The United States, along with its Western and Arab allies, has done its best to overthrow the legitimate government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, even by making use of armed gangs and terrorists from neighboring Arab countries.
______________________________________________________________
Analysts believe that while Obama is crying for the rights of the armed gangs in Syria, he deliberately turns a blind eye to the real pro-democracy movements of the oppressed Persian Gulf nations such as, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait and United Arab Emirates.
Interviewe with prominent author and historian Webster Griffin Tarpley from Washington to further discuss the issue.
Q: Now, President Obama seems pretty sure that the US agenda of regime change in Syria will be implemented, how do you think this unilateral position would affect the global balance of power?
Tarpley: Well, I think we first have to see that Obama is a desperate demagogue, an embattled demagogue and he is facing a republican challenger, Romney, who is about to go on a world tour, he is going to go to Israel [Occupied Palestine] to the Olympics, and all kinds of places in between.
So Obama is trying to preen himself as a great world statesman which of course is complete nonsense.
I think the world balance of power has, maybe, shifted even more against Obama than maybe obvious, when we look at the events in Syria over the last week I think we had a big offensive by the NATO side with their Saudi and Turkish and other supporters, that this offensive has perhaps failed.
It had, I think we can say, five or six prongs; there was a prong at the United Nations, they wanted to pass a resolution finally allowing Chapter 7 measures to attack Syria.
This has been vetoed by Russia, vetoed by China even Pakistan and South Africa abstained in the face of heavy US arm twisting.
Secondly, television warfare has been unleashed, right! The plan that has been circulated for the past five or six weeks that NATO would shutdown Arab Sat, shutdown Nile Sat and begin broadcasting their own programs to get a kind of hysteria of defeatism inside the Syrian population, that has not worked.
Then we had attempted decapitation of the Syrian armed forces with what I think might have been a drone attack, using small missiles to kill the three leaders [of the Syrian government]: Defense Minister [Dawoud] Rajiha, Mr. [Assef] Shawkat, [Assistant Vice President Hassan] Turkmani and the intelligence chief who later died.
There was also an attempt, last week to have a panic crash of the Syrian currency to try to, essentially, use economic warfare and finally the fifth prong is swarming.
It looks like NATO has done another airlift as your report was just saying, to bring in foreign fighters in unprecedented numbers, really taking just about anybody who would come, from Libya, from Egypt, from Jordan, from many, many other parts of the world, in, maybe, tens of thousands; it is not clear how many; and these fighters were allowed to swarm in across the Jordanian and other borders and try to create this situation of siege in Damascus and it looks like those forces have been largely defeated.
So what happened between Wednesday and Friday of last week seems to look like a significant defeat, at least so far, of the NATO side.
Q: Right, now in the case of Syria, Russia and China have come out as strong supporters of security and stability and meanwhile Washington is trying to pacify protests in other countries like Bahrain.
Why do not Russia and China try to take those situations to the Security Council?
Tarpley: Well, they should and it would be better of course to be on the offensive rather than to always be on the defensive and it seems to me that the time has come to drop the verbal charades and essentially state that there is no democracy movement in Syria.
There is a bunch of NATO agents who run the attack and in the countries where there really is a democracy movement, Bahrain or Saudi Arabia itself, this is being systematically blacked out here in the US media and so forth. Clearly done with the help of the State Department.
So I think it would be important to shift the attention to Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, terrible situation; Oman, United Arab Emirates [UAE], all these reactionary monarchies of the Persian Gulf, it seems to me, really are the ones that ought to be on the hot seat and that might give Syria some sort of cease.
Q: Indeed, now President Obama’s speech on the world’s leadership today, sounded very much as coming from an imperial power, so to speak, how will this be perceived by the international community, do you think?
Tarpley: Well, as a combination of bluff and bombast and threat, it is important, though, to see that Obama has delivered for imperialism the Obama method is to try to avoid US direct military attack; at least in terms of large conventional forces.
Obama relies on drones, he relies on special forces; he relies on irregular forces and his irregular forces include al-Qaeda, interestingly enough and all kinds of terrorist groups around the world that have now been recruited into this US strategy, so I do not think any intelligent observer is going to be much impressed by what Obama has said.
I think they are going to be more interested in the fact that this big push, last week, against Syria, by some indications at least, has been a failure.
One commentator said a gesture of despair on the part of the NATO forces, it just did not seem to jell and now I think what we have to see, they are not going to give up but they have been dealt to set back.
_____________________________________________________________
Thank You For Reading
کوئی تبصرے نہیں:
ایک تبصرہ شائع کریں