportation and infrastructure sector with Chinese Minister of Transportation Li Shenglin. The project will later on be presented before the Israeli government for approval. According to this agreement, the Chinese governmental team for infrastructure will arrive to the occupied territories within two weeks to set up the implementation of the project whose cost will range between ten and fifteen billion shekels.

Lebanese affairs.

News analysis.

McCain and Suleiman.

John McCain arrived to Lebanon in haste, met with Jumblatt, Geagea and Senioura and said that his mission was being carried out in coordination with Obama’s administration to establish areas of support and back up for the Free Army in North Lebanon.

Akkar’s towns and villages are suffering due to the terrorism practiced by masked armed men erecting mobile checkpoints in search for officers and soldiers from the Lebanese army.

During the last few days Beirut witnessed repeated attacks against Syrian citizens who support their country and their president at the hands of criminal armed gangs affiliated with the Syrian opposition.

President of the Republic Michel Suleiman issued a statement to deny the information saying there were camps for the Free Army in Lebanon, in response to the statements issued by Suleiman Franjieh regarding the existence of six camps in the North.

Our question to the president of the republic is the following:

The boat that was loaded with all sorts of weapons and ammunition – which were enough to equip an army - and was intercepted by the Lebanese military, how would have its load been stored had it reached its destination if there are no stable posts for the Free Army?

If the existence of such posts is not true, this would mean that his excellence, as a military man, knew that the freight was destined for the Lebanese domestic arena and should have said that Lebanon was on the brink of civil war.

Lebanese file.

A security source assured that the investigations into the killing of sheikhs Abdul-Wahed and Mereeb were ongoing, and that five military elements were still under arrest and were transferred to the military court to be prosecuted after it turned out they had participated in the shooting on the two sheikhs’ convoy. The source added that the three officers who were released along with a number of soldiers had nothing to do with the incident.

In a related context, exclusive sources revealed that the disputes between the deputies of the Future Movement in Akkar were the main reason behind the incidents that broke out on Thursday night-Friday morning and contributed to the fueling of the situation on the street. The sources explained: “Following a meeting held yesterday in the house of former Mufti of Akkar Sheikh Osama al-Rifai, a violent dispute erupted between the deputies of the Future Movement. One deputy unilaterally issued a decision calling on the armed men to take to the streets. Another team headed by Deputy Khalid ad-Daher did not approve the escalation against the army.

Prime Minister Najib Mikati believed that the calls issued by some for the government’s resignation were not new, assuring that the government was proceeding with its work and productivity despite all the difficulties. During his meeting with the media delegation that accompanied him on his trip to Germany, Mikati addressed all those unfairly accusing the government by saying: “If you have no shame do as you wish. There are constitutional mechanisms to disband the government and until they are available, I can assure you that the government will be sustained and will not be affected by the futile campaigns that aim at achieving known goals.” He indicated that the contacts were ongoing to find a solution to the parliamentary dispute, adding that the meeting he held with Minister of Energy Gibran Bassil before he came to Germany fell in the context of the efforts to reach solutions to the existing disputes.

It is worth mentioning that parliament had witnessed a fierce standoff this week after the file of the Electricite du Liban workers law was adopted and approved by Speaker Nabih Berri despite the voting mechanism that was used inside the council and was considered by some as being illegitimate. As a result, the deputies in the Change and Reform bloc, in addition to those of the Lebanese Forces and the Phalange Party left the premises. Later in the day, General Aoun announced that his ministers will not be taking part in the Cabinet meeting in protest against the attitude adopted by his allies.