Thread: No Letup In Western-Backed Syrian Violence: Attempt To Topple President Assad Failed

No Letup In Western-Backed
Syrian Violence

By Stephen Lendman
3-25-12

Washington's dirty hands control anti-Assad violence. At issue is longstanding policy to install a pro-Western regime. All means are used to do it, including war if others fail.

As a result, the Syrian pot keeps boiling. Assad's obligated to confront it. Syrians rely on him, yet he's blamed for doing his job.

Besides heavily armed killer gangs, US, UK, French, and perhaps other NATO Special Forces operate in Syria covertly. They've done so for months the same way as last year in Libya.

Nonetheless, NATO secretary-general Anders Fog Rasmussen audaciously claimed intervention in Syrian affairs isn't planned. In fact, it's been ongoing for months stoking violence.

On March 23, addressing the German Marshall Fund, he also said:

NATO "played a major role in guaranteeing peace in the Euro-Atlantic area for over sixty years, and as our mission for Libya showed, our Alliance remains an essential source of stability in an unpredictable world. NATO is the indispensable Alliance."

In fact, it's a lawless, aggressive killing machine. It's responsible for millions of deaths, mass destruction, insecurity, and instability wherever it shows up. Expect no letup in its crimes against Syria.

Its people have other ideas. On March 24, huge crowds massed in Damascus' Saba Bahrat Square. They railed against foreign interference and expressed strong support for Assad's reforms.

Chanting slogans, carrying banners, displaying Syrian flags, and showing other expressions of support, they blamed US imperialism and complicit Arab states for months of violence and deaths. Along with Syrian security forces, they vowed to resist.

It's their country and their right to choose leaders they wish, free from outside interference. International law prohibits but doesn't stop it. It also doesn't prevent spuriously accusing Assad for all sorts of alleged wrongdoing.

On March 23, Turkey's Today's Zaman headlined, "Turkey enlists northern Iraq's help in countering threat of Syria-PKK alliance," claiming:

Assad's "courting terrorist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) militants to strike Turkish interests, Today's Zaman has learned."

Quoting unnamed government officials belies their credibility. Nonetheless, one said:

"We have come to an understanding from Kurdish officials in Arbil that the PKK threat in Syria is seriously undermining the legitimate aspirations of Kurds in the region."

"What is more, they also realized that the PKK's support of the violent regime in Syria puts all Kurds in the region in an awkward position. They do not want Kurds to be seen as supporting a brutal regime that has been cracking down on civilian protestors."

Unexplained was why Assad would risk further alienating Turkey, especially when he's pre-occupied against heavily armed Western-backed insurgents. The last thing he wants is Ankara's more direct involvement. Doing so might turn the tide against him. He's no fool and wouldn't risk it.

In 1998, Turkey and Syria nearly clashed. As a result, Assad distanced himself from PKK elements to prevent war erupting. Why risk it now? Moreover, Syria's Kurdish area's been peaceful since he granted hundreds of thousands there citizenship.

However, Today's Zaman claimed "Turkish intelligence reports submitted to the government detailed how the Assad regime has been providing support to the PKK in Syria by giving them freedom to operate in the northern part of the country bordering Turkey."

It added that doing so provides a buffer zone against possible Turkish intervention in Syria, either alone or as part of NATO. Again, antagonizing Ankara hardly seems a sound way to do it.

On March 24, Reuters headlined, "Syrian tanks enter northern town, Homs pounded again," saying:

"Ignoring a U.N. Security Council call for an end to hostilities, President Bashar al-Assad's forces clashed with rebel fighters and bombarded several towns and cities, aiming to crush a year-long uprising against the government."

Killer gang violence is ignored. Assad confronting it responsibly is called "ignoring" a UN mandate. What's about his people's safety. As head of state, he's obligated to protect them.

Months of violence took thousands of lives. More die daily. Assad's blamed for killer gang deaths and atrocities. Washington's war on him rages. So do scoundrel media backing regime change.

Major Media Scoundrels Attack Assad

On March 18, Washington Post deputy page editor Jackson Diehl headlined, "Why the US should intervene in Syria," saying:

Notorious warmongering Senators John McCain, Joe Lieberman, and Lindsey Graham support Washington intervention. Their joint March 6 statement said:

"The Syrian people are outmatched. They are outgunned. They are confronting a regime whose disregard for human dignity and capacity for sheer savagery is limitless."

"Still they carry on their fight. And they do so on behalf of many of the same universal values we share, and many of the same interests as well....Shame on us if we fail to help them now in their moment of greatest need."

A year ago they called for Libyan intervention for reasons as spurious as now. They're at it again to replicate charnel house conditions in Syria, install a pro-Western regime, remove a key Iranian ally, then call for bombing Tehran and risk general war.

Diehl failed to see the potential consequences of what three notorious rogues support instead of forthrightly opposing them.

On March 22, a Washington Post editorial headlined, "The UN's unworkable plan for Syria," saying:

"....there is virtually no possibility that the new initiative will accomplish" an end of conflict "as the Obama administration should know by now."

"Instead, it will likely provide time and cover for the regime of Bashar al-Assad to continue using tanks and artillery to assault Syrian cities and indiscriminately kill civilians."

Fact check

Syria was calm and peaceful until heavily armed Western-backed insurgents arrived. Assad supports conflict resolution. He has all along. Syrian National Council (SNC) leaders reject it.

So does Washington. Obama generated violence for regime change. He's not backing off now. Assad's more victim than villain. You'd never know it from scoundrel media misreporting and lies.

"The Annan plan won’t work because, like the Arab League plan before it, it calls for the Assad government to take steps that would lead to its swift collapse — and the regime has no intention of capitulating."

"To buy time last year, the regime accepted nearly identical demands by the Arab League, admitted its monitors — and then proceeded to ignore its obligations completely."

Fact check

Most Syrians support Assad. Polls confirm it. The longer violence rages, the stronger his support. It's true virtually everywhere foreign elements intervene violently.

Assad didn't instigate it. He supports negotiations to end it. However, he won't stand aside while killer gangs terrorize Syrians, nor should he.

The Security Council proposed "dialogue between the Syrian government and opposition - something that both sides have repeatedly rejected."

Fact check

The violent Syrian National Council (SNC) alone rejects dialogue. So does Washington and rogue NATO partners. Assad and nonviolent opposition National Coordination Committee for Democratic Change (NCC) leaders support it. It's futile unless all sides cooperate on what others on their own can't achieve.

UN envoy Kofi "Annan's mission allows the illusion that its diplomatic strategy is producing results - and that more decisive measures" aren't necessary. It won't end violence.

"It is just the opposite: a guarantee that the bloodshed will continue, and probably worsen. The fighting in Syria will end only when Mr. Assad is forced to stop — or he succeeds in killing his way to victory."

Scoundrel journalism suppresses truths, spreads lies, supports Washington's imperium, cheerleads its wars as well as others planned, and calls victims defending themselves terrorists.

America couldn't get away with murder for decades without them. They bear main responsibility and have blood on their hands to answer for.

A Final Comment

A Damascus-based Syrian national sent this writer two emails this morning. For weeks we've maintained contact. His name's withheld for his safety.

He said opposition forces "are targeting Christian neighborhoods in Damascus by setting bombs inside cars and school buses."

"The day before yesterday, I was 40 meters away from one that blew up."

"The Damascus explosion near the air force intelligence buildings was totally catastrophic. I live very close to that area, and we have a lot of deaths, injuries, and damage."

Separately he said "yesterday they caught 6 persons on the roof top of a building near the intelligence center with RBG weapons." For sure, they were choosing targets and opportunities to use them.

He and other Syrians endure daily violence. Why else would they support Assad trying to stop it. So would everyone under similar circumstances. If governments won't stop Western-backed bloodshed, who will?

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also 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.c...ive-news-hour/.

No Letup In Western-Backed Syrian Violence

Patrick Cockburn: The attempt to topple President Assad has failed


World View: The EU travel ban serves to show how impotent the outside world is in its dealings with Syria


Patrick Cockburn


Sunday 25 March 2012



The year-long effort to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad and his government has failed. Two or three months ago, it seemed to come close to succeeding, as insurgents took over enclaves in cities such as Homs and Deir el-Zour. There was talk of no-fly zones and foreign military intervention.

Severe economic sanctions were slapped on Syria's already faltering economy. Every day brought news of fresh pressure on Assad and the momentum seemed to build inexorably for a change of rule in Damascus.

It has not happened. Syria will not be like Libya. The latest international action has been an EU ban on Assad's wife, Asma, and his mother travelling to EU countries (though, as a UK citizen, Asma can still travel to Britain). As damp squibs go, this is of the dampest. The Foreign Secretary, William Hague, claims this increases the pressure on the Syrian government but, on the contrary, it relieves it. Curtailing Asma's shopping trips to Paris or Rome, supposing she ever intended to go there, shows the extent to which the US, EU and their allies in the Middle East are running out of options when it comes to dealing with Damascus.

"Nobody is discussing military operations," the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, said last week. The insurgent Free Syrian Army has been driven out of strongholds in the central city of Homs, Idlib province in the north and, most recently, Deir el-Zour, in the east. Last Tuesday, Syrian soldiers supported by tanks rolled from four sides into Deir el-Zour, which is about 60 miles from the Iraqi border, forcing the rebels to flee and take shelter in homes and apartments after a short gun battle. Their retreat may make it more difficult to bring guns across the Iraq border from the overwhelmingly Sunni Anbar province. The swift Syrian army advance was in contrast with the month-long siege of the Baba Amr district of Homs which killed hundreds of people and left much of the area in ruins. Saudi Arabia and Qatar have blithely advised arming the insurgents, but there is little sign of them doing so.

What went wrong for the advocates of regime change? In general, they overplayed their hand and believed too much of their own propaganda. By this January, everything they did was predicated on international military intervention, or a convincing threat of it. But this ceased to be an option on 4 February when Russia and China vetoed a UN Security Council resolution, backed by the Arab League, calling on Assad to step down. The experience of the US, EU, Nato and the Arab Gulf states in overthrowing Muammar Gaddafi turned out to be misleading when it came to Syria.

This has been the experience of revolutionaries and counter-revolutionaries throughout the ages. What succeeds in one country proves a recipe for disaster in another. There was also a misreading of what had happened in Libya. Watching al-Jazeera television, it might appear that heroic rebel militiamen – and at times they were heroic – had overthrown a tyrant but, in reality, military victory was almost wholly due to the Nato air assault. The militiamen were a mopping-up force who occupied territory after air strikes had cleared the way (this was also the pattern in Afghanistan in 2001 and in Iraqi Kurdistan in 2003).

Conditions are very different in Syria. The regime has a radicalised core based on the Alawite community, a powerful army and security forces. There have been few high-level defections or military units changing sides. Regime loyalists feel they have no alternative but to fight to the end, and are quite prepared to kill anybody who gets in their way. Economic sanctions do not worry Assad loyalists because a dictatorship can always commandeer resources even when they are reduced in quantity. Assad has already lost the support of most of the Syrian business community.

Militarisation of the conflict does not pose a threat to the government at this stage; it is more of an irritant, though this could change if guerrilla warfare develops.

In the second half of last year Assad appeared to be facing an all-powerful international coalition. It included Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the US, EU and Turkey. It emerged, however, that everybody was in favour of somebody doing something to bring him down – so long as that somebody was somebody else. There was talk of "safe havens" being established on the Jordanian or Turkish borders, but neither Jordan nor Turkey showed any enthusiasm for an act that would lead immediately to armed conflict with Syria. King Abdullah of Jordan said ruefully that he had nothing against "safe havens" so long as they were a long way from Jordan. Turkey cooled on the idea as it became apparent that it was becoming embroiled in a regional Shia-Sunni conflict that would lead to Iran retaliating against Turkey in defence of its Syrian ally.

The Syrian protesters did everything they could to give the impression that what happened in Libya could be repeated in Syria. They are now being criticised for their divisions and lack of leadership, but probably they felt they had no choice. The uprising had begun among the under-class of Syrians, but by last summer had spread to the middle class. But the use of snipers and death squads by the regime made street protests highly dangerous and they have got smaller in recent months (one of the benefits of the Arab League monitoring team was that it opened the door again to street demonstrations). Protesters now seldom wave olive branches and chant "Peaceful, Peaceful". Militarisation of the protest movement and the increased sectarianism played to the strengths of the regime. Sectarianism not only weakens the opposition inside Syria, it helps divide the coalition facing it abroad. In a presidential election year, US voters do not care much who rules Syria, but they care a lot about al-Qa'ida.

One of Barack Obama's themes in the presidential campaign will be that it was his administration that killed Osama bin Laden and focused, unlike President Bush, on eliminating the perpetrators of 9/11. The White House does not want al-Qa'ida to show signs of life, so it has been nervous of its increasing role in Syria. For instance, only last week an al-Qa'ida-inspired group called the Al-Nusra Front to Protect the Levant claimed responsibility for two recent suicide bombings in Damascus that killed more than two dozen people. "We tell the [Syrian] regime to stop the massacres against the Sunnis, otherwise, you will bear the sin of the Alawites," said the Al-Nusra Front statement. "What is coming is more bitter and painful, with God's will."

The Syrian regime will not fall without a radical change in the balance of forces. The appointment of the former UN secretary-general Kofi Annan as a UN-Arab League peace envoy is a face-saver to mask the failure so far of the regime's opponents. This is bad news for the Syrian people, who face a prolonged and vicious civil war like Lebanon in the 1970s and 1980s.

Patrick Cockburn: The attempt to topple President Assad has failed - Commentators - Opinion - The Independent