So against the background of contrived brutal events and the almost miraculous rise- and-rise of the so-called Islamic State (IS), the United States (US) has fulfilled its long-term objective of bombing Syria. Cruise missiles have rained down on northern Syria from the Gulf and Red Sea and significantly Israel has shot down Syrian planes over the Golan!
It has done so on the pretext of defeating this new Jihadist “threat” and without United Nations or even Congressional approval. On the face of it therefore, this is another illegal act of aggressive warfare, proscribed by the international community and treaty, to which the US is party. It will undoubtedly result in further civilian deaths.
No one will need to be advised the whole scenario is deeply suspicious and reminiscent of the now wholly discredited Afghanistan and Iraqi invasions of 2001 – 3. It can be no co-incidence either that it is a continuation of formulated American/Israeli policy to spread chaos and fragmentation to states surrounding Israel.
The US has worked hard to “persuade” a number of Middle East states to support the action, both theoretically and practically, even though they have been instrumental in the financing and arming of IS themselves! It would be hard to conceive of a more hypocritical situation.
It also has the considerable danger of making a regional conflagration even more likely, which must be bad for it and the world mustn’t it? I pose the question because clearly our political leaders, for whatever reason, think otherwise – even from the British Labour Party, so terrified of appearing weak and pacifist, it is prepared to echo siren voices.
When Andrew MacNeal posed to the Labour defence spokes-person today (BBC1 23.9.2014) that upward of three hundred bombing raids so far carried out by the United States, had had no discernible affect, his reply was this suggested more attacks were required. So you see we are back in the classic situation in which escalation, with its attendant death, suffering for ordinary people and destruction of civilized values, is the only rational outcome. Enough of this criminal madness I implore!
I think I can say with some certainty, the last thing the devastated Syrian people want or need, is more bombs. It is even possible that recent mass migrations into Turkey have been spurred as much by potential US bombing as by IS aggression.
Is it not strange that the US with its five or six “friends” is attacking the very people whom only a few months before it was arming, supporting and praising for leading the fight against the evil Assad regime?
Where the Syrian Government or the “freedom fighters” stand on this today is difficult to decide. Are they in favour of opposing the militant IS groups on the basis of “my enemy’s enemy is my friend”, or will it be seen as just another US ploy, with the long term aim of decimating the Syrian armed forces if they dare to oppose the US and of eventually deposing Assad himself?
And how will Iran and/or Russia respond. Putin now knows he has two battle fronts on his hands, with the United States in Ukraine to the north and Syria to the south. In the case of the latter the weapons are Russian and there may also be Russian personnel there to man and maintain them. It is an important ally and naval base. Are the current American bombing raids with Syrian/Russian agreement or acquiescence on condition that Syrian/Russian forces will not be engaged. I sincerely hope so or we are into a whole different ball game.
Further how will Iran view the attacks or respond given the fact that it has proved a fundamental principle of national sovereignty and inviolability has been crossed? And in the background China to which the US is wholly indebted. How will it react? It cannot afford to see either Russia or Iran humiliated in the face of American military power. The stakes could hardly be higher.
On the attached Guardian map of the area (Ref. 1), the extent and influence of IS or ISIS or whatever, is helpfully shown in black stretching from Mosul south in NW Iraq, right across Syria through Abu Kamal, Dayr az Zawr and Raqqa to Aleppo in the far west of the country, which is rather convenient as it rather replicates a certain oil pipe line that runs from Kirkuk and skirts the north of the country through NATO member Turkey as can be seen at Ref. 2.
We know America is obsessed by oil and securing it. We know it has supported and encouraged an autonomous Kurdish region in Iraq and is now arming it on the same IS pretext. We know that a largely untapped oil region based on it, is provided with a fairly recent pipeline north and west into supportive Turkey.
So the line from Abu Kamal to Aleppo now conveniently occupied by the “IS Enemy” takes on a very special strategic importance to protect an increasingly valuable oil asset. I have no doubt, just as the Iraq invasion was nothing to do with WMD or human rights, nor is the current military action in Syria. (If Mr Blair thought so it only displays his political naivete) Securing Iraqi oil and removing Hussein’s independent power was the reason in 2003, just as securing Iraqi oil and removing Assad’s, is now. Hopefully the world’s population is now not so gullible as it was then.END.