March 3-4, 2014: Washington Prepares For New Military Operation Against Syria?! | New York Times (NYT) | March 22, 2014 thru September 2014, through 2015 ?
While
negotiating with one hand in Geneva, with the other Washington is
preparing a new military operation against Syria. Whatever the sequence
of events, it will be sure to advance its pawns one way or another. War
comes at no cost to Washington. It is the Syrians who are dying. To
save time, it submitted to the Conference participants a Statement
tabled by the "opposition". Behind a conciliatory rhetoric, there are at
least three traps that Thierry Meyssan breaks down for us.
The second round of the Geneva 2 Conference opened
on a very different tone from the first one. U.S. ambassador Robert S.
Ford is no longer heading the "opposition" delegation and it is unclear
who is now responsible for Syria in Washington. In any case, the
representatives of "opposition" arrived with a "Statement of Basic
Principles" [1]
designed to set Damascus up for the same trap that Walid Muallem had
laid for them during the first session: force him to answer his own
ground. Damascus wanted to broach the fight against terrorism, but the
"opposition" responded with a detailed description of the composition
and mission of the Transitional Governing Body.
It was a particularly good move considering that, during the first
session, Muallem had reached out to public opinion inside Syria, and
sometimes in the Arab world, but never to that in the West. If he had
wanted to target this audience, he should have started by focusing on
international law before discussing the means to enforce it: the fight
against terrorism. But first seeking to bolster the legitimacy of
Damascus, he endeavored to expose the crimes perpetrated by the
"opposition"-backed jihadists and the colonial ambitions of John Kerry.
Occupying the empty field, the United States dictated to the "opposition" a Statement
which is based on the resolutions of the Security Council and the
Geneva 1 Final Communiqué, that is to say on texts endorsed by all the
states sponsoring the peace conference.
The Statement begins by detailing what the Body is supposed
to be. Naturally, it will be neutral, inclusive - i.e. comprising all
components of Syrian society-, peaceful - i.e. it would end the war-,
and the guarantor of the territorial integrity of the country. Its
function is to create an environment enabling the Syrian people to
develop its own constitution and appoint its institutions.
The first problem with this Statement
is that it contravenes the practice of the armed groups. While the
National Coalition expresses itself in a perfectly democratic language,
the groups who are fighting on the ground have continued to brutalize
minorities and try to impose a Salafist organization of society.
Granted, most of these groups do not recognize the authority of the
Coalition, but its legitimacy hinges on their actions.
Moreover, everyone have been aware of the hypocrisy since the
beginning of the crisis: the best speakers for democracy in Syria being
the absolute rulers of the Gulf dictatorships. The
second problem with the Statement is the method to determine the
Governing Body. Washington wants to impose it, as it did in many other
countries. Hence it masterminded Geneva 2, as it did the Bonn Conference
on Afghanistan: the great powers would negotiate among themselves and
designate a Syrian Karzai. Damascus, however, continues to cite the
Final Communiqué of Geneva 1, that "It is for the Syrian people to
determine the future of the country." Therefore, not only must the new
constitution be approved by referendum, but the result of Geneva 2 may
not be implemented unless it is ratified by President al-Assad. As it
happens, he has committed himself to submitting it to a referendum.
Moreover, this remark reflects on the legitimacy of the "opposition"
delegation. As noted by Sergey Lavrov in his opening statement at the
conference, its current composition flies in the face of the Geneva I
communiqué, which stipulates that "the peace talks should be open to all
parties in Syria committed to a political settlement so that they will
take an active part in the process and play their role." However, the
"opposition"delegation boils down only to the National Coalition,
notwithstanding the fact that it has been repudiated by a majority of
its members. The third hitch is that the Statement
affords Washington the possibility to organize a Serbian-style regime
change, by orchestrating a "color revolution". The Kosovo war ended in a
cease-fire followed by elections in Serbia. Through a crafty
psychological campaign, the CIA got a pro-American candidate elected.
Then it had Slobodan Milošević arrested and tried in The Hague for
crimes against humanity. Since at the end of two years, the Court found
no evidence to support the charges, Milošević was murdered in his cell.
Ultimately, the Serbs fought for nothing because today they have lost
Kosovo and are governed by those who bombed their country to
smithereens.
The Statement thus contains an astonishing contradiction: it
calls for the deployment of the United Nations throughout the country
from outset of the transition, but it excludes them from the process.
Instead, it affirms that its supervision will be entrusted to
"independent organizations of international civil society." In Central
and Eastern Europe, these organizations were called Freedom House, Open
Society Foundation and National Endowment for Democracy (NED) . The
first is historically linked to both the United States and Israel , and
the second is headed by business magnate and speculator George Soros,
and serves the interests of both the United States and Israel, while the
third is not an association, but a joint US-British-Australian body,
created at the initiative of President Ronald Reagan to extend the work
of the CIA after the scandals of the 70s. These organizations hand out
billions of dollars everywhere they can to corrupt elites and to buy
States.
In July 2011, Washington had sent an official Canadian delegation to Libya to propose a
solution identical to the one applied in Serbia: a cease-fire followed by a transition period
during which the "independent organizations of the international civil society" could deploy
inside the country. Faced with Muammar el-Gaddafi’s refusal, NATO decided to enter by
force.
In addition, the Statement stipulates that the Transitional Governing Body should create
mechanisms to hold accountable "persons who have committed violations of human rights
and international laws." This phrase points directly to the arrest and transfer to The
Hague of President al-Assad, during the transition period, for crimes against humanity. A
procedure which should conclude, as for Milošević, by his death in his prison cell.
There is no doubt that Washington’s candidates would win the elections once President
al-Assad is eliminated from the game and the pseudo US associations deployed on the
ground.
Therefore, much remains to be discussed in Geneva. Meanwhile, President Obama received the King of
Jordan in California. The two men agreed on how the army currently being constituted in
Jordan should again attack Syria. The deadline for Washington’s war plans is 30 September
2014. During the following seven months, the "opposition" should attempt to reverse the
military balance of power and, at a minimum, take the south to install the seat of a
provisional government. It is always better to have two irons in the fire. [1] “Statement of Basic Principles by the Geneva 2 Syrian Opposition Delegation”, Voltaire Network, 12 February 2014.
French intellectual, founder and chairman of Voltaire Network and the
Axis for Peace Conference. His columns specializing in international
relations feature in daily newspapers and weekly magazines in Arabic,
Spanish and Russian. His last two books published in English : 9/11 the Big Lie and Pentagate.
President Obama and King Abdullah II of Jordan, Brendan Smialowski/Agence France-Presse, Getty Images
RANCHO
MIRAGE, Calif. — President Obama announced during a meeting here Friday
night with King Abdullah II of Jordan that he would seek to renew a
five-year aid package to help Jordan bear the burden of the more than
600,000 Syrian refugees who have fled the civil war there.
Mr.
Obama, amid broader discussions with King Abdullah about the stalemate
in Syria, also announced that the United States would guarantee $1
billion in loans to help keep Jordan’s wavering economy afloat.
The
president briefly outlined that aid package as he spoke to reporters at
Sunnylands, the Southern California estate where Mr. Obama met with the
king for 2 hours and 15 minutes over what the White House called a
working dinner.
Calling
the Jordanians “very generous,” Mr. Obama said, “It’s very important
for us to make sure that we’re supportive of the kingdom in
accommodating all these refugees.”
Mr.
Obama’s discussions with the Jordanian king are part of an intensive
diplomatic outreach to the Middle East over the next month, as the
United States conducts risky negotiations with Iran over its nuclear
program, gropes for a political solution to the fighting in Syria, and
tries to nudge the Israelis and the Palestinians toward a peace
agreement.
President Barack Obama meets with King
Abdullah II to pledge $1 billion in loan guarantees for Jordan and to
consider new ways to pressure the regime of President Bashar al-Assad of
Syria.
Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel will make a trip the White House
on March 3, and Mr. Obama is scheduled to meet with King Abdullah of
Saudi Arabia and, possibly, other Persian Gulf leaders during a visit
there.
In
their talks Friday, the president and Jordan’s King Abdullah discussed a
vast range of regional issues, including the Middle East peace process,
administration officials said. But the dominant issue was Syria, whose
civil war has placed heavy burdens on its neighbor.
Syrians
are only the latest group to seek the relative stability provided by
Jordan, which has also taken in large numbers of people fleeing fighting
in Iraq and Sudan in recent years. The United States aid package, which
expires in September, has been valued at $660 million a year.
Jordan’s
economic problems have been made worse by militants’ attacks on a
natural gas pipeline from Egypt, which has been in upheaval since the
Arab Spring uprising in 2011.
It
is not the first time that Mr. Obama has used Sunnylands — a 200-acre
estate built by Walter H. Annenberg, the publisher, philanthropist and
ambassador who died in 2002 — as a diplomatic backdrop.
Last year, he hosted President Xi Jinping of China at Sunnylands
for a two-day meeting that was noted for its unusual informality and
was interpreted as a milestone in their nations’ often tense and
generally stilted four-decade diplomatic history.
Sunnylands
is “conducive to a conversation” between Mr. Obama and King Abdullah,
“given all the issues they face and given their warm relationship,” said
Eric Schultz, a White House spokesman.
Mr.
Obama will be staying at the estate through Sunday — the canary-yellow
master bedroom is equipped with speakers that pipe in the songs of the
birds outdoors.
The
president arrived at the Palm Springs International Airport about 7:30
p.m. Pacific Time on a day when the temperature hovered around 90
degrees.
Hours
earlier, Mr. Obama delivered remarks in Fresno, Calif., more than 300
miles to the north, about the federal response to California’s severe
drought. The water shortage has placed extra scrutiny on usage here in
the Coachella Valley, where intensive irrigation has transformed the
desert scrubland into lush lawns and golf courses.
Palm Springs residents use 736 gallons of water per day, among the highest usage rate in the state, according to a state database.
The
president has no public events scheduled beyond the meeting with King
Abdullah, and he is expected to spend much of the time golfing. (He does
not have to go far for a quick fix: Sunnylands has a nine-hole course.)
King
Abdullah arrived here on Thursday, and visited with Gov. Jerry Brown of
California ahead of Mr. Obama’s arrival. “Meeting with the King of
Jordan to discuss drought, the efficient use of water and renewable
energy,” Mr. Brown said in a tweet that included a photo of the two on a sunny path, in unnecessary blazers.
The first problem with this Statement
is that it contravenes the practice of the armed groups. While the
National Coalition expresses itself in a perfectly democratic language,
the groups who are fighting on the ground have continued to brutalize
minorities and try to impose a Salafist organization of society.
Granted, most of these groups do not recognize the authority of the
Coalition, but its legitimacy hinges on their actions.
French intellectual, founder and chairman of Voltaire Network and the
Axis for Peace Conference. His columns specializing in international
relations feature in daily newspapers and weekly magazines in Arabic,
Spanish and Russian. His last two books published in English : 9/11 the Big Lie and Pentagate.
Are the posers just posers?
ReplyDeleteThe runaround or runner up?
ReplyDelete