WikiLeaks: to weaken Iran, US undermined democratic elements of Syrian opposition to empower radical groups
While
seven years have come and gone since the leaked document was written
by USMC intelligence, little has changed when it comes to the U.S.’
long-standing goals in Syria and its callous disregard for the will
of the Syrian people and Syrian democracy.
by
Whitney Webb
A
recently uncovered U.S. government document published by WikiLeaks
has revealed that the U.S. directly advocated for undermining
“democratic” elements of the so-called Syrian “revolution” of
2011 in order to ensure the dominance of authoritarian, sectarian
Sunni groups within the Syrian opposition.
The
document, written by the United States Marine Corps (USMC)
Intelligence Department in late 2011, further asserts that empowering
these radical Sunni groups over democratic and secular ones would be
ideal for the United States and its regional partners, as ensuring
the decline of the current Syrian government, and with it a secular
Syria, would harm Iran’s regional clout.
In other
words, the U.S. openly supported undermining democratic opposition
forces in Syria in order to challenge Iranian influence and, with it,
the influence of the Middle East’s “resistance axis” that
obstructs the imperialistic agendas of the U.S. and its regional
allies such as Saudi Arabia and Israel.
According
to the document, which was buried in a previous WikiLeaks release and
recently uncovered by journalist Dr. Nafeez Ahmed, U.S. military
intelligence was well aware that the Syrian opposition movement in
2011 did not pose “a meaningful threat against the [Syrian]
regime,” given that it was “extremely fractured” and
“operating under enormous constraints.” It also noted that
“reports of protests [against the Syrian government] are
overblown,” even though “the exiled [Syrian] opposition
has been quite effecting (sic) in developing a narrative on the
Syrian opposition to disseminate to major media agencies.”
That
narrative — which was subsequently promoted by several foreign
governments, including the U.S., the U.K., Turkey and France —
falsely claimed that the protests were massive and involved largely
peaceful protestors “rising up” against the “autocratic”
government led by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
This
document, as well as substantial evidence that has emerged over the
last several years, shows that this narrative, of a “peaceful
uprising” seeking to establish a secular and “democratic”
Syria, has never been true, as even U.S. military intelligence knew
that the reports regarding these “peaceful” protests were
highly exaggerated.
U.S.
calling on Turkey to do its dirty work
Given
that the USMC intelligence considered the Syrian opposition movement
in 2011 to be an ineffective force for effecting change in Assad’s
status as Syria’s leader, the document notes that it was in the
U.S.’ interest for Turkey to “manage” efforts to
destabilize the Assad-led government, as Turkey “is the country
with the most leverage over Syria in the long term, and has an
interest in seeing this territory return to Sunni rule.”
Those
Turkish-led efforts would involve gradually building up “linkages
with groups inside Syria, focusing in particular on the Islamist
remnants of the Muslim Brotherhood in trying to fashion a viable
Islamist political force in Syria that would operate under Ankara’s
umbrella.” This ultimately came to pass, as the Turkey-backed
Free Syrian Army – previously promoted as the main force of the
“democratic” Syrian opposition but now well known to be a
radical, sectarian group – still takes its marching orders from
Ankara.
The
document advocates for these efforts to mold the “fragmented”
elements of the 2011 Syrian opposition into an “Islamist”
puppet force of Turkey in order to support the gradual “weakening
of the Alawite [i.e., Assad] hold on power in Syria,” as well
as because “Turkey, the United States, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and
others have a common interest in trying to severely under[mine]
Iran’s foothold in the Levant and dial back Hezbollah’s political
and military influence in Lebanon.”
Also
notable is the fact that USMC intelligence at the time knew that
these efforts to undermine the current Syrian government would have a
disastrous impact on the country and its civilian population. Indeed,
the document notes this on two separate occasions, stating first that
“any political transition in Syria away from the al-Assad clan
will likely entail a violent, protracted civil conflict” and
later adding that “the road to regime change will be a long and
bloody one.”
Thus,
not only was U.S. military intelligence advocating for the
undermining of democratic and secular forces within the Syrian
opposition, it was also aware that the U.S.-backed efforts to
undermine Assad would have “bloody” consequences for
civilians in Syria. These admissions dramatically undercut past and
present U.S. claims to be concerned with Syrian civilians and their
“call for freedom” from Assad, showing instead that the
U.S. preferred the installation of a “friendly”
authoritarian, sectarian government in Syria and was uninterested in
the fate of Syrian civilians so long as the result “severely
under[mined] Iran’s foothold in the Levant.”
For much
of the last two decades, but especially since the 2006 war between
Israel and Lebanon’s Hezbollah, the “resistance axis” —
led by Iran — has emerged as the greatest threat to the hegemony of
the United States and its allies in the Middle East. A power bloc
composed of Iran, Iraq, Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas in Palestine, the
“resistance axis” as a term first emerged in 2010 to
describe the alliances of countries and regional political groups
opposed to continued Western intervention in the region, as well as
to the imperialist agendas of U.S. allies in the region like Israel
and Saudi Arabia. Iran’s role as the de facto leader of this
resistance bloc makes it, along with its main allies like Syria, a
prime target of U.S. Middle East policy.
Sunni-stan
Washington’s
support for a future authoritarian Syria may come as a surprise to
some, given that the U.S. has publicly promoted the narrative of a
“democratic revolution” in Syria from 2011 to the present
and has used calls for the establishment of a “new”
secular democracy in Syria as the foundation for its agenda of
overthrowing the current Assad-led government.
However,
powerful individuals in Washington have long promoted an
“authoritarian” and “Islamist” state in Syria
with the goal of countering Iran, much like the plan detailed in the
USMC intelligence document.
For
instance, current National Security Adviser John Bolton called for
the establishment of such a state in Syria back in 2015, stating on
FOX News: “I think our objective should be a new Sunni state out
of the western part of Iraq, the eastern part of Syria, run by
moderates or at least authoritarians who are not radical Islamists.”
A few
months later, Bolton – this time in a New York Times op-ed –
detailed his plan to create a sectarian Sunni state out of
northeastern Syria and western Iraq, which he nicknamed “Sunni-stan.”
He asserted that such a country would have “economic potential”
as an oil producer, would serve as a “bulwark” against the
Syrian government and “Iran-allied Baghdad,” and would
help ensure the defeat of Daesh (ISIS). Bolton’s mention of oil is
notable, as the proposed territory for this Sunni state sits on key
oil fields that U.S. oil interests, such as ExxonMobil and the Koch
brothers, have sought to control if the partition of Iraq and Syria
comes to pass.
Bolton
also suggested that Arab Gulf States like Saudi Arabia “could
provide significant financing” for the creation of this future
state, adding that “the Arab monarchies like Saudi Arabia must
not only fund much of the new state’s early needs, but also ensure
its stability and resistance to radical forces.”
Yet
Bolton fails to note that Saudi Arabia is one of the chief financiers
of Daesh and largely responsible for spreading “radical”
Wahhabi Islam throughout the Middle East. Thus, any future state that
the Saudis would fund would undoubtedly mirror the ethos of Saudi
Arabia itself – i.e., an authoritarian, radical Wahhabist state
that executes nonviolent protesters, oppresses minorities, and
launches genocidal wars against its neighbors in an effort to control
their resources.
Furthermore,
the ultimate goal outlined within the USMC Intelligence document of
undermining Iran’s regional clout continues to be the guide for
the U.S.’ current Syria policy, which recently changed yet again to
include regime change in Damascus as part of its goal. For instance,
earlier this year, Bolton – in his capacity as National Security
Adviser – stated that U.S. troops would remain in Syria “as
long as the Iranian menace continues throughout the Middle East.”
More
recently, the Trump administration “redefined” its Syria
policy to include “the exit of all Iranian military and proxy
forces from Syria” as the administration’s top priority,
while also calling for the installation of “a stable,
non-threatening government” that would not have Assad as
Syria’s leader.
Thus,
while seven years have come and gone since the leaked document was
written by USMC intelligence, little has changed when it comes to the
U.S.’ long-standing goals in Syria and its callous disregard for
the will of the Syrian people and Syrian democracy.
Source,
links:
Comments
Post a Comment