Who committed the crime? Who could profit it? And what could the international community do to avert further violence in the country seized by 14 months of unrest?
_______________________________________________________________
The Syrian government is being blamed for the massacre
in the area of Houla on Friday, May 25, where at least 108 people,
including 34 women and 49 children were killed, yet circumstances
indicate that rebel forces or terrorist groups with backing from the
U.S., NATO, and its regional allies may have actually been responsible,
and the atrocity will likely be cited as a pretext in increasing calls
for military intervention to overthrow the Assad regime on
“humanitarian” grounds.
The U.S. has been providing
to the Syrian opposition what the State Department has called in
Orwellian newspeak “nonlethal assistance”, which effort is coordinated
with those of U.S. “friends and allies in the region”, such as Saudi
Arabia and Qatar, who are funding and arming the rebel forces, including
with antitank weaponry. The U.S. coordination effort includes directing
arms shipments to “worthy rebel recipients”, according to the
Washington Post.
The U.S.’s NATO ally Turkey has
provided a base of operations for the Free Syrian Army, where they are
supplied with surplus weapons from NATO’s campaign to oust the Gaddafi
regime in Libya. The arms are “being shipped on NATO aircraft”,
according to former CIA military intelligence officer Philip Giraldi.
Turkey is “taking the lead as U.S. proxy”, Giraldi wrote last December,
in a clandestine NATO effort with the ultimate goal of another military
intervention that would be based on the pretext of “humanitarian
principles, to defend the civilian population based on the
‘responsibility to protect’ doctrine that was invoked to justify Libya.”
And
as Daniel McAdams has observed, “as soon as the U.S. began supplying
the rebels with specialized communications equipment enabling them to
more accurately target government forces and institutions, some of the
most deadly and gruesome bombings have taken place.”
As former NATO commander General Wesley Clark explained
in a talk at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco, California, on
October 3, 2007, after 9/11, there was a “policy coup” in which the
long-term goals of the neoconservatives were implemented. Clark was an
inside witness to the efforts to use 9/11 as a pretext to launch the war
on Iraq, despite the complete lack of evidence of any Iraqi involvement
in the attacks or possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). But
the plan didn’t stop with Iraq.
Clark recalled a
discussion with an officer in the Defense Department who showed him a
memo he had received from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s office.
“It says we’re going to attack and destroy the governments in seven
countries in five years—we’re going to start with Iraq, and then we’re
going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran,” Clark
recalled the officer telling him. He explained to his audience that the
foreign policy goal of the U.S. was “to destabilize the Middle East,
turn it upside down, make it under our control.”
Taking
out the Assad regime in Syria, in addition to being a goal in its own
right, would also be another step towards implementing the ultimate goal
of regime change in Iran, which would be further isolated by the loss
of its regional ally.
_________________________________________________________________Thank You For Reading
کوئی تبصرے نہیں:
ایک تبصرہ شائع کریں